• volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s the cutting up other peoples countries part without their say

    Please tell me what alternative there was for these “cut up countries”. If the USSR hadn’t established military presence in these countries, they’d just have been invaded by the Nazis. Maybe you expect the Soviet Union, after being ignored for a decade of mutual defense negotiations, to selflessly send its people to die for the countries that refused a military alliance? Like literally, what was the alternative here

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      What a bunch of bullshit. It was naked irredentism as Stalin conquered countries that had gained their independence from Russia during the Revolutions and you know it.

      And they were damn well proven right to be mistrustful of Russian chauvinism.

      • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Many of these countries didn’t “gain” their independence from “Russia”, they were GRANTED independence by the Bolsheviks immediately after the November revolution. Really, look at Wikipedia’s article on the independence of Finland. The first constitution of the Russian Socialist Federation of Soviet Republics clearly specified the right to unilateral secession and independence for all nations of the former Russian Empire.

        Regardless of my or your opinions on the independence of these countries, you didn’t answer the question: what was the alternative to Soviet military occupation for the Baltics and Poland? Tell us, what was the realistic alternative?