Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stalin's plan for the Soviet domination of Europe
Covering the Map of the World — The Half-Century Legacy of the Yalta Conference ^ | February 1995 | Richard M. Ebeling

Posted on 04/24/2005 12:38:51 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe

In 1939, Stalin began his play for Soviet domination of Europe. Years earlier, in a secret speech to the Communist Party Central Committee in January 1925, Stalin had laid out the strategy from which he never swerved in foreign policy: "But if war breaks out [in Europe] we shall not be able to sit with folded arms. We shall have to take action, but we shall be the last to do so. And we shall do so in order to throw the decisive weight into the scales, the weight that can turn the scales." Stalin's Marxist-Leninist view was that any war that broke out in Europe would be a war between the imperialist and capitalist nations. The strategy was to deflect any attack against the Soviet Union, and instead allow the capitalist nations to fight each other to exhaustion, at which point the Soviet Army would enter the war and conquer the European continent for the Communist cause.

In August 1939, Stalin put the strategy into practice by signing a nonaggression pact with Hitler, which meant that the war would be fought in the West among Germany, Britain, and France, leaving the Soviet Union safe and secure. In the meantime, the secret protocols of the Nazi-Soviet Pact gave Stalin control over eastern Poland, the Baltic Republics, Bessarabia, and Finland. Stalin's plan was that in 1942, at the latest, the Soviet Army would attack Germany, now that France was finished and England was weak and isolated off the European coast. The only problem was that Hitler double-crossed Stalin first by invading the Soviet Union in June 1941. This did not stop Stalin, after the German defeat at Stalingrad in the winter of 1942-43, however, in proposing a separate peace to Hitler through intermediaries in neutral Sweden, and obviously at the expense of his British and American allies. The only thing that prevented it was the fact that Hitler was unwilling to pay Stalin's price for ending the war on the eastern front. (See the review of Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War? in Freedom Daily, November 1991.)


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Germany; Russia
KEYWORDS: communists; dictators; flashback; history; hitler; sovietunion; stalin; wwii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last
To: RusIvan
They wanted to build socialism in one country - Soviet Union.

Yeah, they wanted the entire world to be one country, called the Soviet Union.

21 posted on 04/25/2005 6:43:05 AM PDT by dfwgator (Minutemen: Just doing the jobs that American politicians won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

An obvious fact which is noteably missing in most articles or discussions about Lenin, Stalin and communism is that Communist Soviet Russia's emblem is the hammer and sickle crossed over the globe. This is not misleading, it is/was their goal.


22 posted on 04/25/2005 7:06:04 AM PDT by Auntie Toots (The GOP is still the best we've got))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Auntie Toots

"This is not misleading, it is/was their goal."
Should read, "was/is their goal." The evil forces of communism are still very well represented throughout the world. And make no mistake about it, even in the United States.


23 posted on 04/25/2005 7:09:43 AM PDT by Auntie Toots (The GOP is still the best we've got))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Stalin is bad enough person. We don't need to demonize him by hunging on him deeds which he didn't do. Like "Stalin killed 100 mlns". Under his orders it was killed and repressed many peoples but far beneath 100 mlns.
During his rule Soviet Union lost lot of people in WW2. But it is Hitler who responsible.
OR we have to blame british, french or polish goverments of those time for losses which those countries underwent of hitlerites.

Archives open now. We can read and learn truth. I think that if we lie about even so bad person as Stalin then we go against truth and diminish ourselves to him.


24 posted on 04/25/2005 7:13:48 AM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Auntie Toots

emblem is the hammer and sickle crossed over the globe.==

It is not exactly true. Hammer and sickle crossed over contour of Soviet Union borders on EuroAsian continent pictured on globe.

Why to distort truth? To make it more dreadful then in reality? It is deadful already.

But as result you make laugh of yourself. Anyone who saw Soviet emblem tell you that you distort truth. They will get you so easy.


25 posted on 04/25/2005 7:20:45 AM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan

Oh I don't doubt that that Hitler had planned for war with Soviet Union, although his entire timetable was moved up when the West actually kept it's word by going to war over Poland, when they didn't over Czechoslovakia ( a much better strategic move ). But clearly Stalin was certainly ready to begin expanding the Soviet Union, once he felt strong enough. Starting with the Finn's, and making demands on Poland, and Romania. Between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union it was just a question of which snake would try to swallow the other one first....


26 posted on 04/25/2005 8:53:12 AM PDT by Kozak (Anti Shahada: " There is no God named Allah, and Muhammed is his False Prophet")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

But clearly Stalin was certainly ready to begin expanding the Soviet Union, once he felt strong enough. ==

Yeah yeah. And Stalin was bad enough that he eated alive orfans on breakfast.

As I said that Stalin already dead and he is enough bad person so you may not demonize him ever further.
I know it is politcorrrectness to demonize Stalin further. But still it is like to "kick dead lion". He is already dead so can't bite you.


27 posted on 04/25/2005 9:18:49 AM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan; Kozak; dfwgator
Is that why Stalin tried to help Reds take over Spain and succeeded in helping them take over China? Is that why he funded CPUSA subversion in America?

Claiming that Stalin rejected World Revolution outright is basically a Troskyite charge.

The eradication of all nations and religions in a one-world order is one of the cornerstones of Marxism. Stalinists sought to achieve this through conquest by the Soviet "dictatorship of the Proletariat" while the exiled Trotsky, not as motivated by loyalty to his nemesis Stalin, promoted continuous social revolution all around the world.

Trotskyites always try to claim that Trotsky was the true successor of Lenin, but Stalinism is closer to Leninism. Lenin treated Socialists who wouldn't tow the party line the same way Stalin treated Trotskyites.

