Why USSR beat Germany but not Afghanistan?

[Superboy]

Eastern Front (World War II) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Soviet–Afghan War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[That Guy]

You actually have a valid thread topic, well done.

There are many reasons, but the simplest and biggest ones are these: The Germans underestimated the Russian winter, and the USSR underestimated the rebellion in Afghanistan. In both cases, the thought was that superior technology and military might would win the day. In reality, what happened was that, in both cases, the rebels and the Russians (against the Germans) used geographical realities, as well as a lot of patience to cut away at the invading forces.

As the old Russian saying goes, "you don't have to be good, you just have to be good enough."

 

[Norwegian]

Because in both cases, US was supporting the winning side.

 

[C130]

comparing WW2 to a insurgency

 

[AMDR]

Unconventional vs conventional war. Not comparable

 

[SipahSalar]

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

 

[Superboy]

Unconventional vs conventional war. Not comparable

I think it was because of numbers. During WW2 USSR deployed tens of millions of soldiers, hundreds of thousands of aircraft, tanks, artillery. Heck, German soldiers were deaf from all the shelling. Had USSR used such force in Afghanistan, I doubt Taliban would have survived.

 

[Hiptullha]

I think it was because of numbers. During WW2 USSR deployed tens of millions of soldiers, hundreds of thousands of aircraft, tanks, artillery. Heck, German soldiers were deaf from all the shelling. Had USSR used such force in Afghanistan, I doubt Taliban would have survived.

Taliban didn't exist during that period of time.

 

[Superboy]

You actually have a valid thread topic, well done.

There are many reasons, but the simplest and biggest ones are these: The Germans underestimated the Russian winter, and the USSR underestimated the rebellion in Afghanistan. In both cases, the thought was that superior technology and military might would win the day. In reality, what happened was that, in both cases, the rebels and the Russians (against the Germans) used geographical realities, as well as a lot of patience to cut away at the invading forces.

As the old Russian saying goes, "you don't have to be good, you just have to be good enough."

Soviet arms were consistenly on par to German arms. MiG-1 / 3 and Yak-1 / 3 fighter planes, T-34 and IS-2 tanks were very advanced in their day.

Taliban didn't exist during that period of time.

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

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,,

Russia did not want to conquer Afghanistan. It was a police action the got dragged on and became an insurgency.

On the other hand----the U S military action was an invasion.

For Russia---once the insurgency started and got the backing of Pakistan and the rest of the western world---the terrain became the inevitable enemy----.

Bottomline---if you want to conquer and want to take complete control---then let no one escape thru the borders----specially the trouble makers---keep the troublemakers inside the land and then kill them---.

If you arrest them and jail them---do not do the LYNDIE ENGLAND on them---do not do the Abu Ghraib on them. Treat them right---with respect---maybe when they are released and come back to fight you---they will remember your kindness and instead of cutting your throat---they would just out of the kindness of their heart---put a bullet thru your head.

Once treated right---most of these guys would go back to their farmlands and not to return to the battle field---.

If you let the trouble makers escape---they will come back to haunt you.

Someone once quoted---" If you dethrone a King---Kill him".

 

[Azeri440]

You actually have a valid thread topic, well done.

There are many reasons, but the simplest and biggest ones are these: The Germans underestimated the Russian winter, and the USSR underestimated the rebellion in Afghanistan. In both cases, the thought was that superior technology and military might would win the day. In reality, what happened was that, in both cases, the rebels and the Russians (against the Germans) used geographical realities, as well as a lot of patience to cut away at the invading forces.

As the old Russian saying goes, "you don't have to be good, you just have to be good enough."

Germans didn't underestimate Russian winter , they believed Russia would be defeated quickly and there would be no need to carry all the winter gear with them.

 

[That Guy]

Soviet arms were consistenly on par to German arms. MiG-1 / 3 and Yak-1 / 3 fighter planes, T-34 and IS-2 tanks were very advanced in their day.

That's actually not true, German tech was considered to be far superior, and the death toll on both sides shows just how much better equipped and better trained the Germans were over the Russians.

Germans didn't underestimate Russian winter , they believed Russia would be defeated quickly and there would be no need to carry all the winter gear with them.

Which is why I mentioned the technology part.

Unconventional vs conventional war. Not comparable

Devil's advocate: Considering the Russians kept retreating, destroying anything the Germans could use along the way, to stall out the German invasion forces out, it may in some sense be considered an unconventional way of fighting.

 

[C130]

I think it was because of numbers. During WW2 USSR deployed tens of millions of soldiers, hundreds of thousands of aircraft, tanks, artillery. Heck, German soldiers were deaf from all the shelling. Had USSR used such force in Afghanistan, I doubt Taliban would have survived.

how do you kill an enemy that you can't see and won't face you in open pitch?? size is a disadvantage and they would use that against them.

 

[Superboy]

That's actually not true, German tech was considered to be far superior, and the death toll on both sides shows just how much better equipped and better trained the Germans were over the Russians.

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.

how do you kill an enemy that you can't see and won't face you in open pitch?? size is a disadvantage and they would use that against them.

Flatten the mountains with bombs.

 

[AMDR]

Flatten the mountains with bombs.

And 99.9 percent of them wont hit anything but dirt. Even if you use PGMs you won't generate a huge body count.

If wasn't so immoral and with no retaliation and enviromental risk, chemical and nuclear weapons would be ideal for dealing with insurgencies (and just about any other military force).