I would agree except Hitler issued a directive the very day Molotov came to attack Russia regardless of the outcome of the talks. The appropriate excerpt reads:John, although Hitler had already ordered to prepare a plan against USSR in July 1940, his decision to attack came much later, and the primary reason, AFAIK, was the very negative outcome of the meeting with Molotov of 12-13 Nov. 1940, when Hitler even offered to USSR to join th Tripartite Pact.
You can read the rest of the directive here: http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/proc/direct18.html5. Russia
Political discussions for the purpose of clafifying Russia's attitud in the immediate future have already begun. Regardless of the outcome of these conversations all preparations for the East for which verbal orders have already been given will be continued.
Further directives will follow on this subject as soon as the basic operational plan of the Army has been submitted to me and approved.
A problem with the history of WW2 is that while most of the orders and a good number of opinions expressed by Hitler are known and, if possible, used against him, I don't see the same documentation for Stalin.
You're right. This is a major problem and why I said at the beginning whether or not Stalin would attack must for now remain speculation.
I don't know if there any documents explaining the reason. But it would the effort to look for them.Thus, for example, I would like to know if there are Soviet documents explaining the reasons for cancellation or supension of the works on those capital ships, or if we have only to guess them (as done until now).
Hitler himself said it. See above.Guessed reasons that are, in your opinion, the belief that Hitler would have attacked USSR regardless to the outcome of the meeting with Molotov
Well what Stalin wanted is speculation. I can agree that he wanted Russia to be as strong as she could be.and instead, in my opinion, that Stalin had never thought that he wouldn't try to spread communism or at least make USSR stronger
Bukovina was never mentioned in the pact as belonging to anybody. Since it was for grabs, so to speak of, Stalin technically didn't break the pact though it was clearly a move directed against Germany.(a proof, in my opinion, is the occupation of Northern Bukovina on 28 June 1940, against the previous pacts with Germany)
along with his fear (right, but, in my opinion, only since Nov.-Dic. 1940) of a German/capitalist attack in the near future.
Ok so we both agree that Stalin feared an attack by Germany. The question is how did he react? This depends on your view of the strength of the red army. If you think the red army was strong then a preemptive attack might be feasible. However there is a lot of evidence that Stalin's army was not strong and had serious problems. This led him to a strategy of trying to keep Germany occupied in the west while he tried to build up his strength.
Well Hitler mentioned the idea of attacking Russia in June, before Stalin had even done anything against Germany.The problem with the planning of Barbarossa and of its hypotetic Soviet version has always been: who was born first, the egg or the hen? Nazi or Soviet imperialism?
I will try my best but I don't know if I'll find anything.Thus, instead of starting another debate (interesting, indeed, but usually exahusting) about the date of Hitler's decision to attack (when he wrote the Mein Kampf? In 1939? In the Summer of 1940? On 18 Dec. 1940?) or about Stalin's expansionism, I would prefer if you (or anybody else) were able, please, to document the reasons of Stalin's (or of the High Command?) orders of 19 Oct. 1940.