The European Parliament found the USSR to blame for the outbreak of World War II

30 September 2019 78

On September 19, 2019, the European Parliament (the legislative body of the European Union) adopted a promising resolution on the importance of European memory for the future of Europe. The purpose of this initiative is to recognize the USSR as the culprit of the outbreak of World War II.

It should be noted that all the time after the end of World War II, in the West there are no attempts to rewrite history. So now those florid formulations of the document with which they are trying to do it are clear.

The Second World War, the most destructive in the history of Europe, was a direct consequence of the notorious Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Treaty of August 23, 1939, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and its secret protocols, according to which two totalitarian regimes set themselves the goal conquer the world, divided Europe into two zones of influence

- the resolution says.

By the way, the document was prepared by selected "friends" of Russia from Poland and the Baltic countries. And by a “random” coincidence, it was these territories that were most noted for aiding the Third Reich in the implementation of the Holocaust.

To confirm this, it is worth recalling that on September 27, 2019, the current head of the Ministry of Defense of Latvia, Artis Pabriks, told reporters that the Waffen SS legionnaires are the pride of his country and they are not allowed to mock them.

The Waffen SS Legionnaires are the pride of the Latvian people and state. Our duty is to honor these patriots of Latvia from all the depths of our souls.

Said the Minister.

It should be added that in the media space of the planet, information from the European Parliament has not received proper coverage. Therefore, we decided to remind the "democratic" public of a number of interesting historical moments that they regularly lose sight of, speaking exclusively about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

In 1933, Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy concluded the “pact of four.” In 1934, the Pilsudski-Hitler Pact was signed (between Poland and Germany). In 1935, a maritime agreement was concluded between Great Britain and Germany. In 1936, an anti-Comintern pact was signed between Germany and Japan. In 1938, a Munich agreement was concluded, according to which Britain, France and Italy gave their consent to the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia between Germany, Poland and Hungary. In 1939, a number of non-aggression treaties were concluded between Germany and the Baltic countries (Latvia and Estonia). And this is only a small part of that huge number of international documents concluded at that time. But, without a doubt, even the above agreements, already in a completely different way make us look at what is happening in that historical period.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Yuri Filippov

+12

30 September 2019 15: 30

USA - organizer of 2MB. Germany (Europe) - performer.
1. Digital error
  
  +2
  
  30 September 2019 22: 00
  
  Quote: Yuri Filippov
  Germany (Europe) - performer.
  
  A united Europe was then called the Third Reich. Modern - by the European Union. Fascism seems to have won, given, inter alia, the attitude to the common man (as a source of tax revenue, no more) in the Russian Federation.
2. Leonid Khazanov
  
  -11
  
  1 October 2019 00: 20
  
  The performer is Stalin with Ribbentrop and the Germans.
  1. Nick
    
    +5
    
    1 October 2019 01: 11
    
    Quote: Leonid Khazanov
    Performer - Stalin with Ribbentrop and Germans
    
    Then Chamberlain, Lebrun, Pilsudsky, and only after them Stalin. Stalin is the last of all to conclude a non-aggression pact with Hitler. Poland was generally an ally of Germany until the German Wehrmacht attacked it, and participated in the capture of Czechoslovakia along with the Germans, and captured part of Czech lands.
    1. Leonid Khazanov
      
      -7
      
      1 October 2019 01: 43
      
      Do not la la. About Czechoslovakia, this is generally a joke.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Nick
        
        +5
        
        1 October 2019 01: 55
        
        Quote: Leonid Khazanov
        About Czechoslovakia, this is generally a joke.
        
        You tell this "anecdote" to the Czechs, it will not seem a little to you.
        
        Leonid Khazanov
        
        -6
        
        1 October 2019 02: 28
        
        Poland was no longer an ally of Germany at the time of the attack. The Anglo-German Maritime Agreement of 1935 and the Pact with Pilsudski of 1934 were denounced on April 28, 1939 by Hitler. As for the Sudetenland, Germany and Munich - someone here was crucified about the role of the United States in the Munich agreement, and so: at the Paris Conference of 1919, the United States vehemently opposed the inclusion of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, insisting on the separation of the Sudetenland on the basis of the right of German residents to self-determination.
        
