Why did the allies but in particular Great Britain work with the USSR AT ALL when they knew that the Bolsheviks had murdered the entire Romanov family just 20 years earlier? That complete atrocity should've been fresh in the minds of people in Great Britain who's monarch was literally related to the family that just got executed in a basement in the woods. Shouldn't this alone have made the USSR a total pariah state?

maybe they were so set on returning to the status quo they were willing to let a communist russia fester. Maybe they realized if they destroyed russia they wouldn't have any real enemies left to train on in proxy wars. The cold war was just the US letting the soviets limp away and heal their wounds so that we could keep a perpetual war going

>>17853624 (OP)
>Shouldn't this alone have made the USSR a total pariah state?
they were for 20 years until germany made themselves and even bigger pariah. i swear half the people on this board think a week passed between 1919 and 1939

>>17853636
Even the germans were surprised when the allies didn't turn on russia. I think it was to create a protracted peace to study a communist western state and check their military response

>>17853636
The USSR was always the greater evil. For example, the Germans weren’t seeking to overthrow the British Empire or destroy capitalism, the USSR was. Britain honestly shouldn’t have declared war on Germany over Poland given how it ended up being gobbled up and subjugated by the Soviets for four decades, and if the real reason they declared war was to keep Germany from being the main continental power that was also all for naught since the USSR took that role after the war anyway.

>>17853624 (OP)
Britain and France wanted to keep Austria-Hungary intact as a bulwark against Bolshevism

>>17853624 (OP)
>That complete atrocity should've been fresh in the minds of people in Great Britain
The people of Great Britain were working class and were sympathetic to socialism in 1918, that's explicitly why the Romanovs were never given asylum in the UK, the British government feared they'd instigate riots and widespread unrest doing so.

>>17853624 (OP)
It's commonly known the British Royals were German sympathizers due to being German themselves. It's irrelevant though as their family didn't hold any power whatsoever by the outbreak of the war. George VI was put on the throne because everyone knew he was a weak man unlike the self-centered Edward VIII.
>>17853644
The Germans did want to destroy capitalism and replace it with socialism (fascism)

>>17853644
given the german plan for poland was to expel, kill, or enslave the entire population i think a few decades under a kind of shitty government was in fact preferable

>>17853624 (OP)
The British public was sympathetic to Russia because it had been their 'ally' in the first world war and they knew virtually nothing beyond that fact about Russia. The Russian public however was never sympathetic to Britain.

>>17853651
The British had no way of knowing what the Soviets intended to do with the Polish population. While it wasn’t as harsh as German treatment, the Soviets were still pretty fucking cruel to the Poles. Britain going to war over Polish sovereignty was a fruitless venture that ended up costing them their empire.

>>17853659
>the Soviets were still pretty fucking cruel to the Poles
How? They ethnically cleansed all of Eastern Germany and gave it to the Poles as a birthday present

>>17853659
>The British had no way of knowing what the Soviets intended to do with the Polish population.
no but they knew what germany intended since their leader wrote a entire book about it.

>>17853659
Slavic infighting is basically the norm. An Englishman has no reason to care about petty Soviet vs Polish disputes

>>17853659
Poland was a French ally and even the French didn't care about them. The truth is England entered the war because they wanted to preserve French hegemony in Europe. This was partially for ideological reasons as France was a republican capitalist democracy but also because they had a romanticized image of the French as fellow Normans (read any British literature from the early 20th century and the aggressive simping for France will get on your nerves).
Whether or not Poles or Russians or Ukrainians kill each other is basically immaterial from a British perspective. Of course the Nazis were considered barbaric for wanting to ethnically cleanse Slavs but that's because they weren't Slavs themselves.

>>17853658
>>17853650
Anons don't realize how much anti-German sentiment existed there among the average guy. You'd find pro-German sentiment among some people in the aristocracy and Catholics. The left-wing intellectuals were pro-Russian. But the white van men were for England and didn't like Huns, simple as.
https://youtu.be/Xg9aQvjMS60

>>17853677
>they wanted to preserve French hegemony in Europe.
Which ended up not happening since the USSR became the main hegemon in Europe after the war, all thanks to Britain by the way.

>>17853678
The British never held the same grudge against the Germans for WW1 that the French did. They mostly entered WW1 because they wanted to defeat the Ottomans

>>17853686
>The British never held the same grudge against the Germans
>Britain declares war on Germany twice

>>17853624 (OP)
Same reason why Spain kept relations with France after the French Revolution even if Louis XVI was related to the spanish royal family

>>17853687
It wasn't because they held a grudge over WW1. Chamberlain declared war because ironically he hoped it would prevent war. Chamberlain wasn't very smart

>>17853691
WW1 was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans. WW2 was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans. Brexit was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans. When a Briton closes his eyes he see Germans marching down Rotherhithe. He sees blonde women raising German speaking babies in the Austrian mountains. This the wretched Briton cannot abide. His existence is a ball of spiritual hate that welts up in his chest until violence becomes so palatable that he cannot resist.

>>17853695
Jewish post. But I will respond to it.
>WW1 was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans.
England's entry into WW1 was due mostly to her desire to conquer land from the Ottomans. Ostensibly they also wanted to preserve Belgian independence therefore ensuring a buffer-state existed between the Germans and the French. Why did they want this? Who knows. But they had convinced themselves France's security was somehow important to British interests
>WW2 was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans
By this point they had latched themselves to the sinking ship that was France and decided to go with it to the grave. They didn't want war, but the French and Germans wanted to fight each other again so they grudgingly took the French side. They should have foreseen France's inevitable downfall.
>Brexit was because Britain has a seething hatred of Germans
No, it was because the EU migration system allowed vast numbers of Poles into England and a lot of them were criminals. Go figure

>>17853705
>Jewish post
You're right on, I was trying to harness this asshole. Your instincts are as sharp as ever.

You're of course correct about the Ottoman situation as well, I would have pointed to the problems emerging in the 19th century and their role as a geographic pivot area. As for the French- I think you're right about their motivation being greater against Germany but Alsace-Lorraine was their geographic pivot. Having an island mentality really helps set up a country's strategic vision because they're not focused on a smaller local area next to another country.
>No, it was because the EU migration system allowed vast numbers of Poles into England and a lot of them were criminals. Go figure
We can laugh at this when the problems are all sorted out. There's a long way to go.

>>17853718
Ernst Lissauer and his consequences have been a disaster for humanity

>>17853705
>Ostensibly they also wanted to preserve Belgian independence therefore ensuring a buffer-state existed between the Germans and the French. Why did they want this? Who knows
Keeping the balance of power in Europe was a key part of Britain foreign office at the time

Sometimes foreign policy is more based on what's pragmatic rather than what's ideological. USA had no problem making friends with Mao in 1970 or Pinochet in the 1980s because the country, not necessarily the government, was still invaluable.


USSR was still the same body as tsarist Russia, and Russia has always been a major geopolitical factor. Both Britain, France and Germany were competing in winning the USSR over to their side in the 1930s.

>>17853644
You know that it's perfectly reasonable to copy-paste this argument and apply it on Germany.

The Germans should never have invaded Poland because the USSR took everything anyway so why bother?

Whenever you apply this argument on Germany, it's always met with a bunch of 'if's and 'but's, because Germany should never have the burden of agency and responsibility for their actions, they dont need hindsight and its always everyone elses fault for not enabling their ambitions. But in the case of Britain, it's always made with complete disregard for the benefit of hindsight, and that it's always Britain's fault for not accurately predict and course-correct with surgical precision every single situation that Germany kept creating otherwise Britain is to blame for the outcome, because God forbid any state has any interests of themselves but Germany.

Any logical individual with the slightest bit of rational thinking, who isn't ideologically compromised, can see the fallacy in this argument. This is something you will never understand.

>>17853659
>the Soviets were still pretty fucking cruel to the Poles
Enlighten me what did the ebil soviets did

>>17853686
What the fuck are you talking about, Ottomans joined the war late

>>17853978

What the fuck are you talking about, the Ottoman Empire existed solely during the Bronze Age.

>>17853979

Wait, I think I got the Ottoman Empire confused for another one, nvm.

>>17853659
they liberated Poles from the szlachta for the first time in history, and the bourgeoisie as well
Katyn Forest was a boon for ordinary Poles and I'm tired of pretending it wasn't

>>17853677
>England entered the war because they wanted to preserve French hegemony in Europe.
I don't think hegemony means what you think it means retard.
The French wouldn't declare war on Germany without assurances that Britain would follow (not over Rhineland, not over Czechoslovakia, not over Poland). That is by definition not a hegemony because France couldn't and wouldn't move without Britain on the team.

