.

Author Archive

Military Coup against Barack Obama?

Saturday, November 21st, 2009

Source: Talking Points Memo

Full Text Of Newsmax Column Suggesting Military Coup Against Obama

Here is the full text of John L. Perry’s column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to “resolve the Obama problem” is becoming more possible and is not “unrealistic.” Perry also writes that a coup, while not “ideal,” may be preferable to “Obama’s radical ideal” — and would “restore and defend the Constitution.” Newsmax has since removed the column from its website.
Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention

By: John L. Perry

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.

# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.

# They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.

# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.

# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.

# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.

# They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

What Drove Afghan Policeman to Kill UK Troops?

Thursday, November 12th, 2009

From the Institute for War & Peace Reporting (IWPR)

Western and Afghan forces try to find out why an otherwise normal young man snapped and killed men he had worked with for months.

By Aziz Ahmad Tassal and Mohammad Ilyas Dayee in Lashkar Gah (ARR No. 344, 5-Nov-09)

The young man’s name was Gulbuddin and he came from Musa Qala, in the northern part of Helmand. He was big and strong with a reputation for fierceness in fighting the Taleban. Gulbuddin was a graduate of the police academy, had served honourably for two years in the Afghan National Police in Helmand, and his commander describes him as trustworthy.

That was until the afternoon of November 3, when he suddenly took a machine gun and mowed down his British colleagues, killing five and wounding six others. Two Afghan police were also injured in the incident.

“We do not know what triggered this,” said Haji Manan, a police commander in Nad Ali, the district where the incident occurred. “We were sitting at our checkpoint and we heard shooting. My deputy grabbed a gun and rushed out. Gulbuddin knocked him down with his machine gun. I ran up to the roof and I was shot. But I rolled down off the roof. He thought I was dead. He shot the foreigners first, then us.”

In the bitter aftermath of the shootings, both western and Afghan forces are trying to piece together what could have motivated an otherwise normal young man to snap and kill men alongside whom he had served for months.

The killings reopened the debate in Britain about the country’s role in Afghanistan, where it has 9,000 troops and has lost 92 so far this year. The Times newspaper in a headline called the shooting “A Bloody Betrayal” and the Daily Mail asked “What Kind of War is This?”

The reasons for the deployment, which had wide public support when it began in 2001, have become confused, some people say. While the initial aim was to deal with the Taleban and al-Qaeda, politicians now talk about bringing peace and stability to the streets. There does not seem to be an exit strategy and the mounting death toll has hit public support.

Armed Forces Minister Bill Rammell said British troops must stay in Afghanistan until the country’s own security forces are ready to take over.

“We do believe that the approach of partnering, mentoring and training has to be the right approach because it’s about building Afghan capacity,” he said. “We do not want our troops to be there forever and a day.”

Some people in Helmand believe that Gulbuddin belonged to the Taleban and had infiltrated the police. Others think that he may have lost friends or family in the bombardments by foreign forces that have ratcheted up tensions between Afghans and western forces, especially in the south.

“Gulbuddin was a soldier like me,” said Khairullah, one of the wounded policemen. “He did not have psychological problems, and he was not a drug addict. He was a disciplined policeman. Nobody knows why it happened. We rushed out of our rooms and I was shot in the leg by a British soldier. It was hell, shots being fired everywhere.”

A resident of Nad Ali who knew him well said that Gulbuddin was a fighter.

“He was a veteran of many battles against the Taleban,” said the man, who did not want to give his name. “He deserved medals. But he told me that whenever they had the Taleban pinned down the British would call them off. Maybe he was ready for a fight and his nerves just short-circuited.”

Gulbuddin fled the checkpoint where the shooting took place and a Taleban commander said that Gulbuddin was with them.

“After he killed the British soldiers he came to us,” said the commander, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “We picked him up near a cemetery, just three kilometres away from the police checkpoint, in an area under our control. He has been taken away to an undisclosed location. We did not have ties with him before, but recently he started to open relations with us.”

A member of the local council, who did not want to give his name, told IWPR that the police were searching for Gulbuddin even behind the Taleban lines.

