The Nazis would have taken all of Poland had the Soviets not forced them to honor the non-aggression pact, and Britain and France were doing jack-shit other than a naval blockade. You’re either saying the Soviet Union should have attacked Nazi Germany there and then when they were weaker than Germany and had no alliances, or that the Soviet Union should have left Poland to the Nazis. The former is horrible strategy, the latter is holocaust trivialization.
I’m just saying they both did invade, Nazis first and then USSR joined in invading Poland later. I’m just trying to find the agreement on even this basic fact.
The Soviets went in after the Polish government collapsed and the Nazis had already taken Poland, in order to prevent the Nazis from advancing further. The Soviets were not interested in conquest or land-grabbing.
Nazis hadn’t taken all of Poland, just parts of it. In the end both got the parts of Poland they had agreed upon (with the Lithuania thing affecting it too).
The Nazis didn’t take all of Poland because the Soviets went in. The Nazis even over-extended at Brest, which the Soviet approach caused them to withdraw.
I meant they agreed to divide Poland’s area according to the lines mentioned “if something happened to it (heh)”. So stopping the attack and handing over extra parts are all according to keikaku.
World War II certainly wasn’t “done” afterwards
No I meant dividing Poland part from the agreement.
Why not fully agree to joint-invasion in a secret section of the pact?
You have no answers for this, again, you seem to be arguing that the Nazis should have been allowed to extend the Holocaust to all of Poland, including the areas Poland annexxed from Lithuania and Ukraine.
The Nazis would have taken all of Poland had the Soviets not forced them to honor the non-aggression pact, and Britain and France were doing jack-shit other than a naval blockade. You’re either saying the Soviet Union should have attacked Nazi Germany there and then when they were weaker than Germany and had no alliances, or that the Soviet Union should have left Poland to the Nazis. The former is horrible strategy, the latter is holocaust trivialization.
I’m just saying they both did invade, Nazis first and then USSR joined in invading Poland later. I’m just trying to find the agreement on even this basic fact.
The Soviets went in after the Polish government collapsed and the Nazis had already taken Poland, in order to prevent the Nazis from advancing further. The Soviets were not interested in conquest or land-grabbing.
Nazis hadn’t taken all of Poland, just parts of it. In the end both got the parts of Poland they had agreed upon (with the Lithuania thing affecting it too).
The Nazis didn’t take all of Poland because the Soviets went in. The Nazis even over-extended at Brest, which the Soviet approach caused them to withdraw.
I mean it’s all according to the agreement. Both “went in” and took the agreed parts, shook hands, done.
There was no agreement for both to “go in,” no formal plan to do so, and World War II certainly wasn’t “done” afterwards.
I meant they agreed to divide Poland’s area according to the lines mentioned “if something happened to it (heh)”. So stopping the attack and handing over extra parts are all according to keikaku.
No I meant dividing Poland part from the agreement.
Why did the Soviets move in to Poland?
Why not fully agree to joint-invasion in a secret section of the pact?
You have no answers for this, again, you seem to be arguing that the Nazis should have been allowed to extend the Holocaust to all of Poland, including the areas Poland annexxed from Lithuania and Ukraine.