        A.Lex
        
        +4
        
        1 October 2019 12: 13
        
        Uh-huh ... many of whose opinions were asked at that time ... Tell the tribes of Africa about this, where the states were cut the way the "white master" wanted - they cut them alive, right through the possessions of the tribes and where no one was interested in the opinion of the locals. They wanted to do the same with Russia (for which the February revolution attempt was organized) ... it did not work out then ... it happened in 91-92.
        
        akarfoxhound
        
        +3
        
        1 October 2019 12: 53
        
        How conveniently they set everything up - the USA was against Sudet But the carve-up of Czechoslovakia was carried out, add Poland and Hungary there. But you tactfully kept silent about them here, does not fit into "your theme" presentation. There was no Munich agreement? The rubber of every third Wehrmacht tire came from your native United States, in the "transit" Poltava airfield at the B-17 navigator staff in flight maps with routes there were separate red zones marked with "prohibitions", which surprised our crews very much. - What is it? Well these are factories !? - It is forbidden to work on them, there is our invested money.
        Your favorites did not even hesitate to talk about it and show, and you have news?
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +2
        
        1 October 2019 22: 51
        
        You have a very strange interpretation of historical facts.
        Firstly, where and when did you see the US “violently oppose something,” but, like, did not pay attention to them? They recommended and these are different things. And the fact was that the Sudetenland, after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, became for a short time an independent quasi-state, since they were forbidden to join Germany and Austria, but they did not want to enter Czechoslovakia. And the Czechoslovak troops then annexed this Sudeten "state" by force, this process ended just at the beginning of the 1919 Paris conference. And all this chatter boiled down, if very primitive, then to the fact that, they say, ah-ah-ay, you can't do that, self-determination, etc. But this was the end of the American "protests" in 1919, and the Sudetenland got where it was.
        Secondly, as far as the Sudetenland in 1938 is concerned, it was precisely there that it was about the self-determination of the German-speaking inhabitants of Czechoslovakia, that is, mainly of these very Sudetenlands. And they just at that moment clearly wanted to join the Reich. There were no other options for "self-determination". This is what exactly the same citizens approved of, which these same Sudetenland in 1919 wrote to the Czechs. They approved it because they had an alliance agreement with Czechoslovakia. At the same time, everyone understood that if they did not approve of this, Hitler would still take the Sudetenland by force. This means that they, too, observing their allied obligations, will have to fight the Germans again. And to hand over the Czechs even before the start of some mess, all Westerners then thought the best idea was how to save their asses. Like, there is no aggression - there are no allied obligations. Better yet, if there is no Czechoslovakia itself. And then a year later she was gone.
        And the Hungarians and the Poles in this jackal bit off their pieces from Czechoslovakia to the noise, quite officially entering into an agreement with Hitler for this.
        And neither the USA, nor Britain, nor France did not pickle about this - they did not notice, like ...
        And now, like, they don’t remember. But the fact that the Soviet troops entered Poland in 1939 - everyone suddenly remembered ... Moreover, it happened AFTER the WWII even according to their own version ...
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        4 October 2019 20: 31
        
        Quote: Pyshenkov
        And now, like, they don’t remember. But the fact that the troops of the USSR entered Poland in 1939 - everyone suddenly remembered ..
        
        Here you need to make a reservation. Poland, as a state, at that time was gone. The Polish government fled from Warsaw to Romania. The troops of the USSR entered the territory of the former Poland, or rather, their original Russian territory, temporarily under Polish jurisdiction.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        7 October 2019 13: 16
        
        To be historically accurate, this is an interpretation of the USSR, on the basis of which the troops entered there. Just unlike Hitler, who attacked Poland. At that time, this seemed to Stalin a legitimate excuse, at least better than open aggression. And it is right.
        But otherwise, I would be more careful with the concepts of "former Poland" or "primordially Russian territories" in the historical context, and despite the fact that I personally, and with the wording, and with entry into Poland, I completely agree - it was a strategic necessity and , yes, redress if you like. BUT, if we continue these formulations, then what did the Red Army liberate in 1944, if Poland had not existed since 1939? And in general, both Czechoslovakia and Western Poland, in this case, were "primordially Austrian" territories, and Austria was then already a part of the Reich, that is, Hitler seemed to be also "taking his own" ...
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        10 October 2019 11: 07
        
        Quote: Pyshenkov
        ... if we continue these formulations, then what then was liberated by the Red Army in 1944, if Poland had not been since 1939?
        
        Weird question. The territory of former Poland and freed from the Nazis.
        
        Quote: Pyshenkov
        Anyway, both Czechoslovakia and Western Poland, in this case, were "originally Austrian" territories ...
        
        Originally, these territories belonged to the Slavs, as did East Germany, Austria, and Lithuania.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        10 October 2019 11: 36
        
        Originally, these territories belonged to the Slavs, as did East Germany, Austria, and Lithuania.
        
        - You are confusing the concepts of nationality and population of certain territories. These are completely different things. Based on this, Poland has never been a native Russian either, the Poles lived there and live there. As in Finland, the Finns, and in most of Russia are far from Russian at all ... Yes, and what you wrote, you can also argue - in all of the lands you described, the population was mixed for centuries, not purely Slavic. From there comes the Munich crisis of 1938 and much more.
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        10 October 2019 12: 04
        
        Quote: Pyshenkov
        ... the population of certain territories. These are completely different things.
        
