393
O no! Not the nazisss (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
401 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 1 year ago (46 children)

But like what should they have done, reach out to other nations like UK and France to create an anti-nazi alliance?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 46 child comments
    •
  • [+] -15 points 1 year ago* (43 children)

    Refuse to enable Nazi expansion, prepare for war, try to make allies. So carry on before they chose to make a pact. Making that pact with Nazis wasn't some inevitable law of nature they just had to do. You can always resist.

    There's always a reason for all kinds of actions but it's just an attempt to avoid moral scrutiny to present the situation as inevitable. There were other options, they chose not to do those but rather made a pact. Agree or disagree with the decision from moral or some realpolitik sense, doesn't matter. Presenting it as inevitable is avoidance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
    •
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (36 children)

    molotow-ribbentrop was to buy time to prepare for war. They built a huge industrial complex east of the Ural to prepare since they correctly predicted that their facilities in the west would soon be overrun. They also tried to find allies but were shut down at every turn. When it was clear that there were no allies to be found and every other nation had made a non-aggression pact with the nazis only then did they resort to making their own.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
    •
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (35 children)

    I don't think anyone thought the USSR did it for no reason. I'm just saying they could've chosen not to make those pacts and that's why dividing Eastern Europe with the Nazis is given as a moral black mark for USSR.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    Lol, anti communists will never forgive the USSR for not letting the Nazis have all of Eastern Europe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
    •
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (25 children)

    I don't think Nazis should've had any part of Europe tbh.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    Then you probably shouldn't condemn the soviets for not letting them have it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    They let Nazi Germany have parts of Poland and Lithuania in the agreement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    They weren't in a position to stop them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    We don't know how it would've played out if both Western Allies and the USSR committed publicly to declaring war in case Poland is attacked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    You're expecting the USSR to have imperilled tens of millions of lives and risk wholesale extermination by deliberately undermining their own position based solely on "well, you know for sure!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago* (14 children)

    France and UK committed to it. I don't expect the USSR to have done it, but I would've preferred to see that sort of larger deterrent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Ok.

    The USSR isn't obligated to sabotage it's own existence because some random unborn Finish person "would've preferred to see it"

    Not to mention the UK and Frances commitment turned out to be extremely token, a fact that came as zero suprise to the USSR

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    What's this about being obligated

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    So what even is your position anymore? You've stayed completely from where you started

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I haven't had any position on some obligations. I don't know where you got that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    You have a real issue actually answering questions, don't you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Hard to answer when you've refused to tell me what obligations you're talking about

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Why does that make it hard to answer?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Because I don't know what you are referring to

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You don't know what your own positions are?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I haven't had any position on obligations, that's why I'm confused by your question

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The UK and France didn't commit to jack shit. They had a long history of enabling the Nazis at that point, planning to use them as their attack dog in the east. Not only that, the USSR had been pleading for an anti-nazi alliance for a long time and got ignored.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    Um, they very much did make promises to that effect. Neither were in good position to actually help the Poles when push came to shove, hence the Phony War. Brittain did some good with their navy, but neither could get enough troops to where it mattered to help, so they buckled down on ramping up their own war efforts at home to better mobilize. Did they fo it out of cowardice and throw the Poles to the wolves, or out of necessity because they would have been overrun had they over commited? That's a question that has been the subject of much study. But they both very publicly and loudly commit to their defense, they simply failed to meaningfully uphold that commitment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    Your country fought on the side of the Nazis in WW2, and helped them carry out the scorched earth policy you absolutely won't forgive the USSR for turning back.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Not sure if we are supposed to agree with everything our countries have historically done. Are you from a place where you're comfortable with doing that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Well well well. How quickly one goes from "they should have done everything perfectly and not even buying time is morally acceptable, deplorable stuff really" to "oh my god what's a little Nazi collaboration between friends? Everyone was doing it anyway"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Why? It bought them time to prepare further and gave them the possibility to station troops forward in land that they knew was gonna be overrun by nazis and need liberation afterwards anyway. I really don't understand what's so bad about it. You dont win wars with "moral points" but with strategy like that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    You're asking why making a pact with the Nazis is a black mark? I would think that's obvious. Same for Chamberlain and everyone else.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    So your problem is that their victory over the nazis wasn't pure enough?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    My issue is that these sort of deals enables Nazis to conquer much of Europe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    these sort of deals enables Nazis to conquer much of Europe.

    Stalin offered a million men to France and the UK to stop the nazis. They refused.

    Meanwhile, your country was literally in the Axis in WW2, and helped the nazis carry out their atrocities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Meanwhile, your country was literally in the Axis in WW2, and helped the nazis carry out their atrocities.

    Am I personally guilty of what happened in my country's the past or how is that relevant?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Damn, not a fan of people bringing up completely irrelevant points about what other countries should have done?

    Crazy. Sure would be embarrassing if that was something you constantly did yourself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago*

    They needed to buy time to prepare for war, it wasn't until the nazi horde was in Stalingrad that they were ready to fight back. The nazis were going to conquer as much as they did regardless. There doesn't seem to be any detrimental effect on reality to signing the pact.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    You really are writing a lot of responses that don't answer the question. It's funny how you go on about there being other options while diligently refusing to actually list them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Instead of making a pact with the Nazis, refuse to do that and prepare for war. Do you want a fucking WikiHow article detailing the steps for a troop mobilization of 1939 Soviet Union or what

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They did prepare for war with the Nazis, and the pact was part of that. So I take it then your answer is that they shouldn't have prepared as much for the war with the Nazis.

    Given that the level of preparedness they did manage was still only barely enough to win, you answer is ultimately that you wanted the USSR to take a course of action that would have allowed the Nazis to win the Eastern Front.

    Which is ultimately always what it comes down; resentment that the Soviets won.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't think anyone should've made pacts with Nazis and enabled their actions through that. It's not specific to the USSR.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So? The USSR had to make a decision in the world where the West did make those pacts. What you think has zero relevancy to that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago

    And they could've decided differently and try to prevent the attack on Poland from happening. Instead they made a pact, jointly carved up Poland (and took over the Baltics and invaded Finland).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent