":: Really, we should get back to the discussion regarding chronological order before you dig yourself any deeper. Regarding ""some specific circumstance when the nation that actively ought against the major Ally can be considered not as a Nazi co-belligerent,""
when the USSR invaded and brutally subjugated the Baltics it was not an Ally. That it was an Ally later is completely irrelevant to the situation in the Baltics and any other territories where the USSR was the initial aggressor, and you know that. (I also point out that you use later, not original, relationships to tar others but use the same to your benefit when it's good for Stalin.)
 If you wish to demonstrate some semblance of objectivity, I suggest you:
 retract your contentions of ""semi-voluntary"" cooperation by the Baltic peoples with Nazis based on gratitude that Hitler considered them ""semi-Aryan"" and not semi-Simian
 affirm that as far as you are concerned, the only reason Latvians et al. fought against an ""Ally"" is because that ""Ally"" was re-invading their homeland, and that fighting that ""Ally"" had nothing to do whatsoever with the expression of sympathies for the Nazi cause.
 Absent of these two actions on your part, I cannot consider your presence here and participation in this conversation in particular as being in anything resembling good faith.
 Regarding Poland, let's see, 51% of territory to Stalin, 49% of territory to Hitler = Stalin wound up with more of Poland than Hitler. So, your personal attack that I'm lying is, unfortunately, a lie.
 As for your contention that Stalin ""saved"" Jews, with respect to the Baltics at least, Jews were deported to Siberia by the USSR in a greater proportion of population than any other ethnic group and to harsher conditions, as Stalin was a rabid anti-Semite. Your history is flawed there as well. That some Jews escaped owing to circumstance had nothing to do with Stalin being beneficent to Jews, he plainly was not.  ►TALK

"