Why USSR beat Germany but not Afghanistan?

[Arsalan]

not as much as they , more like Hitler himself underestimated Russia , the size of the country not the people.
if Hitler only let his Generals have the actual say in strategies instead of making important decisions himself , who knows how WW2 would of turned out.

Hitler became more and more self centric as the war progressed and after the initial Germany success. Invading Russia was there biggest mistake, bigger then the Japs attacking pearl harbor!

 

[ptldM3]

Because the USSR didn't have DSI...

 

[Lord ZeN]

The casualty difference was not that great. USSR lost about 10 million men. Germany lost about 5 million men. Germany used surprise tactic but later when USSR caught up both sides had roughly equal casualty rate.

There is a huge difference, while the Germans fought against every allied nation in a multiple front war with just 5 million military and 2 million civilian causalities. The Russians on other hand lost 11 million soldiers + 13 million civilians by just fighting against Germany.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Comparing conventional warfare with unconventional warfare??

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Soviet army didn't even use 10% of its total forces in afghanisthan.
None of its brand new t-72 or t-80 tanks served there.Only t-62 and t-55 which could be killed by RPG.
Anyway it was an insurgency..so 'victory' for the insurgents means being able to survive and not allow themselves to be wiped out which they did with pak and usa help.Soviet-german war was total war between 2 states-the greatest in human history.

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

Mujahedeen is generic term for Taliban, ISIS, Qaeda, Islamic Front etc. Mujahedden means fighting in the name of Allah.

None of them are true Mujahideen as none of them has adopted the methodology of warfare tought by Prophet Muhammad SW.
Infact,most of them have resorted to methods 180 degree opposite to those of Prophet Muhammad SW.
The Jihad of Islam strictly prohibits killing of women,children and the weak.

 

[M.SAAD]

Cause they were fighting a Geurella war in Afghanistan, and almost the whole world was backing 'The Mujahideens' against the Russians.

 

[Psychic]

Soviet army didn't even use 10% of its total forces in afghanisthan.
None of its brand new t-72 or t-80 tanks served there.Only t-62 and t-55 which could be killed by RPG.
Anyway it was an insurgency..so 'victory' for the insurgents means being able to survive and not allow themselves to be wiped out which they did with pak and usa help.Soviet-german war was total war between 2 states-the greatest in human history.

Why would Soviets employ all of their forces and brand new tanks when it was an insurgency, not a war? Point which is missed by everyone is that the ordinary Soviet conscript was ill trained with just a month of training and far less motivated as compared to mujahiddeen. And you are wrong that mujahidden only avoided being wiped out. Many areas were held by them and were defended like a conventional force, which Soviet and Afghan armies failed to capture despite attacking them multiple times.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Why would Soviets employ all of their forces and brand new tanks when it was an insurgency, not a war? Point which is missed by everyone is that the ordinary Soviet conscript was ill trained with just a month of training and far less motivated as compared to mujahiddeen. And you are wrong that mujahidden only avoided being wiped out. Many areas were held by them and were defended like a conventional force, which Soviet and Afghan armies failed to capture despite attacking them multiple times.

I'm merely pointing out that the two are incomparable because the soviets used nowhere near their full might in afghanisthan.Its true conscripts were less motivated than mujahideen,on the other hand the spetsnaz commandos and their raids were very effective.In 1941-45 both sides used everything they had in a battle for survival as a nation.
Afghanisthan was sideshow for ussr not a battle for survival.

 

[Natalia]

[QUOTE = "Супермальчик, должность: 7208632, член: 149832"] разница жертвой был не столь велик. СССР потерял около 10 миллионов человек. Германия потеряла около 5 миллионов человек. Германия использовала тактику внезапного но позже, когда СССР догнал обе стороны были примерно равной скорости от несчастных.




Свести горы с бомбами. [/ QUOTE]
27 !!! миллионов человек погибло в СССР!!!

 

[Stephen Cohen]

They lost due to the terrain

In such a terrain The only way USSR could have won in Afghanistan was to kill ALL people

Then it would have become a genocide and USSR could not have faced
global public opinion

Same thing happened with USA

 

[macnurv]

The simplest answer would be in both wars history was ignored other than that there was nothing common.

 

[flamer84]

[QUOTE = "Супермальчик, должность: 7208632, член: 149832"] разница жертвой был не столь велик. СССР потерял около 10 миллионов человек. Германия потеряла около 5 миллионов человек. Германия использовала тактику внезапного но позже, когда СССР догнал обе стороны были примерно равной скорости от несчастных.




Свести горы с бомбами. [/ QUOTE]
27 !!! миллионов человек погибло в СССР!!!

 

[livingdead]

russians came unopposed, parked there tanks and stayed on for years...
in the end afganistan does not have any produce that will make it economical to stay on(say oil or gold)..
finally russia was empty and corrupt from within, they lost cold war to US, afganistan was just a front in that war.

 

[IrbiS]

Because Russians didn't have T-34's in Afghanistan.

Not T-34 itself, but swarming numbers of T-34 due to mass production was the key