I would’ve rather like to have seen Soviet Union doing their all to prevent the attack on Poland by Germany instead of joining the attacker in carving up Poland (and Eastern Europe) and doing their own massacres
They did. The Eastern Pact was killed by the British, French, and Polish. Poland hated Russia, and had just been at war with the USSR 2 decades ago, where they took areas in Ukraine and Lithuania. When the Soviet Union entered Poland after the Polish state fell to the Nazis, they met resistance and obviously met that resistance with force, but the way the Soviets treated the Polish and the way the Nazis treated the Polish were entirely uncomparable, the Nazis were slaughtering men, women, and children in unmarked mass graves. Goebbels even tried to blame one such massacre on the Red Army, Katyn, despite the spent ammunition clearly being marked as produced by Nazi Germany in 1941.
You don’t have to have formal pact or alliance in place to pledge to declare war in case of another country is invaded. You don’t have to have an agreement in place to share intelligence to them, such as the secret protocols or about the negotiations, etc etc. They could’ve done more.
Goebbels even tried to blame one such massacre on the Red Army, Katyn, despite the spent ammunition clearly being marked as produced by Nazi Germany in 1941.
Oof. Soviet Union already admitted to Katyn massacre. Time to let this conspiracy theory go.
So your point is that the Soviet Union should have fought the Nazis there and then, without formalizing alliance with the west who made it clear that they wished the Nazis and Soviets would kill each other? You would have had the Soviets commit suicide for Poland, rather than trying to close their industrial gap with the Nazis as much as possible and align with the west? This is incredibly silly.
As for Katyn, it’s more intentional mistranslation, there was admittance of prisoner transport. None of this explains why the execution method was the exact same as the Nazis, in Nazi territory, with Nazi bullets manufactured during 1941.
I’m saying they could’ve threatened to. USSR, France, UK all declaring war at the same time because of the invasion would’ve been a better deterrent than just France and UK, especially since it would be war on both sides.
As for Katyn, it’s more intentional mistranslation, there was admittance of prisoner transport. None of this explains why the execution method was the exact same as the Nazis, in Nazi territory, with Nazi bullets manufactured during 1941.
This is incredibly silly. The Soviet Union had no strong alliance with western countries, even after Britain and France declared war they did jack shit other than a naval blockade. After the Soviets went into Poland, Britain finally extended diplomatic talks of an alliance. The Soviet Union was rapidly industrializing, but was behind Nazi Germany and needed firm acknowledgement of a real alliance.
As for Katyn, the bullets were Nazi-produced in 1941, the grave was “found” by Nazis, the rope used was German produced, the execution method was the same as the Nazis, and Goebbels was the one who started the story. The anti-communist government in Russia “admitted” to doing it, but material evidence directly points to the Nazis doing so.
I mean USSR could’ve backed away from actually declaring the war or waited to see what the West does. That is if Germany would’ve risked attacking Poland then. We don’t know because that’s not what USSR ended up doing.
As for Katyn, the bullets were Nazi-produced in 1941, the grave was “found” by Nazis, the rope used was German produced, the execution method was the same as the Nazis, and Goebbels was the one who started the story. The anti-communist government in Russia “admitted” to doing it, but material evidence directly points to the Nazis doing so.
This is all part of a conspiracy theory not taken seriously by the actual field of researchers or the governments of the relevant countries. I don’t think it will be very fruitful to continue on into conspiracy theory zone here.
It isn’t, neither is that they were the first ones (after Poland) to actually fight the Nazis. So can’t knock them on that account
Sure, so again, it seems like you would’ve had the Soviet Union let all of Poland be subject to the Holocaust instead of half of it.
I would’ve rather like to have seen Soviet Union doing their all to prevent the attack on Poland by Germany instead of joining the attacker in carving up Poland (and Eastern Europe) and doing their own massacres
They did. The Eastern Pact was killed by the British, French, and Polish. Poland hated Russia, and had just been at war with the USSR 2 decades ago, where they took areas in Ukraine and Lithuania. When the Soviet Union entered Poland after the Polish state fell to the Nazis, they met resistance and obviously met that resistance with force, but the way the Soviets treated the Polish and the way the Nazis treated the Polish were entirely uncomparable, the Nazis were slaughtering men, women, and children in unmarked mass graves. Goebbels even tried to blame one such massacre on the Red Army, Katyn, despite the spent ammunition clearly being marked as produced by Nazi Germany in 1941.
You don’t have to have formal pact or alliance in place to pledge to declare war in case of another country is invaded. You don’t have to have an agreement in place to share intelligence to them, such as the secret protocols or about the negotiations, etc etc. They could’ve done more.
Oof. Soviet Union already admitted to Katyn massacre. Time to let this conspiracy theory go.
So your point is that the Soviet Union should have fought the Nazis there and then, without formalizing alliance with the west who made it clear that they wished the Nazis and Soviets would kill each other? You would have had the Soviets commit suicide for Poland, rather than trying to close their industrial gap with the Nazis as much as possible and align with the west? This is incredibly silly.
As for Katyn, it’s more intentional mistranslation, there was admittance of prisoner transport. None of this explains why the execution method was the exact same as the Nazis, in Nazi territory, with Nazi bullets manufactured during 1941.
I’m saying they could’ve threatened to. USSR, France, UK all declaring war at the same time because of the invasion would’ve been a better deterrent than just France and UK, especially since it would be war on both sides.
http://archive.government.ru/eng/docs/10122/print/
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-04-14-mn-972-story.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/26/russian-parliament-guilt-katyn-massacre
It’s been admitted to many times. It’s no error.
This is incredibly silly. The Soviet Union had no strong alliance with western countries, even after Britain and France declared war they did jack shit other than a naval blockade. After the Soviets went into Poland, Britain finally extended diplomatic talks of an alliance. The Soviet Union was rapidly industrializing, but was behind Nazi Germany and needed firm acknowledgement of a real alliance.
As for Katyn, the bullets were Nazi-produced in 1941, the grave was “found” by Nazis, the rope used was German produced, the execution method was the same as the Nazis, and Goebbels was the one who started the story. The anti-communist government in Russia “admitted” to doing it, but material evidence directly points to the Nazis doing so.
I mean USSR could’ve backed away from actually declaring the war or waited to see what the West does. That is if Germany would’ve risked attacking Poland then. We don’t know because that’s not what USSR ended up doing.
This is all part of a conspiracy theory not taken seriously by the actual field of researchers or the governments of the relevant countries. I don’t think it will be very fruitful to continue on into conspiracy theory zone here.