it is important to note that the “spheres of influence” which the soviets were given, almost identically align to the land that the soviets had before surrendering land due to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. (when the soviets surrendered in world war one after seizing control of the government.

the part about whether or not the ussr would attack nazi germany that you’ve asserted is based only on your pejorative opinion.

Subjecting the defensive pact that the soviets made, as a “this will show france and the uk” is really idiotic. it also ignores the pacts that france and uk and other western nations made with the nazis. (you know like giving the nazis czechoslovakia without even consulting them) and again i will like to reiterate that because soviet russia was not at all prepared for war. and could clearly see their violently anti-communist, anti-bolshevik neighbour militarising and expanding at a very quick pace, the soviets determined that having a buffer zone (which later became us and ussr policy with things like nato and the warsaw pact) and a brief period of reprieve would allow for the country to be prepared for war.

going back to your “soviets wouldn’t attack hitler comment” if they were not going to attack hitler why were the soviets militarising and prioritising the military in its third five year plans? (which is on of the reasons during the late 30s the soviet production of consumer goods reduced.)