Believe you have a handle on history?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yes, that's why majority acceptance doesn't come until after corroboration and review in peer journals.

I'm an Elkhart High School Class of 1959 graduate. This was two years after Sputnik in the height of the Cold War. The Soviet Union was the enemy and very little was written favorable to the USSR in the history texts of those days.  Before that graduation, in my love for history, I had already completed the my reading of Churchill, Montgomery, Hitler, Heinz Guderian, Eisenhower, Nimitz, MacArthur and every book on WW II in the Elkhart Public Library -right across the street.- I had enough information from those books to reach the conclusion that while D Day shortened the war, it was the massive armies of the Soviet Union that brought the end to the **** reign over Europe and, had we not invaded, they would have ended up at the English Channel. My opinion was booed down by my pears. It took 30 years before Russia was openly acknowledged for their massive contributions in WW II. My prediction after Dien Bien Phu that Viet Nam would become one country free of all outside domination and our getting involved was a mistake also drew jeers, except from Dr. Corbett, my major professor.
 
Bob Maxwell said:
Yes, that's why majority acceptance doesn't come until after corroboration and review in peer journals.

I'm an Elkhart High School Class of 1959 graduate. This was two years after Sputnik in the height of the Cold War. The Soviet Union was the enemy and very little was written favorable to the USSR in the history texts of those days.  Before that graduation, in my love for history, I had already completed the my reading of Churchill, Montgomery, Hitler, Heinz Guderian, Eisenhower, Nimitz, MacArthur and every book on WW II in the Elkhart Public Library -right across the street.- I had enough information from those books to reach the conclusion that while D Day shortened the war, it was the massive armies of the Soviet Union that brought the end to the **** reign over Europe and, had we not invaded, they would have ended up at the English Channel. My opinion was booed down by my pears. It took 30 years before Russia was openly acknowledged for their massive contributions in WW II. My prediction after Dien Bien Phu that Viet Nam would become one country free of all outside domination and our getting involved was a mistake also drew jeers, except from Dr. Corbett, my major professor.

Might there be some contemporary examples as well?
 
Are we assuming that something called "cracked.com" is going to be an authoritative source of developments in the field of archeological news?  Hoo-kay.
 
Carl L said:
Are we assuming that something called "cracked.com" is going to be an authoritative source of developments in the field of archeological news?  Hoo-kay.
History is nothing but a bunch of opinions packaged to entertain you. Any connection to the real truth is purely coincidental.
 
Always remember, if you read it on the internet it must be true  ::)
 
This may sound crazy but my husband said one of the most objective news reports he has seen was Al Jazera (sp?).  Of course not all of it but he said he was really surprised at their reporting and looking at different sides of the issues.
 
I like to tune in the BBC and when I can get it Canadian Broadcasting Company for different news perspectives. The Jerusalem Post online addition is good to. Duh, I bet Canada live streams the news for the bush!
 
If you don't read the Blogs you are uninformed.
If you do read the Blogs you are misinformed.

Me & Mark Twain
 
Back
Top Bottom