If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
english Wikipedia is neutral because it is Wikipedia or because it is in English? you really don't have the maturity to know by now that neutral and peace are two words that you can hardly ever use in discussing anything in the Balkans?
It seems that for somone who gets his history from Wikipedia a civil war at the same time as a world war could be confusing so let me clarify for you. The Chetniks were happy to fight both the Nazis and the Communists. Both were the enemy that should be eliminated from the country. Which they eliminated first was of minor importance. In hind sight I have to say they were quite right to want to eliminate Tito. If the Chetniks knew the Communists were being pursured by the Nazis on one side of the river they were happy to fight the communists on the other side of the river. Whether they found out by themselves or the Nazis happend to tell them is part of the murky world of military intelligence. The Nazis were not unhappy that the Chetniks and partisans were fighting each other. So if they helped matters along by passing intelligence on to either the partisans or Chetniks about each other so they would fight each other more, that was very much to the Nazis benefit. The Chetnik troops were not integrated with the Nazi troops nor did they fight as combined forces or under combined command. You still have made no comment on how the alleged Nazi collaborating Chetniks happened to return more Allied airmen to their own lines to fight again than any other force in WW2 fits in with your allegation of collaboration. Collaborators do not return Allies to their own lines. Collaborators kill them or turn them over to the Nazis. Like the Ustas did. Those returned airmen did more to fight the Nazis than the sum total of anything that the partisans managed to do. Dropping bombs on German cities was way more effective.
The Communists felt the same way about the Chetniks as far as eliminating them too. They attempted to assasinate Chetnik commanders, attacked Chetnik forces etc. all the while diminishing their own effectiveness against the Nazis who you have pointed out they would not face directly. That's the nature of a civil war/world war at the same time. At the very beginning of the war the Communists and Chetniks did combine forces and in fact had joint commanders together whether the troops were partisan or Chetnik. That quickly ended when it became obvious to the Chetniks that all the partisans wanted was power for themselves. Even when the partisans faced the Nazis indirectly their clumsiness only lead to mass attrocities by the Nazis such as the mass execution of an entire high school in retribution for a partisan attack on a convoy. Those were the same Nazis who you quoted as admiring the fighting ability of the partisans - we admire their fighting ability but we are still going to kill their children? Does not compute.
You also have not explained why Tito had an absolute right to rule Yugoslavia for life. Yes Tito broke away from an alliance with Stalin. Tito did this because he he did not want to have his own power diminished in any way and just like Stalin would murder or imprison anyone who got in the way of this. But we've already established that you support Tito's crimes in doing that. He also tried to play big man on the world stage for example by lending money to African nations that was never paid back, worsening economic conditions in Yugoslavia ultimately leading to the most recent civil wars in Yugoslavia, or rather former Yugoslavia. The amount of corruption with the Communists enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else in Yugoslavia is sickening. Do you know for example how many prime hunting lodges, retreats that Tito had reserved and maintained just for his own personal use. More than he could ever use in twenty life times even if all he did was visit all his properties.
I absolutely agree that the Balkans is a mess. During the rule of Tito, it was less messy than it is now. You must admit that. Why do you blame Tito for the recent wars in Yugoslavia? He died many years before the recent wars in Yugoslavia. Yes, communists after him were corrupt, I don't deny that. Many didn't care about the ideas Tito fought for. Why don't you blame all the nationalists that come to light right after Tito's death? Of course the world's political map changed too, which allowed changes that had happened . Tito has nothing to do with it.
Simple, they did start with the guerrilla warfare, but by '44 or '45 things changed, they got more support from the Allies and Soviets, organized themselves, gained strength, and were able to change their strategy. Germans (and Chetniks if I may notice) on the other hand lost their strength. I think Partisans should have been grateful to the Soviets, but not to the degree to which they would allow Soviets to occupy their country. All I am saying, I am glad I didn't have to live in an Eastern Bloc country. Yugoslavia was independent and free, its citizens could travel wherever they wanted, enjoyed a relatively good life, and were not oppressed, as it was the case in countries such as DDR or Czechoslovakia. I can only thank Tito for that.
