this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
426 points (98.9% liked)
Political Humor
1912 readers
485 users here now
Welcome to Political Humor!
Rules:
- Be excellent to each other.
- No harassment.
- No sexism, racism or bigotry.
- All arguments should be made in good faith.
- No misinformation. Be prepared to back up your factual claims with evidence.
- All posts should relate to politics and be of a humorous nature.
- No bots, spam or self-promotion.
- If you want to run a bot, ask first.
- Site wide rules apply.
- Have fun.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Don't worry, the Soviets weren't super invested in it either, until it actually threatened them
What should they have done and why wasn't it enough what they suggested?
Not helping Nazis invade Poland would be a start
They didnt. They entered poland when polish govt has already fled and they did so to create buffer between nazi germany and soviet union.
Poland had invaded soviet ally Czechoslovakia.
They had planned this (in cooperation with Nazi Germany) quite some time before, and even put it in writing.
The secret accords of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact haven't been much of a secret for quite a long time, I wonder if you just missed that well known fact, or are omitting it on purpose.
No, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was not an 'alliance'
The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was an non-aggression agreement signed between the USSR & Germany in late August 1939. (Alot of countries signed various pacts with nazi germany beforehand).
This agreement was a direct result of the failure to create 'collective security' in Europe The USSR had tried this and failed due to the irrational anti-communism of Poland & the unwillingness of the UK & France to make this a reality
A non aggression pact with secret accords that divided up Eastern Europe into spheres of influence for land grabs, as you conveniently omit once more.
Again it happened AFTER the west rejected proposal of soviets to ally against nazis. Any newly formed country dont want war, ideology is secondary. Hitler was vehemently anti communist and both hitler and stalin hated each other.
There is evidence that the Spheres of Influence did not refer to any partition or invasion, according to General Franz Halder's diaries. He says that Hitler was considering independence for Western Ukraine, although the USSR's 'spheres of influence' fell in Western Ukraine.
So, this provides evidence that the Secret Protocol was not about 'invading' nor 'annexing' anyone, in this case, Poland. It also provides evidence that Hitler was prepared to negotiate over Western Ukraine with the Poles, and not the USSR. In further entries, Halder repeats that the Germans are discussing the formation of an independent Western Ukraine Additionally, Halder suggests that the USSR expected a negotiated settlement would leave a 'rump' Poland.
This provides substantial evidence that the 'Spheres of Influence' was not abut the 'invasion' nor 'annexation' of any territory. The secret protocols merely mean that Germany is not allowed to extend itself beyond a certain LINE in Poland.
Poland had invaded soviet ally czechoslovakia prior to that and no one bats an eye on it. Soviets entered poland after polish govt had fled i.e. they entered poland when nothing like poland existed.
Not to forget britain was planning to invade soviet union after WW2 because soviets had made the greatest sacrifices and were weakened so Churchill wanted to destroy communism once and for all.
What does that mean for you? What do you include?
Isn't it quite obvious? Having a government that's not as utterly abhorrent and disagreeable as that of Josef Stalin is quite possible, even if you are a one party dictatorship. Likewise not having imperialist ambitions is utterly possible.
On top of that, especially since the Soviet Union anticipated that Nazi Germany would turn on them at some point, reacting to that becoming a fact more quickly and decisively could have helped. Stalin was so hell bent and stubborn about not provoking Hitler at any cost, that defensive action was practically forbidden even until for quite some time after the invasion had started. His purges of the military (partially instigated by Nazi German military intelligence to weaken the Soviet Union) didn't help with defence either. But I guess that's all symptoms of Stalinism. If you have a megalomaniac paranoid autocrat who has practically anyone who disagrees with him shot, you get that kind of a dysfunctional shitshow as a state.
USSR was about global socialism. How could they be non imperialistic? But then, is it imperialism to spread socialism?
There were three spheres of power, two of which hoping the other two would fight each other. As Tolc mentioned, the USSR tried to create an alliance. After that failed which other options were left?
Under Stalin, yes, of course. That's almost as unhinged as people claiming Hitler was socialist because he had "socialist" in his party's name.
Preparing to defend against Nazi Germany without the land grabs in Eastern Europe?
They didn't amass riches for an elite and didn't build their country on racial superiority. That's closer than most to socialism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curzon_Line
Why is it a land grab if that was the start?
The "land grabs" happened after Germany started conquering. The preparations had to be made before.
I am no expert at all so please correct me if I am wrong but I think that only the SU made suggestions for, as Tolc mentions, "collective security". What else should they have done?