Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
1. history is what narratives about what happened say it is.
|
I disagree.
Quote:
|
it is a type of text taken up with narratives that construct and link elements--maybe events, maybe other things--into a type of pattern.
|
I disagree.
Quote:
|
2. your notion of history via the example of "roots" is kinda absurd. historians make shit up all the time--
|
Historians may make stuff up, but made up stuff is not history. Again I disagree.
Quote:
|
if you want to hold up the standard of "what actually happened" and you take that idea "what actually happened" at all seriously, then there is no written history, just types of fiction.
|
I disagree. We have written records of people in the military, weapons inventories, battle communications, medical records, reports of deaths/injuries, etc. these things make an historic record. A historian can even count the number of spent shells on a battle field to help determine the course of a battle. That also would be real history, that can make up a real historic narrative.
Quote:
|
3. as for documentation of the bush-process of selling the fake case for the iraq war--you wouldn't be interested because you're politically inclined not to be, and methodologically inclined not to look at that sort of documentation. so your history--the one you'd write--wouldn't use them. almost any other historian doing the same project would use those documents, were they available. your history would soon become an example of politically motivated fiction claiming to be history because its arguments, types of evidence and logic that connected these into patterns, wouldn't stand up. if you don;t believe me, try doing it. it'd be fun.
|
What is it that we don't know about the lead up to the war? I clearly state why I supported the war, and the information I used to come to my conclusion. I gladly include the trade-offs and the costs. I have never ignored them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
ace...this is not about impeachment or subpoenas. It is about access to presidential documents after they leave office.
I agree with rb....you dont understand history or the value that uncensored presidential policy documents bring to a more complete understanding of a president's policy decisions and actions, and thus a more complete history of that president's term of office.
|
Like I stated history is best served with honesty. If you don't understand how information and documents can be "staged" that o.k. , however you will be generally be taken advantage of as you seek truth.