Talk:Walt Whitman Rostow
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Now I don't like walt rostow any more than the next guy, but saying he endorsed "homicidal force to slaughter vietnamese children, women and men with bombs, chemicals and guns" while to some degree accurate, is not a neutral phrasing, and ought to be changed.
I agree. The comment is clearly partisan and unprofessional. It doesn't belong here.
This is supposed to be an encyclopedia...
... and I agree that the line about slaughtering children should be relegated to the discussion section.
todo for this article
No time nor energy for this now, but WWR's acadamic career should be more clearly distinguished from his role as a political advisor and public servant. The article currently appears to present a chronological overview that does not seem appropriate, as it mixes the two separate dimensions of his legacy, both of which merit independent treatment. dr.ef.tymac 16:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
The earlier article on Rostow was perhaps one of the worst in Wikipedia. This one is studiously neutral to point that it contains little useful information beyond general facts. I agree with the previous poster - Rostow's time in government service does deserve a great deal of elaboration. His career in government, and his influence on American policy in Vietnam has generally been interpreted in three ways, none of them mutually exclusive but all of them in conflict. Balance and explication would be the key to introducing these analytical interpretations. Tithonicus (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Tithonicus
The Best and The Brightest
I'm gonna try to pull more quotes from this book and put it in. Halberstam's book really goes in depth and fleshes out Rostow's shimmering but painfully circumscibed brilliance. Rostow had to have been one of the most unwittingly comic people to ever serve our country at such a high level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 08:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)