“Talks are going on between tribal elders and the local Taleban to turn him over to the police,” said the man.

But most Helmandis think it is unlikely that the Taleban will give him up voluntarily.

“That boy is a hero,” said Khial Mohammad, a resident of Greshk. “The Taleban will treasure him like a flower.”

Shin Kalay, the village in Nad Ali where Gulbuddin staged his desperate act, is on the front line in the fight against the Taleban. The British soldiers and their Afghan police colleagues had been working and fighting side by side, and the police are now shocked and ashamed by their colleague’s action.

“I cannot look anybody in the eye,” said a police officer in the police headquarters, in Lashkar Gah. “The British will not trust any of our soldiers after this. We killed people who were trying to help us.”

Musafer, a police officer with the counter-narcotics team, also expressed shame and embarrassment but he tried to find some rationale for what most see as just a random act of violence.

“Maybe Gulbuddin was offended by the British,” he said. “Sometimes the foreign soldiers insult the Afghan police. Sometimes they restrain them and will not let them shoot when they are in a battle with the enemy. When we ask why, the British just say ‘these are our rules’.”

Captain Tim Dark, a media liaison officer with the western forces’ Lashkar Gah Provincial Reconstruction Team, PRT, said that he could not comment on ground operations.

“I cannot possibly know what happens in the heat of battle, or second guess what decisions are made,” he said.

An Afghan police commander in Nad Ali praised the British soldiers with whom he had served, and said he could not understand why his colleague had done what he had.

“This group of British soldiers was with us in every single operation, and they were very brave,” he said. “They were better than us in fighting. But this policeman had been with us for two years, and had served in Chanjir, Bolan, and other districts in Helmand. He was not al-Qaeda or Taleban. I cannot understand why he did this.”

For now the British are saying that Gulbuddin was a rogue policeman and the Nad Ali shootings are an isolated tragedy, not part of a wider pattern.

But the years of war have made many Afghans angry and bitter against the western presence on their soil. Tensions between the British and the Afghans are deep, and go back almost two centuries, to the three previous wars the British fought, and lost, on Afghan soil.

Civilian casualties are a major irritant in the relationship, and some Helmandis welcomed the news of British losses.

“[Gulbuddin] is a good boy, and the parents that bore him should be proud,” said Gul Agha, a resident of Greshk. “He should be given a medal. Let the foreigners know the pain of losing your own people. Let them know how death smells.”

“Let them know how tragic is the death of a son, a father or a brother,” said Abdul Majid, another resident. “Just last night they bombed innocent people in Babaji. Didn’t they have fathers and mothers? They were just farmers, threshing corn, and they were killed on the spot. All their young sons are dead. I am sure they would welcome that soldier as a hero.”

According to the Helmand PRT, the incident Majid referred to occurred at about 7.30 pm on November 4, when international forces launched a rocket attack against people they believed to be insurgents.

“We killed nine individuals who were attempting to plant an IED (improvised explosive device),” Dark said. “I am not aware of any civilian casualties.”

But this version does not sit well with Helmandis, who say that nine civilians were killed, including three children, as well as eight insurgents. A group of 60 tribal elders went to the PRT, the governor’s office, and to a local hospital in Lashkar Gah, the provincial capital, to protest at the attack, and according to media reports, they had the bodies of the civilians with them.

Aziz Ahmad Tassal and Mohammad Ilyas Dayee are IWPR reporters in Helmand province.

Margot Honecker – Victory to Socialism!

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

Video of Margot Honecker and Comrades celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of the founding of the German Democratic Republic (GDR).

Hoxha on the 1956 Hungarian Counter-Revolution

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

October 23 marked the 53rd anniversary of the 1956 counter-revolutionary riots in Hungary. On this occasion, proto-fascist puppet forces under the command of Titoite loyalists and the NATO-imperialist bloc attempted to quell the growth and development of socialism and people’s democracy in Hungary in a reactionary campaign to bring back to power the deposed fascists.