I know of people who were threatened with imprisonment when they applied to work abroad, I also know of many, many that were imprisoned for in any way criticizing Tito. That's what you call free and not oppressed? Let's try a simple issue like religious freedom? Oops nope sorry you had to sneak around in secreat just to have your child baptised so no freedom there. Christmas - not in Tito's Yugoslavia. A relatively good life compared to who? Romania and Bulgaria? Maybe if you were a member of the communist party and had some scams going. Not if you were an ordinary Yugoslav that could not even find housing in Belgrade. That's like one homeless guy comparing himself to another homeless guy and deciding that he's a little better off. That's like one horse deciding that since his master beats him a little less than the other horse that he's a little better off. Tell that to the patisans who were killed or imprisoned for their support of the Soviets. Tell that to all the political prisoners in Yugoslav jails. Tell it to Milovan Dilas while you are at it. Tell him on Wikipedia if you like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milovan_%C4%90ilas And where is eastern Europe today? Part of the EU while the former Yugoslavia is still left cap in hand at the door pleading to be let in.
Did you also forget about the forced expulsion of Yugoslav families to make way for Albanian refugees so that Tito could brag that the Albanians were coming to him because his brand of communism was better than Albania?
I already explained that Churchill was duped by his own double agents who turned out to be communist and thus withdrew support from Mihailovic and the Chetniks. Thus the change in effectiveness. Never the less the Chetniks fought on until the end and when at the end of the war the Allies were most active in bombing Germany the Chetniks were most active in returning downed Allied airmen to fly and fight again. The only thing the communists managed to do was reduce the overall effectiveness of the Yugoslav resistance to the Nazis. Had Churchill continued to support Mihailovic and what was a standing army already armed and with a command structure compared to communists who by their own legend making only had 5 bullets each, the overall Yugoslav resistance would have been much more effective.
The surviving partisans certainly were free to reward themselves by plundering the state on a continuous basis. If that's what you mean by free. It is clear that you are Tito's man although I have no idea why. Anyone who saw Yugoslavie decend into civil war due to Tito's policies and bankrupting of the country should realize what Tito was all about. And don't try to tell me that Tito and the communists ruled Yugoslavia from 1945 to 1980 in Tito's case and during the civil war in the case of the communist party but had nothing to do with the causes of the civil wars of the 1990's. Most of the combatants were Tito's former henchmen. You rule a country as absolute dictator for 35 years, set the pattern of corruption at the top but then your supporters claim you have nothing to do with events subsequent to your own death? Get real. The Balkans was hell on wheels for Yugoslavs as the recent civil war shows. Tito may not have been alive when the war broke out again but his hand and his communist party's hands were everywhere in the Balkans for at least a decade or two after his passing. Or did you forget the bizzare political structure he stipulated be put in place after his death?
Here I thought you objected to my criticism of Gligoric being a partisan and party member because you like Gligoric. Now I find you really object because you love Tito.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 22nd August, 2012, 06:42 PM.
It's great you provide details for who is interested, but do not argue with people who use this forum to promote their agenda, and who mask their holed logic with insolence. As you said it, the discussion will go nowhere.
For the record, in Romania the agents of Stalin took over. We did not have a Tito. But we had hundreds of thousands of people in communist concentration camps, and millions of family members affected by the imprisonment of their fathers, husbands, brothers, sons, daughters or wives. Concentration camps run by Stalin agents with a cruelty rarely encountered and largely remained unknown.
Gligoric was a young man who bravely defended his country. And everybody recognizes that, no matter what some isolated people may say.
Well, I know many people who worked abroad. You know very well how many Yugoslavs worked in Germany in the 60's and 70's. I also know many who baptized their children. Churches, mosques, or synagogues functioned during Tito's time. I visited some of them personally. Everything there was business as usual. What you are saying about the religious freedoms is absolutely not true. Or maybe we lived in a different region, or maybe you never lived in Yugoslavia during that time and simply don't know enough. If you were a communist party member, you were not supposed to believe in God and go to church, but if you weren't their member, they didn't care. Many joined the communist party, simply because it was more convenient, and not because they believed in it.
