Whatever one may think about its lack of morality, it was coldly pragmatic and wasn’t responsible for sparking World War II, just for temporarily putting off what proved to be its most deadly phase in Europe.
Excellent history, but you missed one crucial point. Before Stalin sent Molotov to negotiate with Ribbentrop on dividing Poland, he offered a defensive military alliance to both the British Empire and France.
They declined, and because of all of the reasons you cite Stalin decided the USSR's best option was to make a deal with Nazi Germany.
You see the tendentious bias on the neming of the treaty as a Pact. Same as any government that is not on the like of the US / west is called a "regime", the manichean tendencies good/bad.
Whereas the Skyes-Picot Agreement between France and UK to divide the Middle East between them is called an "Agreement" (betwenn gentlemen and good guys), not a "Pact" made between gangsters, bad guys... You see the difference?
The fact that the Soviets thought that all that captured land, from Poland, Baltic States, Finland, Romania will be a large enough buffer against mechanized german army shows how behind times Stalin was. Never mind aquiring additional enemies that otherwise might have stayed neutral...
Lots of bits of history are missing. Lebensraum is twisted and Hitler's comments do not mean what the west has altered them to mean. The winners have altered history. Even Putin is ignoring the unconscionable evils committed by the communists against their own and against surrendered Germans- after the war ended. The UK also committed war crimes. German's crime? They threw out the parasitic Rothchild banking cabal. That is a death sentence for any country. UK, US, Poland, France and Soviet leaders refused peace. The Zionists controlled their politics and made sure that Germany would be punished, enslaved back under the Zionist yoke using money as the tool.
Excellent history, but you missed one crucial point. Before Stalin sent Molotov to negotiate with Ribbentrop on dividing Poland, he offered a defensive military alliance to both the British Empire and France.
They declined, and because of all of the reasons you cite Stalin decided the USSR's best option was to make a deal with Nazi Germany.
The defensive military alliance for the nazists, similar as for the communists was how to unite for robbing and tearing.
It wasn't a defensive alliance. Th treaty was called a Non-Agression treaty, not a friendship treaty, or an Alliance treaty for good reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
You see the tendentious bias on the neming of the treaty as a Pact. Same as any government that is not on the like of the US / west is called a "regime", the manichean tendencies good/bad.
Whereas the Skyes-Picot Agreement between France and UK to divide the Middle East between them is called an "Agreement" (betwenn gentlemen and good guys), not a "Pact" made between gangsters, bad guys... You see the difference?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement
The fact that the Soviets thought that all that captured land, from Poland, Baltic States, Finland, Romania will be a large enough buffer against mechanized german army shows how behind times Stalin was. Never mind aquiring additional enemies that otherwise might have stayed neutral...
Lots of bits of history are missing. Lebensraum is twisted and Hitler's comments do not mean what the west has altered them to mean. The winners have altered history. Even Putin is ignoring the unconscionable evils committed by the communists against their own and against surrendered Germans- after the war ended. The UK also committed war crimes. German's crime? They threw out the parasitic Rothchild banking cabal. That is a death sentence for any country. UK, US, Poland, France and Soviet leaders refused peace. The Zionists controlled their politics and made sure that Germany would be punished, enslaved back under the Zionist yoke using money as the tool.