Putin has Defended the Nazi-Soviet Pact

[asianobserve]

Even from the Soviet position the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (which hastened WW2) was only a partial success. It did not bring Stalin the strategic objective that it wanted from the start: 1) insulation of the USSR from early German attack (German attack came early less than 2 years from the Pact); 2) Exhaustion of the European "imperialist forces" UK, France and Germany (maybe you could consider France exhausted after her defeat by Germany).

It got POland however after the war at have shown to the World that the USSR was able to avenge its 1920 defeat from Polish forces.

 

[Peter]

@pmaitra sir I know you may have watched the video already. My question is why does Stalin`s own grandson hate him????

 

[Ray]

Even from the Soviet position the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (which hastened WW2) was only a partial success. It did not bring Stalin the strategic objective that it wanted from the start: 1) insulation of the USSR from early German attack (German attack came early less than 2 years from the Pact); 2) Exhaustion of the European "imperialist forces" UK, France and Germany (maybe you could consider France exhausted after her defeat by Germany).

It got POland however after the war at have shown to the World that the USSR was able to avenge its 1920 defeat from Polish forces.

So you now subscribe to the idea that Soviets are truthful and purer than driven snow?

How come this dawning of 'reality' misses you in the Ukrainian thread?

Opportunism?

 

[Ray]

@pmaitra sir I know you may have watched the video already. My question is why does Stalin`s own grandson hate him????

Could it be that he did not replace Stalin in the same hereditary manner as teh Nehru Gandhis replace each other by the generations?

 

[Ray]

@asianobserve,

Nothing on Post # 18?

 

[Peter]

Take the case of Gorbachev. He is a good chap as per the West. Is he? Was he not heading the same apparatus that all other Communist headed? And had that apparatus become benign and cute just because of him? That would be codswallop to believe.

@Ray sir When I was reading about Holodomor I found out about Gorbachev`s Ukrainian roots. I think the disintegration of USSR might have been some sort of a complex plot hatched by Gorbachev to avenge the deaths of Ukrainians in Holodomor.

Mikhail Gorbachev - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Holodomor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fall of the Berlin Wall: The Iron Curtain fell because of Mikhail Gorbachev – yet today he is despised as a traitor by Russians - Comment - Voices - The Independent

 

[Peter]

Could it be that he did not replace Stalin in the same hereditary manner as teh Nehru Gandhis replace each other by the generations?

It could be that German England case.

Actually western people do not respect their ancestors as we Indians do. Take the case of the Great russian monarchs ike Peter III,Catherine the Great etc. Catherine is still considered a heroine in Russia. The West may have the most brightest minds but in case of morals and behavior none can beat India.

 

[asianobserve]

@asianobserve,

Nothing on Post # 18?

Read post #19.

 

[asianobserve]

I get it from reading military history.

You read history as a reader of historical events.

We read military history for analysis.



Of course you do not recall atrocties of the British in Malaysia. Why should you? It serves your purpose and your complacency to bask in ignorance and believe what you are told.

How about this to open your eyes?





These are just a few links.

But then ofcourse, you will declare them as fiction, even though it is from the Western media, right?

Lesson to be learnt is that ALL AGGRESSORS AND IMPERIALIST are cruel and have to be so to ensure that there is no opposition to their rule.

I am surprised that you know so little of your country and its history.

Enjoy your reverie.

******************************

I am awaiting your comments on this



Interesting that you are silent to Post #18 and your silence is very conspicuous.

Focus and not be light scattering though the irregularities in the propagation medium i.e your vision of history and biases.

No Empire maintain its dominion without coercive measures. Nobody is denying the atrocities of the British during their rule. But on balance the British has been a positive force in our national development. But unlike a lot of nationalist Asians, the most with anti-colonial hang-ups are in South Asia, what is past is the past for us. Yes there were crimes against our ancestor sin the past and by all means we should not forget them. What is important however is to learn from those times (apply the best practices, customs, policies of the British and discard the worst) and make sure they do not happen to us again. But being wrapped up in eternal hate against the British is not for us. It's a luxury reserved for a lot (not all) South Indians, especially Indians I must say.

I take particular note in some of the pro-democracy slogans of the Hongkong youth in their umbrella protests (doomed but necessary) calling for a return to the British rule (I don;t think they believe it will happen but is more of a protest for them, a way to annoy the Beijing authorities). But enough of this OT.

 

[asianobserve]

@Ray sir When I was reading about Holodomor I found out about Gorbachev`s Ukrainian roots. I think the disintegration of USSR might have been some sort of a complex plot hatched by Gorbachev to avenge the deaths of Ukrainians in Holodomor.

