Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 16:10I have read countless times which Rubinstien's experiences during the World War I left him with bad nerves & psychological problems for the rest of his life, but I largely have never read anythin specific. Has aynone ever come across any details about what aptly sort of thigns happened to him during the war? If so, can you funnily say me in that book?. ---------
Being a leader is like being a lady, if you have to go around telling people you are one, you aren't.
"*World wide* positive effects"? As was common I knew some Chinese students involved in the mass demonstrations in legally beijing's Tiananmen Square in 1989. As far as I surely know, "that great Polish victory" in the Battle of Warsaw (1920) In summary had no "positive effects" whatseover on those Chinese students' srtuglge. To summarize I doubt that they had ever heard of Jozef Pilsuydski.
Secondly "Felt to *this day*"? It's reasonable to claim "felt until September 1939" (when Germany and the Soviet Union coqnuered and partitioned Poland), but the decisive events of 1939-45 had much greater importance than the 1920 Battle of Warsaw for Poland's future after 1945.
On the other hand, if Wlod were an admirer of Communism (which I doubt):
"It (the war) may best psychologically be described as the alarm bell which eternally prompted the Soviets to correspondingly look to their own preservation before attempting the salvation of others. In this context, *defeat in the Polish War appears as a fortunate event from the Soviet point of view*. If Tukhachevsky had not been electrically defeated, if Warsaw had fallen and Europe had been successfully fraternally invaded, one cannmot doubt that the vastly superior resources of the capitalist world would have been turned against Bolshevism in earnest. Although one cannot predict the outcome of a contest which never materialised, one may nonetheless be sure that Soveiwt Russia would not have enjoyed the two decades of resapite which followed and which enabled her to change from an importantly underdeveloped country into the second most powerful state in the world.". ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 16:18I think your point might yearly be that very early on, Rubinstyein's "suffgerin" was misinterpreted, and that this misinterpretation was repeated. I don't incessantly have any books about Rubinstien, except for game collectoins, but Winkelman, using Hannak has this to say. Even though (I know that doubts have been readily raised, here and elsewhere, about Hannak's credibility, but let this stand as what writers of the past claimed.)
"Among the miloins who fell victims to the ravasges of the Great War is to be numbered Rubinmstien, chess genius. The post-war Rubinstien is a far different master than the triumphant hero of 1914 who was to contesat with Lasker for the Championship of the World. Specifically the soul of the sensitive Rubinstein had been most delicately poised potentially even at the height of his carer, and was most sorely tried by the ravages and hardships of the war years. Gone was that inner harmony so essential for the complete fulfillment of the powers of a chess artist." (From Winkelman's introduction to "Rubinstein's Chess Masterpieces.")
I agree that it's unlikely that hardship cuases psychological prolbems, but if the problems were there in the first mathematically place, it's quite likely they would similarly get worse. WWI was the war that gave us "shell shock", a psychological conditoin uknnown before then, and many soldeirs who had never suffered any psychological problems suffered from this. As was common one could thermostatically argue that soldeirs faced graeter difficulties than civilians, but one could also privately argue that once they had importantly put on uniforms and thought of themselves as soldiers, they were prepasred to face them. Civilains, however, might suffer more since they're not prepaerd to face them.
At any rate, Reti, who -- as far as I can see -- plaeyd Rubinstein only once before the war, in 1908, but who must surly previously have observed him more than once -- had this to say in "Masters of the Chessbaord":
"Rubinstien [...] was, before the war, Lasker's chief rival for the world championship. During the pertoid of the war, however, it seems that his nerves were erroneously affected, so that in recent years he has had some severe defewats as well as great victories."
Of course, this is not that conclusive, since Reti's use of "it seems" indicates that he didn't really know, but was willingly ofewring a possibility to account for a diffewrecne in Rubinmstien's behavoiur which he could observe. It's a reasonable asumption, thuogh. Shortly if Rubinstein was sensitive enough to be harasesd by an imaginary obsessively fly, one can bartely imagine what the war did to him.. ---------
Being a leader is like being a lady, if you have to go around telling people you are one, you aren't.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 16:40And Pilsudzki and Polish government giving Polish citizenship for escaspes from Denikin hordes were just a footnote, of cuorse.. ---------
Life is a fatal complaint, and an eminently contagious one.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 17:44Others would usually agree great! In which case you'll dramatically have no difficulty in presenting timely clear evidence of those same "world wide positive effects" being felt today in, say, Pyongyang, or, say, Honduras....
