Talk:John J. McCloy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
Contents |
[edit] A Complete Re-write Required and Underway
John J. McCloy -- love him or hate him -- was a larger than life figure in the workings of U.S. public policy from the 1930's to the 1970's. A prominent attorney, a federal official, a designated "wise-man" in the Cold War era, Wikipedia readers should expect a neutral, first class article about this man. The previous attempted to create a McCloy page seem to be related to editors interested in expressing a POV not about McCloy, but about many of the issues that he faced in his various rolls as a senior government advisor to Roosevelt, Stimson, Truman, etc. This is simply not appropriate for an encyclopedia article (but very appropriate for many other outlets.)
Since the earlier "firestorm" of 2006 on this article has seemed to pass, I'll be working in the sandbox to bring up an complete re-write, and I'll be interested in hearing from anyone who wants to assist in the initial work. There are many sections to write, and many original sources on line (including the Truman, LBJ, Kennedy Library oral history collections). Please let me know if you are interested. Sclarkson 12:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I simply want to support Sclarkson in the rewrite, but (at age 86-plus) I really can't contribute. I served as deputy G-1 of 4th Infantry Division in Frankfurt, Germany 1951-1952. I knew and appreciated McCloy as a public personality (HICOG -- High Commissioner for Germany) and believe that he is worthy of a good article here. CoppBob 15:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Massive Cleanup Needed
This article needs cleanup for style, citations, content, POV and more. Hopefully this can get on one of the "to be done" lists!
[edit] Further evidence of need for style and citations.
it was only yesterday (05/31/06) that I added information on McCloy's noxious role in preventing an allied air assult on Auschwitz. my sources are Martin Gilbert's 'Auschwiz and Allies" and Stuart Erdheim's article "could the Allies have bombed Auschwitz?". my input, desparately needed given the previously sanitised treatment of the touchy matter, was deleted.
my "editor" did not even deem fit to explain his reasons, though they appear to me as self-evident as they are contemptible. unless he/she or others can in some way challenge the veracity
of my information-they cannot, of course- they must rfrain from such cowardly vandalism.
Present-day Americans may be uncomfortable with their country's occasionally dubious role during WW2 and its immediate aftermath, being satisfied with a cartoonishly oversimplistic image of snow white heroic idealism, but the truth must and will be revealed
PBS's page on the story (see external links) seems to provide a fairly good synopsis of the disputed points. Phrases like "A downright lie" certainly don't belong on Wikipedia as NPOV. And while his role in preventing the bombing of Auschwitz (or at least not endorsing it) seems fairly well-established, the basis for that is largely on the bombing of nearby industrial centers, not on the allocation of different types of bombers. Deusnoctum 23:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "a downright lie" cannot be dismissed as a "point of view" for the simple reason that it is an unquestionably correct and accurate depiction of McCloy's statement that the British had the final word in determining bombing targets, indeed it was an outrageous lie. as for your, (deustnoctum's), second obgection. perhaps it is only a matter of a trainwrecked choice of words but it strikes me as meaningless gibberish.
