Posted on 11/24/2009 6:31:52 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson
All interesting suggestions. A course in this upcoming semester I’m taking is on nothing but the holocaust. I figure it will provide some interesting things for these threads, but at the same time I expect the 600 level course to be one of the hardest ones I’ll take. Not only from a work load perspective but from an emotional one too. I did a short research paper on the rape of Nanjing in my first semester and even though it was a small paper when you really dig into these events there is a lot of stuff that is out there that you just don’t here about because it just isn’t pleasant in any context.
I’m staying away from political topics for my thesis since I want to write as objective paper as I can and I know that it would be harder to keep bias out of a political paper. I mean why make it harder than you have to right?
I can research in German. My French is awful...well, my German isn’t superb anymore either. Japanese, Polish, Italian, are right out.
U.S. War games prior to 1941. That is very interesting and I hadn’t thought of that. That might be a real interesting topic.
Thanks.
The press seems to like those for long stories with photos. If you can get your professor delay the due date for a year or so . . .
But seriously, I just found a second source for Times articles. The local JC has the period on microfiche also. I can go there without making an all day expedition out of it. So if you need a particular story or want to check a particular period I could turn it around quickly. Let me know if I can aid the cause of Higher Education.
Thanks Homer, I’ll take you up on that. I’m going to try to narrow my topic down to 5 by the start of the next semester on the 7th of December and then I will talk to my professors in those classes as well as a couple from these past classes that I particularly liked. I want to start doing the research by the 1st of January at the latest. That will give me 7 months to get it done properly.
Tijeras_Slim just gave me a bunch of his old history books that he didn’t want anymore so I have a whole box of new material to give me ideas too. Ironically, one of the books he game me is a required book for my 600 level class so I wont have to buy it.
The war games are a subject that I’ve wanted to read more about, but not enough to do heavy research. I’ve found a short chapter on the Louisiana games in one book, but that’s been about it, except some short items about the Tennessee games.
There ought to be a fair amount of original army material available for research. The question is, of course, how much of it can be easily accessed.
I just recently (and I mean today) was given a copy of “The Regulars: The American Army” by Edward M. Coffman. It covers the Army from 1898 to 1941. From the looks of it the second half covers the interwar year. Might be worth picking up if you want to read more on the subject.
Subject #1:
Roosevelt -- I am often accused (sometimes correctly ;-) ) of forming opinions based on reading just one book. So, have just added and finished reading Robert Stinnett's 2000 book, "Day of Deceit -- The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor."
Stinnett's book is confirmed and amplified by George Victor's 2007 "The Myth of Pearl Harbor -- Rethinking the Unthinkable."
Both books support the charge that FDR not only knew the 12/7/1941 attack was coming, but had deliberately provoked it so that America could enter the war against Nazi Germany.
So, to me the issue is settled. But not everyone agrees.
For example: a frequent poster and good friend of Free Republic is Larry Schweikart, whose 2008 book "48 Liberal Lies About American History (that you probably learned in school)," includes as "Lie #3" 'FDR Knew in Advance About the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor."
And I've debated the question long and hard with Schweikart. He is something of an expert in codes and code-breaking, through which my obvious amateur learning was unable to penetrate. So I couldn't convince him.
But since the subject is difficult and confusing to follow, I'd be most interested to see a "Pearl Harbor for Us Dummies" explanation -- even if it didn't advocate one side or the other, at least explain so we can more easily understand.
And, assuming Roosevelt did know, did even in some sense "provoke" the Japanese attack, do we still think WWII was the "just war." I do.
Subject #2:
Hitler's National Socialism -- at the peak of it's power, Hitler's empire covered a territory of roughly the size and much larger population (don't have exact numbers for this, would be nice to see actuals) than the United States. And yet the Nazi empire was never able to achieve anything like the industrial output of the America's "aroused democracy." Wonder why?
Subject #3:
The Pope -- All statistical BS aside, how many Jews did the pope really save? Or, look at the broader issue: of nine million European Jews, roughly three million survived the war -- how? How many escaped, and to where? How many hid out? How many were protected by the Church and others? How many somehow survived in concentration camps? Seems to me a lot of people these days are rushing to claim credit for "saving the Jews." I'd be interested to learn who actually deserves some credit.
Subject #4:
Stalin -- is there any reasonable explanation for his refusal to believe and respond to numerous intelligence reports of German preparations for Barbarossa. Or is there some comparison between the behavior of Stalin and Roosevelt regarding the "surprise attacks"?
Subject #5:
Churchill -- Referring you to Guido Preparata's 2005 book "Conjuring Hitler -- How Britain and America made the Third Reich" -- surely the ultimate conspiracy theory book, claims Hitler was nothing more than Churchill's sock puppet, sent to destroy Germany! Any truth to that?
Subject #6:
Mussolini -- Why did Il Duce decide to follow Hitler into hell?
Subject #7:
The Japanese -- why did the Japanese allow President Roosevelt to "provoke" them into attacking Pearl Harbor, instead of first combining with their ally Hitler to finish off Stalin?
Subject #8:
The Atom bomb -- no, on second thought, since my father, along with millions of Japanese, would most likely have died while invading Japan, I have no interest in alternate theories about "what if" Truman had refused to drop the bomb. ;-)
Surely that's enough for starters? :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.