Russians did not kill Poles in Katyn

pigdog wrote in message ...
Lituania, Latvia, Estonia officially invited russian army and
than voted on referendum to join USSR.

Michael if you really believe this you are beyond hope.

cheap demagogy. Whether you like it or not the aggrements and
the referendum are historical facts and it will stay forever.

For starters, I'd sure like to see the document where the Baltic
countries "officially invited" Stalin's Red Army to their terri-
tories.

The official agreement was signed with soviet military bases
allowed in, period The text is not secret and can be found if
you want. Moreover I am sure you have seen that. am I right?

Wonder what the _heck_ would've they invite them for?

There could be many reasons. Poland and Germany for
instance had official territorial demands to Lithuania.
But three smalls had borders with three europen powerfull
military powers and they new that neutral status will
no be allowed. That's why I guess.


In reality though, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland were
given flat out ultimatums with 48 hour timeframes for "partnership
treaties" to allow military bases with overpowering Soviet military
numbers, or be considered Russia's enemies, face war and be overrun
by Soviet forces in several times the manpower (not to mention hard-
ware) that was already stationed near their borders.

What ultimatums? They were politely offered a deal. And decided
they have better to sign it. That's all.

Since the
Western allies were at war and quite busy themselves at this point,
and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (existance of which the Soviets
had denied well into the 1990ies,

What? It was published immidetaly, without secret protocol certainly,
exactly because it was a secret protocol.

but the originals not to mention
official copies of which have been found)

Although no originals are found so far, and available
copies have marks of fake. Nerver mind, though. I ask you
what is so bad about this protocol? Two states
defined its respective "spheres of invluence" in a
very hypothetical case of political and economical
restructure of Poland state. That's all. Absolutely legal
and after all western states done toward USSR in 1938-39,
100% moral act towards those states and Poland.

gave free hands by Hitler
to Stalin to do with Baltics/Finland as he wishes, there was no help
expected from Germany either.

So what? Hitler was indepedent of USSR and as such had free hands.
It was not in Stalin power to forbid something to Hitler. Stalin
got a deal protecting (at that time) its own country and a few
neibouring countries of interest against German and Polish invasion.
100% legal, moral and necessary steps.


So the governments of the Baltic states made the grave mistake
and accepted the terms of the ultimatums.

So you admit they accepted terms. Good. What's the problem?

Unfortunately, by at-
tempting to avoid war and save lives by choosing not to attempt
military resistance (they did *not* consult with their nations
nor even considered military resistance against enemy 100 times their
size), they actually settled the grounds of the 50-year old
occupation that followed, and allowed people with misconceptions
such as yours to even exist.

Were Swedish rule over Baltics in 17 century and russian rule in
18 and 19 centuries an occupation as well? These three smalls
were always under someones occupation. It is their normal state
of business. They economically, politically and military
cannot be indepedent and the only thing they can do is to sell
themself to someone who pays more at any given moment. This
sort of business includes certain inconviniences like
occupations or even deportations.


Fortunately, Finland (who received
the ultimatum last) witnessed the fate of the Baltic states and
knew better -- they refused, and as a result, indeed faced their
bloody Winter War, but instead of being turned into the Finnish
SSR they were able to keep their independence despite losing some
of their territory in the end.

True to some extend. They did not accept and they fought
resulted in some sort of independence. BTW why do not
you ask yourslef why Stalin did not occupied Finland in
1944 and did not convert it into Finish SSR? He had all
means and excuses for that? After all Finland joint Hitler
in 1941. So why is that? What is your theory? As for me
I believe it was true Stalin's crime.


In the Baltics, after a few months (in 1940) the Soviet government
quoted some BS as grounds for "breaking" the "partnership treaties",
demanded _unlimited_ number troops to be stationed in the countries
(in case with Estonia, 90,000 vs 15,000 of Estonia's own army),
and flat out demanded for new, "Soviet-friendly" government to be
installed, this time with just 8 hours to comply. Being surrounded
and outnumbered by enemy troops in their own country, they complied
again. Communist "revolutions" were staged (I loved a photo from
that day in Tallinn with a column of "revolutionaries" marching
up to the government buildings, which many newspapers printed..
after cropping away the Soviet tanks that lined the crowd from
both sides, that is), Stalinist-style "elections" were held for
the puppet government (with only Soviet-approved communists as
candidates), which in turn declared the countries Soviet Socialist
Republics and "pleaded" access to Soviet Union a few months later.

OK? What fraction of population came and vote for that?
How do you know that majority did not want exactly that?
Oh, I see those were Stalinist-style "elections". So
if it was British-styled "election" there would an opposite
result. Is that what do you really mean?


It's worth mentioning that despite all that stuff that took place
in the Baltics 1940 being unconstitutional, illegal under inter-
national law and with utmost clarity against the will of the
people.. there *never* were *any*, not even obviously fabricated
Communist-style, referendums neither about allowing Soviet bases in
the countries, nor about joining the Soviet Union. If you're
quoting Soviet history books, you might as well quote THOSE right.

Well baltic countries separation from USSR was also unconstitutional.
Before that was unconstitutional 1917, Swedes also believed that
Baltics was their integral crown lands just before Poltava battle
before that there were poles, russians, germans and one god
knows who else. So what?

Tell us the true. You simply hate only russians and therefore
whatsoever they did wrongly or correctly is unconstitutional
and illegal. Am I right?

Michael