Here’s what Comrade Hoxha had to say on the subject in a speech delivered before 81 other Communist and Workers Parties in November 1960:

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/nov1960.htm

In our opinion, the counter-revolution in Hungary was mainly the work of the Titoites. In Tito and the Belgrade renegades, the U.S. imperialists had their best weapon to destroy the people’s democracy in Hungary.

After comrade Khrushchev’s visit to Belgrade in 1955, no more was said about Tito’s undermining activity. The counter-revolution in Hungary did not break out unexpectedly. It was prepared for, we might say, quite openly, and it would be futile for any one to try to convince us that this counter-revolution was prepared in great secrecy. This counter-revolution was prepared by the agents of the Tito gang in collusion with the traitor Imre Nagy, in collusion with the Hungarian fascists and all of them acted openly under the direction of the Americans.

The scheme of the Titoites, who were the leaders, was for Hungary to be detached from our socialist camp, to be turned into a second Yugoslavia, be linked in alliance with NATO through Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey, to receive aid from the U.S.A. and, together with Yugoslavia and under the direction of the imperialists, to continue the struggle against the socialist camp.

The counter-revolutionaries worked openly in Hungary. But how is it that their activities attracted no attention? We cannot understand how it is possible for Tito and Horthy’s bands to work so freely in a fraternal country of People’s Democracy like Hungary where the party was in power and the weapons of dictatorship were in its hands, where the Soviet army was present.

We think that the stand taken by comrade Khrushchev and the other Soviet comrades towards Hungary was not clear, because the greatly mistaken views which they held about the Belgrade gang did not allow them to see the situation correctly.

[...]

Whether to intervene or not to intervene with arms in Hungary is, we think, not within the competence of one person alone; seeing that we have set up the Warsaw Treaty, we should decide jointly, because otherwise it is of no use to speak of alliance, of the collective spirit and collaboration among the parties. The Hungarian counter-revolution cost to our camp blood, it cost Hungary and the Soviet Union blood.

Why was this bloodshed permitted and no steps taken to prevent it? We are of the opinion that no preliminary steps could be taken so long as Comrade Khrushchev and the Soviet comrades placed their trust in the organizer of the Hungarian counter-revolution, the traitor Tito, so long as they set so little value on the absolutely necessary regular meetings with their friends and allies, so long as they considered their unilateral decisions on matters that concern us all as the only correct ones, and so long as they attached no importance whatsoever to collective work and collective decisions.

[...]

Hungary was a great lesson for us, for what was done, and for the drama that was played on the stage and behind the scenes there. We believed that the Hungarian counter-revolution was more than enough to show the betrayal of Tito and his gang. We know that many documents are kept locked away and are not brought to light, documents that expose the barbarous activity of Tito’s group in the Hungarian events. Why this should happen we do not understand. What interests are hidden behind these documents which are not brought to light but are kept under lock and key? To condemn Stalin after his death, the most trifling items were searched out, while the documents that expose a vile traitor like Tito are locked away in a drawer.

But even after the Hungarian counter-revolution, the political and ideological fight against the Titoite gang, instead of becoming more intense, as Marxism-Leninism demands, was played down, leading to reconciliation, smiles, contacts, moderation and almost to kisses. In fact, thanks to this opportunist attitude, the Titoites got out of this predicament.

Workers’ Songs!

Monday, October 19th, 2009

Below is a list of well-known songs by, and for, the revolutionary working-class. The original list was compiled by Chapaev and posted in the forum, but are worth posting here on the Editorials as well.

If you know of more, please post them in the comments section!

You can download these songs by right-clicking on the title and select, “Save As.”

