Worlds best Chess players.
Sanny
What is the rating of each player?
Here is what I think
I suppose Best Player is Anand.
Second best is Kasparov
Third best is Kramnik
Fourth best is Topalov
Fifth best is Karpov
I do not know rating of each I have chosen them as per their
populatity.
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
From a website I got more details about best players of the world.
Current top 50 (July 2007): Anand, Topalov, Kramnik, Ivnchuk,
Morozevich, Mamedyarov, Leko, Aronian, Radjabov, Jakovenko, Shirov,
Svidler, Gelfand, Grischuk, Adams, Kamsky, Carlsen, Akopian, J Polgar,
Ponomariov, Eljanov, Wang, Bacrot, Alekseev, Bu, Nisipeanu,
Kasimdzhanov, Short, Almasi, Volokitin, Ni, Dominguez-Peres,
Rublevsky, Van Wely, Karjakin, Malakhov, Sasikiran, Milov,
Miroshnichenko, Landa, Movsesian, Sargissian, Vallejo Pons, Sokolov,
Harikrishna, Georgiev, Inarkiev, Krasenkow, Socko, Volkov
Chessmetrics (Sonas) top 50 list: Kasparov, Lasker, Capablanca,
Botvinnik, Fischer, Karpov, Alekhine, Anand, Kramnik, Pillsbury,
Ivanchuk, Korchnoi, Steinitz, Smyslov, Tarrasch, Maroczy, Petrosian,
Rubinstein, Tal, Reshevsky, Keres, Najdorf, Nimzovich, Spassky,
Zukertort, Bronstein, Chigorin, Marshall, Kamsky, Leko, Gelfand,
Salov, Bogoljubow, Beliavsky, Shirov, Geller, Timman, Adams, Fine,
Janowsky, Polugaevsky, Topalov, Schlechter, Portisch, Stein, Euwe,
Flohr, Morozevich, Larsen, Bareev
Roman Krumsieck's top 50 list: Eichborn, Kasparov, Anand, Kramnik,
Ivanchuk, Karpov, Topalov, Svidler, Ponomariov, Leko, Shirov,
Morozevich, Aronian, Grischuk, Adams, Kamsky, Milov, Bareev, Gelfand,
Fischer, Radjabov, J Polgar, Salov, Bacrot, Kasimdzhanov, Mamedyarov,
Short, Akopian, Sasikiran, Dreev, Smirin, M Gurevich, Malakhov, Van
Wely, Sokolov, Khalifman, Azmaiparashvili, Georgiev, Rublevsky,
Korchnoi, Nikolic, McShane, Piket, Yusupov, Beliavsky, Lautier,
Nisipeanu, Nakamura, Naiditsch, Timman
Professional Chess Association (PCA) (WCC) top 50 list (2002):
Kasparov, Kramnik, Topalov, Ponomariov, Anand, Bareev, Leko, Adams,
Ivanchuk, Gelfand, Grischuk, Khalifman, Shirov, Morozevich, Svidler,
Azmaiparashvili, Malakhov, Zvjaginsev, J Polgar, Karpov, Bacrot,
Dreev, Short, Lautier, Krasenkov, Smirin, Sutovsky, Van Wely, Sakaev,
Ye Jiangchuan, Akopian, Sokolov, Nikolic, Vallejo Pons, Vaganian,
Lputian, Radjabov, Rublevsky, Tkachiev, Graf-Nenashev, Goldin,
Kasimdzhanov, Georgiev, Volkov, Lutz, Almasi, Macieja, Piket, Pigusov,
Tiviakov
PCA top 50 list (1994): Kasparov, Karpov, Kamsky, Anand, Ivanchuk,
Salov, Piket, Shirov, Kramnik, Gelfand, Yusupov, Lautier, Sokolov,
Ehlvest, J Polgar, Timman, Short, Akopian, Vaganian, Korchnoi, Adams,
Bareev, Tiviakov, Nikolic, Huebner, Georgiev, Dreev, Topalov, Hodgson,
Epishin, Kaidanov, Beliavsky, Gulko, Nunn, Hansen, Speelman, Dolmatov,