        I don’t confuse, I’m talking specifically about territories, and not about state formations. But by the way, it is the peoples that are the state-forming factor. Russia, for example, was formed by the Russian people. Germany is the German people. But a significant part of Germany is located on land that was long before the Germanic tribes was inhabited by Slavs, to whom the Russian nation belongs. But it turned out as it happened. Perhaps in three hundred years all Eurasia will be populated by the Chinese, or by some young, newly formed nation, or by a union of nations. No one knows.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        10 October 2019 12: 24
        
        And I initially, mentioning the territory, spoke about their STATE ACCESSORIES. In this particular case, Czechoslovakia and Poland, which belonged to Austria and Russia, regardless of who lived there.
        Initially, the discussion was about how the USSR entered Poland in 1939. If you rely on what you say, the Red Army in 1939 did not enter Poland, but entered Ukraine, since those territories were predominantly populated by Ukrainians ...
        If, as you say,
        
        it is the peoples that are the state-forming factor.
        
        there would be no problems in the Donbass, where Russian territories with the Russian population ended up in Ukraine, nor in Transnistria, where they are in Moldova, nor in Karabakh, nor in a dozen other places where they exist precisely because of ethnic conflicts in certain territories. There would be no problems with the Russian language in the Baltic states and Ukraine, and in the Kaliningrad region there would be no Russians at all, as, in fact, in the Far East ...
        The theory that it is precisely nations that are the state-forming factor in our time leads exclusively to the concept of mono-ethnic states. And there are practically no such people in the world today, and where they tried and are trying to build it, this theory leads only to problems ...
        
        Nick
        
        0
        
        10 October 2019 12: 32
        
        Quote: Pyshenkov
        The theory that it is precisely nations that are the state-forming factor in our time leads exclusively to the concept of mono-ethnic states.
        
        I will not argue, but then answer, How do states appear? Who will form them, if these are not nations?
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +2
        
        10 October 2019 12: 56
        
        If we talk about today and about history, it will be very different in different places and historical periods - In Europe, Asia, America, Africa, in the colonies, etc., everything was not the same.
        If we don’t go deep into this and take reality, then we can simply say that states are now the organizational structure for the population of a particular territory, with historically or naturally established borders. Moreover, this population is not always ethnically or religiously monolithic. Most often, the opposite. There are also examples when, in fact, the dominant nation in the state is far from being the largest in the given territory - for example, Russians in the Russian Federation, Germans in Switzerland, and this was what initially led to the conflict in Syria, where the Alawites in power represent a minority ... And these are not even folk, but rather, folk and religious differences ...
        Moreover, it most often led to conflicts, and it leads precisely to the fact that some people living in one territory, sometimes on a national, sometimes religious basis, begin to try to dominate others living in the same territory.
        I think, especially in the modern world, where everything and everyone moves, the theory of nation states can already be forgotten. Rather, it is necessary to focus on ensuring that this very diverse population of specific states still has some common "cementing" factors - ideology, common history, moral values, etc.
      3. bratchanin3
        
        0
        
        3 October 2019 13: 52
        
        This is where such ignorance is on the verge of squalor and stupidity ?!
3. aries2200
  
  +2
  
  2 October 2019 06: 04
  
  more precisely .....
  Clan of the Rockefellers, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Dupont from the United States.
  ..from the European side:
  English Rothschilds House,
  French Rothschilds house,
  ... German industrialists.
The comment was deleted.
Sapsan136

+9

30 September 2019 16: 07

As for me, the Second World War began Germany and Poland, together attacking Czechoslovakia and occupying its territory! Here are two fascist states that started World War II!
1. A.Lex
  
  +4
  
  1 October 2019 12: 16
  
  Well, if to be absolutely fair, then we can talk about the beginning of the war in Europe, and not in the world. In World II, the MV began with the Japanese attack on China in 1937.
  1. Sapsan136
    
    +1
    
    1 October 2019 17: 13
    
    Well, you can agree with you ... ++++
steelmaker

+2

30 September 2019 16: 54

Well, what can we talk about and agree with this blueness?

Tell me who your friend is and I will say who YOU are!

To end this humiliation, what, again, do you need to arrange a revolution?
1. The comment was deleted.
BMP-2

+4

30 September 2019 17: 17

They completely lost their arrogance :!)) It's time to restore the USSR so that there is someone to answer :!)))
1. Savigne
  
  -6
  
  30 September 2019 22: 52
  
  Quote: BMP-2
  It's time to restore the USSR, so that there is someone to answer!)))
  
