0
0
0
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 1
I watched this in the spirit of what I expected it to be, and found it to be more balanced than I expected-lots of historical details, and some personal insights from both "sides" of the Soviet-Afghan experience. It's a UK oriented documentary, so I wasn't surprised at the lack of US viewpoint... but it would've made it more "complete" in my opinion. Like him, or hate him, Rory Stewart has a pretty impressive resume of credentials, and I felt he covered ground many of us who've been "there" would appreciate... even if we may not concede to all of his conclusions.
One could summarize the thesis as being, "Empires enter Afghanistan for reasons they believe justified-even unavoidable, but soon find that these are all the wrong reasons, and getting out is far more difficult." From the British general who conducted the Second Anglo-Afghan War, to the Soviet general who oversaw the USSR's invasion... the circumstances, challenges, strategies, and results all seem to mirror our own.
One could summarize the thesis as being, "Empires enter Afghanistan for reasons they believe justified-even unavoidable, but soon find that these are all the wrong reasons, and getting out is far more difficult." From the British general who conducted the Second Anglo-Afghan War, to the Soviet general who oversaw the USSR's invasion... the circumstances, challenges, strategies, and results all seem to mirror our own.
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
If one looks at world history beyond Europe, this is a theme that has come up more than once since the time of Alexander The Great. During the era's when war of a business, there was just not enough in the region to justify large military expenditures to keep it. The only "successful" rulers of the Area were the Mongols, who just killed everyone that opposed them. No many countries left that are that ruthless.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next