Local amateur historian and occasional beloved family member Paul Poppavich vehemently dismisses news of fascism’s rising international tide, despite an encyclopedic knowledge of World War II history.
The Soviets initially signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, in '39, after Stalin concluded that the old Allied alliance of WW1 was functionally dead and the US/UK’s government wasn’t going to put up a fight against German encroachment.
A lot of American liberals took that to mean Stalin was a German ally, intent on carving up Europe between them. And there’s ample period propaganda with Hitler and Stalin in cahoots. One famous bit even has them getting married.
The “Trump/Putin Kissing” meme is an echo of these critiques.
Molotov-Ribbentrop was a non-aggression territorial and economic agreement, not an alliance. One that every knowledgeable historian agrees was seen by the signees as temporary (except possibly by Stalin’s drunk ass)
It was not an alliance, they were not in the Axis, and any suggestion otherwise is suspect especially in this context.
Shit, the first thing that happened between them after the invasion of Poland was the Winter War where Finland was supplied by Germany and was a hair’s breadth and some racism away from joining the Axis itself.
It was a detente that allowed Germany to focus its military expansion into Poland and France without fear of a Russian counterattack.
If you want to really bust balls, you could easily argue that America was a German ally, given how influential Ford, IBM, and Standard Oil were in getting the German war machine off the ground. But that’s something of an argument for M-R, as Russia wasn’t in a position to fight a war with both Germany and America (any more than Germany was able to years later). German expansion into France ruined its relationship with the US and allowed the Soviets to broker a deal with FDR. And the rest is history.
Shit, the first thing that happened between them after the invasion of Poland was the Winter War where Finland was supplied by Germany
That was a bit more complicated, as it was initiated by the Russians with the intent of installing a Soviet-friendly government as a buffer zone around Leningrad. The war ended in Russian defeat and - after Germany broke the non-aggression treaty - very nearly cost them Leningrad as a result.
The Winter War did not end in Russian defeat. After initially getting slapped around by Finland, the USSR committed more troops and forced Finland to concede to all of the Soviets’ initial territorial demands (and more).
Pyrrhic Victory, then, given the costs. It did not meaningfully improve their security, as Leningrad was under siege by the Germans shortly thereafter.
if you want to really bust balls, you could easily argue that America was a German ally, given how influential Ford, IBM, and Standard Oil were in getting the German war machine off the ground.
if you follow that logic, then Krupps started WW1 and WW2.
But actually, well, they kinda did. Read: The Arms of Krupps.
The Soviets initially signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, in '39, after Stalin concluded that the old Allied alliance of WW1 was functionally dead and the US/UK’s government wasn’t going to put up a fight against German encroachment.
A lot of American liberals took that to mean Stalin was a German ally, intent on carving up Europe between them. And there’s ample period propaganda with Hitler and Stalin in cahoots. One famous bit even has them getting married.
The “Trump/Putin Kissing” meme is an echo of these critiques.
Molotov-Ribbentrop was a non-aggression territorial and economic agreement, not an alliance. One that every knowledgeable historian agrees was seen by the signees as temporary (except possibly by Stalin’s drunk ass)
It was not an alliance, they were not in the Axis, and any suggestion otherwise is suspect especially in this context.
Shit, the first thing that happened between them after the invasion of Poland was the Winter War where Finland was supplied by Germany and was a hair’s breadth and some racism away from joining the Axis itself.
It was a detente that allowed Germany to focus its military expansion into Poland and France without fear of a Russian counterattack.
If you want to really bust balls, you could easily argue that America was a German ally, given how influential Ford, IBM, and Standard Oil were in getting the German war machine off the ground. But that’s something of an argument for M-R, as Russia wasn’t in a position to fight a war with both Germany and America (any more than Germany was able to years later). German expansion into France ruined its relationship with the US and allowed the Soviets to broker a deal with FDR. And the rest is history.
That was a bit more complicated, as it was initiated by the Russians with the intent of installing a Soviet-friendly government as a buffer zone around Leningrad. The war ended in Russian defeat and - after Germany broke the non-aggression treaty - very nearly cost them Leningrad as a result.
The Winter War did not end in Russian defeat. After initially getting slapped around by Finland, the USSR committed more troops and forced Finland to concede to all of the Soviets’ initial territorial demands (and more).
You two are going a bit two deep responding to a clueless teenager-level attempt at humor that gets published by that site.
Stay out of the way it’s about to get physical.
Let me hear your body talk!
Thanks for the ducking ear worm
You expect me to pass up an opportunity to pontificate upon the Winter War? As if!
Pyrrhic Victory, then, given the costs. It did not meaningfully improve their security, as Leningrad was under siege by the Germans shortly thereafter.
if you follow that logic, then Krupps started WW1 and WW2.
But actually, well, they kinda did. Read: The Arms of Krupps.
The hard truth about war profiteering
deleted by creator