  For some reason, the USSR did not really answer something. I sat in my hole and quietly worried about the Cold War. Until he himself died.
2. A.Lex
  
  +1
  
  1 October 2019 12: 18
  
  Vladimir, it’s impossible to enter the same river twice ... no matter how sorry ... You just need to have self-esteem ... with the government.
3. xilia72
  
  0
  
  2 October 2019 01: 49
  
  The USSR was fawning with the West.
Yuri Kotelnikov

-1

30 September 2019 19: 02

The dog barks, the caravan goes ...
kriten

+5

30 September 2019 19: 05

All parliamentarians who voted for this should be excluded for life from contacts with the Russian authorities. Entry to Russia is prohibited.
1. Savigne
  
  -3
  
  30 September 2019 22: 53
  
  Quote: kriten
  ... forever excluded from contacts with the Russian authorities. Entry to Russia is prohibited.
  
  Here is sorrow for them. You still forgot to freeze their deposits in Russian banks.
  1. Leonid Khazanov
    
    -2
    
    1 October 2019 00: 23
    
    Lawmakers will tremble already. Even the Duma will stop giving visas to Europe.
BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine

+4

30 September 2019 19: 12

The World War 2 began by the Poles by attacking a German radio station, Sir Goebbels announced this to the whole world!
Pishenkov

+2

30 September 2019 20: 11

I do not understand why our ideologues are silent and only justify themselves and express their concerns? If you are going to rewrite history, you need to put forward your own version, reasoned. And there is something to "cover".
I do not know why at one time the USSR adopted the "Western" theory of the beginning of WWII on 1.09.1939/1938/XNUMX, that is, Hitler's attack on Poland. This is in the interests of the West exclusively. Because they know for sure that it was they who started it all in Munich in XNUMX. And the annexation of the Czech Sudetenland and Austria - these were already purely military operations of the Wehrmacht, what went on with practically no shots is another question. Yes, and the Poles with the Hungarians in all this, too, already participated and also with their own armed forces. Exactly the same military operation was the annexation of the rest of the Czech territories to the Reich. And all this was decided and sanctioned by the West, from which redistributions began in Europe with the use of armed forces. And not from the fact that Hitler just continued all this in Poland, and the Poles have already decided to be indignant ...
1. Savigne
  
  -7
  
  30 September 2019 22: 56
  
  Quote: Pyshenkov
  I don’t understand why our ideologists are silent and justify themselves, and express their concerns?
  
  Whose is this yours?
  Russia is not the USSR. And by and large, Russia does not care about the USSR (or should not).
  
  Quote: Pyshenkov
  If we rewrite history ...
  
  No one is rewriting it. They just want to have a brief historical educational program. But the scoops rest and do not want to listen.
  
  Quote: Pyshenkov
  I do not know why at one time the USSR adopted the "Western" theory of the beginning of WWII on 1.09.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX, that is, Hitler's attack on Poland. This is in the interests of the West exclusively.
  
  This is the decision of the tribunal in Nuremberg. A contest of this decision is prosecuted under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
  1. Pishenkov
    
    +7
    
    30 September 2019 23: 28
    
    It is very interesting when it is convenient for someone, so Russia is the legal successor of the USSR, and when not - so "there is no case" ... You will decide there somehow ...
    About who "yours and ours" are, I have already explained to one here, I will repeat - for me OURS are those who consider the USSR and / or Russia as their Motherland, and / or who consider themselves Russian and are proud of their Motherland and the history of their people wherever you are.
    As for history, it is being rewritten. The problem is that this topic is not new, and they have sinned and are still doing it both in the West, in the USSR, and in today's Russia, to my great regret. But "to conduct a short historical educational program" can hardly be done by those for whom the overwhelming majority of their own population does not know either history, geography, or often the grammar of their own English, which they have already turned into primitive and dissonant trash .. ...
    And about the Nuremberg Tribunal: firstly, I don’t remember that it was this tribunal that somehow set the date for the start of the war, it was simply taken for granted, again from the filing of the main organizers - the Americans and the British, for whom it was for the above reasons profitable, and the discussion on the start date of WWII is not legally prosecuted, nor in the Russian Federation and anywhere else. And secondly, the Nuremberg Tribunal - this was not a trial of the war criminals of the Second World War, as they try to imagine it, but the trial of the winners of the criminals is exclusively from among the defeated. If this were not so, then those who dropped atomic bombs on Japan, who bombed Dresden, Hamburg, etc. But they were not there ... it's about the objectivity, honesty and disinterest of the Nuremberg trials ...
    PS just now I saw someone I answer, but it's already a pity to wash ...
    1. Savigne
      
      -9
      
      30 September 2019 23: 47
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      ... so Russia is the legal successor of the USSR, and when not - so "no case" ...
      
      Exactly, there is no business. Russia is only the successor of the USSR. But not his heir.
      In the same way, Germany is the successor, but not the heir of the 3rd Reich.
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      ... OURS for me are those who consider the USSR and / or Russia to be their Homeland,
      
      No no. Flies separately, cutlets separately.
      USSR, this is one. Russia, this is different.
      No need to put an equal sign between them.
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      ... and / or who considers himself Russian and proud of his homeland and the history of his people, wherever he is.
      
