.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 27th, 2006, 09:14 AM

Bishop746 Bishop746 is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Bishop746 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Morale Issues

Marshalls book is highly controversial when it was published and has been cited by many respected historians. It wasnt until Dr. Roger Spiller did a study on Marshalls claims did anyone realize there was a problem.

Here is a link with a brief of Dr. Spillers results. I personally dont know who is right but I do know Marshalls book is not accepted by some military historians and sociologist.

http://www.warchronicle.com/us/comba...rshallfire.htm
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 27th, 2006, 11:17 AM

andy1964 andy1964 is offline
Private
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 2 Posts
andy1964 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Morale Issues

Ty Bishop,

Will have a look at that one, had a quick read of it for now, will delve into it more later.

Not sure who is right there, will leave it to better brains than me to figure it out :-)

If Spiller is right then I guess the gullible include lecturers at Sandhurst RMA.

TY
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 27th, 2006, 12:20 PM

Bishop746 Bishop746 is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Bishop746 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Morale Issues

According to one source I read even John Keegan has used Marshalls books and quoted from them and Keegan is without a doubt one of the best living military historians.

I disaggree with the article calling them "gullible". If a respected member of the military with a track record such as Marshalls writes a book that puts forth a new theory and it seems to be well researched and documented; I dont blame them for giving him the benefit of the doubt. If the critism is true, they were not gullible, they just didnt check his statements enough.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 29th, 2006, 05:55 AM

andy1964 andy1964 is offline
Private
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 2 Posts
andy1964 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Morale Issues

I was reading through the sites linked from that link.

The only slight problem I have with all of this is that they only seemed to start going after his results in 88, after he had died.

He may have been a sloppy researcher (Marshall) but to use some of the terms they do when the guy isn't around to defend his work strikes me a bit low. Thats the only thing i find slightly tasteful and distracts a bit from what Spiller is saying. Whether that is Spiller saying it or not or someone hyping his work using that language is another matter.

I honestly haven't got any clue who is right and reading thru all the material to get a better idea is something that will have to wait for another day. But it's an interesting point that i will have to check out.

TY
Andy
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.