• Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 天前

    You’re getting hung up on the literal title and ignoring the historical reality. When your “non aggression pact” also includes actively partitioning independent nations, coordinated military invasions, joint victory parades, and massive economic agreements specifically to fuel war against the West and support your war against the eastern bloc its an alliance in all but name.

    USSR didn’t need nor want mutual defense as germany was the only one who would threaten them and they were themselves about to go on an expansionist war against smaller countries.

    • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 天前

      Yep. That’s a good description of a non-aggression pact. Not an alliance. I also like your use of bigly non-specific words, reminds me of a certain president.

      So, you gonna keep making up dumb shit or what?

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 天前

        Its a good description of an alliance two nations dividing up Europe to conqueror and supporting each other with supplies, oil, military hardware. But I’m sure you also think north Korea is a democracy after all they are called the democratic peoples republic.

        • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 天前

          Okay. Let’s apply your definition of an alliance to other scenarios. Non-aggression pacts, economic ties, and backchannel communications.

          Europe was allied with the Nazis until 1939.

          The US was allied with the Nazis until 1941.

          And, most interestingly, Ukraine became part of NATO in the early-mid 90s, in direct violation of their treaty with Russia…meaning that the Russian justification for invading Ukraine is perfectly legitimate.