Wants western countries pushed Hitler to the east?

Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#51
There is more to it than just that. One of my books I read in the last 3-4 months mentions it in detail, but I can't remember which one. There is more info on the Wikipedia page with sources, but I'll try to figure out which book of mine detailed it.

Bottom of Munich Agreement section

UK especially, and some degree France but nothing like the Briitsh, were attempting to use Poland to curtail not only German expansion East but Soviet expansion West.

The non-aggression pact wasn't designed to allow Hitler to invade Poland, there was zero about them at the time, it was to buy some time where Germany and Soviets didn't need to worry about one another. Poland came later when Hitler quickly had the General Staff draw up plans for Case White only months before the invasion occurred, with only short notification (a few weeks, maybe a month, if memory serves) that the Soviet Union was aware, who gave their blessing only because Hitler bribed them with Eastern Poland.
Richard Overly's Russia's War discusses the diplomatic attempts by the USSR to create a military alliance with British and French just after Czechoslovakia, to more effectively deter Germany with a giant ground force staged on their western and eastern borders, but UK and French representatives did not have any authority to make decisions, only talk, were uncommitted, so Stalin bailed and then took up German offer for economic talks which led to non aggression talks.

Written in 1997, so before Putin came to power, so not influenced by Russian national apologists.

The current unclassified letter gives more details but its already historical fact it occurred.

Knowledge of and acceptance of this information should completely change the framework of this discussion, and it should be interesting to see how it goes from here.
 
Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#52
- Hitler wrote about this in his Mine Kampf a quarter of a century before the start of the WWII. He wrote about this when he was imprisoned in a German prison and did not even guess that he would become the German chancellor and its führer.

I am not sure that he diligently put all his ideas of 1924 into life when he headed a large country. The role of the head of state for the one who occupied this post sets new priorities and goals. It's unavoidable.

As for the living space in Russia in 1941, no one explained to me why there is not a word about this both in the Barbarossa Plan and in the main document on the arrangement of the occupied territories of the Soviet Union - in the Rosenberg Plan. Its compilers did not find any benefit in Russian territories - if we talk about the territory of the RSFSR.

The Barbarossa Plan is essentially a plan to eliminate Russia as a major military threat to Germany. And nothing more.

And the Rosenberg plan is a plan for the arrangement of the hostile territories which Soviet Russia itself seized and annexed in 1918-1920 and in 1939. That is, it was about the redistribution of foreign lands between the two bandits.

Russia itself, as an area for the settlement of the German population according to by the Rosenberg plan was not interesting for the Germans.
Why would there be anything about politics in Barbarossa? Its the name for the plan discussing purely a military operation. And what are you talking about the compilers (I'm guessing you mean planners) did not find any benefit in Russian territories? Are you discounting something as simple as the resource rich Donbas region, Ukraine grain, and oil from the Caucasus? Germany needs this to support an enlarging and self supporting 1,000 year reich, they can't get any of this until the govt of the Soviet Union is defeated the European part of their country is annexed, which Germany was going to accomplish by traditional military defeat in a war of annihilation of Soviet military forces, destroying their abilities to resist.

You and every other Historum member wanting to debate this need to accept that Hitler wasn't the one who came up with lebensraum, the Nazis were far far far from the only ones promoting it.

Before replying just read the below links, explore the sources a little and then afterwards say if Hitler and the Nazis are too blame for expansion East and not German culture as a whole:

Drang nach Osten

Ostsiedlung
 
Nov 2015
1,474
Kyiv
#53
You stated that the USSR "occupied" some territories in 1939. Now some of those territories are owned by Ukraine. The question is simple - are you going to return those "occupied" territories?
- Return? What means - return? Ukraine occupied that territiries? As far as I know she herself was under Russian occupation in 1939.

As I understand it, Russia now intends to return to other countries the territories it seized between 1939 and 1945. And to begin, I think, she needs from the lands that belong to her at the moment. From the Kaliningrad region, from Sakhalin and Kuriles. And her neighbors will then think whether it is necessary to return to someone that they did not ever capture.

I am afraid that if the Russians would start the return of the lands they seized, Russia will soon be reduced to the size of the early Moscow tzardom. Something like that -

 
Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#54
You stated that the USSR "occupied" some territories in 1939. Now some of those territories are owned by Ukraine. The question is simple - are you going to return those "occupied" territories?
If you too want to fight the traditional Rus vs Ukraine war of nationalism, there is already a perfect real life battle field to do it. Leave it out of Historum.
 
Nov 2015
1,474
Kyiv
#55
Why would there be anything about politics in Barbarossa? Its the name for the plan discussing purely a military operation. And what are you talking about the compilers (I'm guessing you mean planners) did not find any benefit in Russian territories? Are you discounting something as simple as the resource rich Donbas region, Ukraine grain, and oil from the Caucasus?
You probably did not quite understand my point. I say that the Germans were not interested in the territory of Russia itself. They were interested in the non-Russian territories that Soviet Russia seized and annexed since 1919. Therefore, the Germans planned, at worst, to take the lands away from the Russians, which they seized in 1918-1920 and in 1939.

At the same time, the Germans had to remember very well how the government of the Ukrainian People’s Republic invited German troops to Ukraine in the spring of 1918 to help Ukrainians drive the Russian invaders out of the UPR. What the Germans did.

