Missed this at the time. Belated thoughts: Hmm. I didn't address the point about primary sources because it didn't seem like the main point. Right after you br

Missed this at the time. Belated thoughts: Hmm. I didn't address the point about primary sources because it didn't seem like the main point. Right after you brought that issue up, the next sentence seemed to cast aside the importance of the issue: "Also what, exactly, would adding those [sources] change about his essential point..." I wasn't sure the key point, and the last sentence seemed to be the most likely crux of what you were saying, but maybe I misread. Maybe you're right about the sources, I can't claim to have looked for books or papers by ex Soviet soldiers. Although given how many Soviet soldiers there were, and given the USSR's incentives to highlight German brutality, are you sure on this score that there are not raw recollections of brutal war in USSR in ww2? Anyway, I think a piece by the same author without such a sweeping and judgmental title ("real" is a very loaded word in this context that, as I've said, I don't think is earned here) would work just as well.