Bloomcole

joined 1 week ago
[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

It must've been that they were so active I got the impression there were more back then.
Also that there is an unhealthy amount of them in our time.
But thanks for correcting me.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 hours ago

LOL at the mods calling this Xenophobia

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (20 children)

LOL the western propaganda press suddenly quit reporting about that 'Russian influence' lie when it was proven it was the Romanian liberals who did it.
You should keep up with the lies you parrot.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 2 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

Most of the Baltics and especially ukraine had large percentages of nazis.
Nothing has changed.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Wow, you're doing some serious revisionism here.
A non-aggression treaty literally is that, they were enemies and it bought time for Russia to arm itself.
Keep focussing and obsessing on that and misrepresenting it to fit your narrative.

It's a small detail in the big picture and mostly brought up by the those idiots promoting the laughable horseshoe theory.
Same as how they say nazis were socialist bcs of their name.

In no way could those clear enemies be seen as 'aligned' and definitely not from something you imagine and want to see in that pact.
It is the Soviets who went to war with the nazis of Germany and of your fascist country that was most certainly aligned with them, had nazi troops there and fought on their side.
I'm done here

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 8 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Centuries of colonialism, wars, regime change and stealing resources from other continents?
At the same time wanting to ban the refugees they cause and would rather have them drowned and shot at by Frontex or their kids put in cages by the US regime?
You're right it's almost impossible to imagine something better, I must be dreaming.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

banning you now loser troll

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 3 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

As I said 'spheres of influence and still having the option of having an independent state in Poland' sounds a lot less bad than simply handing over Sudetenland.
Complaining about only one and ignoring the worse other one is hypocritical at best.
And imagine blaming the Soviets for going in to countries aligned with nazis.
Like Finland, where you're probably are from and explains your bias.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 5 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

you seemingly hadn’t heard of the pact

I've been to school and it's invariably mentioned to make the BS claims you make.
And I probably know better than you how Wikipedia works.
NONE of the references show what they claim.
The original texts talk about 'spheres of influence' in the tiny Baltics andthe rest is only about Poland.
It even says:
" The question of whether the interests of both parties make desirable the maintenance of an independent Polish States and how such a state should be bounded can only be definitely determined in the course of further political developments."
That hardly sounds like 'dividing Europe between them'.
I could call that a deliberate misinterpretation.
If you want countries making deals with the nazis that literally say they can annex them even look to the Brits and France. "Czechoslovakia must surrender its border regions and and defenses to Nazi Germany" is more like it.
Funny how they never mention that or the dozen of other pacts with nazis, all of them before the Soviets.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.ml 5 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 children)

I fully endorse dismantling both.
Away with the horrible racist old powers

view more: ‹ prev next ›