Would you support the USA-USSR-Syria Government supporting alliance or the China-Vatican-Haiti National Liberation...

How was I even supposed to know it was the Nigerian Civil war? Nowhere in the OP that was stated.

Could have googled Nigerian Biafra war, mate.

This is like imperialism 101

Was there any conflict the USSR was on the wrong side of?
IDK why people think it's damning for them to be on the same side as the US on some conflicts (and no I'm not even talking about WW2). The US and the USSR stood together to cuck Anglo-French imperialists in the Middle East (ofcourse the US later assisted in a coup against Nasser and they also did this in the first place cause they were taking over the torch from the UK as the #1 capitalist empire, which is also why they took over Indochina from France). The USSR and the UK invaded Iran together. The USSR supported Indonesian rebels while the USA threatened the Dutch with cutting Marshall aid for their continued occupation of Indonesia (and once again, they backed a coup later).

And in this case too the USSR was probably on the right side.

Ahh well yeah I suppose you're right. My bad.

I see what you mean, but if I had to pick any conflict it would probably be the 1948 israeli-palestinean war. But I'm realistic and fully understand why Stalin thought Israel would go to their side. He couldn't have possibly know they would betray them afaik. I'm not denying I could be wrong, Stalin wasn't perfect and maybe there was more he could've done/researched to know the israelis couldn't be trusted, but idk man. It would be interesting to imagine a scenario where Israel was part of the soviet bloc.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (395x600, 371.04K)

Ismail once mentioned that the reason why USSR supported Nigeria over Biafra was because USSR was against secession movements in third world. US and UK supported Nigeria over oil I believe. France and Israel just sold weapons.

Was this towards any third world nation or for socialist (or soviet-aligned) countries only?

All. As seen in OP. As far as I know USSR didn't even like to see socialist partisan movements in countries where communist parties can participate in elations(Like India and Sri Lanka).

Why though?

A necessary sacrifice for anti-imperialism

They were faggots but most people here lick their boots because it was the best attempt at socialism in history. Hope that changes someday

I agree but that doesn't mean we should like the USSR from start to end. But at the end does it even matter to say "I like the USSR" when it no longer exists? That being said though, this policy was enacted by Brezhnev right? What reason would he have to do this?

At a guess, they didn't want their own people to try and break off. Ukraine, Chechnya, Kazakhs, just to name a few.

They also probably didn't want to lose the few allies they had (India was definitely one)

Attached: main-qimg-929a7054edbc666f770b4d6ee9851a07.jpg (340x510, 59.65K)

At keast USSR had allies. US only had vassals.

Because little countries like Biafra would easily fell to imperialism.

...

Preserving the integrity of nation-states is in line with ML theory.