Dautov, Malaniuk, Azmaiparashvili, Vladimirov, Nenashev, Illescas,
Magerramov, Khalifman, Romanishin, Gurevich, Oll, Fischer, Andersson
Edo (Rod Edwards, Bradley-Terry algorithm) historical ratings
(1809-1902) top 50 list: Morphy, Steinitz, Em Lasker, Kolisch,
Tarrasch, Paulsen, Neumann, Zukertort, vond der Lasa, Pillsbury,
Anderssen, Chigorin, Winawer, Suhle, Staunton, Blackburne, Maroczy,
Dubois, Bauer, de Vere, Makovetz, Lipshutz, Gunsberg, Weiss, Janowski,
Mackenzie, Schlecther, Mason, Harrwitz, Charousek, von Bardeleben, de
Labourdonnais, Buckle, Burn, Englisch, Rosenthal, Petrov, B Lasker,
Potter, Moehle, Atkins, Goetz, Lipke, Schwarz, Alapin, Bird, Riemann,
Hirschfeld, Lange
Wall's top 50 list (my opinion only): Fischer, Kasparov, Kramnik,
Anand, Topalov, Karpov, Leko, Ivanchuk, Svidler, Capablanca,
Botvinnik, Lasker, Alekhine, Tal, Spaasky, Smyslov, Morphy, Petrosian,
Ljubojevic, Adams, Morozevich, Anderssen, Shirov, Kamsky, Ponomariov,
Euwe, Steinitz, Bareev, Bacrot, Gelfand, J Polgar, Korchnoi,
Blackburne, Timman, Short, Reshevsky, Kasimdzhanov, Bronstein, Keres,
Lautier, Yusupov, Fine, Beliavsky, Portisch, Geller, Khalifman,
Ehlvest, Boleslavsky, Sokolov, Larsen
Top players by Elo rating (all over 2700, 47 players): Kasparov,
Topalov, Kramnik, Anand, Fischer, Karpov, Svidler, Leko, Ivanchuk,
Morozevich, Aronian, Mamedyarov, Adams, Shirov, Radjabov, Kamsky,
Ponomariov, Bareev, J Polgar, Jakovenko, Gelfand, Grischuk, Bacrot,
Navara, Capablanca, Botvinnik, Lasker, Salov, van Wely, Akopian,
Short, Beliavsky, Carlsen, Nisipeanu, Kasimdzhanov, Sokolov, Tal,
Dreev, Krasenkow, Smirin, Khalifman, Azmaiparashvili, Eljanov,
Malakhov Bologan, Sasikiran
Elo's list (1978, 47 players): Capablanca, Botvinnik, Lasker, Tal,
Alekhine, Morphy, Smyslov, Petrosian, Reshevsky, Spassky, Bronstein,
Keres, Korchnoi, Fine, Geller, Boleslavsky, Euwe, Steinitz,
Rubinstein, Najdorf, Pillsbury, Portisch, Timman, Flohr, Gligoric,
Kholmov, Kotov, Larsen, Maroczy, Stein, Averbakh, Nimzovich,
Andersson, Bogoljubov, Furman, Ljubojevic, Szabo, Tarrasch, Mecking,
Polugaevsky, Anderssen, Chigorin, Schlechter, Taimanov, Vidmar, von
der Lasa, Zukertort
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
Offramp
> Which are the top 5 best players in the world?
>
> What is the rating of each player?
>
> Here is what I think
>
> I suppose Best Player is Anand.
> Second best is Kasparov
> Third best is Kramnik
> Fourth best is Topalov
> Fifth best is Karpov
>
> I do not know rating of each I have chosen them as per their
> populatity.
> Current top 50 (July 2007): Anand, Topalov, Kramnik, Ivanchuk,
> Morozevich ....
There's your answer!
> PCA top 50 list (1994): Kasparov, Karpov, Kamsky, Anand, Ivanchuk,
> Salov ....
