Your latest link makes the point perfectly
Your evidence, such as it is, is based on the satements of historians a century after the event.
You have dismissed contemporary accounts as "lies", "revisionism" and "romanticism" - all directed at those who actually experienced the war - they were there and they experienced the events.
Dr Dan Todman is a Sandhurst graduate presenting the official army line on warfare a century after the event - on what gounds should we accept his word over those who were there - he is military mouthpiece - read his credentials.
He would say what he says, wouldn't he?
"There were as many reasons for joining as there were men who joined, including all your 14."
Please stop lying - you have dismissed them all
First you accused me of inventing them, then you said they were random opinions not given by official (read "carefully selected")historians
You are suck-holing up to the establishment again Keith - it's the only thing you are consistent about.
Now where are those statements about why soldiers joined?
You are a joke.