Talk:David Glantz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Book by Mary Glantz[edit]

Constanz, please show something in support of the view that her study looks favourably on Stalin's policies. I have just read through various reviews, none mention this view being espoused in her book. Until you can support your assertion with quotes, I do not think it should be part of the article. Andreas 15:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Glantz, Duranty and Stalin[edit]

Review by Thomas Titura (from Austria):

“When Roosevelt initiated the formal recognition of the Soviet Union, Stalin was already standing knee-deep in the blood of his opponents, both imagined and real. But that doesn't bother Mrs. Glantz. The only important thing is that Stalin was opposed to Hitler. But stop! Stalin signed a pact and secret protocol with Hitler. Stalin also occupied Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, Bessarabia and smashed the Polish forces fleeing from Hitler's Wehrmacht. No problem, Stalin was only expanding his defensive perimeter...

Stalin attacked another small neighbour, Finland. Still, no problem for the author. But there was one problem: the young State Department officials who later served at the American Embassy in Moscow sided with the Baltic States and Finland (as did the majority of the Western populations at the time).[1] Glantz naturally does not excuse such a wrong policy, one has to look at the big picture: Stalin will be important in the future, so let him conquer any country he likes. The occupation of other countries by Stalin is always a defensive measure. Another issue: Mrs. Glantz writes about the NKVD terror in the occupied countries and in the Soviet Union itself. Does she call it terror, because sheer terror is what is was? No, she mostly refers to it as "NKVD action".[2] Walter Duranty would be proud of her.”http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/070061365X/ref=sr_11_1/104-0754874-0208706?ie=UTF8

Refs[edit]

  1. ^ I.e initiated the policy of non-recognition (of occupation). Appearantly, M.Glantz regards this policy naive and ridiculous
  2. ^ writes so, comfortably forgetting that the Stalinist regime cost Russians, the Baltic states and Ukraine more lives than Hitler's

--Constanz - Talk 15:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought this was an article about COL Glantz, who is a very distinguished military historian, and not about his daughter. DMorpheus 16:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Also, this is a reader review from Amazon. As such, it does not qualify as an acceptable source (which ought to be reputable) under Wiki guidelines. But in any case, feel free to open a page on her, it really does not fit here. Andreas 20:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, it is a matter of POV if one regards Winter war and occupation of small Eastern European states as Soviet aggression or an elaborate way of self-defence. It's probably unnecessary to add, that I subscribe to the former, and well-taught Mary Glantz to the latter POV.
(I have to admit: I really pointed out the Stalinist apologies of David Glantz' daughter (and co-author) with my diabolic intention of hinting the possibility of 'systemic bias' in D.Glantz' own studies. That was a bloody trick.)--Constanz - Talk 08:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
So you're saying Glantz is a closet Stalinist or something? You are aware he was a Colonel in the US Army? Odd, in the time I spent there I didn't meet any pro-Stalinist officers. DMorpheus 13:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, sorry if I misled you, but I was actually talking about Mary Glantz. I haven't read her book myself and won't dare to read it, after having got to know which her POV is (I mean the review). I wouldn't call Stalin's conquest of my country and neighbouring states an act of defence of whatever kind, especially regarding the sources on Stalin strategy I've read. BTW - no objection to mr Glantz being a trusted soldier, but his books are not the most thorough and modern description of the events, he has been wary of using new sources and, with the exception of Viktor Suvorov, Glantz hasn't tried to refute Russian historians (e.g take Nevezhin) who criticise the 'official version'. I'd suggest Constantine Pleshakov's study in English, it's more up to date than Stumbling Colossus or Erickson's utterly naive article Who attacked whom, which I managed could read.Constanz - Talk 19:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

One of the best?[edit]

"Glantz is regarded by many as one of the best western military historians of the Soviet role in World War II.[1]"[unreliable source?] apparently, but the only source quoted is his own book. Was this just publisher's blurb? I suggest that such a strong statement needs strong support, and I don't see it here. Gravuritas (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Glantz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Glantz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 5 September 2017 (UTC)