Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa
What's a better and more accurate way of writing history?
1. Interviewing the architects and builders of the ancient Egyptian pyramids while they are being constructed?
2. Using educated guesses 2000 years later?
|
The blog says that 98.2% reported as a failure, but isn't it more likely that 98.2% said it was premature to discuss the result while not all the relevant facts are in.
Even if they said it was a failure, I'm not sure I even understand the question. Was there a time line Bush committed to and failed? The answer is no. What criteria defines success and does not allow for a "work in progress?" I guess set-backs and unforeseen challenges equate to failure. Is it so unreasonable to suggest historians wait to see the end?
Wouldn't it be better still to have the real information to draw upon? The classified information takes 50 years before it is available. By that time at least the dust on this era will have settled.
__________________
My uncle has a country place, that no one knows about. He said it used to be a farm, before the motor law.
'72 911T 2,2S motor
'76 BMW 2002
Last edited by 72doug2,2S; 04-16-2008 at 06:42 AM..
|