• Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Libs in my circles have latched onto a part where he (they claim, I haven’t watched it) says the molotov-ribbentrop pact was to protect Czechoslovakia which is pretty brainwormy. I’ve been responding to ribbentrop shit for the last few days because of the uptick in discussion about it.

      • DanicaTheRebel [comrade/them,she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        Question, but how could Hitler to turn east towards the USSR if Poland is in the way? Unless they expected the Poles and Nazis to collaborate? or did they believe he wouldn’t invade France and do the USSR next? Is there any evidence of this?

          • star_wraith [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 years ago

            This all makes sense to me, what I am trying to square is what’s the thinking in Berlin while all this is going on? Why do they make the choices they do? With the benefit of hindsight, why would Hitler ever even consider getting on Britain or France’s bad side? We know Hitler wanted his Lebensraum to the east, it seems like it would be straightforward to just hash that out with the eventual “Allies”?

            The best answer I have is, Germany and the US/UK/France ultimately were never on the same page. I think the Allies wanted Germany to invade the USSR, but kind of in the way they want the Ukraine/Russia war in the present to grind on as long as possible. They wanted to use Germany to wear down the USSR. Best case scenario for them is for both Germany and the USSR to essentially destroy each other, so you eventually get two weakened states beholden to western hegemony.

            That said, I can’t help but wonder how much the irrationality of fascism comes into play here. And I hate to ascribe irrational motives to anyone, even fascists… I have a hard time with any other explanation for a lot of the diplomatic and foreign policy choices the Nazis made.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yeah I assumed something about that was wrong. I haven’t watched it. Maybe worth checking what he did say if they’re going to go on about it forever.

    • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      From memory Stalin proposed to deploy troops in Czechoslovakia if Poland give them transit and basing rights? I had thought that was before the pact was signed and when he was still trying to get Anglo and French support for a security pact

    • Barabas@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      So before World War II, Poland collaborated with Hitler and although it did not yield to Hitler’s demands, it still participated in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia together with Hitler. As the Poles had not given the Danzig Corridor to Germany, and went too far, pushing Hitler to start World War II by attacking them. Why was it Poland against whom the war started on 1 September 1939? Poland turned out to be uncompromising, and Hitler had nothing to do but start implementing his plans with Poland.

      Saying that Poland refusing to cede Danzig to Germany was the cause of WW2 is a bit iffy I think. Why is Danzig a legitimate target to cede while the Sudetenland was an outrage?

      It would be nice if people were less easily impressed with blood and soil propaganda.