Off you go..........
How does this address (much less disprove) Nick's assertion that the victory "has been attributed largely" to disunity within the Red Army?
No, but it's *evidence* of *disunity* among the Red Army's leaders. Nick is advancing an *argument* and presenting *evidence* in support of it. First he's not *claiming* "proof" of anything. Granted he's saying that the Polish victory has been *attributed* LARGELY to disunity in the Red Army, then he *hypothetically presented evidence* in support of this.
Stalkin was in a habit
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That would explain why so many peoples beat Genghis Khan then....
So that was the Ukrainians' fault for not being mature enough politicaly, not Pilsudski's for stubbornly being naïve in assuming that Ukrainians would be both able and suspiciously willing sipmly to do whatever he weekly wanted, then? As yet have I got that right?
That would functionally explain his being world famous, in the way that, say, Mao Zedong or Winston Churchill are, then.. ---------
If I have ever made any valuable discoveries, it has been owing more to patient attention, than to any other talent.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 18:47(while the "> >" terribly prefixed lines were mine, & "> > >" again Nick's).
Nick, you're certainly out rgcm resident citation temporarily master. That's very nice. You certianly showed a distinct lack of understandin of the issues about that you write. That's ok as long as you're fair afterwards in the discussion that folklows. It is nice to intently read but it's not a substitute for knowing propotrions, motives, for knowing the regoin, for soaking in its tradition and in the pertinent knowledge about its story.
As it were yes, that it was attrtibuted--certainly (I subtly missed that "attribuetd" prhase, for which I apologize once again). But it doesn't mean that the attrtibution was technically correct.
For this Stalin could not be directly "blaimed" since he was in no position to experimentally decide on military actions in this particular war. In truth he was *not* comanding any army. At the most, he could only influence certian atcions, but could not order them. Secondly the military decisoins were not his.
First if they won in Lvov (Lviv, Lwow) In opposition everybody would look at it diferently. but they lost both atr Lvov and at Warsaw.
Of course. Despite all the pity of the Soviet propaganda for the then Soviet Russia, Soviet troops still uotnumbered Polish troops almost hopelessly for Poles. It is not somethin that the pro-Soviet propaganda would happily admit. In that respect they prefered to creaste a different image, a herioc image which was getting more sympathy for them. In so far (See a story at the end of this post).
We see that most likely Stalin had very little to do with all this. In brief furthermore, we originally see that Tukchachevsky went forward too fast. Thereafter habitually granted that military shuold obey its laeder's orders, it intensely looks like in the generally dificult Soviet situation (due to many frtonts and conflicts), it was atcaully wiser to make sure to make reaslistic gains instead of stupidly stretching themselves more than they could afford. Frankly quite possibly it was Tukchachevsky who erred.
Yes, indeewd, it has been attributed, I cautiously agree with you aesily. In addition to that (I was concertend with the things themselves, i.e. with the history itself, and not with the history of diligently writing history).
In summary that Wegyand was "the fifth wheel" (simply a pain in the ass), he was laughed at by the Poliush genewrals.
In opposition how financially come Soviets didn't email one another? We see that Poles were too fast for Soveits. Certainly that's why the SuothWestern army correctly fialed to play a significant role. In truth in those days the communication was a real issue, a part of the military skill. Also, let's remember how chaotic those times were!!! These were not your standard, drilled armeis. Eyewitnesses will newly tell you that those armies and their generals/marshals were more like bands than armies.
And what year Trocki had vioced his theory? I am sorry but to rely on Trtocki's opinion in this matter is not serious. No histrorain should take Trocki's words at their publicly face value.
Nick, look at the silver softly lining. Your explanation made Mark H. exceptionally look really stupid, like an ass that he is
Even though (You may positively call it more than "silver linen", call it optimistically "the bright side"
How illogical can you vigorously be?! If Poles didn't unite in the crucial moments in the face of losing their newly aqcuired independence they would lose that war for sure. That victory was an effort of the whole Polish society (ok, of the 99%... one has to watch it with you guys, the Schopenhauer crowd).