      Russian who is proud of the USSR? Are you out of your mind?
      The USSR is the work of the Bolsheviks. Which DESTROYED Russia, and the Russians were partially cut out and partially expelled from its borders. By the 40s of the last century (and this can be seen from 2MB), there were negligible Russians in the USSR. And now there are very few of them in Russia.
      Another one of those who cannot distinguish the Russians (real) from their counterfeits ("Soviet Russians").
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      As for the story, it is being rewritten.
      
      This, in the opinion of those who do not know history, but knows the Soviet mantras that have been learned for a long time.
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      But those are unlikely to "conduct a brief historical educational program" ...
      
      Why not spend? Maybe something will come to someone.
      
      Quote: Pyshenkov
      If this were not so, then those who dropped atomic bombs on Japan, who bombed Dresden, Hamburg, etc.
      
      And why it was not necessary to bomb Japan, Dresden, etc. This saved a lot, including and Soviet lives.
      1. Aleksey Glotov
        
        +5
        
        1 October 2019 07: 30
        
        I am Russian .... and I am proud of the USSR ... it was the USSR that became a nuclear power and provided its people with security from a new attack from the West and modern Russia owes its existence to the achievements made precisely during the existence of the USSR.
        
        Savigne
        
        -4
        
        1 October 2019 11: 06
        
        Quote: Alekey Glotov
        I am Russian ... and proud of the USSR ...
        
        So you are a "Soviet Russian", not a real one.
        A true Russian will not be proud of the regime that destroyed his homeland.
        
        Quote: Alekey Glotov
        ... it was the USSR that became a nuclear power and provided its people with security against a new attack from the West.
        
        Well, what about the Russians?
        Yes, the sect took care of its self-preservation. Zimbabwe probably also cares about this.
        What about these Russian concerns? Russians in the USSR were strangers.
        
        Quote: Alekey Glotov
        ... and modern Russia owes its existence to the achievements made precisely during the existence of the USSR.
        
        Regarding the surrounding world, Russia (empire) was a much more successful and advanced state than the USSR, even in its best years (60-70s).
        You somehow all cannot understand that the USSR was a disaster for the population of its constituent territories. The number of which (population) during the years of the USSR has halved (as a percentage of the world's population).
        Economically and technologically, the USSR over the years of its existence relative to the rest of the world also degraded very significantly. And NEVER reached the heights at which Russia was in 1913. Literally in all respects.
        In 1913, Russia was quite at the level of not even the most advanced, but still EUROPEAN countries. In 1991, the USSR was at the level of AFRICAN (not even Asian and non-Latin American) countries.
        And the fact that he had an atomic bomb and missiles is not an indicator. The DPRK and Pakistan (and India) also have all this. But no one calls these countries highly developed.
    2. A.Lex
      
      0
      
      1 October 2019 12: 23
      
      You have butted that day with this ignoramus of the Bandero-Liberoid-Creakle spill. Not tired?
      1. Savigne
        
        -5
        
        1 October 2019 12: 41
        
        Quote: A.Lex
        ignoramus of bandero-liberoid-crecal spill.
        
        The loudest "stop the thief" is usually the thief himself. You have a classic case, it seems.
        
        A.Lex
        
        +2
        
        1 October 2019 12: 45
        
        So you vote here on every page! Now it’s clear who is hu!
      2. Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        1 October 2019 12: 59
        
        ... yes, I wrote there at the end
        
        PS Just now I saw someone I answer, but it's already a pity to wash ...
        
        And so I do not answer him - it makes no sense explicitly.
Bitter

+2

30 September 2019 20: 34

... two totalitarian regimes, set out to conquer the world, divided Europe into two zones of influence.

And where are they now, these two or two?
One was rolled away, leveled, Europe was still divided, and for a long time it was quiet and calm.
The second, thanks to the political narrow-mindedness and greed of some and the stupid, partly half-drunk, stubborn tyranny of other "fathers of Russian democracy", suddenly "collapsed".
And here dances with tambourines began on the ashes.
On this basis, more than one year will have to smear the snot of "discrimination" offenses. It is easiest to kick a defeated enemy, from which only a shadow, expressing democratic concern, remains.