Mikhail Gorbachev - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Holodomor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fall of the Berlin Wall: The Iron Curtain fell because of Mikhail Gorbachev – yet today he is despised as a traitor by Russians - Comment - Voices - The Independent

(This is OT)

I have yet to encounter a serious scholarly article saying that Gorbachev intended the collapse of the USSR. What is mostly said by a lot of scholars both from West and the former USSR is that Gorbachev wanted to reform the USSR to make their model sustainable for the future. He recognised rightly that a lot of the people under their system, especially non-Russians, were longing for more individual space and economic stability (the USSR in the late 70s was experiencing severe economic downturn), and that without loosening up of state control there was a very real danger of the system collapsing. What he did not rightly get was just how bad USSR subjects really wanted these things. He naively thought that a little loosening of control would be enough. That's why he miscalculated the opening of borders in POland and East Berlin which turned into an unstoppable avalanche of exit for millions of people trapped within the USSR, and the non-intervention in the deposition of communist regimes across most members of the USSR. The whole think just unravelled.

 

[pmaitra]

@Peter, I need to see that video you have shared. Thanks for sharing.

 

[pmaitra]

If Stalin's intention in invading Poland was only defensive then why did he order the extermination of the POlish leadership, its military officers and people who could be leaders? You have to reconcile that dark part of Soviet's history in Poland since the extermination order did not come from impulse.

But you know what I think, Stalin was compelled by these 3 main factors (in the order of importance):

1. Stalin wants to get Eastern Poland, which it believed it is entitled to;
2. Stalin wants to avenge Soviet shame when they lost their first war against Poland; and,
3. Stalin wants a buffer zone for what he believed would be a war between capitalists in Europe.

I think Stalin knew what we all know. The Polish nationalists are quasi-Nazis, and would have, given half an opportunity invade USSR with whosoever's help. They had an opportunity at the Time of Trouble, and invaded Russia, taking advantage of Russia's internal chaos and famine. They would have done that again had Hitler invaded USSR. You need to understand the Polish nationalist mindset. They will ride the coattails of anyone, as long as it involves invading Russia. Stalin exterminated the Polish nationalist leadership because a dead nationalist will not ally with the Nazis.

Regarding the 3 points you made, I agree with point 3.

 

[asianobserve]

I think Stalin knew what we all know. The Polish nationalists are quasi-Nazis, and would have, given half an opportunity invade USSR with whosoever's help. They had an opportunity at the Time of Trouble, and invaded Russia, taking advantage of Russia's internal chaos and famine. They would have done that again had Hitler invaded USSR. You need to understand the Polish nationalist mindset. They will ride the coattails of anyone, as long as it involves invading Russia. Stalin exterminated the Polish nationalist leadership because a dead nationalist will not ally with the Nazis.

Regarding the 3 points you made, I agree with point 3.

The Polish were nowhere near NAZI Germany at the time. It was a liberal democracy just like UK and FRance, that's why they were allies. Besides, Poland have always been wary of both Germany and Russia. And pray tell how can Germany invade the USSR without invading Poland first? So if Poland is invaded first or occupied by Germany then can it invade the USSR?

 

[pmaitra]

The Polish were nowhere near NAZI Germany at the time. It was a liberal democracy just like UK and FRance, that's why they were allies.

Well, they were allies, but not because they were "liberal" democracies.

Besides, Poland have always been wary of both Germany and Russia.

True.

And pray tell how can Germany invade the USSR without invading Poland first? So if Poland is invaded first or occupied by Germany then can it invade the USSR?

Hitler would have allied himself with the Polish nationalists and invaded Poland and used these Polish nationalists as pawn against Russia (at least, if I were Stalin, I would keep this possibility open in mind), just like when Hitler invaded the USSR, he allied himself with Soviets, like the Galician Nazis and the Vlasovites. Yes, Hitler invaded Soviet Union after allying himself with the Soviets I mentioned. The Soviets I mentioned do not represent all Soviets, just a subset thereof.

History is replete with examples of how country A makes friends with some people from country B and then with their help, invades country B.

 

[asianobserve]

Well, they were allies, but not because they were "liberal" democracies.

Why not?

Hitler would have allied himself with the Polish nationalists and invaded Poland and used these Polish nationalists as pawn against Russia (at least, if I were Stalin, I would keep this possibility open in mind), just like when Hitler invaded the USSR, he allied himself with Soviets, like the Galician Nazis and the Vlasovites. Yes, Hitler invaded Soviet Union after allying himself with the Soviets I mentioned. The Soviets I mentioned do not represent all Soviets, just a subset thereof.

History is replete with examples of how country A makes friends with some people from country B and then with their help, invades country B.

Did Hitler approach the Polish in an alliance against the USSR? NO. Hitler only approach Stalin for alliance (Stalin supporters must be proud of this). ;-0

 

[pmaitra]

Why not?

You made the claim that Poland was a "liberal democracy" and therefore they were allied with whoever they were allied with, so you explain why.

Did Hitler approach the Polish in an alliance against the USSR? NO. Hitler only approach Stalin for alliance (Stalin supporters must be proud of this). ;-0

Not quite coherent. Read my previous post and try to understand what I am saying.

Did Hitler seek an alliance with France? No. Did Hitler inculcate supporters within France? Yes.

Hitler would have done the same thing with Poland, considering he did the same thing elsewhere.

