Quote:
Originally posted by Aerich:
Getting back to the original issue, the question of whether the Allies would have won WWII if Hitler had not "ticked off" Stalin is fundamentally flawed. The Non-Aggression Pact was never more than a convenience to either side; it ensured the security of one border for an indeterminate length of time, providing Hitler the security to act aggressively, and Stalin the time the Soviets needed to build their military-industrial output - the division of Poland was a nice bonus for each of them.
There were two real reasons Germany and the USSR signed the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. First, both sides wished to buy time. Neither was suitably ready for war with each other (and Germany was not expecting a declaration of war by the Western powers following their invasion of Poland, in light of their success in Czechoslovakia), which is why the secret part of the agreement provided for the peaceful division of Poland between the two powers. Second, their historical relationship (beginning in the mid-1930s) grew out of the industrial and trade-related constraints on both powers - on the Germans because of the Versailles Treaty, and on the Soviets because they couldn't trade or otherwise acquire military materiel and expertise from wary European powers.
|
Your words work wonders, now understand what you have written. IF Hitler WOULD NOT have invaded Russia, would the Axis have won WWII? We cannot answer that yes or no, but many probable conclusions would lead to a probable yes.
For years we have been stationed on the ground in Korea, but we have not attacked the North. We were there to prevent the North from walking into the South. Even if I have a non-aggression pact with you, don't think I'm going to strip my borders and allow you or anybody else to freely stroll down my alley. If the Soviets did not protect their borders, Moscow would have surely fallen under Operation Barbarossa, and then we would have had another outcome.