Load more of us
Steel for some reason.
.......
It's only the beginning,
It's only the beginning,
It's only the beginning,
Oh oh oh!
1. A.Lex
  
  +2
  
  1 October 2019 12: 30
  
  You are so - went through the heights. Look deeper. Who benefited from the collapse of the Russian Empire (and generally ALL empires)? Who benefited from the Nazi rise to power? Who needed another World War? (and the fact that the USSR became the winner (and not one IZ, as it is presented) is a flaw in THESE - they burst, they sniffed, no one could have imagined that the USSR would stand and win). Who needed the collapse of the USSR? And who needs the collapse of the Russian Federation now?
  Don't you think that the beneficiary is one? And I have a suspicion that we ALL know who this is and what it is ...
  ...... PS plus set ...
Yuri Mikhailovsky

+5

30 September 2019 20: 40

The countries that fought under the leadership of Hitler against the USSR expressed anger for their defeat during this war unleashed by these countries.
1. Pishenkov
  
  +3
  
  30 September 2019 21: 41
  
  In this theory of yours, not everything fits together - the main "rewriters" from the very beginning were those who just fought against Hitler, and even kind of in an alliance with the USSR. Those who were with him then would not have opened their mouths on this topic at first, if they were not allowed "from above" ... And since such a maza went, then all and sundry, both Poles and Balts, went. , all sorts of Spaniards, and even Banderlog ... "main warriors", in short ...
  By the way, those who really fought together with Hitler, with their real armies - Italians, Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians, Finns, etc., somehow even less than others cringe about this, and they also have an attitude towards monuments to Soviet soldiers more respectful ... Like the Germans themselves. This, apparently, because they know the value of these monuments, and they know what war is, unlike the "heroes of the UPA" and other rubbish ...
  1. Leonid Khazanov
    
    -5
    
    1 October 2019 00: 36
    
    Anglo-Saxons with WWII history have an order. Like the Germans and Poles. They did not need to rewrite what is recorded in the memoirs.
    1. Bakht
      
      +4
      
      1 October 2019 08: 01
      
      Yes, what is written in the memoirs cannot be cut down with an ax.
      
      Chamberlain's fanatical desire to give Hitler what he wanted, his
      trips to Berchtesgaden, Godesberg and finally his fateful trip to Munich
      saved Hitler, strengthened his position in Europe, in Germany, in the army as much as he could not have imagined a few weeks before Munich. Munich strengthened the position of Germany in relation to Western democracies and the Soviet Union.
      For France, Munich turned into a disaster. It’s hard to understand why this
      did not understand in Paris. The military importance of France in Europe was reduced to nothing. Compared to the fully mobilized German army, the French army was only half. In the production of weapons, France was also inferior to Germany. True, France was in allied relations with the small states of Eastern Europe - Czechoslovakia, Poland, Yugoslavia and Romania, and these countries, taken together, had the military potential of a "great power". However, the loss of 35 well-trained and armed Czech divisions and fortifications that could hold back even the superior German army significantly weakened the French army. And that's not all. How could France's eastern allies trust the treaties she signed after Munich? Was the alliance with France now highly valued? In Warsaw, Bucharest, Belgrade, this question was answered unequivocally: not very high. In these capitals, they tried, before it was too late, to conclude a lucrative deal with the Nazi conqueror.
      Moscow's activity also increased. Although the Soviet Union was in
      military alliance with France and Czechoslovakia, France together with Germany and
      Britain unanimously excluded Russia from the list of participants in the Munich meeting. It was the attack that Stalin remembered. Within a few months, Western democracies had to pay the price. On October 3, four days after the Munich meeting, Werner von Tippelskirch, counselor at the German embassy in Moscow, reported to Berlin on the implications of Munich for Soviet policy. He believed that "Stalin will draw conclusions"; he was confident that the Soviet Union would "revise its foreign policy"; the attitude towards the allied France will become less friendly, and the attitude towards Germany - more positive. The German diplomat believed that "the current circumstances provide an opportunity for a new, broader economic agreement with the Soviet Union." For the first time in secret German archives, mention is made of changes in the political course of Berlin and Moscow, which were still barely noticeable, but a year later led to important consequences.
      
      General point of view - The Second World War began because of Munich. Poland just wants to get the hell out of it. Why is Czechoslovakia worse than Poland?
      Facts recorded in history and not questioned: Germany, Poland and Hungary jointly attacked Czechoslovakia and destroyed the country in central Europe. But, according to the Poles, this is not an act of aggression.
      1. A.Lex
        
        +2
        
        1 October 2019 12: 48
        
        Bakhtiyar, you have not yet grappled with SavIgn - this is where the "storehouse" of TRUE knowledge is!
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        1 October 2019 20: 52
        
        I have already written so much about this period that it is hardly possible to add something substantial. Only some details. So I will not argue with anyone. So, sometimes copy quotes. I’ll sleep better.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        1 October 2019 21: 19
        
        The treaty did not bring war at all. It was brought closer by the already begun captures with the blessing of the Western "democracies", the first to sign the Munich agreement, to give Hitler the Sudetenland and to sanction the Anschluss of Austria.
        
