Censoring Remarks?

We usually don’t place any restrictions on incoming remarks. So far, this has not been an issue except for one remark a while back that looked suspicious. Our commentators on this blog have always been very respectful. We received another comment the other day that seemed odd. It referenced a paper on Kursk by an author I was not familiar with. A quick glance at the paper clearly showed that this was a bizarre piece not worthy of further attention. So, do I post the remark and let each person make their decision on the referenced paper, or do I decide that this should get no more attention and not post the remark?

Let me quote the third paragraph from the paper which will show why I really don’t want to bring any attention to it:

“To support his enunciation, Kellerhoff quotes only one source – an obscure British historian Ben Wheatley, who allegedly found some obscure aerial photographs in American archives 75 years after the war. And those photographs, allegedly made by the Luftwaffe planes, are Kellerhoff’s only argument for what he called the “disastrous defeat of the Red Army at Prokhorovka.”

Now, I have not read the referenced article by Kellerhoff, but I am familiar with Dr. Wheatley’s work and have blogged about it before. I also went into those same photo files over a decade ago and there is a 32-page aerial photo section in my big Kursk book. He did not reference my work in his paper. I found out about these aerial photo files from John Sloan, a retired Sovietologist who runs the Xenophon Group (link is in our sidebar). So, these files are certainly not “allegedly found” and “allegedly made by Luftwaffe planes.” They are also not that “obscure” (nor is Dr. Wheatley). A couple of Italian Advanced Squad Leader module designers are currently developing their game map sheets from these Luftwaffe aerial photos. See: http://advancingfire.com/

The rest of the article is filled with similar crap. It was bad enough that if I posted it, then I would be obligated to immediately respond to it.  A point-by-point refutation of a ten-page paper would take a while. It sometimes takes more time to refute bad “research” then it takes for the author to make their claims. I do have better and more important, things to do with my time right now. Therefore, I decided not publish the remark and give the referenced article any visibility.

It does appear that the comment is from Russia or a Russian although they use a Chinese appearing name. We will, with some judiciousness, not publish remarks that are obviously deceptive, propaganda-like and based upon poor data. The one other such remark that we did not publish was similar.

This entry was posted in Eastern Front, Kursk, World War II by Christopher A. Lawrence. Bookmark the permalink.

About Christopher A. Lawrence

Christopher A. Lawrence is a professional historian and military analyst. He is the Executive Director and President of The Dupuy Institute, an organization dedicated to scholarly research and objective analysis of historical data related to armed conflict and the resolution of armed conflict. The Dupuy Institute provides independent, historically-based analyses of lessons learned from modern military experience. ... Mr. Lawrence was the program manager for the Ardennes Campaign Simulation Data Base, the Kursk Data Base, the Modern Insurgency Spread Sheets and for a number of other smaller combat data bases. He has participated in casualty estimation studies (including estimates for Bosnia and Iraq) and studies of air campaign modeling, enemy prisoner of war capture rates, medium weight armor, urban warfare, situational awareness, counterinsurgency and other subjects for the U.S. Army, the Defense Department, the Joint Staff and the U.S. Air Force. He has also directed a number of studies related to the military impact of banning antipersonnel mines for the Joint Staff, Los Alamos National Laboratories and the Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation. ... His published works include papers and monographs for the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the Vietnam Veterans of American Foundation, in addition to over 40 articles written for limited-distribution newsletters and over 60 analytical reports prepared for the Defense Department. He is the author of Kursk: The Battle of Prokhorovka (Aberdeen Books, Sheridan, CO., 2015), America’s Modern Wars: Understanding Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam (Casemate Publishers, Philadelphia & Oxford, 2015), War by Numbers: Understanding Conventional Combat (Potomac Books, Lincoln, NE., 2017) , The Battle of Prokhorovka (Stackpole Books, Guilford, CT., 2019), The Battle for Kyiv (Frontline Books, Yorkshire, UK, 2023), Aces at Kursk (Air World, Yorkshire, UK, 2024), Hunting Falcon: The Story of WWI German Ace Hans-Joachim Buddecke (Air World, Yorkshire, UK, 2024) and The Siege of Mariupol (Frontline Books, Yorkshire, UK, 2024). ... Mr. Lawrence lives in northern Virginia, near Washington, D.C., with his wife and son.

One thought on “Censoring Remarks?

  1. HI Chris,
    I see no reason for you to post eroneous stuff – there is too much of it on Internet already – Yes, I even delivered copies of some of those WWII German aerial photos to Russian historians during various trips to Russia and they were delighted to receive them. The photos are not ‘obscure’ for sure. And they show much more than WWII activities – some show archeological evidence going _in the case of Sevastopol – back to Greek times. Others, such as Narva and Smolensk are great views of Vauban style or earlier 16th century fortifications. The archive fee for reproduction is reasonable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *