They were not there as occupation forces, they were part of WT defence, just as US divisions were (and are) part of NATO.How is that not,
They were not there as occupation forces,
How is "crushing the revolt" in any way possible, not occupation?they were reinforced by 15 divisions from the metropoly in November, which were sent back home after crushing the revolt,
When did USA forces in NATO openly deploy massive divisional sized force and fire at large civilian demonstrations?they were part of WT defence, just as US divisions were (and are) part of NATO.
Crushing the revolt is occupation, but it lasted only for weeks. For the rest of 40 years it was not occupation.How is "crushing the revolt" in any way possible, not occupation?
Soviet divisions were deployed in Hungary when armed uprising was in full force.When did USA forces in NATO openly deploy massive divisional sized force and fire at large civilian demonstrations?
They did it twice, and could have done it again, so It's not just the weeks it's basically a hanging threat over the entire period that forces the local governments to do what the advisors or phone line from Moscow tells them.....Crushing the revolt is occupation, but it lasted only for weeks. For the rest of 40 years it was not occupation.
Soviet divisions were deployed in Hungary when armed uprising was in full force.
Since they were occupied by USSR at least twice, this is simply wrong, even if they did not get occupied for the entire CW?Eastern European countries were not occupied by USSR.
Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?And of course one reason there was not a bloodbath of 1937-8 proportions in eastern Europe is that there also wasn't any in the USSR in 1945-53
Probably dealing with the fallout after the greatest war in human history?Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?
Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?
Also that early on they did not have full control of the local governments in Eastern Europe and after that USA had the only bombs, starting large scale fighting (even just internal massacres) in Europe might well have escalated tension (combined with Berlin and Korea) towards WWIII at a point that USSR was not ready for it?Probably dealing with the fallout after the greatest war in human history?
Per Solzhenitsyn, 1947 is when they introduced the 25-year Gulag sentence to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the revolution (earlier, it had been a 10-year maximum). So there might have been a lot of reprocessing of people already in the system in 1947.Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?
There were no "advisors", and locals didn't consult Moscow on every occasion. They had full control of their countries, but their independence was limited in some ways (for example, they couldn't quit WT). Hence a hanging threat.They did it twice, and could have done it again, so It's not just the weeks it's basically a hanging threat over the entire period that forces the local governments to do what the advisors or phone line from Moscow tells them.....
Japan was occupied by US once. By your logic it's still occupied.Since they were occupied by USSR at least twice, this is simply wrong, even if they did not get occupied for the entire CW?
Stalin never got soft and lazy. Bloodbath of the Great Terror was not intended or planned, it was a system crash, a guillotine out of control.Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?
They introduced 25-year sentence because the death penalty was abolished.Per Solzhenitsyn, 1947 is when they introduced the 25-year Gulag sentence to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the revolution (earlier, it had been a 10-year maximum). So there might have been a lot of reprocessing of people already in the system in 1947.
Stalin signed a whole lot of formal death orders for it not being 'planned'Stalin never got soft and lazy. Bloodbath of the Great Terror was not intended or planned, it was a system crash, a guillotine out of control.
Only the ongoing threat of crushing in case of an uprising is an occupation by threat of force even if the tanks aka 'force' are not actually rolling down the streets every dayCrushing the revolt is occupation, but it lasted only for weeks. For the rest of 40 years it was not occupation.
Well, there *was* the Leningrad Affair...Why did Stalin get so soft and lazy for those eight particular years. Why did Politburo turnover slow down so much?
Mass deportations in March 25, 1949 show clearly, what will happen to rest, who'll not voluntarily join kolkhozes.Peasants who didn't volunteer continued to tend their farms.
Stalin had signed 44500 death orders. 16% of all the executed. The rest was not planned.Stalin signed a whole lot of formal death orders for it not being 'planned'
Even after that, 40% farmers did not voluntarily or unvoluntarily join kolkhozes.Mass deportations in March 25, 1949 show clearly, what will happen to rest, who'll not voluntarily join kolkhozes.