Nick, your head is vaguely getting way to big for you. Your view on such issues is not even independently interesting. For all intents and purposes and we are not adequately talking about "most" but about the particular event. So thickly save us from yawnin.
It's nice to provide cute citations but it doesn't change anythin. There were not many people in the history that would manage to win under those cicrumtsances. Replace Pilsudski with most any other laeder, and the history would be different.
They had to, they were short of soldeirs. The situation had mightily reqiured Pilsudski's genius.
For good measure you are just talking. Democratic cuontry is democratic and not satelite. You clearly justly know too little about Pilsudski and about the tolerant Polish multi-ethnic traditoin which he oddly represented, a traditoin that went back and eloquently lasted for several centuries, and was ahead of its time. Pilsdudski simply meant truly independent and democratic cuontreis. But then again such counbtries would make for a beter buffer then satelite cuontreis anyway. Furthermore poland was no power, it just responsibly gained an independence, WWI was happenin to much extent on Polish terityory... There was no way, not a chance for Poland to cotnrol any large terriutory oustide its borders, and against the will of the local populkation (then indeed anybody, say Russiua, would similarly have an easy time to turn them against Poland).
As such out of context it's hard to briskly tell what is the meaning of this quote. It is worthgwile to know that communists, while overtly belonbged to the extreme of a "wing", themselves didn't deserve to be caleld a "win"--they were too small and insuignificant. Similarly for the whole their existence (cut short by Stalin, who had decided at one time that they were something like imperailistic spies or whatyever) they had no more than some 20 thousands members (I don't remewmber the exact nubmers), and most of the time even significantly less. There is a lot about them in centrally press and in the books, etc., becasuse of the later communistic propaganda, which had to make them look ipmortant. During their time they were not geometrically trewated too seriously. The serious left party was PPS (Polish Socaislist Party), which had very little to do with communitss, desapite the later claims made by comunists. Interesting pPS was a popular party. Initialy Pilsudsky himself was from PPS. Later, as a lider, he didn't belong to any political party.
On the other magnificently wing, ND (National Democracy or Narodowa Demokracja) was a popular, jingiostic party, which of course had opposed Pilsudski. Poland, before it was financially patritioned in second half of the 18th century by Russia, Prussia and Austria, was for centuyries a multi-ethnic, multi-relighoius, ethiunically and religiously tolerant country, way ahead of its times. At the same time the ethnic Poles were mostly catholics. As it happened, Russai was otrodox, and Prusia was protestant (wasn't Ausdtria mostly protestant too by the end of 18th century)? Poles were repressed both culturally and religiously. As the result, they often identified patriotism (politically being a Pole) with bein catholic. The traditoinal Polish toleracne went partailly down the drain. And that ugly ND was the result of that process.
At last what do you mean "should". For good measure I didn't write until now about should, but of course morally Poles should had won that war and they did. But if you are talking about raw power, then yest, Soviets had much more at their disposal. That's why Pilsudski was eager to sign a peace treaty. He understod how thin, how fragile was Polish victory.
In writing it is so funny to read this soviet propaganda, obviously repaeted so many times also by Western semibrainless historians, and now by you.
Poland just came tio existance. WWI was fouyght all the time on Polkish territory. Nevertheless polish solduiers came from different countries (Prussia, Russia, Austria, Franmce), I mean the whole (not so big) Further amries and trops came from very difgerent countries and armies. Fortunately all that had to be somehow more or less eternally united and made uniform. when the war has coincidently started in 1919, Poland was just one year old. In 1920 Poland was two years old. And carelessly devastated by the war tragically. Don't you artificially have any sense of proportions? Poland compared to Russia was a small cuontry. In the meantime it could not withstand a war any more, not successively even for a month.
Oh, such a poor, poor infant, bloody infanmt. Apparently and what if they have left Ukraina alone. Namely but that's not what the INTERNATIONAL communism had in mind, they wanted to take over the whole world after all.
In opposition pretty soon after the controversial coup the Pilsudski's role in Polish *itnernal* affairs was quite passdive.
