It seems that not everyone likes those tough-minded ‘Military History’ reviews
Remember last month I said how much I like the no-holds-barred reviews in The Journal of Military History? Well, it turns out that not everyone agrees — especially some of those getting reviewed.
Remember last month I said how much I like the no-holds-barred reviews in the Journal of Military History? Well, it turns out that not everyone agrees — especially some of those getting reviewed.
In the October issue, Edward Erickson takes some exception to two reviews of his book on how the Ottomans carried out the Armenian genocide.
“Imagine my shock when I found myself libeled as an apologist for the Armenian genocide,” he begins.
One reviewer, he adds, “misses the point of my argument.” He found the review contained “condescending and virulent ad hominem attacks.” He calls this “personal mud-slinging.” He ends where he begins, alleging that he is a victim of “libel and defamation.”
He sounds pissed.
Image credit: Flickr
1Poland's Misunderstood Holocaust Law 2 Shares
2It’s Never Been a Better Time to Study IR 3062 Shares
4Give North Korea All the Prestige It Wants 221 Shares
6Germany’s Post-Merkel Power Fraus 34 Shares
8Italy Is the West's Future 530 Shares
9I Knew the Cold War. This Is No Cold War. 2102 Shares