Ivanchuk, the Grandmaster who looks and acts like a Ukrainian Nazi war
criminal, may end up as one of those "best players never to win
anything".
raylopez99
>
> Ivanchuk, the Grandmaster who looks and acts like a Ukrainian Nazi war
> criminal, may end up as one of those "best players never to win
> anything".
is Ivanchuk a fascist? He seems normal from his public pronoucements.
Here is the answer for the top ranked players at any given moment:
http://chess.liverating.org/
Right now it is:
01 Anand off 2792,0 +9 5 1 1969 id-card
02 Topalov off 2791,0 0 0 0 1975 id-card
03 Carlsen off 2782,0 -4 3 1 1990 id-card
04 Ivanchuk off 2781,9 -4,1 4 1 1969 id-card
05 Morozevich off 2778,8 -8,2 11 1 1977 id-card
06 Kramnik off 2763,0 -9 5 1 1975 id-card
07 Aronian off 2756,3 -0,7 3 1 1982 id-card
08 Radjabov off 2753,8 +2,8 2 1 1987 id-card
09 Leko off 2747,0 0 0 0 1979 id-card
10 Movsesian off 2744,4 +12,4 6 2 1978 id-card
Good to see youth (Carlsen, Topalov, Morozevich, Kramnik) lose to
experience (Anand, Ivanchuk).
RL
Offramp
> Offramp wrote:
>
> > Ivanchuk, the Grandmaster who looks and acts like a Ukrainian Nazi war
> > criminal, may end up as one of those "best players never to win
> > anything".
>
I don't know if he is a fascist or not. I doubt it. But he is laden
down with superstitions and neuroses. He has that neolithic monobrow
thing going for him as well. The whole package is quite a sight....A
ticcing brooding wailing kicking sight.
taylor....@comcast.net
Does Ivanchuk have much in the way of political opinions? Admittedly
I know little about him as a person, but I had the impression he was
so obsessed with chess that he knew or cared little about anything
else. What has he said or done that would qualify as "acting like a
war criminal"?
chessplayer
> Which are the top 5 best players in the world?
Kasparov is the greatest chess player of all time, with Fischer and
probably Capablanca. (IMHO).
However, since Kasparov has not played competitive chess in quite a
while certainly Anand has a good chance to beat him. Something he
could rarely do in his matches against Kasparov while Kasparov was
actively playing competitve chess. (Especially in classical chess).
Offramp
> I know little about him as a person, but I had the impression he was
> so obsessed with chess that he knew or cared little about anything
> else. What has he said or done that would qualify as "acting like a
> war criminal"?
He looks and behaves like Rudolf Hess in Spandau.
Tobias Heidelmann
tv of an old imprisoned man. just from looking you couldnt tell he
committed atrocities.
samsloan
> Which are the top 5 best players in the world?
>
> What is the rating of each player?
>
> Here is what I think
>
> I suppose Best Player is Anand.
> Second best is Kasparov
> Third best is Kramnik
> Fourth best is Topalov
> Fifth best is Karpov
>
> I do not know rating of each I have chosen them as per their
> populatity.
Completely wrong.
The best player in the world right now is Magnus Carlsen of Norway.
Sam Sloan
taylor....@comcast.net
Did Hess ever commit any atrocities? Granted, he was a shameless
(and clueless) shill for Hitler, but I don't recall that he ever was
involved in any mass executions and such. Once the war started he was
pretty much out of the picture, which is why he pulled his ridiculous
stunt of flying to England.
samsloan
I think Hess was probably innocent.
Otherwise, why would he parachute into England?
Sam Sloan
raylopez99
> Did Hess ever commit any atrocities? Granted, he was a shameless
> (and clueless) shill for Hitler, but I don't recall that he ever was
> involved in any mass executions and such. Once the war started he was
> pretty much out of the picture, which is why he pulled his ridiculous
> stunt of flying to England.