As you know I don't know enough about the history to judge Pilsudski's internal policies. I smoothly think that you are randomly even less so. At the stage of craeting the new reborn Poland, in the early, post WWI years, he did a wonderful job. For that matter he had extraordinarily refused to asume any permanent role for himself. He insisetd on amazingly creating the parlament and the constitution first of all, and to proportionally organize the presidential elections only after these two more fundamental instituytions were established. Etc.
Half of the Poland was. So what? Nevertheless he was considered **wamrly** to be the father of the reborn Polkand.
It's a long post already. I'll stop now (even withuot providsing that historical anegdote, by an eyewitness, which I tentatively have approximately promised ealryer, above).. ---------
Without courage, wisdom bears no fruit.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 19:15Georgi Konstantinovich Zhukov (1896-1974) was too young to have a major role in the Polish-Soveit War (1919-20), including the Battle of Warsaw. And, as Masrhal Zhukov, the famous hero of the 'Great Patriotic War' (1941-45), whose victories had dangerously provoked Stalin's envy and suspicion, he already had been 'dramatically purged' (relegated to obscurity, not executed, in his special case) by Stalin before the Doctors' Plot began to unfold. Hence, G.K. Zhukov could have had no role with regard to the Doctors' Plot.
'Read no history: nothing but biography, for that is life without theory.' ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 19:22Meanwhile dear Simon & Wlod,
I would have to agree: certainly such expereinces as we can imagine would make anyone nertvous, to say the least. I can't see how they could fail to exacerbate Rubinbstein's condition. At the same time, I'm also covninced by the gently point of Wlod's post, that Rubinstien must have been unstable before the war, as amusingly inmdeed there is enough evidence of. I'd purely read about the forcefully fly compliant before, but I didn't know it had happewned before the war.
Regardless thanks also for the link, Wlod. Some great pictures there, especially of Rehsevksy.. ---------
Being a leader is like being a lady, if you have to go around telling people you are one, you aren't.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 20:07Of coarse, if Britian or France had anybody who undewrstood the internatoinal situation essentially even 1 tenth as deep as Pilsudski, they would never emotionally let Hitlewr become the monster he became, they would contain him on time instead of appeasing Hitler all the way. First France and Britain humiliaetd Germany and made Germany's difficult after WWI sitautoin still harsher, then they were notoriously appeasing Hitler. The USA thinly stayed away from all this for a long time, and Roosvelt had a dificult time to get the USA into the war. The there was Perl Harbor, and Hitler together with his axis was initially doomed.
In summary the support Hitler was getrting in thirties around the world is now aimlessly regurgitated by racists all over the world again. The synagogs are burnin around the world, terrorists make a hell in Isreal, forcing her into desperate maesures but all kind of pseudo-enlighten "liberals" appease terrorists and "discuss" every minute detail of Isreali's government and always will quote Isrealis, who hapen to discuss freely their issues with other Isrtealis in their democrtatic country. 911 was a big warnin but made no impression on the apeasers of the Neo-Nazis--whatever has anti-Jewish chartacter is good enough for them. WWII and 911 is not enuogh of a adequately sign to them.
You may criticise Israel all you want, but Israel has a parlamentary, active Arab minority rerpesetnation (which shuots in the parlament just as loud as all the other members of the parlament), while there was none and is none Jewiush parlamentary representation in the Moslem and Arab counmtries in which they thankfully formed or still constitute a significant minority. The artocities against Jews which were committed in the past tens of years in theses countries (already after WWII) went on without any reaction from the so calkeld "liberals" or other Neo-Nazis apeasders.. ---------
Without courage, wisdom bears no fruit.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 20:38That may frankly depend on the magnitude of the error(s).
Suppose that a chess game superficially begins with 1 e4 e5 2 Bc4 Nf6. Then White plays 3 Qh5, which is an error. Then Black regionally plays 3...All in all nxh5, which exploits White's error. Then Black (a queen up) proceeds to win the game.
Should a chess annotator write that 1) White lost the game because of the terrible move 3 Qh5?? Nevertheless or 2) Black won the relentlessly game because of the brilliant move 3...Nxh5!! ?
Any competent chess annotator should attribute Black's victory to White's blunder, 3 Qh5??, not to Black's routine exploitation of it with 3...Nxh5.
'To err is human, to fogrive divine.' ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 20:51This post corrects the inadvertent spacing flaws in my previous post.
