Talk:Guenter Lewy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] With regards to: # Vahakn Dadrian responds to Guenther Lewy about his denial of the Armenian Genocide
If we are going to start going down the road of calling the works of a historian clearly better qualified than anyone editing these pages an exercise in denial rather than an exercise in the study of history then this page will soon become yet another Armenia based wikipedia nonsense. By all means we can provide substantiated criticisms of the author, but such authoratitive proclaimations as if the topic is subject to empirical fact will only invalidate the page. I appreciate some of you will have a hard time realising your own ideas are not emperical fact but please come to terms with those issues. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.145.232.205 (talk • contribs).
- I assume you are refering to the link. This is not part of the wikipage.Travb 23:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Apocolocynthosis: What kind of an edit summary is this User:82.145.232.205? Please go read WP:CIVIL and refrain from engaging in such racist attacks against Armenians!!!Apocolocynthosis 20:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism
Deleted section:
A careful reading of Lewy's America in Vietnam reveals that it is often a relatively honest account of a brutal U.S. military attack on a defenseless rural peasant population, but that everything is then "explained away." It is the "explained away" rhetoric that is quoted by other U.S. apologists for the war -- e.g. Norman Podhoretz in his book Why we were in Vietnam (Simon and Schuster, 1982). For example, at one point Lewy quotes Noam Chomsky that "these are war crimes, in the layman's sense of the term" and then goes on for twenty or more pages attempting to convince the reader that the Law of War is really a highly technical subject and so things are not as they obviously appear. See Chomsky's scathing review of America in Vietnam titled "On the aggression of South Vietnamese peasants against the United States" collected in his book Towards a New Cold War, (New York: Pantheon/Random House, 1982).
I will keep this section deleted because it is not quoted, and seems to be someone's opinion, not a quote from another historian. I will restore the Chomsky's review of America in Vietnam somewhere in the text.
Signed: Travb (talk) 21:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] source for "pretending"
A scientist does not research for years in an area to publish his researches to make a pretence. he - from his own point of view - wants to clarify something. though it is possible that he pretends something. but this opinion must be given by another source, for instance by another scientist. if this is the private opinion of User:Apocolocynthosis, then it should be changed. which sources have been used for "pretending" while making this assumption? until the sources are delivered, this word should be avoided (I hope for a better argument than "bok yemenin arapcasi")--Moorudd 22:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
