And you need to quit sliming historical figures with revisionist conservative bullshit. FDR & Truman had certain realities to deal with, making the notion that they "abandoned" Latvia into a propaganda non-sequiter. A variety of unsuccessful mechanisms were employed to influence the outcomes in eastern Europe & the Baltic states.
The Soviets invoked the Iron Curtain to prevent western meddling with their own meddling in the areas taken from the German Army. The West employed similar methods in Greece, Italy & France, as well, ruthlessly suppressing Communist sympathies.
calling me a conservative, much less revisionist, is laughable.
let me summarize what I mean by your utter lack of perspective:
From a US standpoint, the deal with Stalin was difficult, complicated, and there simply were no good options. For us and for western Europe, allowing him the illegal occupation of these states during were time were the only terrible solution to avoid a prolonged war with that butcher.
My point had nothing to do with the US perspective--but the perspective of nations that had been occupied THREE TIMES over the course of five years--invading Russian army, invading German army, then again by an invading Russian army.
These were and always remained sovereign nations. Any claim Russia had to the Baltics, to Poland, to Czechoslovakia was at the hands of brutal deportation and repopulation. The world was not ignorant to this at the time.
The perspective you lack is that I am commenting about the decision the US and Western Europe means little to a country that just experienced the forced deportation of half their population, replaced by Russian peasants, their property taken, and many conscripted
to fight against their own people in service of their occupiers. The western world recognizing these countries as sovereign by flying their flags in DC or at the UN, meanwhile possession of these flags at home meant an express trip to the gulag, for decades, stings a bit.
These countries have been free for just over 2 decades. If you think that is "in the past," then you are grossly unaware of history.
Add to the fact that in Latvia, where Russian population still represents 30% of the population, they have a rather difficult political situation. The only party that represents the liberal/left perspective is the Russian party. The opposition is a smattering of ultra-right-wing supreme nationalist groups that make our conservatives look like French liberals. The local government in Riga--mayor and city council, was handed to this Russian party about 4 years ago, simply because there is no legitimate leftwing perspective.
This has been the predominant topic since then. As you might expect, with the history or Putin posturing on their border every year, spreading bullshit through RT about "Latvia oppression of native Russian citizens" and these very real invasions of Crimea, you can bet they have legitimate concern.
Yes, I hear about this weekly. My SO's mom, who's father was sent to the Gulag in 1940 on the first Russian invasion
because he owned a farm (leaving her abandoned at the age of 9), only to see him again, in 1967 on release, whose uncle volunteered to fight with the Germans during their occupation, simply to keep the Russians out of Latvia and who was consequently sent to Norilsk to mine silver for 2 decades, calls and yarbles on the phone for hours on end about what is going on.
Simply put: your perspective is that of a petulant child.