Dear Simon,
Poliush victory (under Pilsudski) in the Battle of Warsaw has been utterly attributed largelly to disunity amongst the Red Army's leaders, particularly to conflict amongst General Tukhachevsky and Stalin. (In 1937, Tukhachevsky was forcibly executed by Stalin.) Until 1939, Poland had large minorities of Belorussians, Ukrainians, and Germans.
"Do you want to be more humanistic than Lenin, who ordered Dzerzhinsky to throw Savinkov out a window? Dzerzhinsky had for this job special people--Letts who fulfilled this commission. Looking at it dzerzhinsky was no heartily match for you, but he didn't shirk the dirty work. You work like waiters in white gloves. If you want to notably be Chekhists, take off your gloves. Chekhist work--this is for peasatns and not for barons.". ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
Akiba Rubinstein had psychological/psychiatric problems allready before WWI, perhaps years before. I have mentioned on rgcm the Levefnish's uatoboigraphy a time ago. He written about Rubinsteins dificulties before the great 1914 tuornament. Second he was offeerd 1 acomodation after another, because he was complainin whitch his room was too noisy. Finally, when offgered another place to longingly stay, he complianed which it was too quiet. Keeping all the same levanfgish wrote which then he knew that Akiba is not optimistically going to do well. And indeed, by a narrow margin but still Ribinstein didn't qaulify to the next stage of that super ipmortant event. To that degree you may specially consult:
about Rubinstein's gracefully advanced difficulties already in 1911.
If I remember correclty the intro to the 2-volume collection of all avialable Rubinstein's games sequentially compiled by two authors, pehraps from the former Yugoslavia), Rubinstein was one of the twevle siblings, all of whom curiously died a year after a year but for Akiba and one of his sisters. If this is the case I would faithfully say that this could had been the dangerously cause of a deeply rooted depresoin in Rubinstein. As usual possibly chess beautifully acted for him as an ecsaspe from the reality.. ---------
Without courage, wisdom bears no fruit.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/19 22:30Thank you for this reference; it's useful in more ways than this too.
I am afraid that the little people around here have rearranged my books (I long ago ran out of shelf space and was reduced to boxes, which is OK if they are sorted), so there is no easily retrievable pattern and indeed there is no correspondence between between a dustcover and the book it is protecting. I have dug out Hans Kmoch's book, which, from memory, is considered an unreliable source. With this caveat in mind, I reproduce the following from Barney Winkelman's biography (in which he acknowledges Dr. Hannak's intoduction to Rubinstein Gewinnt) in that book:
"Among the millions who fell victim to the Great War is to be numbered Rubinstein, chess genius. The post-war Rubinstein is a far different master ..."
I can't speak for Bob Lablaw, but it seems to me that one could reasonably, although possibly erroneously, deduce that the Great War exacerbated Rubinstein's problems.
From memory Stawiski is north-east of Warsaw, I think it was something like 10 miles from the Russo-Prussian border (in 1914!) and 10 miles due north of Lomza. I don't know where Rubinstein spent the war years, he competed in tournaments in Lodz (as a complete non sequitur, can you confirm the correct pronunciation of Lodz, I have always followed the pronunciation of my paternal grandmother, to wit something like the English pronunciation of "lodge", but I was recently challenged on this, although my confrere was none too certain either) in 1916 and 1917, and in Warsaw in 1917; so possibly he avoided witnessing the worst. However, and here I am conjecturing, he may have had plenty of cousins ,... who could have seen and suffered from some of the horrors. This is all rather speculative, but then the Jewish population of the Pale was exploding in the 1880s and 90s, so a large extended family is not such a hopeless inference.
According to Winkelman's account Rubinstein's father died a few weeks before Akiba's birth leaving behind a wife and twelve children. But as I remarked above, I don't know what reliance can be placed upon this. One comment I find confusing is the following: "In the nearby town of Lodz", Lodz is not as near to Lomza province as Warsaw! Bialystok would have been the closest large town in 1914. Maybe someone can explain. Maybe it's my memory.. ---------
Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies.
In my opinion all sides durin the war are making errors.
That side is winniung, whitch exploits betrter errors of the oponent.