Russian:
Internationale
Varshavianka
Workers of All Countries, Unite!
We’re Renouncing the Old World (“Workers’ Marseillaise)
Ahead, Fearless Comrades
Oh, roads
Forward, Red Marines
Rage Tyrants
Red Banner
Through Hills and Over Valleys
Hymn of the World Democratic Youth
Song of the Motherland
Grenada
The Sacred War
Song About Shchors
Katiusha
Young Eagle
Cuba, My Love
The Sacred War
Dubinushka
Toward the Future

German:
March of the Komintern
Social Democratic Party Congress
Leftist March
Song of Struggle Against Fascism
Kampflied der Internationalen Arbeiterhilfe
Song of Solidarity
Song of the United Front
Peat Bog Soldiers
Song of International Brigade
The Secret Deployment
Thälmann Kolone
Hans Beimler
Subbotnik
Zeit Marsch
Thank You, Soviet Soldiers
Ballad of the XI Brigade
Kaserne Winkt

Czech:
Ahead, not a step back
Prague’s direction
Hey, there is a sunrise
Earth belongs to us

International conference of Communist, Worker and Labor Parties held in Syria

Thursday, October 1st, 2009

The People’s Victory Over Fascism

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

THE PEOPLE’S VICTORY OVER FASCISM, THE DECISIVE ROLE OF THE SOVIET UNION AND THE GREAT HISTORIC MERITS OF J.V. STALIN.

(Reproduced from the «ZËRI I POPULLIT» daily, dated May 9, 1965)

THE «NAIM FRASHËRI» PUBLISHING HOUSE
TIRANA, 1965

The correctness of Stalin’s military science and art was magnificently proved in the heat of the Great Patriotic War and in its historic battles.

The imperialists, the international bourgeoisie and world reaction have tried and continue to try to minimize the decisive role played by the Soviet Union in the war against fascism. In this respect they were given ample aid by the Khrushchevite and Titoite revisionists who launched attacks and piled slanders against the Commander-in- Chief of the Soviet Army, J.V.Stalin. But no gross falsifications of bourgeois scribblers who try to hold out «the vast economic and military potential of the USA and of Great Britain» as the principal factor, or to match the Stalingrad battle with that of El Alamein in Africa, and no mean slanders of the Krushchevites and Titoites against Stalin, against the Soviet Army and the Soviet people, can bedim a historical truth.

The correctness of Stalin’s military science and art, his great role as a prominent leader of the Soviet Union and of the Red Army, as an architect of the triumph over Hitlerite Germany, were clearly and forcefully proved in the heat of the Great Patriotic War, in its decisive battles. 

Stalin, relying on the principles of marxist-leninist science on the war and army, on the right policy elaborated by the Communist Party and the Soviet State, deeply cognizant of the objective laws governing the establishment of socialism and of the other moral and political factors, raised military science to a higher standard, linked the military problems with the moral and political ones tightly together and defined their reciprocal interdependence very clearly.

Stalin’s military ingenuity lies in his elaboration of many problems and principles of strategy, of operative art, of tactics, and especially in determining scientifically the permanent factors that are continually at work in the war like: the stability behind the lines, the morale of the army, the number and quality of divisions, the armament of the army and the organizational and managing efficiency of cadres. It is precisely in the determination of these problems that the essence of Stalin’s military science and art lie.

With these principles of military science in view the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet government took all the necessary measures beforehand, that is, during the period of peaceful reconstruction, to raise and strengthen the defensive capacity of the county, to enhance vigilance and build up all the categories of armed forces.

It was only thanks to these measures that the Soviet Union succeeded in withstanding the aggression of nazi Germany, which aided by the international bourgeoisie after having speedily prepared for war after having occupied all of Europe, taking possession of all its highly developed economic basis, directed its armed forces towards the East and threw them against the Soviet Union.

Assuming that the Soviet state made up of many nations and its army weak and would crumble at the first blow, the German High Command prepared its «Barbarossa» war plan which envisaged to smash the main forces of the Soviet Army with a few powerful and surprise attacks and put the Soviet Union out of action before winter. But the war confirmed that the predictions of the German high military command, based on the momentary factors of their «Blitzkrieg» were fundamentally wrong.

The «Blitzkrieg» of the German fascist army was confronted with Stalin’s idea of strategy which, under circumstances created at the initial period of fighting, aimed at weakening the striking power of the enemy through stubborn and active operations of defence, at gaining time to mobilize, at spreading out and concentrating reserves in order to create superiority in men and technique, at adapting all the industry and economy to the needs of war, so as to create favourable condition conducive to the complete smashing of the enemy forces.