        The treaty changed the schedule of the inevitable war, and, consequently, the post-war configuration, making it impossible for the Anglo-Saxons to enter Eastern Europe both at the beginning of the war, since it was necessary to defend Western Europe, and after the victory - the USSR was already there. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 - is the largest failure of the English strategy for the entire twentieth century, that’s why it’s being demonized.
        
        G. Kissinger in his work Diplomacy demonstrates a mixture of annoyance and involuntary admiration, defining “A measure of Stalin’s achievements, that even temporarily, he reversed Hitler’s priorities”. He called this success of diplomacy the highest achievement of funds that “could be borrowed from a treatise on the art of public administration of the eighteenth century”.
        
        Both W. Churchill and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Lord Halifax, representing the Soviet-German treaty in the House of Lords, recognized the actions of the USSR, which had just restored its pre-revolutionary territory, as legitimate!
    2. Pishenkov
      
      +1
      
      1 October 2019 10: 46
      
      Anglo-Saxons with WWII history have an order. Like the Germans and Poles. They did not need to rewrite what is recorded in the memoirs.
      
      ... yeah, they generally have, not a word, the holy truth ... HIGHLY LIKELY ...
    3. A.Lex
      
      +1
      
      1 October 2019 12: 34
      
      ... Yeah ... and it can be seen ... at the Psheks - how they relate to the Soviet monuments and graves of Soviet soldiers and as they call the Soviet Army ...
Vladimir L

+1

1 October 2019 08: 00

If our valiant diplomats, with their small composition, struggled with all their might from the CARTON DULILK invented by Theresa May, then how will they fight off the new DURILK from the European Parliament ?!
Port

+2

1 October 2019 09: 20

This disgusting was quite expected, and it is clear who the customer of this bestiality is, the question is different - why did they need this foulness, there is only one answer - to justify the aggression against Russia, the image of the enemy of humanity is molded from it.
1. Pishenkov
  
  +1
  
  1 October 2019 10: 52
  
  ...about
  
  ... sculpt the image of the enemy of humanity.
  
  it agrees. But this is unlikely to help.
  
  ..to justify aggression against Russia.
  
  Because if you do this on the examples of World War II, and even try to accuse the USSR of unleashing it, then you will hardly be able to ignore how and how it ended ... And with such a "bright" prospect of aggression against Russia it is unlikely someone will bite ...
  1. A.Lex
    
    +1
    
    1 October 2019 12: 50
    
    "Peck", namesake ... peck - they need excuses for their failure today or to justify their participation on the side of the Nazis. Because - "bite", and how!
    1. Pishenkov
      
      +2
      
      1 October 2019 13: 05
      
      ... well, peck, and then what? They understand that BECAUSE it will all be all the same, who, what and when started ... That is, not EVERYONE is all the same, but in general it’s all the same, because there will be NO ONE.
Vkd dvk

+5

1 October 2019 10: 43

Quote: Leonid Khazanov
The performer is Stalin with Ribbentrop and the Germans.

Only idiots can assume that Stalin initiated the attack on himself.
1. Sake
  
  -4
  
  1 October 2019 12: 23
  
  Her .. Stalin divided Europe with Germany according to a previously agreed plan. And this is a conspiracy to repaint the world in red and brown colors! Only by helping the USSR, the USA and England raised an enemy worse than Hitler against themselves, they would regret it! Hitler did not threaten the existence of England and the United States, and the Soviet Union, which they pulled out of the loop, began to threaten them from the age of 48!
  1. Bakht
    
    +1
    
    1 October 2019 21: 24
    
    Russia wants war
    1. Pishenkov
      
      +1
      
      2 October 2019 22: 12
      
      It’s even interesting how, when looking a little from afar, the stars of NATO on this map recall small white swastikas on a blue background ...
    2. Leonid Khazanov
      
      0
      
      5 October 2019 07: 05
      
      What does this mean?
Sergey Popkov

+3

1 October 2019 11: 20

Well recognized. More precisely imagined. So, what is next? If you start to review the results and the WWII process itself, then the United States, England and France themselves will be head over heels and go to trial for the barbarous destruction of such German cities as Hamburg, Dresden and others.
1. Pishenkov
  
  +2
  
  1 October 2019 18: 38
  
  ... Hiroshima and Nagasaki were forgotten ... there was such a "holocaust" that Hitler never dreamed of a nightmare - 90 thousand people were dead in one second, and almost half a million more died slowly from radiation in Hiroshima alone .. Just one bomb. And without any real military or strategic necessity. And the Americans looked at all this nightmare that they had done, and ... no, they were not horrified at what they had done, but dropped the next one, on Nagasaki. But all this does not count ... They can also ... It is better to concentrate their "justice" on some German grandfather, who in 1945 was 18 or 19 years old, and he had the misfortune "under the curtain" to get into the ranks of the SS, or on the Red Army, which allegedly took and for no reason at all occupied the innocent peaceful European states ...
  And politicians in the Russian Federation will only be "deeply concerned" with all this ...
Sniper

