Churchill's Alliance with the Genodical Murderer, Stalin

[jcdf]

You could ask the same question about the USA, why did they not declare war on Russia as well? Or Japan, why did they not declare war Russia from the outset? Or there is Spain and Turkey and China, they did not declare war on Russia either! I wonder why?

[liamfoley]

Hypocrisy exposed. Just to highlight it: They declared war over the occupation of 50% of Poland. By the wars end, Poland was under 100% occupation by the USSR. Not only did they do nothing about it, they facilitated it. This exposes the agenda of not the protection of Poland but the destruction of Germany.

Its simple, Britain, and to a lesser extent, France - got sour grapes over an emerging Continental competitor.

No, you moron, they declared war because they had a pact with Poland.
You got to love these threads which are started directly to attack the British. I am presuming that is the case since anyone who has ever read on ony of the issues at hand would be able to do better than the infantile analysis offered in the OP.

If Hitler invaded Hell," he once remarked, "I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.

Incidentally many of the Irish "Nationalists" that would take up this cause with glee are the "intellectual" descendants of Seán Russell. Would you like to discuss his record of collaborate in genocide?

[sondagefaux]

Churchill's quip about the Devil, with which I'm familiar, proves the point - the alliance with Stalin was formed because it was in Britain's best interests. The rhetoric about fighting for freedom and against tyranny was simply cover.

The Unionist poster who started this thread, in which de Valera's policy of outward military neutrality for Ireland during WWII, is criticised as a failure to confront tyranny, doesn't seem to understand that de Valera was simply doing what he thought was best for Ireland, much as Churchill did what he thought was best for Britain by forming an alliance with Stalin, a tyrannical mass-murderer.

To criticise de Valera's realpolitik as a failure to confront Hitler's tyranny is hypocritical unless you also criticise Churchill's realpolitik as a failure to confront Stalin's tyranny.

This thread isn't designed to bash the Brits. It's designed to highlight the hypocrisy of certain Unionist posters.

[Odyessus]

Stalin, one of recorded history's worst mass murderers, was part of the alliance that defeated Nazi Germany and the other Axis powers.

It has been claimed that WWII began in order to defeat tyranny and, more specifically, to defend the freedom of Poland after its invasion in 1939.

However, Poland was invaded by two powers in 1939 - Germany and the Soviet Union.

The leaders of those states, Hitler and Stalin, had formed an alliance, known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, in which they agreed to divide Poland.

Since Polish freedom was one of the stated reasons for France and the UK declaring war on Germany, then why didn't they also declare war on the other state that invaded Poland in 1939, the Soviet Union?

Since the fight against tyranny was one of the stated reasons for going to war against the Nazis, then why did the western Allies form an alliance with Stalin, one of the greatest tyrants of his age?

Why did the western Allies, Churchill in particular, agree to the carve-up of Europe, why did they allow a tyrannical régime to take control over much of Eastern and Central Europe (including Poland) and why did they send Soviet POWS back to the Soviet Union to be murdered by Stalin?

Are claims that the western Allies fought for the freedom of Poland and against tyranny merely shallow rhetoric to disguise the fact that they fought for their own interests?

And what does Churchill's good personal relationship with Stalin (both pictured below) say about his personal character and the nature of the state he led during WWII?

Since Polish freedom was one of the stated reasons for France and the UK declaring war on Germany...

The British and French ultimata to Germany made it clear that the German occupation of Polish territory was the sole reason for their declarations of war on Germany. It wasn't one of the stated reasons. It was the only stated reason.

[liamfoley]

As an Irish person, why do you feel the need to be an apologist for the English? Sure the English and their colonial puppets killed more people around the world than either Hitler or Stalin ever did... or Russel.

Where's your indignation about that?

First of all your use of "English" here is inaccurate and misleading. I am left to wonder is your use deliberate or are you really that silly?
Anyway I'm not defending anything except logic and truth.
Finally at least you have revealed your true nature with the silly, atavistic anti-Britishness. If you were really concerned about the issues you list then you would be consistent. You are most likely just another looser who subsists on the Dole paid for by English taxpayers.

[edifice.]

To hell with the Czechs!

[parentheses]

Churchill's quip about the Devil, with which I'm familiar, proves the point - the alliance with Stalin was formed because it was in Britain's best interests. The rhetoric about fighting for freedom and against tyranny was simply cover.

The Unionist poster who started this thread, in which de Valera's policy of outward military neutrality for Ireland during WWII, is criticised as a failure to confront tyranny, doesn't seem to understand that de Valera was simply doing what he thought was best for Ireland, much as Churchill did what he thought was best for Britain by forming an alliance with Stalin, a tyrannical mass-murderer.

To criticise de Valera's realpolitik as a failure to confront Hitler's tyranny is hypocritical unless you also criticise Churchill's realpolitik as a failure to confront Stalin's tyranny.

This thread isn't designed to bash the Brits. It's designed to highlight the hypocrisy of certain Unionist posters.

When one considers the history of the war, the Poles had good reason to be bitter with Britain.

I believe there was a postwar victory parade held in Britian. The Polish forces refused to take part in the parade because of their anger over the betrayal of their country

[edifice.]

First of all your use of "English" here is inaccurate and misleading. I am left to wonder is your use deliberate or are you really that silly?
Anyway I'm not defending anything except logic and truth.
Finally at least you have revealed your true nature with the silly, atavistic anti-Britishness. If you were really concerned about the issues you list then you would be consistent. You are most likely just another looser who subsists on the Dole paid for by English taxpayers.

Everybody defends that; the problem is interpretations of them differ. Your interpretation certainly smacks of West Britism.

[sondagefaux]

No, you moron, they declared war because they had a pact with Poland.

To defend Poland against invasion. But it was invaded by two powers in 1939 - Germany and the Soviet Union.

You got to love these threads which are started directly to attack the British. I am presuming that is the case

You presume wrong. The motivation for starting this thread is explained in my post above.

Incidentally many of the Irish "Nationalists" that would take up this cause with glee are the "intellectual" descendants of Seán Russell. Would you like to discuss his record of collaborate in genocide?

Why not? Start a thread if you like.

[liamfoley]

Churchill's quip about the Devil, with which I'm familiar, proves the point - the alliance with Stalin was formed because it was in Britain's best interests. The rhetoric about fighting for freedom and against tyranny was simply cover.

The Unionist poster who started this thread, in which de Valera's policy of outward military neutrality for Ireland during WWII, is criticised as a failure to confront tyranny, doesn't seem to understand that de Valera was simply doing what he thought was best for Ireland, much as Churchill did what he thought was best for Britain by forming an alliance with Stalin, a tyrannical mass-murderer.

To criticise de Valera's realpolitik as a failure to confront Hitler's tyranny is hypocritical unless you also criticise Churchill's realpolitik as a failure to confront Stalin's tyranny.

This thread isn't designed to bash the Brits. It's designed to highlight the hypocrisy of certain Unionist posters.

Aaaaaw, that's so cute, you feel aggrieved because someone said something nasty about Dev. Is it not true that he offered condolences on the death of Herr Hitler?
This thread is a retaliation for someone pointing out that DeValera was an idiot? How mature.