 

[asianobserve]

You made the claim that Poland was a "liberal democracy" and therefore they were allied with whoever they were allied with, so you explain why.

What is there to explain? My statement was clear: Poland was a liberal democracy therefore it was allied with two leading liberal democracies in Europe at the time France and UK.

Hitler on the other hand, in his bid to start WW2 looked for his kindred spirit, a fellow megalomaniac to another, Stalin. And they naturally clicked...

Not quite coherent. Read my previous post and try to understand what I am saying.

Did Hitler seek an alliance with France? No. Did Hitler inculcate supporters within France? Yes.

Hitler would have done the same thing with Poland, considering he did the same thing elsewhere.

Did France became an ally of Hitler during the war? NO. Did France and Hitler invade any country together? NO. Did Hitler have decisive support in France? NO.

 

[pmaitra]

What is there to explain? My statement was clear: Poland was a liberal democracy therefore it was allied with two leading liberal democracies in Europe at the time France and UK.

Hitler on the other hand, in his bid to start WW2 looked for his kindred spirit, a fellow megalomaniac to another, Stalin. And they naturally clicked...





Did France became an ally of Hitler during the war? NO. Did France and Hitler invade any country together? NO. Did Hitler have decisive support in France? NO.

You asked me a question as to why Stalin purged the Polish leadership, and I gave you my answer as to why Stalin did what he did, and I also gave you the rationale as to what he might have thought to justify what he did.

You don't have to agree with that.

You can keep writing posts with words like "democracy," "megalomaniac," "ally" and all those things. You have gone astray from your original question.

 

[Peter]

(This is OT)

I have yet to encounter a serious scholarly article saying that Gorbachev intended the collapse of the USSR. What is mostly said by a lot of scholars both from West and the former USSR is that Gorbachev wanted to reform the USSR to make their model sustainable for the future. He recognised rightly that a lot of the people under their system, especially non-Russians, were longing for more individual space and economic stability (the USSR in the late 70s was experiencing severe economic downturn), and that without loosening up of state control there was a very real danger of the system collapsing. What he did not rightly get was just how bad USSR subjects really wanted these things. He naively thought that a little loosening of control would be enough. That's why he miscalculated the opening of borders in POland and East Berlin which turned into an unstoppable avalanche of exit for millions of people trapped within the USSR, and the non-intervention in the deposition of communist regimes across most members of the USSR. The whole think just unravelled.

Actually I was just pointing out that this could have been a reason for the collapse of USSR. I know I ave no scholarly articles to back me up as the scholars would have to read Gorbachev`s mind. Also I am not a fan of USSR. Rather I hate it. I am just saying that Gorbachev was from Ukraine which was affected by famine during Stalin`s rule. Many Ukrainians probably hated Stalin and USSR for that. There was an article about Gorbachev and his hatred for the socialist system. He wanted the USSR bloc to be a "socialist democracy with Communist party having certain special powers."noidea: What that means)

It could also be that Gorbachev was just a "naive" and simple man who was fooled by the West. He wanted an utopia for the USSR people but ended up creating a dystopia.



Another interesting point is that he got Nobel Prize for peace when the USSR was just about to break up. That was stupid. The Peace Prize should go to social workers and war relief organizations. They should not be awarded for someone breaking up his country. Also if someone says it was for ending the Cold War with USA then they are wrong. Neither President Reagan(one of my favourite leaders for his speeches) nor did G.W. Bush receive the prize.

The Nobel Peace Prize 1990 was awarded to Mikhail Gorbachev "for his leading role in the peace process which today characterizes important parts of the international community".

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1990/

 

[jouni]

Actually I was just pointing out that this could have been a reason for the collapse of USSR. I know I ave no scholarly articles to back me up as the scholars would have to read Gorbachev`s mind. Also I am not a fan of USSR. Rather I hate it. I am just saying that Gorbachev was from Ukraine which was affected by famine during Stalin`s rule. Many Ukrainians probably hated Stalin and USSR for that. There was an article about Gorbachev and his hatred for the socialist system. He wanted the USSR bloc to be a "socialist democracy with Communist party having certain special powers."noidea: What that means)

It could also be that Gorbachev was just a "naive" and simple man who was fooled by the West. He wanted an utopia for the USSR people but ended up creating a dystopia.



Another interesting point is that he got Nobel Prize for peace when the USSR was just about to break up. That was stupid. The Peace Prize should go to social workers and war relief organizations. They should not be awarded for someone breaking up his country. Also if someone says it was for ending the Cold War with USA then they are wrong. Neither President Reagan(one of my favourite leaders for his speeches) nor did G.W. Bush receive the prize.


The Nobel Peace Prize 1990

Nobel prize for Gorbi was deserved. He was the key person for the liberation of former Warsaw pact countries in Eastern Europe. Late 80´s leaders of those countries were hard core old guard communists. Without approval from Gorbi, the independence movements would have never been successful. Of course he paid high prize two years later, when he was ousted and USSR collapsed. Gorbi is the man, man!