5 ms·

Yes, cherrypicking the pact when the relevant part is the international context back then.. Soviet Union had to defend itself not only from nazi Germany. To re

Yes, cherrypicking the pact when the relevant part is the international context back then.. Soviet Union had to defend itself not only from nazi Germany. To remind you of western capitalists helping the nazis? Of the British royal family ties to the nazis?

lycopodiopsida 1y ago
Yes, yes, the "defense" where you occupy parts of Poland, attack Finland. And of course, providing resources and training facilities to the dear ally in Berlin. There is a reason why soviets always talked about "BoB" and never about WWII - they've entered the latter as allies of Hitler, which does not fit to the soviet victim narrative.
- justsomejew 1y ago
  [dead]
- thatsamejew 1y ago
  [dead]
- thatsamejew 1y ago
  Here are some documents about american capitalists financing the nazis https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=WallStHitler&C=11.0 https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=WallStHitler&C=...
  - lycopodiopsida 1y ago
    The USA had their share of nazi-related business (IBM, e.g.), but no amount of whataboutism will save you from the simple fact that soviets entered the war as active allies of nazi germany.
    - thatsamejew 1y ago
      You wrote above that Soviet Union was helping the nazis before 22 june 1945. I just told you that those who really helped to build the nazi war machine, were you (the american and other capitalists), and not the Soviet Union. Also the motives were quite clear, to "fight the judeo bolshevism". I am not denying the existence of Molotov Ribbentrop pact, only the emphasis western propaganda puts on it (for obvious reasons) is misleading, and deliberately does not take into account parts of the historical context.
      - lycopodiopsida 1y ago
        > I just told you that those who really helped to build the nazi war machine, were you (the american and other capitalists), and not the Soviet Union. Oh, this is not a point of blaming and finger pointing, looking for excuses why the communists are not to blame(are they ever?). It is to illustrate the very simple fact that the soviet union was an imperialist, expansive and warmongering state and one of the direct initiators of WWII - contrary to the usual soviet-russian victim narrative. Not that we would not know it in the retrospective looking at the soviet occupation of half of europe.
        thatsamejew 1y ago
        Half of Europe is nothing compared to what the US owns (de facto) now or what the British empire had. And they are (were) imperialist, expansive, and war mongering. Actually Soviet Union, compared to them, is an amateur. As to who started the war, the basic fact is that the nazis attacked Soviet Union on 22 june 1941, that it was an immense tragedy, and that saying that the victim was the aggressor is a very unjust and evil thing to say.
        throwaway3060 1y ago
        You forget that the Soviet Union's sphere of influence was a lot more than just half of Europe. For the families who left, there is gratitude every day that the Soviet Union lacked the power to control more than it did - certainly not for lack of will.

lycopodiopsida 1y ago

Yes, yes, the "defense" where you occupy parts of Poland, attack Finland. And of course, providing resources and training facilities to the dear ally in Berlin. There is a reason why soviets always talked about "BoB" and never about WWII - they've entered the latter as allies of Hitler, which does not fit to the soviet victim narrative.

justsomejew 1y ago
[dead]
thatsamejew 1y ago
[dead]
thatsamejew 1y ago
Here are some documents about american capitalists financing the nazis https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=WallStHitler&C=11.0 https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=WallStHitler&C=...
- lycopodiopsida 1y ago
  The USA had their share of nazi-related business (IBM, e.g.), but no amount of whataboutism will save you from the simple fact that soviets entered the war as active allies of nazi germany.
  - thatsamejew 1y ago
    You wrote above that Soviet Union was helping the nazis before 22 june 1945. I just told you that those who really helped to build the nazi war machine, were you (the american and other capitalists), and not the Soviet Union. Also the motives were quite clear, to "fight the judeo bolshevism". I am not denying the existence of Molotov Ribbentrop pact, only the emphasis western propaganda puts on it (for obvious reasons) is misleading, and deliberately does not take into account parts of the historical context.
    - lycopodiopsida 1y ago
      > I just told you that those who really helped to build the nazi war machine, were you (the american and other capitalists), and not the Soviet Union. Oh, this is not a point of blaming and finger pointing, looking for excuses why the communists are not to blame(are they ever?). It is to illustrate the very simple fact that the soviet union was an imperialist, expansive and warmongering state and one of the direct initiators of WWII - contrary to the usual soviet-russian victim narrative. Not that we would not know it in the retrospective looking at the soviet occupation of half of europe.
      - thatsamejew 1y ago
        Half of Europe is nothing compared to what the US owns (de facto) now or what the British empire had. And they are (were) imperialist, expansive, and war mongering. Actually Soviet Union, compared to them, is an amateur. As to who started the war, the basic fact is that the nazis attacked Soviet Union on 22 june 1941, that it was an immense tragedy, and that saying that the victim was the aggressor is a very unjust and evil thing to say.
        throwaway3060 1y ago
        You forget that the Soviet Union's sphere of influence was a lot more than just half of Europe. For the families who left, there is gratitude every day that the Soviet Union lacked the power to control more than it did - certainly not for lack of will.