Talk:Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact

message: The article includes statements by Nazi ministry of propaganda, e.g. accusing USSR of agression which makes Nazi & their allies invasion a preventive action. These claims were found false in Nuremberg trials with a lot of evidence to support this ruling. The trial materials are open. No word of that. Also critical details are omitted. For example, the territories USSR took from Poland were Russian territories occupied by Poland 20 years prior, right after Soviet Russia granted intependance to Poland. Also what was the official state ideology in Poland of the time? It was Nazism. Poland was the first coutry in Europe to sign a pact with Nazi Germany. Any word of that? No. That's your typical Wikipedia "freedom": whitewashing Nazi is all fine, telling truth about USSR is a no-no.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.104.199.51 (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source for your claim that Nazism was the official state ideology in Poland in 1939? Betelgeuse X (talk) 13:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Read up speeches by Pilsudsky compare to those by Goebbels or Schicklgruber. Try to find a difference. Crushing subhumans in the East was their dearest dream. Per secret protocols to Polish-Nazi pact Poland occupied part of Czechoslovakia along the German Nazi. With blessing from UK and France i might add, but it's a different story of British royal family posing with Nazi salutes, etc. Also Poland started solving the "Jew question" prior German Nazi invasion. They might not have the word "duck" in the documents, yet they looked like duck, flied like duck and sounded like one. Yet, as i said, whitwashing Nazism is all fine on Wikipedia, so that's no evidence, right? :)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.104.198.37 (talk) 17:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes, I ask for proof that Poland was a Nazi state and your only response is to refer to some speech by someone who died four years before World War II even began. Excellent. Not much point in wasting more time here, but I will point out the hilarity in your comment about the British royal family supposedly posing with Nazi salutes, when there are actual photos of Soviet military personnel parading with their Nazi cobelligerents in Brest-Litovsk after their joint invasion of the country in 1939. Carry on. Betelgeuse X (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Has anything changed in Polish politics after Pilsudsky died? Nope. They kept hunting down communits and other disagreement. Like the Nazi. But Nazi supporters won't see that, it was all fine. Besides, i listed 5 points. You "reject" one. Great example of typical partial blindness, thank you. Re British royal family - even BBC had to report it and and queen Elizabeth II confirmed it was true. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33578174 Can you show anyting similar for the joint parade fake?  And how come the "joint invasion" was 2,5 weeks apart? When Poland and Nazi Germany jointly invaded Czechoslovakia there was no delay.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.104.199.6 (talk) 02:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Nazi Poland invaded democratic Czechoslovakia with help of Nazi Germany. That is how WW 2 started in Europe. Than Nazi Germany invaded Nazi Poland. 2A02:AB04:3145:5A00:69F5:9CB4:B9FD:35D7 (talk) 02:32, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is literal Soviet and now Russian propaganda. Lol. Galehautt (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Materials by Nazi ministry of propaganda 

message: I love how many lies there are in this article solely for left wing political reasons. For example, this article falsely claims the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact did not result in an alliance. It provably did, evidenced by the immediate and massive increase in war materiel sent to the Nazis by the Soviets after the pact signed. Why do we lie that they weren’t in alliance, and cite random personal novels to support this claim?
Do editors here think that people, not far right conservatives or far leftists, don’t see what you’re all doing? It’s overwhelmingly clear that you always tilt the narrative towards left wing interpretations that are almost invariably factually incorrect. 2600:1700:FC80:1CC0:40F8:72C:CF4B:C797 (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It turns out that the USSR was an ally of Germany, and Great Britain and the USA were allies of the USSR, which means they were all in the Axis ?  Or let's talk about how the Central Bank of England admitted that before World War II it helped the Third Reich sell gold that was stolen in Czechoslovakia on the European market? https://www.bbc.com/news/business-23513654 . Or how Poland, in alliance with Hitler, took away the territories of Czechoslovakia and Lithuania? Or how did neutral European countries, like Sweden, supply resources to the Third Reich until the end of World War II? It becomes very uncomfortable when you start to learn uncomfortable facts. Regarding the trade between the USSR and Germany, let me remind you that the USSR was a state that on its shoulders bore the burden of the deprivations of the First World War, the Civil War, and monstrous devastation, the USSR needed to increase the number of machine tools, technologies and equipment on the eve of the inevitable war with Germany, but reading the opinions of modern sofa historians, it seems that you all would like the USSR to lose that terrible war, but then there would be no one here to write your perverted history ... Hopestyle (talk) 17:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need to be insulting; Wikipedia editors (and professional historians) are far from a monolith, politically or otherwise. It's unclear from your comments if you feel there are changes needed to this article; if so, some specifics would be helpful. -- Beland (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Which country invaded Poland in September 1939 along with Nazi Germany? Was it the US, UK, or Germany? Oh that's right, it was the USSR. Funny how countries that are involved in an invasion of a third country are generally considered allies. Betelgeuse X (talk) 22:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure there was any particular political agenda behind the article describing the pact as not an alliance. That assertion was sourced to a journal article. It's entirely possible someone read that article, found it interesting, and added details from it to this article. It's certainly true that opinions may differ about what are the best words to describe the pact. It would be more helpful to find sources that do call the pact an alliance and note the difference of opinion, than to insult the entire community of Wikipedia editors and call them biased for an addition by one editor presumably made in good faith. Another editor has since removed the assertion from the intro, so it seems there's no further action to be taken. -- Beland (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systematic Lying in this article 

message: @Rjensen Regardin this edit I think it's still worth having this information in the article, possibly more clearly described - it's now a permanent trope in Russian propaganda that "Poland refused Soviet help and this is why it was invaded by Hitler". The fact that "Soviet help" was equivalent to Soviet occupation is conveniently skipped in these narratives. Cloud200 (talk) 08:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree the Poles blocked any crossing of their border by Soviet armies. HOWEVER what I deleted was a misleading news story to the effect that Stalin was "prepared to move more than a million Soviet troops" against Germany. There was a draft memo to that effect in the Russian archives. BUT the news story quotes historian Donald Cameron Watt showing that the Soviets never told the British or French that. So the "million troops" offer never happened. Rjensen (talk) 10:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet troops in Poland 

message: The pomp and circumstance of the diplomatic meeting is not relevant. The fourth paragraph is also irrelevant to the topic. I recommend complete removal of the 4th paragraph, and rewriting the 2nd paragraph in a less florid, more simple 'stating the facts' manner, as is done for e.g.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements 2003:DF:774A:3143:D111:4D60:3403:1884 (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The entire second paragraph of 'Beginning of secret talks' is at best superfluous