Leonoid, there you go again. Let's tell the rest of the story.Molotov Plan Explained
The Molotov Plan was the system created by the Soviet Union in order to provide aid to rebuild the countries in Central and Eastern Europe that were politically and economically aligned to the Soviet Union. It was called the "Brother Plan" in the Soviet Union and can be seen as the Soviet Union's version of the Marshall Plan, which, for political reasons, Central and Eastern European countries would not be able to join without leaving the Soviet sphere of influence. However, the Molotov Plan cannot be considered a Soviet response to the Marshall's initiative, as the Soviet plan predated the American by about two years, having started operating in Central and Eastern Europe as early as 1945.[1] Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov rejected the Marshall Plan (1947), turning the Molotov Plan into the Soviet-sponsored economic grouping which was eventually expanded to become the Comecon.[2] [3] The Molotov Plan was symbolic of the Soviet Union's refusal to accept aid from the Marshall Plan, or allow any of their satellite states to do so because of their belief that the Marshall Plan was an attempt to weaken Soviet interests in their satellite states through the conditions imposed and by making beneficiary countries economically dependent on the United States (officially, one of the goals of the Marshall Plan was to prevent the spread of Communism). The plan consisted of a system of bilateral trade agreements which also established Comecon to create an economic alliance of socialist countries.[4] This aid allowed countries in Europe to stop relying on American aid and therefore allowed Molotov Plan states to reorganize their trade to the Soviet Union instead.
| Feature | The Marshall Plan (West) | The Molotov Plan / COMECON (East) |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Goal | Foster economic recovery, industrial growth, and democratic stability. | Consolidate Soviet dominance and build a market for Soviet surpluses. |
| Sovereignty | Allowed participating nations to maintain independent governance and self-sufficiency. | Enforced totalitarianism through hand-picked, Moscow-friendly puppet governments. |
| Long-Term Impact | Sparked the fastest period of economic expansion in European history. | Subjugated local economies, leading to decades of lower living standards. |
If an attempt by Britain and France to take control of the suez canal in a 3rd world country doesn't qualify as "imperialism" then your entire position is null and void. This example just doesn't happet to fit your absurd characterization so you want to ignore it. Doesn't work that way but nice try. Consistency is not your strong suit.
So, if that's not imperialism, then what is post WWII ?There was no colony involved, there was no war for Independence, there was no point made in your post.
So, if that's not imperialism, then what is post WWII ?
About all I can see is Russia invading it's former sattelites.
So, no colony, no war for independence means no imperialism ? That's your standard?I was specific in what US supported, his example fell short of what I specified.