Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 50: Line 50:     
: What are you teaching these children, after the 6th grade I would expect a higher level of detail and competence in a history class. Glossing over the details to this degree would get you fired from any of the history classes I have attended from middle school all the way to my professional education. Read the history before you teach it and please fix this question. --[[User:DylanBiery|DylanBiery]] 16:33, 4 June 2009 (EDT)
 
: What are you teaching these children, after the 6th grade I would expect a higher level of detail and competence in a history class. Glossing over the details to this degree would get you fired from any of the history classes I have attended from middle school all the way to my professional education. Read the history before you teach it and please fix this question. --[[User:DylanBiery|DylanBiery]] 16:33, 4 June 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
:'''FURTHER REPLY''' Furthermore, The assertion that Eisenhower was only partially responsible for Normandy is COMPLETELY WRONG. So wrong that I showed it to my former company commander, who teaches college level military history and ethics at Texas A&M, he lol'ed. Eisenhower was the supreme allied commander in Europe, while the details of the attack was left to his staff Eisenhower himself set it in motion and led key diversion and secrecy efforts to secure his surprise. This is perhaps more significant that Hannibal's attack because Eisenhower's enemy had the ability to see more of the allied movements through aerial, human, and signals intelligence. All of those had to be countered through massive air defense and OSI missions to maintain his element of surprise. While the question being challenged may have been a gaffe of a teacher churning out test questions. The halfhearted defense displays a gross misrepresentation of facts and is offensive to real military historian. --[[User:DylanBiery|DylanBiery]] 16:45, 4 June 2009 (EDT)
     
15

edits

Navigation menu