In the major battles of defense undertaken by the Soviet Army in the summer of 1941 and in the fall of 1942 the fierce attacks of the superior German forces were resisted, considerable damage was inflicted on them and their advance was finally brought to a standstill. In bitter and bloody fighting ranging from the bordering regions to the interior of the country, the German army was encountered everywhere with the stubborn resistance of Soviet Army units which grew in numbers uninterruptedly.
The German army had never before met with such resistance. The enemy incurred great losses by the defensive operations at Tihvin, Rostov and Leningrad, at Odessa, Sevastopol and other less protected regions. The heroic defense of Moscow which became a stumbling block for the German army and the counter offensive worked out and directed by Marshal Zhukov according to instructions and ideas of the Commander-in- Chief, resulted in frustrating the amassment of the main German striking force and bringing their in this strategic direction to a final standstill.
The «Blitzkrieg» failed altogether. During four months of fighting Hitlerite Germany lost about four and a half million soldiers killed, wounded or captured in the Soviet front.

The final turn of the tide of the Second World War was brought about by the Soviet Army in the legendary battles of Stalingrad and Kursk. The battle at Stalingrad reflected in a most brilliant way J.V.Stalin’s ideas on launching a strategic counter offensive, on dealing deep blows to besiege and exterminate large groupings of the enemy, on setting up an internal and externally front of encirclement, on hurried and secret concentration of reserves, on selecting the direction of the main strike and on the perfect way of directing the troops in order to realize the objective of the operation.

The historical facts on the legendary battle of Stalingrad familiar to the whole world, discard the false assessment made by Marshals of the Soviet Union A.I. Jeremenko and V.I. Chuykov who, in a servile way and for deliberate reasons, distort historical facts, attributing the merits of this battle to people who have never deserved them.

If the Stalingrad operation was an unparalleled example of besieging and completely annihilating a very large group of enemy forces, the Kursk operation was the brilliant combination of classic defense and resolute counter-offensive, which brought about the annihilation of the most powerful army, mainly of tanks, of the enemy. 
The legendary battle of Kursk was carried out according to the proposals of the Commanders of the Central and Voronezh Fronts, Marshals of the Soviet Union K.K.Rokossovsky and Army Corps-General N.F.Vatutin.

The major importance of these battles of the Great Patriotic War is also pointed out in the assessment Stalin made of them when he said: «If the Stalingrad battle announced the sunset of the German fascist army, the Kursk battle pushed it to the brink of catastrophy».

1944 which has gone down in the history of the Great Patriotic War as the year of ten Stalinite attacks, finally decided the fate of the Second World War. In these operations the Soviet Army carried out in a brilliant way the operational and strategic manoeuvre dealing repeated blows, breaking through the German Lines in many directions and depriving the German Command of the ways and means of using its reserves in the directions under threat, besieging and annihilating large groupings of the enemy one after the other.

These gigantic blows, typical of the offensive strategy of the Red Army, brought about the complete liberation of the territory of the Soviet Union, knocked out of battle the satellite states of nazi Germany, carried the war into enemy territory and created in this way favourable conditions for a general assault on all fronts, for the complete annihilation of the enemy in his own territory. These successes of the Soviet Army gave a further impetus national-liberation war of the oppressed peoples of Europe.

The realization of the operational strategic plans by the Soviet Army in last stage of the war was characterized by a general simultaneous attack on all fronts stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea on a breadth of 1200 kilometers, by the high tempo of attack, by the rapid onward advance over fortified belts and vast water obstacles, by the occupation of big cities and major industrial centres and by the unparalleled massive use of all kinds of weapons and military technique.

The Berlin operation, the greatest classic offensive operation during the whole Second World War, was characterized by the massive participation of forces and means, by the simultaneous assault on many directions, by the continues day and night offensive, by the creation of the internal and external front of encirclement, by the isolation and extermination of enemy groupings one at a time and by the high tempo of attack against a very deep and fortified system of defense of the enemy. After this operation the German army ceased to exist as an organized military power. 

