• Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      How is it not an alliance? It fits that definition perfectly. They supported Germany’s war effort economically they had meetings where they talked about dividing up Europe, they double teamed Poland together and had a parade after.

      • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Because it is a non-aggression pact. Alliances usually involve mutual defense treaties. Non-aggression pacts are agreements that neither country will attack or otherwise interfere with the military operations of another country.

        I know it’s popular to hate Russia, but you don’t need to fabricate history that never occured.

        • Fizz@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          You’re getting hung up on the literal title and ignoring the historical reality. When your “non aggression pact” also includes actively partitioning independent nations, coordinated military invasions, joint victory parades, and massive economic agreements specifically to fuel war against the West and support your war against the eastern bloc its an alliance in all but name.

          USSR didn’t need nor want mutual defense as germany was the only one who would threaten them and they were themselves about to go on an expansionist war against smaller countries.

          • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Yep. That’s a good description of a non-aggression pact. Not an alliance. I also like your use of bigly non-specific words, reminds me of a certain president.

            So, you gonna keep making up dumb shit or what?