Rosenberg’s plan envisaged the creation of a Ukrainian state, allied to the Third Reich. Something like Slovakia or the southern half of France that the Germans did not occupy in 1940. Ukraine with its grain, manganese, iron ore and first-class black soil - yes, it was to become a significant resource in supplying Germany. Chechnya and Baku would supply Germany with oil. And what could Russia itself give to the Germany after its occupation? Nothing but an extra headache. Therefore, in Rosenberg plan you will not find anything about how the Germans were going to exploit the territory of the RSFSR or to settle it with Germans.
 
Nov 2015
1,474
Kyiv
#56
If you too want to fight the traditional Rus vs Ukraine war of nationalism, there is already a perfect real life battle field to do it. Leave it out of Historum.
- what means traditional Rus in your post? All traditional Rus was located in the territory of Ukraine - around Kiev-Chenigov-Pereyaslav.

Read the Primary Chromicle. Russian historians located the terrirory of Rus or the Rus land using the text of the Chronicle. They made it several decades ago. Rostov, Suzdal, Vladimyr-on-Klyazma, Novgorod and other cities of the Russians were outside Rus according to the Chronicle.
 
Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#57
You probably did not quite understand my point. I say that the Germans were not interested in the territory of Russia itself. They were interested in the non-Russian territories that Soviet Russia seized and annexed since 1919. Therefore, the Germans planned, at worst, to take the lands away from the Russians, which they seized in 1918-1920 and in 1939.

At the same time, the Germans had to remember very well how the government of the Ukrainian People’s Republic invited German troops to Ukraine in the spring of 1918 to help Ukrainians drive the Russian invaders out of the UPR. What the Germans did.

Rosenberg’s plan envisaged the creation of a Ukrainian state, allied to the Third Reich. Something like Slovakia or the southern half of France that the Germans did not occupy in 1940. Ukraine with its grain, manganese, iron ore and first-class black soil - yes, it was to become a significant resource in supplying Germany. Chechnya and Baku would supply Germany with oil. And what could Russia itself give to the Germany after its occupation? Nothing but an extra headache. Therefore, in Rosenberg plan you will not find anything about how the Germans were going to exploit the territory of the RSFSR or to settle it with Germans.
The Germans wanted all of European Russia to the Urals. Everything east of that they didn't care about. Generalplan Ost

Beyond that, you're confusing a political desire with an attempted execution, stalled since most of what your'e talking about wasn't planned until after Barbarossa stalled and it became apparent that temporary solutions would be needed, with those failing too. But the point of their goals was for the Slavik as a whole to be largely liquidated, with only farmers and workers left, all their elite gone, with ethnic Germans (or something racially close to them) lording over them like Spartans over the Messenian Helots.

To do this, they first needed to knock the USSR out militarily (per traditional Prussian German strategic way of war), then that would lead to collapse of govt, then the remnants would escape east as the German military pushed to the Urals, at which point the Reich would exploit their new lands in a long term plan that would eventually see it all as Ostland.
 
Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#58
- what means traditional Rus in your post? All traditional Rus was located in the territory of Ukraine - around Kiev-Chenigov-Pereyaslav.

Read the Primary Chromicle. Russian historians located the terrirory of Rus or the Rus land using the text of the Chronicle. They made it several decades ago. Rostov, Suzdal, Vladimyr-on-Klyazma, Novgorod and other cities of the Russians were outside Rus according to the Chronicle.
I mean traditional drama. You and the other guy aren't the first Russian/Ukraine nationalists to come to Historum to fight a war of words and non-stop nationalistic propaganda. One, nobody wants that, they don't care and it just clutters up a respectable forum. Two, if you're both so eager to fight, then go fight for real, there is an ongoing war in the Ukraine and both sides are accepting volunteers for combat duties. Just stop bringing this crap into this forum and this thread. If anything you write doesn't have to do with WW2 itself, don't mention it.
 
Nov 2015
1,474
Kyiv
#59
You stated that the USSR "occupied" some territories in 1939. Now some of those territories are owned by Ukraine. The question is simple - are you going to return those "occupied" territories?
- As far as I see - to return means to get back something to the one from whom you take it. Return the territories to whom? To Russia? Or to the Soviet Union - as Russia called its new empire she created in 1922? In this case you need to reanimate that empire first, and then demand something to return to it. But I am afraid that the Ukrainians have a very long own account both towards Russia and its Soviet Union.
 
Jun 2011
34
Slovakia
#60
aggienation: UK especially, and some degree France but nothing like the Briitsh, were attempting to use Poland to curtail not only German expansion East but Soviet expansion West.

The non-aggression pact wasn't designed to allow Hitler to invade Poland, there was zero about them at the time, it was to buy some time where Germany and Soviets didn't need to worry about one another.

__
But we forgot that Poland was strongly anti-Soviet and anticommunism. They want make some cooperation with Hitler and there was a real option to invade Ukraine. ;)

Dir: I do not understand what all these discussions are i about, if it is obvious to everyone that Russia entered WWII on its own will and without any compulsion on September 17, 1939. Entered as an aggressor and invader.

__

This discussion is also about the narative, that II. world war started by the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (and that nazism = communism/bolsehism, liberals view).

_________________________

And I have one more question. Is here somebody from Russia or who knows contemporary russian historiography: historians like N. A. Naročnickaja, V. M. Falin, A. G. Dulian... are they serious historians?
 

Similar History Discussions