I am alluding to the Ribbentrop-Molotov agreement which aimed to split Europe into spheres of influence. One common Soviet justification is that it was signed in order to "buy time" for an "imminent war" with Germany which seems rather spurious to me. After all, the Soviet Union did also invade Poland and annex it, in addition to invading other countries such as Finland and the Baltics. And why were the Soviets caught with their pants down when Germany did end up invading them?
It was only when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union that the Soviets could now come across as being "the good guys" because they were now fighting a common enemy with the allies, a fight which did indeed substantially contribute to the end of Nazi Germany.
But it seems like such a ridiculous episode.. it's as if someone tries to burn a house down, then decides to get a hose to put out the fire, and then this very person is suddenly called a hero for doing so.
So my question is, isn't it fair to say that WWII began because of Germany and the Soviet Union?