"Socialism in one country" was more about proving to the world that socialism could work. Trotskyites like to claim that the USSR collapsed only because real communism has never been tried.

28 posted on 04/25/2005 4:02:11 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

Stalin figured it would have been 1943 before the Soviets were ready to begin an offensive war. He was placating Hitler to try to avoid provoking him in the meantime. That's why he got caught with his pants down in 1941. But by 1943, if Hitler had not struck first, Stalin would have.


29 posted on 04/25/2005 4:04:52 PM PDT by dfwgator (Minutemen: Just doing the jobs that American politicians won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan
Why did he invade Finland? Was this all part of "socialism in one country?" You should be more cautious about believing Soviet slogans. They are intended to deceive.

The Soviet Union never abandoned its long range goal of world domination, the only question was a tactical one of how to achieve this.

30 posted on 04/25/2005 4:05:59 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Why did he invade Finland? Was this all part of "socialism in one country?" ===

WHY? It was preparation of world war. He wanted to move border somewhat farther of Peterburg. He decided to do this on account of Finns. Since those Finns was one of few nations collaborated with commies before.
It was done as everything done by Stalin the dictator. It was unjust.
But in frames of discussion of Did he want or not to export socialism I rather say he didn't since his enemy Trotskii who was ideological exporter.


31 posted on 04/25/2005 11:43:48 PM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lukasz; Tailgunner Joe

FDR was one of our most incompetent Presidents. And the time of his administration had to be THE all time low in terms of the political intelligence quotient of the majority of the US population. That they kept reelecting the fool attests to a particularly dark and dumb chapter in our history. Shameful, utterly shameful.


32 posted on 04/28/2005 3:52:35 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

RE: And in the chaos that a general war in Asia would create, the breeding ground for communist revolutions would be expanded. To help seal this likelihood, Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Japan in April 1941.

This is key. The Vietnam War, really was one of Stalin's ugly babies! That we CHOSE not to win it, demonstrates just how strategically stupid the political mainstream was in this country throughout most of the 20th century.


33 posted on 04/28/2005 3:55:27 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan

RE: They wanted to build socialism in one country - Soviet Union.

Well then, why did they occupy half of Europe for a number of decades? You know, that Warsaw Pact thingey?


34 posted on 04/28/2005 3:58:32 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan; Tailgunner Joe; lizol

That conflicts with the dry, boring, but extremely enlightening account written by Hans Ulrich Rudel, based on some of the first Luftwaffe recon flights to occur into the USSR after the onset of Barbarossa. It was evident based on the staging of materiel, men and fortifications (or lack thereof), that Stalin had been readying a serious offensive along two alignments - along the Danube Corridor, and, along the Moscow-Berlin one. Stalin's biggest mistake was his underestimation of the ability of the materiel deficient Germans to take Blitzkrieg to a whole new level, penetrating deep into the USSR with minimal to non existent logistical support. Of course, ultimately, the Nazis were forced to retreat or were simply cut off and destroyed since their hastily assembled offensive was unsustainable. So in the end, Stalin's lack of preparations for a defensive war, in favor of his preps for a major breakout into the heart of Europe, was not an ultimate disaster. No one can invade Russia without amazing logistics and hope to succeed. In the end, Stalin's push Westward was only really delayed by 18 months.


35 posted on 04/28/2005 4:07:39 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD
Stalin's invasion of Finland which RusIvan called "preparations for world war" also show that Stalin had every intention of pursuing war against the west even before he was ever attacked by Hitler.
36 posted on 04/28/2005 4:12:10 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GOP_1900AD

Well then, why did they occupy half of Europe for a number of decades? You know, that Warsaw Pact thingey?==

To counterbalance Nato which was created before Warsaw Pact. After one bloody war commies wanted to create defense against possible another.
At least that system plus nuclier weaponry kept peace in Europe for 50 years.


37 posted on 04/29/2005 3:07:52 AM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Stalin's invasion of Finland which RusIvan called "preparations for world war" also show that Stalin had every intention of pursuing war against the west even before he was ever attacked by Hitler.==

Finland is one of the nation which collaborated with bolshevicks in 1920th. (Another example: baltic nations.)
Finns could grab in 1920th Karella Ismus (I hope I prononce right) and town Vyborg. This territory wasn't finnish. Bolshevicks gave it to them in 1920th as trade-off because they seeked the finish support for bolshevick power.
In 1940 Stlin decided to took given back to mov eborder west from town Peterburg. Finns refused then war began.

West is Germany, France, Italy, Britain, Spain.
Others are EAST. The bunch of countries which interacted with Russian Empire later Soviet Union.

IMO you consider those countries of eastern Europe as innocents.
But they don't. They collaborated in bolshevick revolt in 1917. Thier ethnic members participated in bolshevick party and even more numerious in Civil War 1917-22 against russian White Movement.
What they got later from hands of Stalin was well earned in 1920.


38 posted on 04/29/2005 3:18:33 AM PDT by RusIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan

Oh, come on now. What, did the Kremlin invision something like Adenaur, Heath and Dulles, with their pens drawn as swords, attempting to succeed where Napoleon failed? Are you serious? NATO the hegemon - ooooh, ooooh, oooh! What bullies! What conquerors! /sarcasm


39 posted on 04/29/2005 10:41:35 AM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RusIvan
At least that system plus nuclier weaponry kept peace in Europe for 50 years.

Wrong. It kept the whole world at war for fifty years with a nuclear EVIL EMPIRE, including repeated Soviet invasions of Eastern Europe to quell slave uprisings. We should have nuked the Soviet genocide machine out of existence before they ever got nukes. MAD was a liberal's dream - a no-win war.

40 posted on 04/29/2005 3:08:29 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson