Jean wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 28, 2023 3:21 pm

Careful El Major, if you let him hypnotise you too much with his blocks bricks Propaganda, you'll become as "crazy" as Mvivi So ok read him, but put your glasse anti crazy propa when you do it

El Major wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 28, 2023 1:28 pm

Its almost imporessive how you are able to get evertyhing wrong

MVitaly5 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 28, 2023 2:14 pm

All these Western interpretations of 20th and 21st century world history are largely hypocritical, or false. Some Western commentators have been in the habit of shitting on the Soviet Union throughout its existence, lickity-splittingly forgetting their own extremely unenviable involvement in this history.
Somehow they forget how they supported Hitler economically at first, and even some Western politicians met with Hitler, including members of the British royal family, albeit against the official policy of these countries.
The meeting between Edward VIII and Hitler.


For some reason they forget about the Munich agreement of 1938, when in fact Great Britain, France and the Kingdom of Italy gave Czechoslovakia to Germany and Hungary to be torn apart.

About Poland, I would not want to offend some adequate Poles, but don't make it look like a "white and fluffy sheep" either. After the Western invaders tormented the young Soviet State, which was in a difficult situation after the revolution of 1917 and the ongoing civil war, Poland fought with the Soviet Union, after which it took the territories of Western Ukraine and later part of the modern Belarusian territory. Everyone now remembers only "Katyn", where it is still a mystery who shot Polish prisoners of war, but no one remembers that during the period from 1921 to 1939, in Polish captivity died, according to various estimates about 180 thousand captured Red Army soldiers.
Poland concluded a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany in 1934. And after the Munich agreement in 1938, with the consent of Great Britain and France, on Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia and taking away of the Sudetenland, Poland on this background, took away from Czechoslovakia the Tiszynska region. If it is considered as assistance to Poland by Great Britain and France, because the latter did not care about it, then probably yes, because after the invasion of Poland by Germany, no one helped her. "The Hyena of Europe", that's what Churchill called Poland. And the claim is not against me, it's against Churchill! The first wave of anti-Semitism in Europe started in Poland. And in Western countries, the question of protecting Jews before the war, knowing that they were threatened with total annihilation, was not solved. There was a lot of controversy. When Germany began to infringe on the Jews, many of them ran to neighboring Poland, so the latter refused to accept them without their property confiscated by Germany. In general, as far as the Jewish question is concerned, there were a lot of very controversial moments before the war. Now everyone remembers the Holocaust. Well, that's a big topic.
And who then liberated Poland from the Nazis? The same Stalin who took away in 1939 the territories from Poland, which previously belonged to the Russian Empire, actually returned Poland's statehood and the territories in which it exists to this day. The Soviet Union completely rebuilt Warsaw, which had been almost completely destroyed during the war. I now many Polish politicians, only pour shit on the USSR and Russia, and still demand some reparations not only from Germany, but from Russia. Isn't that nonsense? And I know that now many people will get excited after my words, but alas, all this is confirmed by archival official documents, and stored in the archives of not only the USSR, but also Western countries.

The Soviet Union, which was in this period conducting the formation and development of its statehood, carrying out industrialization, was still not up to the war. The politics of the time was very tough and not to the point of sentimentality. Why in 1939 the Soviet Union had to take into account the interests of Poland, which was in conflict with the Soviet Union?
In 1939, the Soviet Union and Germany signed a non-aggression pact. Before that, in 1938, the same pact with Germany was signed by Great Britain, France and a number of other countries.
From the point of view of politics, such a pact between the Soviet Union and Germany can be understood, from the point of view of morality, to sign an agreement with the Nazis, I do not think it is right. But in such cases, morality comes second and political interests come first. History should always be viewed from the point of view of contemporaries of those historical events, not in relation to contemporary realities.
The USSR was at that time at war with Japan, an ally of Germany, and a war on two fronts was not the best solution, and from a moral point of view, to help European countries, which were invaded by Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, there was no reason, because before this Western European countries, only harmed the USSR.
But Hitler deceived everyone. When he started the war in Europe, he quickly occupied almost all of continental Europe. No country, did not give him a decent resistance, and on the contrary, the industry of the occupied countries, began to work fully for the war machine of Germany and its allies in World War II. In Hitler's plans was war with Great Britain, but for this he lacked resources. And he could take them only from the USSR. Accordingly, Hitler deceived the Soviet Union, without a declaration of war, invading the USSR on June 22, 1941. It became known about Hitler's general plans, such as "OST", which envisioned almost complete extermination of the Slavic population of the USSR and Poland, for the Soviet Union, this war became "sacred". And who but the Soviet Union made a decisive contribution to the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allies, suffering huge human and economic losses? Until 1944, virtually the entire German war machine, the entire industry of continental Europe, was at war with the Soviet Union. Yes, Great Britain and the USA, rendered material assistance to the USSR, but all this was: firstly, not gratuitously, the Soviet Union paid everything, and even with interest, secondly, according to the majority of professional analysts and historians, the Soviet Union would have defeated Germany without this assistance, thirdly, all this assistance of the Western countries was not out of love to the Soviet Union, and that the latter did all the "black and dirty work" and saved the ass of the same Great Britain and the USA. Because if Hitler had defeated the USSR, he would have had access to virtually unlimited resources, and then he would have been unstoppable. Stalin, from the beginning of the German invasion of the USSR, persuaded Roosevelt and Churchill to open a second front against Hitler in Europe. They opened it only in 1944, when the Soviet Union had already defeated Germany on its territory, and had already liberated the countries of Eastern Europe. Realizing that the Soviet Union, if alone will defeat Germany, all "laurels", will go only to it, and so, they now, can name themselves liberators of the Western Europe which the USA, actually have occupied, having created camouflaging block NATO, and till now, on the territory of almost all Western-European countries, there are military bases of the USA, and political management of these countries only puppets. But, now they only remember about the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe and remember only nasty things.
Who helped China to become the winner in World War II, to defeat the million-strong Kwantung Army in Manchuria? It is now remembered that only the United States defeated Japan. Stalin actually made France the winner of World War II, and what is France doing now?...? It's in the UN Security Council, thanks to Stalin, and only shits on Russia. And after the war, Western countries suddenly remembered their ideological confrontation with the Soviet Union, and the Cold War and the nuclear arms race began.
I could write here the volume of a whole book, with the provision of archival documents, but I wrote briefly, and very superficially, but not to idealize anyone, and not to deliberately humiliate. One should know history from all sides and consider historical decisions from the point of view of their contemporaries. And the Soviet Union had many controversial decisions. And now they like to write history only as it suits someone.

El Major wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 29, 2023 12:03 pm

Yeah . You agree with the intellectual giants that has proven to be homophobic and racist etc. Calling Zelensky a faggott etc.

Offcourse he also know history and is right here aswell so its me that dont inderstand anything Pierre. Supporting Putin was right all along Pierre . Peolple like him is the way to go

milster wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 7:53 pm

MVitaly5 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 6:23 pm

Zelensky today: "Today we signed an application for accelerated accession to NATO!

Stoltenberg today: "There is no question of Ukraine's accelerated accession to NATO, and there is no such question in the short term either. In other words: "Fuck you, junkie Zelensky, we are not ready to enter an official war with Russia, our asshole is not iron! We are ready to supply you with all the weapons we have, so that you can quickly destroy the entire population of Ukraine, for the sake of our ambitions against Russia.

Russian hackers do not sleep. Putin interrupted Stoltenberg on German TV.
https://youtu.be/KLyINNXf-YE

I wonder who gave that faggot and failed actor money to candidate for presidency, while allying with real Nazis, like Azov.