When a military action doesn't have some fairly evident outcome, and isn't necessary to the main narrative, it has a hard time competing for space in a long survey.Henry, I wonder if the author of your college text was related in any way to Ken Brns, who made such interesting television series; one about the American Civil War, and another all about the Lewis & Clark expedition.Now we'll have to wonder from where they get their facts.Interesting thought about Allied troops being on Russian soil during their war.Lorrie Hi, everybody, I hope to participate in this, too.At one time I had two copies of this book, one I bought and one my mother-in-law sent me.They learn, early on, that our word for history derives from the Greek word that translates as 'enquiry.' But, having become confident in wielding "what everyone knows," they forget that asking is more important than telling."--- The First Thanksgiving? Oh yes, I think my teacher once said that the slaves loved to sing their "darky" songs. And come to think of it, that Indians were mostly savages out to get the white folks and ran around all day whooping their war songs? That's why I'm anxious to read this book and find out just how many falsehood were pounded into our heads, as Robby says! We have got to have the ugly facts in order to protect us from the official view of reality." ---Bill Moyers I have been sitting here trying to think of lies any of my teachers told me- and I can't come up with one!
A survey book by Harold King not only mentions it (1969), but says "Allied and American troops were thrown onto Russian soil, something Communist hierarchs never forgave nor forgot." Writing about Twentieth Century Russia in 1958, Donald Treadgold says that there was considerable disagreement among Allied commanders exactly what should be their mission; any consensus would have been along lines of containment.
We can check on Lowen and his sources, use our own sources, compare sources, In fact, Loewen, offers some ways in his book that teachers can do better than repeat lies from the past (including, perhaps , his own) For an interesting review of the book that brings into question some of Lewen's sources on one paricular aspect of the book go to H599_Ke rr/sullivan1.htm"" Must be heavy traffic there.
I assume, (yes, Marjorie) that we will all be reading this book with an open mind.
How do we know if Loewen's history is better than that of the books he takes on- One way is the way he suggests a number of times in the book and that is to always go back as much as possible to the primary sources.
In that respect the book gives good advice on teaching history (or anything) but he doesn't always follow his own advice in attempting to correct some of the errors he finds .