Putin says there was nothing wrong with Soviet Union’s pact with Hitler

Russian president says he sees nothing wrong with treaty with Nazi Germany that led to the carve-up of Poland – and blames Britain for destroying any chance of an anti-fascist front. Vladimir Putin has said there was nothing bad about the Nazi-Soviet Pact, the non-aggression treaty which led to the carve-up of Poland at the outset of the Second World War, suggesting Britain and France were to blame for Adolf Hitler’s march into Europe. The Russian president made the comments at a meeting with young historians in Moscow, during which he urged them to examine the lead-up to the war, among other subjects.

The comments are likely to cause dismay in eastern Europe, amid wider debate in Russia about growing attempts to use history as a means of shoring up Mr Putin’s rule.Mr Putin said that Western historians today try to “hush up” the 1938 Munich Agreement, in which France and Britain – led by Neville Chamberlain, the prime minister – appeased Adolf Hitler by acquiescing to his occupation of Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland. “Chamberlain came, waved a piece of paper and said, ‘I’ve brought you peace’ when he returned to London after the talks,” Mr Putin, who is a keen amateur historian, said on Wednesday, according to a Kremlin transcript. “To which Churchill, I think, said somewhere to a small group of people, ‘That’s it, now war is inevitable’. Because compromise with an aggressor in the form of Hitlerite Germany was clearly leading to a large-scale future military conflict, and some people understood that.”
Mr Putin appeared to think Moscow’s own agreement with Hitler – the 1939 Nazi-Soviet or Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact – was fine, however. “Serious research must show that those were the foreign policy methods then,” he said, adding: “The Soviet Union signed a non-aggression treaty with Germany. People say: ‘Ach, that’s bad.’ But what’s bad about that if the Soviet Union didn’t want to fight, what’s bad about it?”
Full article: Telegraph


http://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/putin-says-nothing-wrong-soviet-unions-pact-hitler.html



I do not agree with Quill on stereotypes, but in this instance he would find a perfect example of his views on those who like violence, on this I will make an exception. Putin here looks to deflect blame on Russia, playing on nationalism. It is poor, he ignores wrongs done, and only looks to blame others, when his country did get into bed with Hitler for a time and even more so showing the worst hypocrisy here. When Germany ended Czechoslovakia independence in March 1939, and created the puppet state of Slovakia, the Soviet Union was the only country on earth outside the Axis that extended legal recognition to this unit and hence to the disappearance of Czechoslovakia.


So all his babble views are very much double standards.

Have to agree somewhat with Putin here. A large portion of blame must lay firmly at the feet of Britain, France, Poland and to some extent, the USA for the out break of WW2 as they all had a hand in blocking peaceful attempts for the Germans giving support to their people suffering terrible crimes at the hands of the Poles. But history only tells the story from the victors perspective.

manicfooted wrote:Have to agree somewhat with Putin here. A large portion of blame must lay firmly at the feet of Britain, France, Poland and to some extent, the USA for the out break of WW2 as they all had a hand in blocking peaceful attempts for the Germans giving support to their people suffering terrible crimes at the hands of the Poles. But history only tells the story from the victors perspective.

Eh?

Yes I am very interested on this, being as both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Unions had their sites set on expanding their empires, so much so they got into bed with each other for convenience, where the fact is before the war even started, when Germany annexed the rest of Czechoslovakia an created the puppet state of Slovakia. The USSR was the only nation to recognise the new country.
All were to blame, in one way or another, because they all had the chance to stop Hitler earlier, but the sad fact is because of the First World War Still in living memory. The last thing many wanted to do, was be engaged in another long costly war. Hitler and the Nazis had clear goals, or formulated well in advance. Hitler had no justifications for his attacks, because his rel intent was Lebensraum, living peace which went well beyond any former territories. He used the ruse on former territories to buy time to complete the full rearmament of Nazi Germany.


Hitler was always going to attack the USSR also, where one of Stalin's biggest cock ups, was making a pact with Hitler, getting into bed with him, as it bought Hitler not only time to further build his forces for the invasion of Russia, it provided stacks of many raw materials. Stalin wanted to take advantage of this treaty to also further the USSR's expansion.

Hitler and Stalin "got into bed" so to speak because of the other nations wanting to "crush" Hitler before the outbreak of war. Too much detail to go into, but research WW2 rather than relying on the "facts" you might have been taught in school or seen in the MSM.

manicfooted wrote:Hitler and Stalin "got into bed" so to speak because of the other nations wanting to "crush" Hitler before the outbreak of war. Too much detail to go into, but research WW2 rather than relying on the "facts" you might have been taught in school or seen in the MSM.

Sorry but again you are completely wrong, and I have studied this conflict intensely, so thanks for your advice, but being as you have nothing to back your views, I will ignore your advice if that is okay with you . When again they got into bed with each other for mutual gain  and time. Stalin knew at some point he would have to attack German of which they had plans, but would not be ready until at least 1943. They both gained territory from this, because getting getting into bed with other nations helped their long term plans. The allies were not hindered from declaring war on Nazi Germany by a view to a pact, Hitler knew they would at some point be at war. He had planned for it, hence the pact. Hitler wanted his back secure, whilst he first dealt with the west first, of which is what happened, apart from Britain standing firm.


You always know when a poster makes poor points they cannot back up, thy then try to deflect the debate about the other poster on their knowledge, when you really did happen to pick on the one poster who has many History qualifications

Me thinks this could be smelly Bandit.

Time will tell.

Brasidas wrote:Me thinks this could be smelly Bandit.

Time will tell.

Something pongs about her or him, maybe their foot being manic has something to do with it.

Recently found a darn good doc on the subject of the last WW2, very interesting indeed. Not saying Hitler was squeaky but if this documentary is anything to go by there were others a lot more involved in the beginning of this war and the war's continuation.

captainJane wrote:

Brasidas wrote:Me thinks this could be smelly Bandit.

Time will tell.

Something pongs about her or him, maybe their foot being manic has something to do with it.  

Recently found a darn good doc on the subject of the last WW2, very interesting indeed. Not saying Hitler was squeaky but if this documentary is anything to go by there were others a lot more involved in the beginning of this war and the war's continuation.

That does not surprise me at all Captain Jane, hi by the way and thanks for the heads up on the documentary, as am keen to watch. To give a good example of this, many people castigate Chamberlain for the Munich agreement being naive. Most will back this up with how Churchill would have never done that if leader. When little do those who castigate Chamberlain know, is a document that Churchill said in private to the Ambassador of Czechoslovakia. That in the same position, he would have had no choice but to do the same thing. .I will give you my views on whether there is case to be made or not after I have had a chance to watch. Thanks

Enjoy your weekend.

Sorry Captain Jane, that video is from the few minutes I have watched, really poor to say the least. Will watch the rest, but the set arguments are off two wrongs, as if they make a right.
They never will, it poorly tries to take much of the responsibility of Hitler away, based on two wrongs, that if wrongs can be seen on the allied side it excuses Hitler.

Will watch the rest, but as a moral argument it is poor.

Night

Ok, but looking back in history here because we have been lied to big time, on just about every thing.

Night.

captainJane wrote:Ok, but looking back in history here because we have been lied to big time, on just about every thing.

Night.

Morning Jane
Okay, what do you believe you have been lied to about?