During the Second World War the Soviet Army annihilated or captured 507 nazi divisions and about 100 divisions of its satellites.

The achievements of the Soviet Army in the operation of the Second World War confirmed the superiority of the Soviet military art and the application in a creative way of permanent factors that decide the fate of the war.

The stability and power of the Soviet rear ranks based on the Soviet social order, on socialist economy, on the organization of the working masses, on ideology, science and so forth demonstrated its great vitality all along the Great Patriotic War.

The industrial basis of defence in the Soviet Union was set up as a result of the correct farsighted policy of the Communist Party and of the Soviet Government of the socialist industrialization of the country, of the collectivization of farming and the all-round development of science and culture.
Through the fulfilments of five-year plans the economy of the Soviet Union succeeded in solving many complicated problems which enabled equipping the army with all the necessary military means and techniques.

During the Great Patriotic War the unity and high sense of duty of the people and of the Soviet Army were manifested as never before and turned into an irresistible force. 
This gigantic and inexhaustible force sprang from the just war which the Soviet people waged in defense of their socialist homeland and from the historic internationalist mission of the Soviet Army. This factor enhanced the patriotism, the spirit of sacrifice, the revolutionary impulse and multiplied in this way the power of the Soviet people and Army to overcome the enormous difficulties and vicissitudes of war and to achieve final victory over the enemy.

The scientific manner of solving the problem of the number, quality and technical equipment of divisions and the proportional development of the kinds of arms and of the armed forces, increased the defensive and offensive power of the Soviet Army. 
The successful achievements of these measures enabled the Soviet Union to create the necessary superiority over the enemy in military forces and technique. Soviet military art succeeded also in solving the problem of reserves and masterful use, a thing which influenced a great deal at the decisive moments of the war.

The skilful application of these key-problems of strategy enabled the Soviet Army, during all the stages of the war, to fulfil plans, both during the period of the general counter-offensive for smashing the enemy altogether.

Special attention had been devoted eversince the creation of the Soviet state to the selection, training and educating the cadres of the Soviet Army. These cadres, trained in marxist-leninist science and Soviet military art, directed, with consummate skill, the Soviet troops in the fields of battle. During the Great Patriotic war a whole generation of cadres of the Soviet Army were trained and tempered to combine personal courage and valor with the art of leadership in the fields of battle. It was precisely these cadres and the pleiades of distinguished military leaders that constituted one of those permanent factors that brought about the great historic victory of the Soviet Union.

The heroic war against fascism enhanced a lot the authority and prestige of the Soviet state and of the Bolshevik Party, it brought J.V.Stalin to the fore as a great political leader as well. It confirmed the correctness of the Leninist policy pursued by the Communist Party and the Soviet Government under J.V.Stalin’s guidance both in socialist construction as well as in directing the war for cleansing the Bolshevik Party of Trotzkites, Bukharinites, bourgeois nationalists and other enemies. The onslaught of Hitlerite Germany against the Soviet Union found a very sound Communist Party, of a steel-like organizational and ideological unity, bound as flesh to bone with the people.

Pursuing a Leninist foreign policy the Communist Party and the Soviet Government frustrated all attempts of the imperialist powers to set up a single front of the capitalist states against the Soviet Union. 
J.V.Stalin discovered in time the strategic and tactical schemes of these states, made a correct assessment of the contradictions between these states, utilized them thoroughly in the interests of defending and fortifying the Soviet Union.

J.V.Stalin’s great merit lies in setting up the anti-fascist coalition and in preserving the solidarity of this coalition up to the victory on fascism. Under the circumstances when Hitlerite Germany, fascism was the principal enemy of the freedom and independence of peoples, the Communist Party and the Soviet Government did not only accept to ally themselves with England and the United States of America, but made that alliance to serve the interests of all the peoples enslaved by fascist states.

