8 ms·
yes, that's simplifying a lot, definitely. First, the whole landscape would've been different. And then, Hitler invaded Poland because he could, and because he
by kofejnik 7y ago
yes, that's simplifying a lot, definitely. First, the whole landscape would've been different. And then, Hitler invaded Poland because he could, and because he had additional reassurance from Molotov-Ribbentrop. Also, you are conveniently skipping the part where USSR invaded the remaining part of Poland two weeks later. (Need I remind you about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre ?)
As for Auschwitz, nice strawman. Stalin and Lenin have blood of millions on their hands, no need to bring up something unrelated.
- antisemiotic 7y agoI meant that while my country was quite fucked because of USSR, it would be completely wiped out without it. [1] I brought up Auschwitz specifically because it was the Red Army that finally kicked Germans out of there (only when it was convenient, but still). [1] I know people IRL who claim Poland should have teamed up with Hitler against USSR and then double-crossed him, but I have doubts it would work. EDIT: I re-read the above conversation, and I'm still not sure how did I end up defending USSR in the name of a discussion boiling down to "do you prefer plague or leprosy?" I don't think we really disagree all that much, so I'm out, thanks for conversation.