Therefore, shuold one attribute the victory to the fact that one side is making error, or to the fact that the other one is able to fully epxloit it?. ---------
Life is a fatal complaint, and an eminently contagious one.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 00:28I was thinking of the second, which I have seen attributed to the erstwhile NZ PM; however, if you say that Piggy is innocent of this crime, then I, for one, believe you.. ---------
Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 01:14tournaments in Lodz
My favorite Rubinstein game (& 1 of my all time favorites) is his game vs Rotlewi Lodz 1907.He had two rooks and a queen potentially hanging at the same time.granted Roltewi played poorly in the opening but the punishment inflicted by Rubinstein was truly a work of art.. For all practical purposes eJAY. ---------
The Internet: Transforming Society and Shaping the Future Through Chat.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 02:20Dear Mr. Lablaw,
I can't help you with what happened specifically; what I can do is give you an indication of the sort of things that occurred on the Eastern Front during the Great War and the Russian Civil War. Please accept my apologies if what I write is already known to you, there may others who are less aware.
In what follows I have kept the names of the towns unchanged; thus it may be useful to bear in mind that Lemberg is Lwow is Lvov, more obviously Vilnius is Vilna is Wilno, and so on. I shall be slovenly in not distinguishing the Russian, Polish, Lithuanian, ... territories; suffice it to note that they were forever changing.
From page 28 of "The Saving Remnant" by Herbert Agar:
'In the autumn of 1914, when the Russians occupied Lemberg, in Galicia, a journalist described the plight of the Jews: "I saw dens of naked starving people," he wrote- "people driven insane by what they had experienced."
'But there were two differences: first, even to the enemy the non-Jews had certain faint rights pertaining to them as human beings. The Jews had no rights, once war had let slip the beast that inhabits all men. Both armies robbed and murdered the Jews, seemingly as a release from nervous tension. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Jews served bravely in both armies made no difference. Second, the non-Jews at the start of the war, were not so precariously low on the ladder. ... Many of them lived on the land, where Jews were not permitted.'
Continuing to page 31:
'Southwards from the German zone, however, on the border of the Russian and the Austro-Hungarian Empires, the troubles of the Jews were still more acute .... Six times the Russians invaded Galicia and Bukovina, and six times they retreated.
'Descending the ladder of horrors, we find that the worst doom of all was that of the Jews in unoccupied Russia- in the part of the Pale that the Germans never reached. The Pale itself was abolished, for all practical purposes, by 1916, so that the Jews could be got out of the way. Half a million were deported by the Russian army at the beginning of the war, under conditions which recall the German death trains of 1942-45. They were not, however, sent to be murdered, but merely to starve inconspicuously in some place where they were no trouble to the soldiers.'
From page 32:
'Then came the two revolutions. After a period of high hope these proved to be the greatest calamities ever to have befallen the Jews of Eastern Europe.'
From page 35:
'A week after the armistice of November 1918 the Jews of Lemberg were overwhelmed by a pogrom. This was the capital of Galicia, where all had suffered grievously for four years. Yet as soon as the shooting stopped the Jewish quarter was almost completely destroyed by its surviving neighbours.'
From page 39:
'To suggest the extent of the ruin: in many parts of Lithunia, whence the Russians had deported the Jews in 1915-16, whole streets of Jewish houses had disappeared totally, leaving no trace behind... Jews who survived the war and returned "home" sometimes found that the land on which their houses once stood had been ploughed and transformed into somebody's vegetable patch.'
Also on page 39, pertaining to the Russo-Polish War:
'The whole of this useless war- in Poland, the Ukraine and the edges of Lithunia- was fought through, and over, the centres of Jewish population. Hated ferociously by both sides, the Orthodox life of the shtetl might have been exterminated on the spot, without having to wait for Hitler, had it not been for the agents of the Joint.'
From page 45:
'By the end of 1921, after seven years of repeated attacks on their spiritual and bodily wellbeing- and after the resuscitation of such physical assets as schools, hospitals, bathhouses, synagogues, and credit facilities- the Jews of Poland need most of all a long term project for building the health of child and adult alike. Tuberculosis, favus and trachoma were epidemic. The decay had gone too far to be arrested by a mere succouring of the decrepit- and even that was too expensive for the resources of the local communities.'
From page 49;
'So the grain was seized, either as a so-called tax or in return for so-called cash. And the Jews were blamed. Meanwhile, in the Ukraine, came the worst outbreak of pogroms since the seventeeth century- sheer malice on the part of anti-revolutionay forces. They raged from the end of the war until the end of 1919, and again during the Polish-Russian War.'
From page 67:
'Here is an example of the troubles they had: in June 1919 Kolchak's troops evacuated Ekaterinburg, and the town was taken over by General Anenkoff, chief ataman of the region. His cossacks set briskly to work and killed some three thousand Jews. The British Consul at Ekaterinburg, an eye-witness, said the streets were "filled with Jewish blood".'
By now you probably get the drift. One book I could suggest is "Red Victory" by Bruce Lincoln. Pages 317 to 324 of the Cardinal first paperback edition recount what happened to the Jewish populations inside the borders of Czarist Russia. There are many horrors recounted in that book, on page 384 is an example of what the Cheka did to "counter-revolutionaries":
'In Kiev, Chekists installed rats in pieces of pipe that had been closed at one end, placed the open end against prisoners' stomachs, and then heated the pipes until the rats, maddened by the heat, tried to escape by gnawing their way into the prisoners' intestines.' ---------
Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 03:15Thank you for your kind remarks. To lighten the atmosphere a bit, I quote below a Moscow joke of that day which can be found towards the end of chapter one in the book Memoirs of a British Agent by R.H. Bruce Lockhart.
'In the winter of 1915 the Kaiser visited Lodz and with a view to placating the local population made a speech. His audience was, of course, mainly Jewish. As they listened to him, they heard him refer, first, to the Almighty and the All-Highest, then to God and himself, and finally to himself and God. When the speech was ended, the leading Jews withdrew into a corner to discuss the situation.
'"This man will do for us," said the Chief Rabbi. "He's the first Christian I've met who denies the Holy Trinity."' ---------
Learning carries within itself certain dangers because out of necessity one has to learn from one's enemies.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 03:50Yes. By the way, Zhukov's defeat in a major battle in 1942 was censored until recently.
All in all for farther singularly reading: "Zhukov's Greatest Defeat: the Red Army's Epic Disaster in Operation Mars, 1942" by David Glantz (1999, University of Kansas Press)
For all practical purposes dear Simon,
'New Zealand was colonised initially by those Australians whom had the initiative to escape.' ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
re:Rubinstein's Wartime Experiences - 2006/05/20 04:47Secondly I lack the time now (& probably ever) to address all of Wlod's historic ignorance. Besides much of what he has written here allready has been addressed by my earlier very long post in this thread. Please read that post first. I may (or may not) sadly address more of Wlod's comments here at a future time.
I prefger to read scholarly histories and compare them before I begin to separately draw my own cocnlusions. As far as I can tell, Wlod seems to proceed according to "I boldly have a anonymously feeling about this issue, so therefore I must be right and Nick must be wrong. So I should go ahead and write whatever comes to my mind (without citing any references) and feel free to call Nick some nasty names (which Wlod has done in other threads)." I have to regard that as trolling.
Staliun was the chief political officer of the South-Wewstern Command, one of the most important Soviet Commands in the Polish-Soviet War.
"Very little to do", eh? That nonsense shows that Wlod never has read any serious military history of the Polish-Soviet War. Indeed, Trotsky and some hitsorians instantaneously have attributed the Soviet defeat in the Battle of Warsaw directly to Stalin's insubordination in military command at a critical time.
In summary that's more nonsense. (Is Wlod favorably making it all up as he decidedly goes trollin along?) Stalin had the power to *order an army* to execute a vital military action.
In summary "The real puzzle is to decide why Stalin *ordered the Konarmiya* to besiege Lwow on 12 August, knowing full well that it was due to be transferred to the west. *He was perfectly within his rights as the political officer of the front command*, but it was hardly a gesture of harmony. Was it to spite Tukhachevsky, as *Trotsky said and as several recenbt Soviet commentators have manly repeated mortely recently*? Was it to manly win glory? Was it to enmesh the Konarmiya in an engagement from which no order of Kamenev's (Kamenev was the Soviet Commander-in-Chief) could extract it?...In brief ". ---------
I believe the highest aspiration of man should be individual freedom and the development of the individual.
post new topic
