alexander koryagin wrote to Robert Bashe on Friday August 18 2017 at 11:29:

RB>> Russia wasn't Russia after WWI. Lenin gave up large swaths of
RB>> territorty to the Germans at Tannenberg. That was Lenin's method to
RB>> end the war and keep his own people quiet.

ak> The USSR appeared only in 1923. Lenin had no choice when singing the
ak> peace treaty - the army almost stopped to exit and would not be able
ak> to resist either Germany or Poland.

You conveniently forget the role Trotzky played in beating down the "Whites".
And "no choice"?? Just because the Tsar was a lousy strategist and his generals
incompetent doesn't mean Lenin could have done no better, but he was more
interested in establihing his own power. As for "resistinbg Poland", you also
conveniently forgt the history of the country. Not Poland, but Germany declared
war on the Russians after the incompetent Tsar mobilized the armed forces to
help the Serbs.

ak> Hitler in Germany was inevitable -- such people always appear when a
ak> strong nation is greatly humiliated, as was Germany after WW1.

Nice attempt at justification. Now just consider the situation if Hitler had
been assissinated in 1924. A replacement? Who?

ak> The USSR and the Soviet ideology was the only chance to stop the Nazi
ak> Germany. Western impotent nations were worthless in WW2. They entered
ak> the war when Germany was actually defeated by the USSR.

That old saw again. You and Ward should get together sometims and slap each
other on the back. Belgium and the USSR of 1940 coud "surely" have defeated
Hitler .

RB>>>> I suppose that's why there was a secret addendum to the Molotov-
RB>>>> Ribbentrop treaty allowing Germany and Russia to split up Poland
RB>>>> between themselves.

ak>>> It depends from point of view. IMO Poland was captured by Hitler,
ak>>> but the USSR returned its own territories.

"Point of view"? It's now availble as a black and white protocol. Read it
sometime to find out what really happened. Forget the propaganda circulating in
present Russia - but if you do, don't talk about the facts. That could get you
into prison or even murdered.

RB>> Like the Crimea. Except that there was no subtrefuge.

ak> There was a good subterfuge -- the Russian people referendum and the
ak> way Crimea appeared in Ukraine. The Crimeans started all this mess
ak> themselves after the coup in Kiev. Putin had no choice.

Then Trump now has no choice but to invade Crimea, drive the Russians out and
restore the national borders of Ukraine. Yeah, sure.

Look, you can spout your propaganda as much as you please, but don't expect
anyone outside Russia to believe it.

RB>>>> That's probably why Stalin was so supprised when Hitler attacked
RB>>>> Russia - he thought both Russia and Germany had arranged quite a
RB>>>> nice deal for themselves. But only Russia got to keep it's share.

ak> 

No wonder. It's hard to dispute known facts that even became public when the
USSR dissolved, leaving only Russia.

RB>> The result was, as we know, the destruction of the so-called "Third
RB>> Reich". Which, incidentally, Ivan the Terrible ("Ivan Gruzny") termed
RB>> Russia during his reign ("Rome was the first reich, Constatinopel the
RB>> second, and Moscow the third reich").

ak> Not correct -- Ivan the Terrible called Russia "The third Rome".

Word play. I heard that in Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible, Part 1" also.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613