No, you weren't supposed to criticize Tito, of course not. You also weren't supposed to sing Chetnik's or Ustase's songs either. I don't claim, Yugoslavs enjoyed the same freedoms that we enjoy now living here in Canada. But it was much better than any other eastern European country. I thank him for that.
Originally posted by Laurentiu GrigorescuView Post
It's great you provide details for who is interested, but do not argue with people who use this forum to promote their agenda, and who mask their holed logic with insolence. As you said it, the discussion will go nowhere.
For the record, in Romania the agents of Stalin took over. We did not have a Tito. But we had hundreds of thousands of people in communist concentration camps, and millions of family members affected by the imprisonment of their fathers, husbands, brothers, sons, daughters or wives. Concentration camps run by Stalin agents with a cruelty rarely encountered and largely remained unknown.
Gligoric was a young man who bravely defended his country. And everybody recognizes that, no matter what some isolated people may say.
Yes Yugoslavia was a workers paradise compared to Romania. Or at least that's the Tito approved propoganda.
Everyone recognizes that communism was a failed system. Everyone recognizes that the communist take over of Yugoslavia and eastern Europe that Gligoric ideologically supported and helped make possible in the case of Yugoslavia was a tragedy. Everyone except for some isolated people recognize that everywhere ruled by communists including Yugoslavia resulted in summary execution, imprisonment, secret police and informants, corruption on a mass scale and bankrupt nations some of which then decended into civil war. Except for some isolated cases most people do not approve of summary execution and imprisonment. Yes I like Gligoric but I'm not going to accept that Yugoslav dictator Tito was a great guy no matter how wonderful and charming Gligoric was.
If you don't think communism was a failed system maybe you would like to try another term of it in Romania? I mean what's wrong with you guys I just explained that Tito murdered or imprisoned thousands of his own partisans and party members and you are both like hey that's fine. I mean Tito would have had Gligoric shot or imprisoned if Gligoric had supported the Soviets - you do realize that we are talking about real human lives here right?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 22nd August, 2012, 07:02 PM.
I know however, that you still don't realize how little he has in common with any wrongdoings committed by the Yugoslav communists and Tito. And that's what started our discussion.
Communism is a failed system? Trust me, I believe in that system as much as you do, but for the argument's sake, what do you think about China nowadays? It doesn't look like a failed system to me. Maybe not yet. Tito was a smart man, he proved it many times. I am sure Yugoslavia could have changed as it was about to change during the government of Ante Markovic. Yugoslavia changed in the 60s and 70s too. However nationalists took over. Communism and Tito have nothing to do with the recent wars. He warned everyone during his time, and tried to teach "brotherhood and unity".
You keep mentioning how cruel Tito was with his political or war enemies. Well, the same would happen to him, had he lost the battle. That's simply the nature of the Balkans and war (or post-war). We could argue as much as the Americans argue about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Whether or not Communism is a failed system now, it's a pretty certain fact that it wasn't known as a failed system in the mid 1940s. Around half of the developed countries used it, and the other half feared it so much it was in some circles considered the greatest threat.
China now is an interesting case. They've been able to evolve and adapt their system. Is it truly communism anymore? That probably depends on whether or not you think there was ever a country that truly followed communism!
I used to think communism would be great with one huge caveat - you need someone or something truly impartial to oversee it. Like a computer - or like Data from Star Trek. Not only impartial, but well-intentioned and with no personal needs to satisfy. The problems in communist countries historically have been mainly from the top one or two layers.
Personal property is a great motivator however... so I don't know what the "perfect" answer is, I just know that nobody is using it yet :)
Whether or not Communism is a failed system now, it's a pretty certain fact that it wasn't known as a failed system in the mid 1940s. Around half of the developed countries used it, and the other half feared it so much it was in some circles considered the greatest threat.
China now is an interesting case. They've been able to evolve and adapt their system. Is it truly communism anymore? That probably depends on whether or not you think there was ever a country that truly followed communism!
I used to think communism would be great with one huge caveat - you need someone or something truly impartial to oversee it. Like a computer - or like Data from Star Trek. Not only impartial, but well-intentioned and with no personal needs to satisfy. The problems in communist countries historically have been mainly from the top one or two layers.
Personal property is a great motivator however... so I don't know what the "perfect" answer is, I just know that nobody is using it yet :)
Spoken like someone who was not subject to Lenin's 'system of terror' that made Stalin possible. Which 'developed' countries are you meaning? I hope you don't mean the Soviet Union. Developed hardly describes the economy of the Soviet Union in the 1940's nor does developed describe all the eastern European countries that adopted communism. The Soviet Union was so under developed because of Stalin's purges that they could not even defeat Finland. Which is what encouraged the Nazis to attack the Soviet Union. Something Stalin was sure would never happend and which you literally warned Stalin about at the cost of your own life. Stalin's excesses certainly should have shown that the model of communism of putting one dictator in place for life only lead to despotic rule, such as with Stalin, Mao and Tito.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Thursday, 23rd August, 2012, 06:30 AM.
I know however, that you still don't realize how little he has in common with any wrongdoings committed by the Yugoslav communists and Tito. And that's what started our discussion.
Communism is a failed system? Trust me, I believe in that system as much as you do, but for the argument's sake, what do you think about China nowadays? It doesn't look like a failed system to me. Maybe not yet. Tito was a smart man, he proved it many times. I am sure Yugoslavia could have changed as it was about to change during the government of Ante Markovic. Yugoslavia changed in the 60s and 70s too. However nationalists took over. Communism and Tito have nothing to do with the recent wars. He warned everyone during his time, and tried to teach "brotherhood and unity".
You keep mentioning how cruel Tito was with his political or war enemies. Well, the same would happen to him, had he lost the battle. That's simply the nature of the Balkans and war (or post-war). We could argue as much as the Americans argue about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
China? You must be kiding. I know your human rights values are kind of iffy but the monstrosity of Mao during the so called cultural revolution should at least show you that communism is a failed system. If the Chinese people are doing a little better now because they have adopted free market ideas then I am happy for them. Mind you it took the fall of almost all the other communist systems to make them realize they had no choice. I hope they can throw off the remaining evils of communism but unfortunately when they tried at Tiananmen Square they were shot down in the streets. A country is not however judged only on economic results but by the freedoms and quality of life and human rights standards. Next you'll be telling me how wonderful North Korea is. Had Tito lost he would likely have gone back to being a communist operative abroad. Sorry for Tito but I am more concerned about the fate of Yugoslavia in general than I am in whether Tito succeeded in his ambition to be dictator for life or how much property and money he was able to abscond with. Yugoslavia did not have to become communist, isolated from the west and bankrupt economically as run by a criminal and corrupt communist junta. Unlike Tito I put the good of the nation above the good of one man. Whether Yugoslavie was a 'nicer' communism than Romania, Bulgaria, Albania et all is pointless argument. It's like arguing which prison is best when the point is not to be imprisoned at all.
Of course I like Gligoric, I just don't like that he was part of a party and system that ruined the country. I don't applaud his decision to assist the communist take over of Yugoslavia. I woiuld have preferred that his priority be to first remove the Nazis and then post-war at least attempt to change Yugoslavia's government in a democratic way. Not to use the cover of war to stage a take over, appoint a dictator for life on no basis what so ever who subsequently punitively punished not only those who did not want communism but also those that were communist but supported the Soviet Union.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Thursday, 23rd August, 2012, 06:29 AM.
I know that question was directed at Zeljko, but allow me to throw in my two cents worth...
I don't think much of a country that would imprison and chemically castrate men for having more than one child.
I think that about sums it up, but trust me, there's way more that I can add in case that's not enough to convince you that China is by far not sitting pretty amongst the world's elite countries.
Jordan
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Spoken like someone who was not subject to Lenin's 'system of terror' that made Stalin possible. Which 'developed' countries are you meaning? I hope you don't mean the Soviet Union. Developed hardly describes the economy of the Soviet Union in the 1940's nor does developed describe all the eastern European countries that adopted communism. The Soviet Union was so under developed because of Stalin's purges that they could not even defeat Finland. Which is what encouraged the Nazis to attack the Soviet Union. Something Stalin was sure would never happend and which you literally warned Stalin about at the cost of your own life. Stalin's excesses certainly should have shown that the model of communism of putting one dictator in place for life only lead to despotic rule, such as with Stalin, Mao and Tito.
Industrialized, if you prefer. I didn't invent the terms nor decide which countries are counted under them. The fact is, rightly or wrongly, the USSR was considered a major power pre-WW2 and by 1949 at the latest was considered the second most powerful country on the planet. It's also a fact that in international circles until VERY recently, European countries "counted" for more than non-European countries (North America excepted). Look how long it took for the G20 to surpass the G7/G8 in prestige.
Anyway, did you even read my post? My former concept included no human dictator for life, which is what you seem to be complaining about.
I know that question was directed at Zeljko, but allow me to throw in my two cents worth...
I don't think much of a country that would imprison and chemically castrate men for having more than one child.
I think that about sums it up, but trust me, there's way more that I can add in case that's not enough to convince you that China is by far not sitting pretty amongst the world's elite countries.
Jordan
Jordan, where did you get that info? I tried online to no avail.
Industrialized, if you prefer. I didn't invent the terms nor decide which countries are counted under them. The fact is, rightly or wrongly, the USSR was considered a major power pre-WW2 and by 1949 at the latest was considered the second most powerful country on the planet. It's also a fact that in international circles until VERY recently, European countries "counted" for more than non-European countries (North America excepted). Look how long it took for the G20 to surpass the G7/G8 in prestige.
Anyway, did you even read my post? My former concept included no human dictator for life, which is what you seem to be complaining about.
Industrialized is worse. Few familiar with the Soviet Union and eastern Europe would have called them industrialized. They were heavily agragrian with most of their labour force living on farms. Even the farms were not industrialized due to a shortage of tractors and other farm equipment. The Soviet agrarian commune policies and Stalinºs manufactured famine in the Ukraine did not help either. They actually skipped the industrialization period that Marx thought so necessary to make the next step economically possible to communism. Thatºs why the Soviets had all those 5 year plans and such to get themselves industrialized. Everybody who saw the Soviets get their clocks cleaned by little Finland knew the Soviets were rotten at the core. That and the fact that many of their military officers, engineers etc were either in Gulags or dead thanks to Stalinºs purges.
They were considered the second most powerful country after WW2 because of the size of their army after the war and because they got the nuclear bomb. Then they started to compete in the space race. Much as in the west there was an economic and technological innovation benefit to WW2; although the Soviets lost so much of their population that in their case the benefit is not so great as in the west.
Show me one communist country with no dictator? Yes theoretically everything is possible with communism; you can draw up blueprints for anything you like. However, it will just be like a concept car at the Detroit auto show. I'm interested in the cars that are actually road tested not the nice glitzy theoretical ones in the showroom. As the old Yugoslav joke goes - if we have to become communist slice me off a little piece so I can sample it first. There is not one communist revolutionary who ever said I don't have a right to be dictator for life because we are trying to eliminate the monarchy not replace it. There is not one communist society that was not murderous and extremely corrupt. You should know that corruption is the death of a country. That's why corruption in Canada is taken so seriouisly - whether that's some of the excesses of our MPs and their choice of hotels and orange juice habits or some of the things that apparently go on in Montreal or recently with SNC Lavalin. Whether it is corporate or government corruption, bribery, kick backs etc it cannot be tolerated in any country, under any system.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 24th August, 2012, 11:37 AM.
Go look up the word "hypothetical" and then perhaps we can continue the conversation. I never said there had been a communist country without a dictator.
Tweet
Comment