All this is correct.
So? Stalin still is an stubborn idiot in that regard.
Yeah? I'm not arguing that Stalin wasn't a stubborn fool - I shy away from the term "idiot," as an idiot could never have accomplished all that he did - for disbelieving his own intelligence, I'm arguing against the idea that the man intended to invade Europe. Most plans the USSR had against the West were defensive in nature; they believed that the "capitalist-imperialists" would eventually attack them. They wanted an offensive war, but were mostly preparing to defend themselves. Ask Cheezy, he could tell you a lot more about this than I could.
German troops summon at the border: O well, my pal Hitler said they are only there to prepare for an attack on the UK, which admittedly happens to be on the other side of the continent, but who cares. I believe him.
Intelligence from the German, Japanese and British front reach Stalin: Ha! They didn't attack on that date! It must be a British conspiracy!
And this book of Hitler talking about "Lebensraum" and such? Clearly only a trick to fool the silly French.
Stalin surely did think like the evil master-mind he was.
I doubt Stalin believed anything like Hitler's claim that
Mein Kampff was just to fool the French. But the Germans had been conducting war games - and two outright invasions of Eastern European countries - near the Soviet border before. There were compelling reasons to believe they may be telling the truth about that. Of course, he was wrong, but he was hardly the moron you are portraying him as. Believing your enemy won't attack - because logic dictates that they would be stupid to do so - is hardly the same as buying their outrageous lies. Stalin
made a mistake. It was a big one, and cost him plenty in the short term. But he was too experienced in politics and intrigue to have bought the crap Hitler was selling.
Especially when building up an "defensive line" which had been utterly stupid from an defensive viewpoint. He had good reason to be afraid of an arrest (by the way interesting remark of yours, didn't know that).
From what I know of the Molotov Line - admittedly not that much - it would have been a decent defensive line
if completed. It never was, of course, and was designed only to combat Germany - and maybe Hungary - not the entirety of Eastern Europe as well.
To be honest, I'm a little surprised Stalin wasn't overthrown shortly after Barbarossa. I suspect it is largely because he'd eliminated all possible successors. None of the generals had the political experience or acumen to run the nation, and they knew it. Molotov was really the only possible choice from within the Party, and he didn't want the job. Stalin seemed to avoid being disposed of simply because there were no alternatives to him at the time.
But oh yeah that is right: Precise dates of invasion proved to be not precise, so this all makes sense.
You need to stop being a little smart arse right now. I'm attempting to have a conversation with you. That you disagree with what I'm saying does not give you an excuse to be a troll. If you do so again, I will report you.
I am not saying that Stalin was smart for doing these things, but it's become obvious that you are either willfully misinterpreting my statements or just being foolish, so I will re-iterate; these are the reasons why Stalin did these things. That is all. I am not making any judgements about whether the man was right or not - he clearly wasn't - I am merely elucidating his reasons for doing so, and explaining why they made a certain amount of sense from his viewpoint.
As already stated I was probably wrong here.
I'm just expanding upon the point.
Regarding what particular issue now?
Most of what you've said, actually. But that particular statement was directed against your belief in the myth above. I can find tonnes of sources supporting it too. It doesn't change the fact that those sources are wrong, much like the common claims that Stalin would have attacked Germany as early as 1942. 1944 was a more likely date, and then only because that's when Stalin's intelligence said Germany would be prepared to attack
him.
What a lucky guy I am. I would have not survived to be dismantled by you. After all, I misunderstood a statement. No sin is more uncommon in the world of debate.
Misunderstanding a statement isn't that bad. It's annoying for the person being misunderstood, but can be corrected. The fact that you continued to misunderstand it through at least four attempts by both myself and red_elk to explain what I actually said there is more than annoying though. It makes one doubt that you are even worth talking to, because such repeated misunderstanding can lead to only several conclusions; you understand English well but are an idiot; you don't understand English very well; you are deliberately misinterpreting my comments as part of some agenda of your own. Regardless of which of the three is the case, it makes you worthless as a conversational partner.
Now, you finally realised that you were mistaken. That's good. Hopefully, we can continue this conversation in an intelligent and rational manner. But your descent into sarcasm and trolling makes that unlikely. You are behaving like a child who has lost an argument and so decides to just be insulting in the hope that he will get his way. If you are so threatened by someone having a different opinion to you that you feel the need to act like a tool, you shouldn't be on these boards. I ignore many threads (and posters) I initially attempt to converse in (and with) because they prove themselves to be unworthy of the hassle. This thread (and you) heading in the direction of being one of them. I know you will likely simply respond to this paragraph with more smart arse remarks or a statement that you really don't care if I stop conversing with you. That's your choice. But I felt you deserved a warning because, up until now, I've found you to be a decent person to converse with.