You don't know the half of it Taylor. Why would the allies keep Hess
in prison for so long, and not allow people to interview him? Because
Hess had a secret plan--to team up Germany with the Allies and fight
communism in Russia--and he tried to sell the plan to the Allies, and
found sympathetic ears. However, the allies had a better plan--to
pretend to be allies with Russia, let Germany invade Russia, and then,
when both parties were spent from fighting each other, to invade
France in D-Day--one year later than they promised Stalin. That is
exactly what the Allies did, and they kept Hess out of the picture
since he would have spilled the beans on their plan. After the war it
would have heated up the Cold War if this devious (but Machiavellian)
Allied plan was exposed by Hess.
RL
taylor....@comcast.net
> On Oct 21, 4:47 pm, taylor.kings...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> > Did Hess ever commit any atrocities? Granted, he was a shameless
> > (and clueless) shill for Hitler, but I don't recall that he ever was
> > involved in any mass executions and such. Once the war started he was
> > pretty much out of the picture, which is why he pulled his ridiculous
> > stunt of flying to England.
>
> You don't know the half of it Taylor.
Well, perhaps not, but I am fairly well-read on WW II. Got more
books on it than any other subject, aside from chess. Some of what you
say below sounds a tad far-fetched — what are your sources for it?
> Why would the allies keep Hess
> in prison for so long, and not allow people to interview him?
The same reason they keep any captured enemy in prison: so he won't
escape. After the war, at the Nuremberg trials, Hess was convicted as
a war criminal — not for any particular atrocity, as far as I know,
but for his general, and very active role, in helping the Nazis come
to total power and pursue a policy of oppression and aggression.
> Because
> Hess had a secret plan--to team up Germany with the Allies and fight
> communism in Russia--and he tried to sell the plan to the Allies, and
> found sympathetic ears.
Hess was hardly special in having such opinions. Some in England,
from either naievete or reactionary sentiments, had welcomed Hitler's
rise and saw Nazi Germany as a counter to Bolshevism. And Hess,
steeped in Nazi doctrine, also saw it in racial terms — that Aryan
Germany and Aryan England were natural allies, and should join against
the Jewish/Slavic menace from Russia. But I wouldn't characterize this
as "a secret plan." It was just the inchoate, harebrained notion of a
man who saw the world through a very distorted ideological lens. No
one in the British government took him at all seriously.
Also arguing against your "secret plan" thesis is the fact that
Hitler was furious about Hess' self-appointed mission, repudiated it
as soon as he learned of it, stripped Hess of all his government and
party titles, and declared him insane. There's even some evidence that
Hess' plane was fired on by the Luftwaffe while he was in German air
space, or was even shot down, requiring him to get a second plane.
These things don't jibe with the idea of a secret plan that Hitler
would have welcomed, had it been successful..
> However, the allies had a better plan--to
> pretend to be allies with Russia, let Germany invade Russia, and then,
> when both parties were spent from fighting each other, to invade
> France in D-Day--one year later than they promised Stalin.
I don't recall that any firm promise was ever made, by either
Churchill or Roosevelt, to open a major second front in Europe by
1943. Certainly Churchill, at least, would have liked to, because he
knew that whatever territory the USSR occupied advancing on the
Eastern Front, they would likely keep, and he wanted to minimize their
opportunities. But invasion just wasn't feasible until 1944.
Furthermore there was no "pretending" to be allies with Russia on
the part of the USA and UK. Well before opening the second front, both
countries sent Russia huge amounts of material aid: weapons, food,
medicine and other important supplies. Without this aid Germany might
still have won in the east.
> That is
> exactly what the Allies did, and they kept Hess out of the picture
> since he would have spilled the beans on their plan. After the war it
> would have heated up the Cold War if this devious (but Machiavellian)
> Allied plan was exposed by Hess.
I don't think Hess would have been given any more credence after the
war than when he landed in Scotland in May 1941. And Stalin's mistrust
of the West could hardly have been any greater than it already was; he
already saw their actions in terms like you have described.
Chess One
"samsloan" <samh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b6e5a05d-d96f-49fa...@v15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Completely wrong.
=======
**Objectively on the past12 month's performance ratings, I think the list
reads: Carlsen, Anand, Kramnik, Morozevich, Topalov. Its interesting to
consider that these ratings are generated in swiss and rr tournaments, but
the championship is being decided by match-play - so poor Kramnik looks
awful. Probably for fireworks potential, the best line-up would be
Topalov-Anand, and Carlsen-Morozevich. I remember someone [Ukrainian] once
saying that the most feared match-play opponent was Fischer, since it
doesn't matter so much if he lost a couple of games, when he was played-in
he seemed unstoppable. For Carlsen fans I see he is playing in the Norwegain
festival early nect year: here are the details: [Phil Innes]
Magnus Carlsen faces Peter Svidler (Russia), Hikaru Nakamura (USA) and Simen
Agdestein in a Super rapid tournament in Gjøvik, Norway from January 2nd to
5th.
The tournament has about the same format as the Mainz Classic, with a double
round tournament followed by final and bronze final games. The Norwegian
audience will be eager to see Magnus Carlsen on home-gound again, since he
does not play a single tournament game in Norway during 2008.
The rapid contest is part of a chess festival with a big and varied program,
held on occasion of the 100th anniversary of the Gjøvik chess club. The
festival starts on December 29th, and the main tournament is a 9 round
GM-Swiss open to players with a rating abov 2100.
Reigning European champion Sergei Tiviakov (NL) 2686 is the highest rated
player of the preliminary list of participants. There is also a parallell
group open for all players rated below 2100.
Gjøvik has been hosting some big chess events in the past, and Simen
Agdestein played an important role both in 1983 when at 16 he beat Spassky
in the 75th anniversary tournament and became an IM, in 1985 when he became
Nordic champion and Grandmaster at 18 (just then the youngest in the world!)
and in 1991 when he drew a classical mini-match with Karpov 2-2.
The home page of the festival (in Norwegian, English and German language)
has the web address: www.gjovikfestival.sjakkweb.no .
We thank you for all mentioning of our festival, and we will be back with
more information later.
Kind regards
Øystein Brekke
(chairman of the organizing committee Gjøvik International Chess Festival
2008-09)
========
Sam Sloan
None
> "samsloan" <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
The list of best players in the world would have to include Sam Sloan.
He has been playing chess for over fifty years and he is already
floored at 1900. This is done to award his prowess as a future GM
taylor....@comcast.net
I read a bit more on this. The 3rd volume of Churchill’s history of
WW II, “The Grand Alliance,” pages 48-55, discusses the Hess affair at
some length. To sum up the main details:
Churchill was notified of Hess’s arrival in Scotland by the Duke of
Hamilton on the night of 10 May 1941. After treatment for some minor
injuries in Glasgow, Hess was brought to London and kept in
confinement. By 17 May, Hess had been interviewed at length on three
occasions by members of the Foreign Office. His main points and
proposals were these:
German victory was inevitable. Aerial and submarine warfare would
continue until England submitted or starved. England should therefore
recognize this, avoid further needless bloodshed, and agree to a peace
settlement on the following terms:
• England to cease all hostilities toward Germany and Italy, and
allow Germany a free hand in continental Europe and in Asia.
• England to remove its forces from Iraq, and return to Germany any
British colonial possessions that had been German possessions before
WW I (e.g. Tanganyika, formerly German East Africa).
• In return Germany would cease hostilities against England and its
remaining empire.
There was no mention of any alliance of Germany and England against
Russia, nor did Hess mention any German plans to attack Russia, nor
confirm any when asked.
Hess had the mistaken impression that there was substantial pro-
German, anti-war sentiment among the British, including in the
aristocracy, and his aim in coming to Britain was to encourage them to
oust the “war-mongering Churchill clique” and accept a peace
agreement. He had in fact expected the Duke of Hamilton to bypass
Churchill and conduct him to King George himself, whom he was sure he
could persuade.
Hess was further motivated by advice he received from an astrologer,
who had dreamed of Hess piloting an airplane on some important
mission.
Churchill sent a summary of all this to FDR on 17 May. He apparently
did not speak to Hess personally. He regarded him as a pathetic
figure, motivated partly by a desire to regain his former place in
Hitler’s affections, but also by confused yet sincere humanitarian
impulses.
As far as Hess proposing (or England entertaining) any “secret plan”
for England and Germany to ally against Russia is concerned, the only
person who seems to have believed in this was Stalin. Churchill says:
“The Soviet Government were deeply intrigued by the Hess episode,
and they wove many distorted theories around it. Three years later,
when I was in Moscow on my second visit, I realised the fascination
this topic had for Stalin … I had the feeling that he believed there
had been some deep negotiation or plot for Germany and Britain to act
together in the invasion of Russia … I was surprised to find him silly
on this point.”
Considering that a deep-seated paranoia was Stalin’s main guiding
principle, I am not at all surprised that he was “silly on this
point.” But I don't think it merits any serious consideration.
Offramp
> saying that the most feared match-play opponent was Fischer, since it
> doesn't matter so much if he lost a couple of games, when he was played-in
> he seemed unstoppable.
I just don't get that.
AFAIR Fischer played matches v Cardoso, Euwe, Reshevsky, Taimanov,
Larsen & Spassky. In which of these, apart from the 1972 match, did he
"lose a couple of games" then get played in and become unstoppable?
Chess One
"Offramp" <alane...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a578a245-6a91-4bbd...@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
I said it wouldn't matter if... not that it happened - but if you want an
illustration of the point, it is, as you know, the last mentioned on your
list, the 1972 World Champion. Fischer was just psyching himself in. PI
raylopez99
> > You don't know the half of it Taylor.
>
> Well, perhaps not, but I am fairly well-read on WW II.
Yes, but you don't know the half of it.
> Got more
> books on it than any other subject, aside from chess. Some of what you
> say below sounds a tad far-fetched — what are your sources for it?
>
You are aware that Hess was lured to England by a MI5 spy in Spain?
See "lured into a trap" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Hess (I
wrote some of this) and here: http://www.rense.com/general61/mysteryofrudolfhess.htm
> > Why would the allies keep Hess
> > in prison for so long, and not allow people to interview him?
>
> The same reason they keep any captured enemy in prison: so he won't
> escape. After the war, at the Nuremberg trials, Hess was convicted as
> a war criminal — not for any particular atrocity, as far as I know,
> but for his general, and very active role, in helping the Nazis come
> to total power and pursue a policy of oppression and aggression.
No. Why would Hess' file be sealed until the year 2016 by the UK
government? What's there to hide?
>
> > Because
> > Hess had a secret plan--to team up Germany with the Allies and fight
> > communism in Russia--and he tried to sell the plan to the Allies, and
> > found sympathetic ears.
>
> Hess was hardly special in having such opinions. Some in England,
> from either naievete or reactionary sentiments, had welcomed Hitler's
> rise and saw Nazi Germany as a counter to Bolshevism. And Hess,
> steeped in Nazi doctrine, also saw it in racial terms — that Aryan
> Germany and Aryan England were natural allies, and should join against
> the Jewish/Slavic menace from Russia. But I wouldn't characterize this
> as "a secret plan." It was just the inchoate, harebrained notion of a
> man who saw the world through a very distorted ideological lens. No
> one in the British government took him at all seriously.
B.S. By your own logic some "harebrained" UK people believed this.
History is written by the winners. Recall the English fought the
Dutch in the 17th century for mastery of the seas--they also had
designs to rule the world in the 20th century, and wanted to vanquish
Russia.
> Also arguing against your "secret plan" thesis is the fact that
> Hitler was furious about Hess' self-appointed mission, repudiated it
> as soon as he learned of it, stripped Hess of all his government and
> party titles, and declared him insane. There's even some evidence that
> Hess' plane was fired on by the Luftwaffe while he was in German air
> space, or was even shot down, requiring him to get a second plane.
> These things don't jibe with the idea of a secret plan that Hitler
> would have welcomed, had it been successful..
If you know German society in WWII, you know that there was no one
"leader" that everybody obeyed. There were, like in Russia, many
centers of power. Perhaps some in the German war machine did not like
Hess--I don't doubt that.
>
> > However, the allies had a better plan--to
> > pretend to be allies with Russia, let Germany invade Russia, and then,
> > when both parties were spent from fighting each other, to invade
> > France in D-Day--one year later than they promised Stalin.
>
> I don't recall that any firm promise was ever made, by either
> Churchill or Roosevelt, to open a major second front in Europe by
> 1943.
Then you don't know what Stalin said about Churchill. I'm surprised
at you. I'm not saying these promises were "firm", but you should be
aware of them. To dismiss them is simply to commit to memory the
sanitized schoolboy version of UK history that you were taught in
elementary school. I too was brainwashed to believe the USA won WWII
in Europe with "V-Day" but a sober review of history shows the Soviets
won in Europe (the Pacific theatre was a different story). You really
need to bone up on history more Taylor.
> Furthermore there was no "pretending" to be allies with Russia on
> the part of the USA and UK. Well before opening the second front, both
> countries sent Russia huge amounts of material aid: weapons, food,
> medicine and other important supplies. Without this aid Germany might
> still have won in the east.
Speculation. History is replete with examples of material advantage
negated by a will to win by the enemy. What beat the Germans in 1941
were the Soviet Union's battle tested Asiatic troops headed by
Zhukov. Lend-lease helped but only in that fewer Soviet lives were
lost (and the Soviets could care less about losing lives). I see you
are not such a student of war history after all. I hope at least
you've read UK war historian John Keegan, who largely agrees with 'my'
point of view that RU won WWII.
RL
taylor....@comcast.net
> On Oct 22, 7:15 am, taylor.kings...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> > > You don't know the half of it Taylor.
>
> > Well, perhaps not, but I am fairly well-read on WW II.
>
> Yes, but you don't know the half of it.
>
> > Got more
> > books on it than any other subject, aside from chess. Some of what you
> > say below sounds a tad far-fetched — what are your sources for it?
>
> You are aware that Hess was lured to England by a MI5 spy in Spain?
> See "lured into a trap" athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Hess(I
> wrote some of this) and here:http://www.rense.com/general61/mysteryofrudolfhess.htm
Hmmm, I ask for sources, and you cite a Wikipedia article you
yourself wrote? Not exactly authoritative.
In any event, you seem to have misunderstood exactly which parts of
your post I considered far-fetched. It would not surprise me if
British intelligence knew in advance of the Hess flight, or had even
lured him there. Churchill hints at this in "The Grand Alliance," or
at least at a disinformation campaign to give the Germans an
exaggerated notion of British anti-war and/or pro-German sentiment.
The main points I disputed were your claims that (A) Hess proposed a
UK-Germany alliance against the USSR, (B) Stalin had been firmly
promised a European second front in 1943, and (C) Britain and America
only "pretended" to ally with the USSR against Germany. Neither the
Wikipedia nor rense.com articles say anything about those points at
all.
> > > Why would the allies keep Hess
> > > in prison for so long, and not allow people to interview him?
>
> > The same reason they keep any captured enemy in prison: so he won't
> > escape. After the war, at the Nuremberg trials, Hess was convicted as
> > a war criminal — not for any particular atrocity, as far as I know,
> > but for his general, and very active role, in helping the Nazis come
> > to total power and pursue a policy of oppression and aggression.
>
> No. Why would Hess' file be sealed until the year 2016 by the UK
> government? What's there to hide?
The involvement of extraterrestrials, or the Illuminati? You tell
me.
> > > Because
> > > Hess had a secret plan--to team up Germany with the Allies and fight
> > > communism in Russia--and he tried to sell the plan to the Allies, and
> > > found sympathetic ears.
>
> > Hess was hardly special in having such opinions. Some in England,
> > from either naievete or reactionary sentiments, had welcomed Hitler's
> > rise and saw Nazi Germany as a counter to Bolshevism. And Hess,
> > steeped in Nazi doctrine, also saw it in racial terms — that Aryan
> > Germany and Aryan England were natural allies, and should join against
> > the Jewish/Slavic menace from Russia. But I wouldn't characterize this
> > as "a secret plan." It was just the inchoate, harebrained notion of a
> > man who saw the world through a very distorted ideological lens. No
> > one in the British government took him at all seriously.