Also Britain literally canceled their military alliance with France in 1921 despite the fact that it was guaranteed in the versailles negotiations, as compensation because France was denied the demand to annex everything west of the Rhine when Germany capitulated in 1918.
Britain not only voided the alliance in 1921 but also worked extensively to enable German economic recovery by significantly lowering the German debt and provide bonds. Britain also withdrew their military occupation in the Rhineland half a decade ahead of schedule which forced France to follow suit. Britain also virtually abandon the anti-German Stresa Front which France was a,part of.
This was all done because Britain recognized the need for Germany and DIDNT want France to be too powerful. It was part and parcel for preserving balance.
Germany wasn't a problem until they began outspending everyone in military and aggressively expand. This is something you stormfags will never comprehend.

Literally everything I just wrote here can be fact-checked by Google or chatgpt. It's a undisputed proof that all your bullshit about Britain being fundamentally anti-German and wanted to "keep" France a top dog is nothing but distortions and lies, most likely because you are a nazi and half-educated on the topic.

Kinda lol'ed hard over your faggit interpretation that Britain based their alliance with France from a racial perspective with the Norman's, especially considering France has throughout 90% of Britain's history been their arch nemesis.

>>17854011

"Poll bad! POLL IS BAD! POUL BAD! BOARD BAD! THE ONLY RIGHT WING BOARD ON 4CHAN...IS LE BAAAD!"

>>17853705
>Why did they want this? Who knows.
>France's security
Securing an independent or aligned Belgium had been English policy for the past 1000 years
Pitt the younger gave the French annexation of the Austrian Netherlands as the reason why Britain went to war with France (most of the British population actually viewed the revolution itself positively)
One of Britain's primary goals in the war of Spanish succession was to prevent French control of alignment of the Austrian Netherlands
Throughout the middle ages Britain regularly supported attempts by the Flemings to gain more independence from the French crown
Why? Look at a map, Belgium and the Pas-de-Calais (which for a long time were also independent of France ) are the two regions closest to England. Most invasions came to England from here, by keeping them aligned Britain can quickly transport soldiers to the mainland. By keeping them divided, Britain can insure that even if one side was an enemy, they could still quickly land troops in the other and threaten any invasion force by land. By keeping all of it aligned, Britain pretty much prevents any attempted invasion of the UK, or at least makes it much harder.

>>17854234
Anon these retards have no idea what you're talking about.
To them, history starts at 1914 and everything that doesn't involve Germany directly isn't relevant to history discussions.

>>17854304
> To them, history starts at 1914 and everything that doesn't involve [le evil] Germany directly isn't relevant
dat projection

>>17854011
> economy of the 3rd reich
let me guess
> le reichs economy was le dependant on plundering oder nations
and
> le reich was so heavily in depth they had to start WW II
?

also obligatory
> i look like this and talk like that

>>17853624 (OP)
I have wondered why the European powers cared so much to send all their armies to defeat Napoleon, but not Lenin?

well ok WW1 but still

>>17853974
Katyn massacre, repression of any Pole who spoke out against the communist Polish Government, more than 40 years of no political freedom, economic decline.

>>17854533
Nazis did it but also it was kinda based, what government doesn't repress it's enemies?, buzzword, what economic decline, are you retarded? The country was literally rebuilt from ruins after ww2
t. Pole

>>17854549
I think Poland should be a cuck to Russia for the rest of time.

>>17853624 (OP)
Why do you feel the lives of "royalty" is worth more than other lives? Anastasias life was worth exactly as much or as little as any old cunts

>>17854549
There was economic decline compared to pre-war Poland

>>17853638
>Even the mental retards were suprised
Yes.

>>17853644
Nazi Germany was run by animals. They are the greatest evil. Not just to the UK, but all humans.

>>17854604
The massive war might have something to do with that.

>>17854703
Yeah sure, let’s not blame the Soviets. How come Western European countries reached pre-war economic levels so soon after the war then?

>>17854700
The Nazis would never have been able to spread their ideology throughout the world. The Soviets, however, were able to fool millions of people throughout the world about communism. The thing is, communism hides its evil with nice words and ideas that seem good at first, only to backtrack and impose brutal dictatorships once the communists are in power. Fascism is more obvious in its evil so less people are fooled by it, thereby making fascism less of a threat than communism.

>>17854732
Because they basically became USA puppet states and let Nato handle the defense while the USA took over their colonial empire.

>>17854744
>Ideology
An all consuming desire to destroy as much of human civilization is not a ideology anymore than a bull in a shop of pottery is ideological driven. Nazis were driven purely by a hatred of humans. That makes them the greater evil.

>>17854760
You can say the same thing about communism, only difference is more people are fooled into supporting communism.

>>17854766
You cannot. Communism is humanistic. Nazism is Aryan in nature, and Aryans are animals by their own admission.

>>17853957
Please care about Polska . . .