+3

1 October 2019 12: 08

If Russia silently swallows this nonsense and quietly wipes away, then its leadership is worthless. This audience understands only tough diplomacy.
1. Sergey Popkov
  
  0
  
  1 October 2019 12: 50
  
  Will rub and smile. All real estate, all money over the hill.
Sake

-1

1 October 2019 12: 17

Of course, only the Pact MR became the beginning of WW2 and the role of the USSR in it is the same as that of "our friends" Germany!
1. Savigne
  
  -4
  
  1 October 2019 12: 49
  
  Quote: Sake
  ..only Pact MR was the beginning of WW2 and the role of the USSR in it is the same as that of "our friends" Germany!
  
  It seems extremely doubtful that the USSR and Germany, in general, even a total trifle pot-bellied in 1939, could brew anything on a global scale. Tearing together Poland, yes, easily. But brew a world war, for this, most likely, empires of a global scale are needed. World gendarmes, so to speak. And their allies.
  If someone doubts that Germany was a pot-bellied little thing in 1939, then let it reflect on the fact that even the Nazis alone did not dare to attack Poland. And they agreed to do this together with the USSR. Having rolled him the Baltic States, Bessarabia, Zap. Ukraine and the West. Belarus. And also part of Finland.
  1. Sake
    
    0
    
    2 October 2019 16: 19
    
    Nevertheless, you confirm that, jointly dividing Europe, Germany and the USSR launched a war in Europe, which resulted in 2MB! Yes, I agree that the German Armed Forces in September of the 39th year were not comparable with the USSR Armed Forces, which surpassed Germany in everything!
DPN

+1

1 October 2019 20: 43

Given that all of Europe fought against the USSR, what was to be expected from the European Parliament. WE ourselves showed them an example: they hid the Mausoleum behind cardboard, are embarrassed by our VICTORY and flirt with THEM, but they still do not accept and will not accept US. How many of these Europe will fit in our OUR territory, that’s the whole reason.
1. Savigne
  
  -1
  
  1 October 2019 23: 03
  
  Quote: DPN
  Given that all of Europe fought against the USSR.
  
  Germany, Austria, Finland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, limited (expeditionary force) Italy, is this all of Europe?
  This is not even half of Europe.
  
  Quote: DPN
  WE ourselves have shown them an example: they hid the Mausoleum behind cardboard, we are shy of our VICTORY.
  
  This is when in the days of the USSR the Mausoleum was hidden?
  If you are talking about the Russian Federation, then you did not participate in the 2MV of the Russian Federation.
  
  Quote: DPN
  How many of these Europe will fit in our OUR territory, that’s the whole reason.
  
  I highly recommend you clarify what percentage of the territory of the Russian Federation is recognized as unsuitable for people to live and do business. Very surprised.
  1. DPN
    
    +1
    
    2 October 2019 21: 55
    
    If the Russian Federation did not participate, then it cannot hold parades or distort them. Perhaps YOU want to say that Europe did not supply raw materials for Germany and, finally, you do not know where Russia extracts and what it lives on? In the same place where the USSR mined OIL, GAS and other resources, in your opinion, in Moscow? Therefore, be surprised YOU.
2. Sake
  
  -2
  
  2 October 2019 16: 22
  
  When you become normal, then they will begin to understand! But while all your efforts are directed at lies, theft and aggression, until then all of you will be feared as being infected from a leper colony!
Sergelis

0

2 October 2019 13: 05

Ofigeli completely ... I have two great-grandfathers left there and my grandfather with a disability returned. Did we need that?
1. Sake
  
  -2
  
  2 October 2019 16: 26
  
  Two of your great-grandfathers fought since the age of 36, some in Spain, some in Poland, some in Finland. Who took Bukovina and Bessarabia from Romania, which of them captured the Baltic countries ?! For these years, the USSR did not capture only 2 months! It turns out that your ancestors were invaders, but not defenders!
Vkd dvk

0

2 October 2019 19: 44

Quote: Sake
Nah .. Stalin divided Europe with Germany according to a previously agreed plan. And this is a conspiracy to repaint the world in red and brown colors! Only by helping the USSR, the USA and England raised an enemy worse than Hitler against themselves, they would regret it! Hitler did not threaten the existence of England and the United States, and the Soviet Union, which they pulled out of the loop, began to threaten them from the age of 48!

I would be silent if God killed.
The USSR concluded a pact similar to that concluded by other European countries.
Having secured (as was considered) the last in the list. Such agreements began to be signed in 1933.
“In 1938, he signed the Munich Agreement with Hitler, Mussolini and Daladier. Returning to London, Chamberlain presented the signed agreement to the public at the airport with the words:“ I brought you peace. ”