>
> B.S.
Profanity is not at all called for. More relevant than references to
bovine excrement, and certainly more helpful to your argument, would
be names of people in the British government who supposedly did take
Hess seriously.
> By your own logic some "harebrained" UK people believed this.
But I did not say the harebrained folks were in the government.
> History is written by the winners. Recall the English fought the
> Dutch in the 17th century for mastery of the seas--they also had
> designs to rule the world in the 20th century, and wanted to vanquish
> Russia.
Another far-fetched statement, especially considering that Britain
and Russia were allies in both World Wars. Please describe to us what
serious plans and/or concrete steps the British government undertook
in the years 1901-1945 to "vanquish Russia." And I won't deny that
Britain was fond of her empire, but "rule the world"? C'mon.
> > Also arguing against your "secret plan" thesis is the fact that
> > Hitler was furious about Hess' self-appointed mission, repudiated it
> > as soon as he learned of it, stripped Hess of all his government and
> > party titles, and declared him insane. There's even some evidence that
> > Hess' plane was fired on by the Luftwaffe while he was in German air
> > space, or was even shot down, requiring him to get a second plane.
> > These things don't jibe with the idea of a secret plan that Hitler
> > would have welcomed, had it been successful..
>
> If you know German society in WWII, you know that there was no one
> "leader" that everybody obeyed. There were, like in Russia, many
> centers of power. Perhaps some in the German war machine did not like
> Hess--I don't doubt that.
Quite possible, but now you seem to be arguing against yourself.
This still has no bearing on the point I made, that Hitler was enraged
at Hess's action, and does nothing to support your claim that Hess
brought an official "secret plan" for an Anglo-German alliance.
> > > However, the allies had a better plan--to
> > > pretend to be allies with Russia, let Germany invade Russia, and then,
> > > when both parties were spent from fighting each other, to invade
> > > France in D-Day--one year later than they promised Stalin.
>
> > I don't recall that any firm promise was ever made, by either
> > Churchill or Roosevelt, to open a major second front in Europe by
> > 1943.
>
> Then you don't know what Stalin said about Churchill. I'm surprised
> at you. I'm not saying these promises were "firm",
Then how do you justifying saying they were "promises"? Calling
something not firm a "promise" is like calling air a solid.
> but you should be
> aware of them.
I am aware that there were many different opinions about when and
where a second front was feasible. However, you have yet to produce
any authoritative source showing that anything that might reasonably
be called a definite promise of a major second front in Europe in 1943
was made to Stalin by any senior Allied leader.
> To dismiss them is simply to commit to memory the
> sanitized schoolboy version of UK history that you were taught in
> elementary school. I too was brainwashed to believe the USA won WWII
> in Europe with "V-Day" but a sober review of history shows the Soviets
> won in Europe (the Pacific theatre was a different story). You really
> need to bone up on history more Taylor.
I might suggest you need to learn manners, Ray. Gratuitous, tactless
disparagement is no substitute for reasoned argument.
> > Furthermore there was no "pretending" to be allies with Russia on
> > the part of the USA and UK. Well before opening the second front, both
> > countries sent Russia huge amounts of material aid: weapons, food,
> > medicine and other important supplies. Without this aid Germany might
> > still have won in the east.
>
> Speculation.
*_I'm_* the one who's speculating here??
> History is replete with examples of material advantage
> negated by a will to win by the enemy. What beat the Germans in 1941
> were the Soviet Union's battle tested Asiatic troops headed by
> Zhukov. Lend-lease helped but only in that fewer Soviet lives were
> lost (and the Soviets could care less about losing lives). I see you
> are not such a student of war history after all. I hope at least
> you've read UK war historian John Keegan, who largely agrees with 'my'
> point of view that RU won WWII.
Yes, I have Keegan's "The Second World War" (Viking, 1989) right
here on my desk at the moment. Please feel free to cite page numbers
relevant to my points A, B, and C above. BTW, I find nothing in Keegan
that supports your view of the Hess episode; he says it "puzzled the
British quite as much as it mystified his fellow Nazis." (p. 173)