In 1939, Hitler and Stalin agreed to invade Poland and carve up the rest of Eastern Europe in the so- called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This suggested that the Soviet Union was not totally innocent of waging aggressive war. How did the Soviet delegation and the other prosecuting Allies interpret this Pact in the indictment and during the trials? The crime of "conspiracy" was controversial among the Allies at the Nuremberg Trials. Why was "conspiracy" so controversial? Did the Nuremberg Trials convict any defendants of conspiracy?
In 1939, Hitler and Stalin agreed to invade Poland and carve up the rest of Eastern Europe in the so- called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This suggested that the Soviet Union was not totally innocent of waging aggressive war. How did the Soviet delegation and the other prosecuting Allies interpret this Pact in the indictment and during the trials? The crime of "conspiracy" was controversial among the Allies at the Nuremberg Trials. Why was "conspiracy" so controversial? Did the Nuremberg Trials convict any defendants of conspiracy?
Related questions
Question
In 1939, Hitler and Stalin agreed to invade Poland and carve up the rest of Eastern Europe in the so- called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This suggested that the Soviet Union was not totally innocent of waging aggressive war. How did the Soviet delegation and the other prosecuting Allies interpret this Pact in the indictment and during the trials?
The crime of "conspiracy" was controversial among the Allies at the Nuremberg Trials. Why was "conspiracy" so controversial? Did the Nuremberg Trials convict any defendants of conspiracy?
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
This is a popular solution!
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
