I wrote a long essay and just deleted it, because I think I'm not coming to a conclusion; the core things that made me uncomfortable with the question are:
- I'm not sure what "condemn" means,
- I'm not sure what "officially" means, and
- I'm not sure what the precendent is that would cause us to condemn one action of the US government separate from all the other actions that turned out in retrospect to be unpopular.
Although superficially the question is objective, answerable, and historical, my doubts about the meaning of the words lead me to doubt that the answer would be meaningful. I believed that this question would be a better fit for a site which encouraged a more discursive response. I believe that the answer to this question would mislead as many as it enlightened, infurate as many as it clarified, and insult as many as it educated. I feel obliged to acknowledge that I did not know that the Supreme Soviet had condemned the Soviet involvement in their Afghan actions. I'm not sure that that would have changed my "close" vote, but honestly compells me to admit that the fact should be taken into account. If the question is re-opened, I suggest that this fact (appropriately cited) be documented.
Aside 1: The Vietnam war is not an era of history that particularly compells my interest. I feel obliged to acknowledge my limits and my ignorance.
Aside 2: I also want to thank @FelixGoldberg for questioning the close vote. I think that my participation is more educational for me, and more enjoyable if I know that I will be held to account for my opinions/votes/actions.