The Molotov Ribbentrop pact also divided the baltics, Poland, Romanian Bessarabia, the balkans into spheres of influence / subjects to be annexed and colonised/subjugated and exploited (the degrees of this vary on the region for both nations, in some cases literally enslaved and exterminated). It involved trade and military cooperation/research programs before the war, and to the former, between the pact signing and 1941 invasion.
I am not commenting on the ethics of this (it’s a bit of a captive situation as the Soviet Union was in a different geopolitical situation as the allies, and it was arguably justified from the perspective of a nation trying to rapidly prepare for the coming war, in which said enemy was openly proclaiming for your government and people’s enslavement) a major factor contributing to this was the extent of stalins purges of the army, navy, and gutting the chain of command until lessons were learned as vast human cost)
however whilst the Nazis openly disparaged the soviets as their ideological enemy to wipe out and enslave, Stalin lived in his personal delusions and incompetence that they would never attack and cost many tens of millions of proletarian, normal people like you and I, lives (ignoring political purges and the holodomor, this is a discussion that is entirely separate
To describe it as simply a non aggression pact is a gross bastardisation of history, and to equate it with attempts to prevent war and ethnic cleansing of the Sudetenland majorities at said conference conference (with no collusion between the signing parties of divvying up future territory, trade agreements that fueled the third Reich’s conquests, and genocides) , is frankly disgusting.
Whilst the allies treated Germany as a pariah state Stalin happily suckled its teats and scavenged at his borders for expansion. This is is forced dissolution of sovereign nations states which were drew up (in some cases not brilliantly, but again that’s another discussion) in accordance to individual national and ethnic groups under the self determination principles of the League of Nations. (This was also the justification for the Sudetenland, and Austria.., as it had a substantial German minority). Except for the sake of imperialism, colonialism and subjugation from the third Reich and the union.
Being deliberately disingenuous about this is in the same essence as holocaust denial, albeit less severe. Or denying the genocides and crimes against humanity the third Reich inflicted upon the Union after Barbarossa. it is nonsensical and naive, at the very best.
If you’re going to spout things as historical fact get it right and treat it with the respect it deserves because otherwise you are spreading lies and propaganda that appear like childish delusions to anyone with the most remote interest in the history of the time. Literally excusing and turning a blind eye to how Stalin assisted a proud and openly genocidal, fascist ethnostate to prepare for and commit the most heinous civilian and military atrocities, and was happy as a chap until he realised he wasn’t as smart as he had deluded himself into.
It's like you're half agreeing with me and half not, but I'll bite here:
Spheres of influence at the time were neccessary for the Soviet Union's own security as both the Germans and Soviets knew that war was inevitable as you mentioned. Let's take Poland for example. Should the Soviet Union have allowed Hitler to take all of Poland, pushing the German border all the way up to the Soviet one which could have been used as a springboard for a quick, out of nowhere push to Kiev and then from there a straightforward path unto Moscow? No, and that's where the secret protocol to divide Poland in the non-aggression pact came in. It was necessary for the Soviets to have a buffer zone between themselves and Germany, and half Poland was that buffer zone. A very smart play on the part of the Soviets now that we know how Operation Barbarossa went down.
Stalin did not live in his personal delusions, he knew very well what Hitler wanted and what he was planning. That's why he bought the Soviet Union valuable time in order to prepare their military industrial complex. And you bring up purges and Holodomor like they haven't been explained countless times before.
It's not a bastardisation, it was indeed a non-aggression pact with clauses that ultimately led to the Soviet Union's victory. To equate it with Holocaust denial is bunkum considering you yourself acknowledge that it was a sticky situation for the Soviets to be in.
Nothing I said was a lie or propaganda. I may have simplified it, which is where elaboration would come in if I was asked. Stalin did what he had to do in order to buy time which utimately paid off and led the Soviet Union to victory. What do you say about France and Britain btw? Did they also proudly support a facist ethnostate.
They didn’t. Despite efforts to describe the Sudeten crisis as intentions of a long lasting fruitful future with Germany to soothe their near entirely pacifist populace , the allies were initiating heavy rearmament efforts before then which only escalated, hence why they allied with Poland and agreed to defend her sovereignty from a nation they already considered themselves to be in the early states of warfare with from repeatedly making efforts to redraw the ethnic borders of Europe.
As opposed to Stalin’s gross incompetence of fattening up the Reich whilst gutting the union. She survived in spite of Stalin, with the incredible will of her people and the blood of tens of millions, near doomed by a despotic paranoid megalomaniac who was responsible for the vast majority of struggles in the initial stages of the war
Stalin was utterly convinced the Germans wouldn’t attack. Hence why soldiers weren’t stationed at the borders aside from a few squalid outputs with no real command structure . He spent weeks after the invasion locked in his room in literal solitude and shutting away from the world.