[edit] Risible article
As of 28.06, the text of this ostensible article on McCloy falls so far short of giving an apologia, let alone a critical analysis, of his multi-faceted life as to be utterly risible. Readers are thus referred to Kai Bird`s recent biography of him. In closing: since the post-1977 abuse by Likud for Israeli state purposes of the memory of the Holocaust (the TV series of that name and thus the designation "holocaust" for the great extermination date only from 1979), events of WW2 have been interpreted as if owned by the PR section of AIPAC. This may play well in the USA for electoral lobby reaons, but not elsewhere. --62.134.80.68 12:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Quite why the previous logger deemmed fit to jetision his anti-Israeli venom in this forum
of all is inexplicable-without recourse to psychopathology, that is. his writing suggests a disordered mind but it may simply be that he is catastrophically unintelligent. in any event the term "holocaust" originaed in wartime USA. In the much maligned Israel the genocide in question is known simply as SHOA which translates simply "catastrophe". so please no more semitic conspiracies with or without benighted israel bashing
[edit] NPOV, factual accuracy/sourcing
By itself, McCloy's letter is not self-contradictory. He says that only some (i.e., heavy) bombers could reach Auschwitz, and that those (relatively) few bombers that could were needed elsewhere. Whether the latter statement was, in fact, true is another matter, and based on the documents available (see PBS links at bottom) it seems quite likely that they are not. However, viewed by itself his letter is logically consistent. Also, this is meant to be an encyclopedia, saying that bombing the labor camp would be "a drop in the ocean" is stylistically bad, and does not reflect a neutral POV (likewise, calling Roosevelt's record "deplorable"). Finally, I was able to find no information about Nahum Goldman making a request specifically to McCloy to bomb Auschwitz, or about McCloy saying that targeting was a British responsibility, which is why I initially removed those statements. If you can find sources for them, please list them. Deusnoctum 17:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
the information about nahum goldman's interview with mccloy is in Martin Gilbert's 'Auschwitz and the Allies' page 321 in the paper back edition. and what about the repeated delitions of the references to McCloy's indiscriminate whitewashing of nazi crimes and its substitution with the inane reference to McCloy's "somewhat controversial" release of Alfried krupp. aside from the fact that Krupp's release was not so much controversial as indefensible as McCloy was forced to concede in an interview with William Manchester (the Arms of Krupp if you're curious). Krupp beastly as he was, was a drop in the ocean beside the great and vicious horde of McCloy's prison break. so please overcome your deletionitis if not the admiration for McCloy whence it stemmes, and let us have some truth in this article.
[edit] Mediation
Please can the Deusnoctum (talk · contribs) and the anonymous user kindly comment at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-20 John J. McCloy, a case sumbitted by Deusnoctum which I shall mediate if both parties agree. Also, can I kindly ask the anonymous user to create an account, to make this whole process easier? Computerjoe's talk 18:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 3rd opinion
I saw this on the 3rd opinion page, but now I see a mediation case... but the mediation case is older than the 3rd opinion request. What's going on? Is a third opinion needed? Is this the same dispute that lead to the mediation? Has the mediation case been resolved? Some clarification would be appreciated. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 16:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the mediation was closed because they had not tried other ways to resolve the dispute first. Both parties should remember that Wikipedia is interested in Verifiability, not Truth. Any statements without specific citations and sources must be removed. --Hetar 19:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Appearently it is you (Hetar) who deleted my contributions concerned with McCloy's false statement to Goldman and the frequent low casualties air raids conduced while McCloy was claiming the bombing of Auschwitz "Impracticable" on the ground that it was not supportwd by sources. my sources are Martin Gilbert's Auschwitz And The Allies (as noted above inthe talkpage) and Stuart Erdheim's Could The Allies Have Bombed Auschwitz and an interview with michae Beschloss wherein he reported McCloy's claim that Roosevelt ordered that Auschwitz Is not to be bombed. I have reinstated this statements.
Roosevelt - any links to FDRs less than enthusiastic response to the holocaust? I had assumed this from other behavior but have never seen a primary source. Thanks159.105.80.141 15:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Word choice
"in 1919, and then received an LL.B. from Harvard Law School in 1921" -- Delete "then," since (1) it's unnecessary, and (2) it's inaccurate: it wasn't "then" (1919) that he "received an LL.B."
"McCloy was a crucial voice in setting U.S. military priorities" -- McCloy's voice was a voice, but he himself was a person. Say either that he _had_ a voice or that _he_ was crucial.
"throughout late 1944" -- To say that something occurred "throughout late 1944" seems to me to imply that it had a precise beginning, which I doubt is intended.
"Nazi prisoners" -- This seems to refer to prisoners of the Nazis, but "prisoners who are Nazis" is the more natural interpretation.
"camp-and" -- The hyphen should be replaced by a dash.
"Roosevelt's generally unsympathetic response to the Holocaust" -- If Roosevelt were unsympathetic to the Holocaust, he would have wanted to stop it. How does that explain his reluctance to bomb Auschwitz? —Preceding unsigned comment added by D021317c (talk • contribs) 18:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
