Not content with reading what he wants to agree with him, he treats reviewers as gospel now. Is there no beginning to Keith's talents?

You quoted my argument perfectly you dozy twat.

1. Sheffield concedes his view is revisionist and people will vehemently disagree.

2. He regrets Blackadder didn't deal with the victory. Or put another way, out of a four year war, he bases his overall opinion on the final months when the message had finally got to the generals that human waves were criminal needless loss of life. Not much to say about the rest of the war then.

3. He speaks of lack of means of communication in a war that was larger theatre than anything before, yet the decisions to push waves of men into no mans land was a decision by Haig. Full stop.

4. Saying they had learned over the time glosses over their atrocities in The Boer War. My digital picture frame in the study this morning was showing me staring at the war graves on the summit of Spion Kop when I visited it last year.


Oh, if you must quote the Nigel Jones review, try to include the bits where he seems to agree with my notes a couple of posts up....

Oh and current thinking isn't the kind airbrushed Hastings account, nor indeed Sheffield's make over of Haig. Just because you have read them, doesn't make them current thinking you silly little man. They were written to CHALLENGE current thinking.

And have largely failed.