• RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    I mean it’s all according to the agreement. Both “went in” and took the agreed parts, shook hands, done.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      There was no agreement for both to “go in,” no formal plan to do so, and World War II certainly wasn’t “done” afterwards.

      • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 day ago
          1. Why did the Soviets move in to Poland?

          2. 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.

          • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 day ago

            #1 Soviets probably wanted their part. And I’m not sure what benefit there would’ve been in #2 that they didn’t get this way.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 day ago
              1. No, lmao. The Soviets had little economic incentive to invade, their economy was a planned one and not one that relied on colonization like the Nazis. Get a better answer.

              2. They didn’t agree to an invasion in the pact, that’s why.

              • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                But invade they did and got their part. As agreed.

                Why not fully agree to joint-invasion in a secret section of the pact?

                They didn’t agree to an invasion in the pact, that’s why.

                It doesn’t really answer the question of what benefit there would’ve been to “fully agree to joint-invasion” when they got everything they wanted to out of the pact with the postponed invasion

                  • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzBanned from community
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 day ago

                    They got their part, as agreed. That much is just a fact. Same for the invasion happening. As for a coordinated attack, no such thing, but joint attack in the sense that both were attacking Poland at the same time.