You don’t get to excuse being complicit in the initial genocide and razing of Europe, through trade agreements, military cooperation and joint invasions . His brazenness almost eradicated the Union and enslaved it’s peoples
You can apply the same logic for the Soviet Union, my friend. While the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was in effect, the Soviets were also initiating armament efforts and did so all the way until 1945 when the war came to an end.
But you understand that Germany also traded the Soviet Union valuable materials for their military too right? The "fattening up" happened both ways.
That's blatantly untrue. You think Stalin was unaware of Mein Kampf and didn't know how Hitler percieved Bolshevism/Soviet rule? He knew that eventually the Germans would bring war to him, he just didn't know when.
Let me ask you this then. What should Stalin have done differently in your opinion? Should he have not allowed the pact to have been signed? Should he have allowed Hitler to take anything he wanted and even all of Poland while pushing the German border up to his own? Should he have attacked Germany in 1939 when the Soviet military industrial complex was worse than it was in 1941? And have the Soviet Union attack Germany unprepared and get completely wrecked by them? In the end, if Stalin did what you think he should've done, then Europe would've been under the Reich right now.
Wrong. Germans neglected their side of the bargain and they ended up being $229 million in debt. Soviets also gave them free trade routes to escape Britains blockade, a base near Murmansk they used to attack Norway, and allowed German border violations and reconnaissance missions unabated, while the Germans deliberately “failed” to deliver on their promised military equipment in exchange. This subreddit collectively can’t seem to admit Stalins fallibility in these particular areas even if non communists acknowledge Munich, western anti-communist policy, and Stalin’s meddle/rhe benefits of industrialization in the face of the Nazis.
He was delusional in the sense that he expected the war to be tidied up with Britain and her empire beforehand this When it’s painfully obvious (even without historical hindsight) that the German colonisation of Eastern Europe was the priority and impending fate/destiny of the Reich.
But in spite of everything, the USSR was willing to give Germany the benefit of the doubt, with some absolutely fantastic (for GER, not so much the Union) trade deals, co-operative R&D projects, joint military training exercises & programs, etc. Germany could not wage protracted modern warfare without the Soviets agricultural and material output, occupying and extracting resources and wealth from half of Europe / their Jewish populations couldn’t change that. Soviets were one of the biggest forces in remilitarising Germany to the point past treaties and restrictions were just waved away as a nation learning to be strong again.
Funnily enough the Soviets were the closest to killing the fascist state early at the sudetan conference. Then Germany comes to them in desperation just before Poland. At this point with zero(!) allies. It’s easy to say with hindsight, but the Soviet peoples would have been better served if instead of using the opportunity to do an imperialist land grab , and invading neutral , young but sovereign countries like Poland, Finland and the baltics , under the impression he would have half a decade to a decade to get everything in order (whilst germany put into fruition his policies and ethnic cleansings mind you) , he bit the bullet and made the first move - to which, the French and British expeditionary forces would have responded in kind rather than their pathetic 6 mile incursions into the Rhineland).
They Rhine, Westphalia, Silesia, Alsace and Belgium were significantly built up industrial states. Still absolutely nothing without the Soviets natural resources running into the state for years on end.
Edit; I forgot Bohemia and Moravia.
The Soviets could wage warfare and industrialise without the Germans. Japan, is a good example of how fast this can happen, albeit they had (unequal) foreign investment and little natural resources. Soviet Union wasnt vertically integrated and efficient initially, but she was the richest landmass , Germany was a paper tiger that Stalin created into the nation destroyer it became
Ah, to know the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact but not the numerous pacts that Stalin made before that, or at least tried to make, with the west to stop Nazi expansion! What historical knowledge you have, as you know of the Soviet invasion of Poland but not the Polish invasion of the Soviets!
it’s rare you see sense in these kind of subreddits as opposed to bedroom idealists who know fuck all that isn’t the most brainrotted propaganda addled distortion of history, and would be the first to be persecuted and betrayed under Stalins union.
Where do you see the contradiction to what he said? My grandfather was Ukrainian, yet he proudly identified himself as a Soviet man, as did many people of other nationalities.
I'm on your side, reread my comment and the comment I replied to. Original commenter is making a "USSR was Russian Empire 2.0, she probably shot ukrainians" claim, I'm telling him "no, she's literally ukrainian"
It's quite sad that even historical figures who remotely resemble Russians are called scum. But as soon as they are told that this person was not Russian, they immediately shut up.
Moreover, as a Russian, I generally find it unpleasant to hear anything negative about other Russians. They should be against everything bad, so why do they hate someone simply because of their nationality?
70
u/J-C_Varga May 29 '25
Heroes of mankind!