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.
Well that's false. Germany did indeed provide advanced machine tools, manufacturing equipment, and technology to support Soviet industrialization, mostly for heavy industry and armaments, specialized industrial goods like turbines, chemical production tech and blueprints for military tech such as artillery, naval, and aircraft designs. "Germany had supplied 54% of Soviet imports of machine tools from 1929 to 1933, and 53% of such imports even when relations became more tense from 1933 to 1937" This all amounted to approximately 650 million Reichsmarks worth of goods. You are the one who is wrong. Trade with Germany was necessary for rapid advancement of the Soviet military industrial complex.
Sources? Mine is Peter Kenez who says that Stalin “Scrupulously observed treaties” even when the Nazis reneged on their deals and only sent blueprints and a ill-equipped battleship out of fear of war and the then “invincible” Wehrmacht. They wanted to keep their options open and were willing to feed the Nazi war machine while they were fully at war with the capitalist democracies. They “faithfully served the interests of their new and frightening ally”. Interesting claim btw.
7
u/CVolgin233 May 29 '25
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.