What I'm seeing is a bunch of asinine nonsense that has been debunked time and again. The fact that you posted this nonsense unironically and don't even realize how absurd it is really says volumes. My favorite example of the absurdities you quoted is the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact which ignores the fact that USSR repeatedly called on the west to ally against Germany, and the fact that US companies continued to work with the nazis deep into the war. Every comment I've read from you has been deeply imbecilic, but this one truly takes the cake.

[–] petrescatraian@libranet.de 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@yogthos "debunked"

Okay, keeping the conversation on Molotov-Ribbentrop - why was the USSR forced to annex Bessarabia, why was it forced to annex Northern Bukovina (a strip of land that the Tsarist Russia NEVER owned)? Why was it forced to attack Finland? Why was it forced to annex parts of former Poland? Why was it forced not to return those territories after the end of WWII?

Where's the argument for "oh, poor little over-12-timezones-stretching Soviet Union once got too scared by Nazi Germany and redraw the map of Central-Eastern Europe" in this situation? Did you see UK or France annexing territories of sovereign European nations just to keep them safe from Hitler? Does your mind comprehend the concept of border inviolability? Do you understand the reasoning done behind it?

Imagine if the US just sent troops to Cuba to annex parts of it so that it won't fall down in the hands of the commies - did that happen? Did that happen to any country in this very world?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's pretty amazing that anybody could be such an utter ignoramus as to unironically ask what territories UK or France annex. The west colonized countless countries. UK murdered so many people in America that it changed the climate. UK brutally colonized India and committed a genocide there under Churchill. The west committed atrocities in China for a whole century. The west today is invading countries left and right having killed over 6 million people in its war on terror.

Imagine having to imagine if US sent troops to Cuba, which they did, and where US currently occupies territory. I simply refuse to believe that you could be so utterly ignorant not to know these things, which leaves the conclusions that you're just a sad troll who's not even good at trolling.

[–] petrescatraian@libranet.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

@yogthos

The west colonized countless countries.

Did they do it with the explicit goal of stopping Nazi Germany, or did they do that just because they were European and "had" to do this European stuff that all empires did at that time?

and where US currently occupies territory

Wow, is that one entire region or is just a place with one base where they sometimes torture people convicted of terrorism the same way as the Soviet Union did?

you're just a sad troll who's not even good at trolling.

I might be a bad troll, but I'm sure as hell not on either end of the horseshoe like your history shows as well.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Did they do it with the explicit goal of stopping Nazi Germany, or did they do that just because they were European and “had” to do this European stuff that all empires did at that time?

No, they did it with the explicit goal of subjugating the people in those countries and plundering their resources. Europeans continue to do that today.

Wow, is that one entire region or is just a place with one base where they sometimes torture people convicted of terrorism the same way as the Soviet Union did?

Yeah, it's just a torture camp that US put on the soil it annexed from Cuba, no biggie. US is literally the champion of invading countries and brutalizing their populations. Yet, here you are pretending that USSR was somehow worse. Really shows that you don't actually have any morals to speak of.

I might be a bad troll, but I’m sure as hell not on either end of the horseshoe like your history shows as well.

The horseshoe theory was invented by imbeciles and continues to be parroted by imbeciles. It's not a real thing as anybody with a modicum of historical literacy knows.

[–] petrescatraian@libranet.de 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@yogthos

No, they did it with the explicit goal of subjugating the people in those countries and plundering their resources.

Oh, okay.

US is literally the champion of invading countries and brutalizing their populations.

Oh, okay, makes sense.

Not gonna comment on your insults.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Ah yes, the holodomor. Why don't we take a look at what actual historians have to say

During the 1932 Holodomor Famine, the USSR sent aid to affected regions in an attempt to alleviate the famine. According to Mark Tauger in his article, The 1932 Harvest and the Famine of 1933:

While the leadership did not stop exports, they did try to alleviate the famine. A 25 February 1933 Central Committee decree allotted seed loans of 320,000 tons to Ukraine and 240,000 tons to the northern Caucasus. Seed loans were also made to the Lower Volga and may have been made to other regions as well. Kul'chyts'kyy cites Ukrainian party archives showing that total aid to Ukraine by April 1933 actually exceeded 560,000 tons, including more than 80,000 tons of food

Some bring up massive grain exports during the famine to show that the Soviet Union exported food while Ukraine starved. This is fallacious for a number of reasons, but most importantly of all the amount of aid that was sent to Ukraine alone actually exceeded the amount that was exported at the time.

Aid to Ukraine alone was 60 percent greater than the amount exported during the same period. Total aid to famine regions was more than double exports for the first half of 1933.

According to Tauger, the reason why more aid was not provided was because of the low harvest

It appears to have been another consequence of the low 1932 harvest that more aid was not provided: After the low 1931, 1934, and 1936 harvests procured grain was transferred back to peasants at the expense of exports.

Tauger is not a communist, and ultimately this specific article takes the view that the low harvest was caused by collectivization (he factors in the natural causes of the famine in later articles, based on how he completely neglects to mention weather in this article at all its clear that his position shifted over the years). However, its interesting to see that the Soviets really did try to alleviate the famine as best as they could.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2500600

Not only that, but kulaks slaughtered livestock in response to collectivization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization

Oh, okay, makes sense.

Doesn't even begin to compare to what US has done in Vietnam, Latin America, Middle East, Korea, and Africa. The fact that you continue to double down on this really says a lot.

Also, I'm not even arguing that USSR was somehow perfect or that bad things didn't happen there. That's the case for any human society. I'm simply pointing out your utter moral bankruptcy or pretending that USSR was somehow worse than the west.

Not gonna comment on your insults.

You mean statements of fact.