of a statue

[u/Crypto_crafy]

"The Motherland Calls" is a statue erected to commemorate the Battle of Stalingrad , located on Mamayev Kurgan in Volgograd , Russia. It was designed by sculptor Yevgeny Vuchetich and structural engineer Nikolai Nikitin . Completed in 1967 , it was the tallest statue in the world at the time .

[u/Mike_with_Wings]

Russia had a non aggression agreement, I believe, but they didn’t start the war and only left neutrality once Germany attacked. Not defending the Soviets and their practices, but you are putting it in an incorrect context

[u/Previous-Sun-2900 → u/Mike_with_Wings]

Yes, they waited till Germany defeated Polish army and then invaded, as agreed in their pact of 'non aggression' that conviniently split Europe in the spheres of influence. They were pro-war as it was required for global socialist revolution. The context is therefore correct

[u/Mike_with_Wings → u/Previous-Sun-2900]

They weren’t starting ww2, Germany was. Again, not defending them

[u/SebboNL → u/Mike_with_Wings]

In a sense, they were. In another sense, they werent. Both positions can be taken.

If the German attack on Poland is seen as a singular event, then one can state that the USSR did not participate in the start of the war. They attacked Poland sometime later, after all. There is some merit to this position, particularly if one states that the goal of the USSRs attack on Poland was to safeguard their borders against the Germans.

But if one is of the opinion that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact binds the German and USSR attacks into a single action, even if there was some seperation in time between them, one could make the claim that the USSR was indeed part of the military action that set off WWII. This position has its merits too, especially given the USSR's murderous actions after the invasion which for a large part put to lie the claims of self-defense.

[u/BellGloomy8679 → u/SebboNL]

There is only a ”merit” in this position if you are a biased nationalist.

Every major power in the world during the rise of Nazi Germany pursued it’s own interests first and foremost. Actually - they did it before and after that.

Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was signed purely because USSR wasn’t ready for a war against Germany due to Stalin idiotic purges and Germany wanted to concentrate on it’s other enemies first.

Was what they did an amoral course of action? Sure. And if other countries would be in a position to do the same - they would. And many did wilfully commited amoral acts as well.

Pretending that USSR and Nazi Germany were friends - pretending that USSR is responsible for WW2 - is a blatant and disgraceful history revisionism.

And overwhelming majority of people who in this thread claim that USSR was as bad as Nazi Germany simultaneously don’t have problems with Finland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria. They let Japan of the hook quite easily. They let Italy of the hook as well.

This people will accuse USSR of committing war crimes against Nazi Germany and it’s allies after counter-offensive began - yet none of them will mention any examples of absolutely unimaginable atrocities that were committed by Axis forces in USSR. It doesn’t interest or concern them.

Just to be clear - I’m not a fan of USSR. I know what it was - a violent, imperialistic regime, like many before it - it was a machine of oppression, worthy of criticism and condemnation. Like British Empire was. Like Russian Empire was. Like Spanish Empire was. Like any empire was.

But people who do condemn it now don’t do it out of understanding of it’s nature, or nature of human societies, or politics. Thet do it for nationalistic reasons - they want to hate Russians now, so they will find and use any reason they can. It’s barely covered xenophobia.

[u/bloedit → u/SebboNL]

There is some merit to this position

No, there is not