This is my first question so I apologize for some inadvertent mistakes.
My question revolves around an excerpt from book called "Between Churchill and Stalin The Soviet Union Great Britain and the Origins of the Grand Alliance" which I am reading right now. What bothers me exactly is this particular fragment:
“What did we gain by concluding the non-aggression pact with Germany? We secured our country peace for a year and a half and the opportunity of preparing its forces to repulse fascist Germany should it risk an attack on our country despite the pact. This was a definite advantage for us and a disadvantage for fascist Germany.” “Germany ...,” Stalin claimed, “has lost politically by exposing itself in the eyes of the entire world as a bloodthirsty aggressor.”
I am asking for explanation of the meaning of "should" in this context. Is it expressing possibility, describing purpose or condition. Is it adding emphasis? I am puzzled and hope you'll find a solution.