Hello teacher,
in his book debunks the myth of anti-Stalinist, highlighting the contribution of the Soviet leadership to the creation of Israel, you can then consider Stalin a Zionist? In his essay also states that the Soviet Union helped the newborn Jewish state in the 1948 war, Stalin in the light of what seems like a responsible Palestinian oppression, because after that victory, the Israelis prevented the formation of a Palestinian state.
you think the two-state solution was right in respect of indigenous peoples Palestine? How does the 1948 Arab attack on Israel?
I saw a video in which she expresses by the Taliban in the Afghanistan war. What I wonder is what would happen to the Afghan people once defeated the Americans, surely the export of democracy is nonsense, but also the Taliban rule is that it is the best.
What do you think? Staying on the subject imperialism, according to her can be called an imperialist attack on the Soviet and American Nazi Germany? From what I know in the Third Reich was not in place as a civil war in Italy, the people German Hitler.Quando was all with the Soviet Union liberated the territories liberated from the Nazis were so many of these anti-anti-fascists but also, it must therefore be considered as a form of social-export of socialism in these states? Stalin claimed that the revolution was to be born within the people, but I believe that in this case did not respect this theory and came up almost permanent revolution.
John overflows
DL
1) On p. 216 of my book on Stalin, quoting an eminent English historian (Roberts) writes: "The preferred option Soviet Union was that of "an independent state and multinational interests that it would respect both the Jewish and the Arabs'." The fact remains that Stalin, in an attempt to combat British colonialism, he underestimated the dangers of colonialism and Zionist expansion of his office.
2) DL: In my book, "The language of the empire" (p. 178) speaks of "growing ridicule of the hypothesis of a Palestinian national state [and the two-state solution] following dell'incessante process of colonization. " My book is 2007: Meanwhile, the Zionist colonization has seen a further jump quality.
3) The espreessione "Arab attack" is incorrect and is in contradiction with what her chair in the first question. Regardless of the finding (problem) cha has fired the first shot, we must not lose sight of the essential point: since the beginning of the Zionist project is a project of colonial expansion and then of aggression.
4) In the age of Napoleon, to quote Marx, "all the wars of independence against France led, bear the imprint of a common regeneration that is coupled with the reaction." In my book "The Language of the Empire" I try to far tesoro di questa indicazione di Marx per analizzare i movimenti di resistenza e di liberazione nazionale di matrice islamica. L’aspetto della «rigenerazione» prevale nettamente nel caso del Libano degli Hezbollah o dell’Iran.
5) Fu la Germania hitleriana a scatenare l’attacco contro l’Urss con l’intento di sottoporre le popolazioni dell’Unione Sovietica a una colonizzazione di tipo schiavistico. La risposta sovietica, la Grande guerra patriottica, è stata una guerra di liberazione nazionale di proporzioni epiche ed ha gettato le basi per le successive rivoluzioni anticoloniali.
6) Non bisogna sottovalutare la forza del partito comunista and the prestige of the Soviet Union in countries such as Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia, in which case the socialist transformation is a process largely endogenous. Unlike the picture is represented by Poland. In this case one can speak of "exporting the revolution", bearing in mind that this "export of revolution" is also a response to a dramatic need for security: as pointed out by prominent American historians, the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (a war virtually over) was a warning of heavy Truman to Stalin.
