9 ms·

Of course he created it for defence. Few years before he made the design Russia was invaded out of blue by an army with a goal to enslave whole nation. The plan

by michalu 13y ago

Of course he created it for defence. Few years before he made the design Russia was invaded out of blue by an army with a goal to enslave whole nation. The plans of Nazis executed in Poland included systematically malnourishing nation to break the spirit and physique of young, giving no education to slavic kids except counting to 500 and learning to serve Nazis like gods. And this was actually executed. (add 16% of your population killed for no reason, gas chambers etc.) Now experience all this like Kalashnikov did, and I guess you would think differently about the role of guns then most people do now in 2013.

refurb 13y ago
Few years before he made the design Russia was invaded out of blue by an army with a goal to enslave whole nation. Don't forget that Russia was invaded by the same army they colluded with to split up and enslave the nation of Poland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
- michalu 13y ago
  They did, and so Great Britain and France pacted with Nazis to give in Czechoslovakia in "Munich betrayal" Czechoslavakia was an ally with Fr/GB agreeing to defend each other and they were much better prepared for war. In WW2 none of the main actors were innocent.
  - refurb 13y ago
    Similar situations, but different in the sense that Russia took Poland from a position of power, while GB/Fr gave up Czechoslovakia from a position of weakness and didn't make any territorial gains from it.
    - oddx 13y ago
      Another difference is relations to annexed territories. Territories, annexed from Poland, had majority of population Eastern Slavs (Ukrainian and Belarussian), not Poles, were part of Russia for hundreds of years (except Galicia) and were annexed by Poland from Russia (Galicia from Austria) 20 years before.
  - gaius 13y ago
    As I said on here recently before, Chamberlain had no choice. Britain was not ready to fight (see Dunkirk). He was playing for time.
    - vacri 13y ago
      The same is true of the Soviets - they were also hastily arming themselves. They were still training secret, massive armies in Siberia as the Germans approached Stalingrad, a city ridiculously deep in Soviet territory. They also had the massive officer purge of the late 30's to recover from.
    - bradleyjg 13y ago
      That's true, in 1938 Britain wasn't ready to fight. Probably not in May 1937 when Chamberlain became PM either. But Chamberlain was a high government official (arguably #2 overall) from 1931. The fact that the British military was where it was, and the German military was where it was, in 1938 was partly his responsibility.
      - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
        Hindsight is always 20/20. Chamberlain didn't see it coming in 1931, events moved swiftly after 1937.
- gdy 13y ago
  Don't forget that the West apparently didn't mind Germany expanding eastward a little bit [1]. Also don't forget that the poor little nation of Poland didn't let the Red Army pass through to defend Czechoslovakia (quite reasonable considering that it took a chunk of the USSR territory not a long before that [4]) and it wasn't shy of getting a piece of Czechoslovakia too [2]. Quoting Churchill: "Poland which with hyena appetite had only six months before joined in the pillage and destruction of the Czechoslovak State" [3]. In this situation expanding the border westward can be viewed as a preventive war on part of the USSR. If you an American this might remind you of the contemporary Bush Doctrine. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_occupation_of_Czechoslovakia#Division_of_Czechoslovakia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_occupation_of_Czechoslov... [3] http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/10/the-polish-guarantee-churchill-speaks-.html http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/10/the-polish-gu... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_1920 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_19...
  - berntb 13y ago
    ('gdy' is a karma 38 account, posting most of a day later.) The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact has been officially acknowledged by Russia since 1989. It is hardly honest to argue the innocence of USSR by blaming the victims. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact "the treaty included a secret protocol that divided territories of Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland into Nazi and Soviet "spheres of influence", anticipating potential "territorial and political rearrangements" of these countries. Thereafter, Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939. After the Soviet-Japanese ceasefire agreement took effect on 16 September, Stalin ordered his own invasion of Poland on 17 September.[3] Part of southeastern (Karelia) and Salla region in Finland were annexed by the Soviet Union after the Winter War. This was followed by Soviet annexations of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertza region."
    - gdy 13y ago
      Somehow you've managed to completely ignore my point. Maybe this will help: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/nov/24/russia.politics http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/nov/24/russia.politics

by michalu 13y ago

refurb 13y ago

Few years before he made the design Russia was invaded out of blue by an army with a goal to enslave whole nation. Don't forget that Russia was invaded by the same army they colluded with to split up and enslave the nation of Poland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact

michalu 13y ago
They did, and so Great Britain and France pacted with Nazis to give in Czechoslovakia in "Munich betrayal" Czechoslavakia was an ally with Fr/GB agreeing to defend each other and they were much better prepared for war. In WW2 none of the main actors were innocent.
- refurb 13y ago
  Similar situations, but different in the sense that Russia took Poland from a position of power, while GB/Fr gave up Czechoslovakia from a position of weakness and didn't make any territorial gains from it.
  - oddx 13y ago
    Another difference is relations to annexed territories. Territories, annexed from Poland, had majority of population Eastern Slavs (Ukrainian and Belarussian), not Poles, were part of Russia for hundreds of years (except Galicia) and were annexed by Poland from Russia (Galicia from Austria) 20 years before.
- gaius 13y ago
  As I said on here recently before, Chamberlain had no choice. Britain was not ready to fight (see Dunkirk). He was playing for time.
  - vacri 13y ago
    The same is true of the Soviets - they were also hastily arming themselves. They were still training secret, massive armies in Siberia as the Germans approached Stalingrad, a city ridiculously deep in Soviet territory. They also had the massive officer purge of the late 30's to recover from.
  - bradleyjg 13y ago
    That's true, in 1938 Britain wasn't ready to fight. Probably not in May 1937 when Chamberlain became PM either. But Chamberlain was a high government official (arguably #2 overall) from 1931. The fact that the British military was where it was, and the German military was where it was, in 1938 was partly his responsibility.
    - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
      Hindsight is always 20/20. Chamberlain didn't see it coming in 1931, events moved swiftly after 1937.
gdy 13y ago
Don't forget that the West apparently didn't mind Germany expanding eastward a little bit [1]. Also don't forget that the poor little nation of Poland didn't let the Red Army pass through to defend Czechoslovakia (quite reasonable considering that it took a chunk of the USSR territory not a long before that [4]) and it wasn't shy of getting a piece of Czechoslovakia too [2]. Quoting Churchill: "Poland which with hyena appetite had only six months before joined in the pillage and destruction of the Czechoslovak State" [3]. In this situation expanding the border westward can be viewed as a preventive war on part of the USSR. If you an American this might remind you of the contemporary Bush Doctrine. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_occupation_of_Czechoslovakia#Division_of_Czechoslovakia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_occupation_of_Czechoslov... [3] http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/10/the-polish-guarantee-churchill-speaks-.html http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/10/the-polish-gu... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_1920 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_19...
- berntb 13y ago
  ('gdy' is a karma 38 account, posting most of a day later.) The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact has been officially acknowledged by Russia since 1989. It is hardly honest to argue the innocence of USSR by blaming the victims. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact "the treaty included a secret protocol that divided territories of Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland into Nazi and Soviet "spheres of influence", anticipating potential "territorial and political rearrangements" of these countries. Thereafter, Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939. After the Soviet-Japanese ceasefire agreement took effect on 16 September, Stalin ordered his own invasion of Poland on 17 September.[3] Part of southeastern (Karelia) and Salla region in Finland were annexed by the Soviet Union after the Winter War. This was followed by Soviet annexations of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertza region."
  - gdy 13y ago
    Somehow you've managed to completely ignore my point. Maybe this will help: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/nov/24/russia.politics http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/nov/24/russia.politics