Although the immediate strategic aim – the demolition of fascist states – was the same for all, collaboration with England and the USA was not so light. The British and American governments did not give up their imperialist aims, their aims to weaken the socialist state as much as possible and to establish their sway on every country of the world so as to be able to dictate their own conditions of peace to both the vanquished and the winners once the war was over. 
If these aims of England and the USA failed to mature a great merit belongs personally to J.V.Stalin.

The Communist Party and the Soviet government, headed by J.V.Stalin, carried out the principles of collaboration of a socialist state with capitalist countries in a true Leninist way. J.V.Stalin honoured with strictness all inter-allied commitments, maintained sincere military relations with England and the USA, but he never struck up bargains and allowed no one to strike up bargains to the detriment of the Soviet Union and of the enslaved peoples.

J.V.Stalin always maintained a firm stand of principle in his relations with the USA and England during all the war period. At the tripartite Moscow Conference (September 1941), at the Teheran Conference (November 1943), at the Second Moscow Conference 
(October 1944), at the Yalta Conference in the Crimea (February 1945) and at the Potsdam Conference in Berlin (July-August 1945) J.V.Stalin distinguished himself as a great statesman, as a fiery champion of the interests of the Soviet Union and of the oppressed peoples, as a wise, far-sighted and capable diplomat of matchless authority.

The Communist Party and the Soviet Government, headed by Stalin, rescued the socialist state from impending destruction, drew the Soviet Union out of the war as a victorious state enjoying great international authority and prestige. The say of the Soviet Union in solving international issues at the end of the war and after became decisive.

After the war American and English politicians and generals together with other servants of imperialism cursed Roosevelt and Churchill who seem to have made impermissible concessions to J.V.Stalin, who have allegedly allowed him to throw dust on their eyes; they reproach them with grave mistakes and with political short-sightedness; they chastise them for having failed to carry out Klausewitz’s familiar principle on «the war as a continuation of politics», for having observed the principle of «unconditional surrender» of the fascist states, for having failed to open the second front in the Balkans, for having helped the Soviet Union with more armaments and strategic materials than needed, for having failed the Soviet Union into the war with Japan before the capitulation of Germany, for having overestimated the Soviet Union as an ally and so on.

It is futile for the imperialist bourgeoisie to lay the blame on and hold responsible their own leaders for the failure of their aims in the Second World War. This failure was inevitable, it was not brought about by the «inability» of the leaders of imperialism but by the heroic war of the Red Army, it was brought about by the national-liberation war of the peoples enslaved by fascism.

May 1 – International Workers’ Day

Friday, May 1st, 2009

FREE MEDIA PRODUCTIONS joins the world’s revolutionary proletariat, history’s most advanced and progressive class, in celebrating May 1 – International Workers’ Day – in honor of the past achievements, current struggles and inevitable victories of the proletariat against the forces of reaction, capitalism, liberalism, Zionism, neo-colonialism, parasitism, social-democracy, Trotskyism, imperialism and all other forms of bourgeois and revisionist faggotry.

Today we remember the unprecedented achievements of the world proletariat, such as the creation of the world’s first proletarian state in 1917; the victory of socialism in the Soviet Union under the leadership of Josef Stalin; the victorious liberation of Europe at the hands of the Red Army in 1945; the victory of socialism in the People’s Socialist Republic of Albania under Enver Hoxha; and so forth. And we stand in solidarity with the ongoing revolutionary struggles against the global bourgeoisie and the forces of imperialism in occupied Afghanistan, occupied Iraq, occupied Palestine, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and the Islamic Republic of Iran, just to name a few.

See Bush administration memos authorizing torture

Friday, April 24th, 2009

Last week the Whitehouse released four memos written by top officials in the former Bush administration authorizing personnel to administer torture techniques in order to obtain information from so-called “terror” suspects.

The Huffington Post previously published these documents, in full, on its website. You can view them here.

Video: The Fall of Berlin

Saturday, April 11th, 2009

Here’s an excellent video created by user “Hugstyggr” on Youtube, using footage from the film “The Fall of Berlin” and music “Attero Dominatus” by Sabaton.


SEO Powered By SEOPressor