"Todman has no military background, except that he taught History at Sandhurst for a time."
That's what I said - an establishment historian - you don't get a job at Sandhurst unless you toe the official line - 'a pair of safe hands' as they say.
"You accept they know more than you, so stop denying them."
Denying who - like you, I have not read their books - I am nothing, just asking for proof as to why I should abandon what I believe to be true on the basis of what you have offered so far - precisely nothing.
Lets see what we've got.
We are told (not asked - "stop denying them") that we should abandon everything we know or have been told on the basis of a group of 'historians' none of us have read who are reiterating a line abandoned generally half a century ago.
On this basis we are asked to join you (and them) in calling the soldiers who come up with accounts which contradict these 'historians' "liars" and dismiss writers, historians and some of England's finest poets who were either contemporaries of or extremely close to the events under the discussion - many of them actually participated in the events.
The basis of your argument is not that you have read these (revisionist - go and look up the term before you use it again) accounts and accepted their arguments, but simply that they are "historians".
You carefully select these 'historians' because they seem to bear out your jingoism, and you carefully choose the bits that seem to suit your arguments
Nowhere have you presented a modicum of proof as to the correctness of their arguments - NOWHERE - we have to take their words and your distortions completely on trust.
I cannot begin to imagine anything more mindless than the way you have interminably presented your case here.
BELIEVE THEM BECAUSE YOU CLAIM THEY ARE HISTORIANS AND REJECT ALL OTHERS BECAUSE THEY ARE FALSE - REVISIONIST - ROMANTIC - LYING, ANTI-ESTABLISHMERNT MORONS
Are you totally out of your mind?
Where are the statements - where is your/their evidence - why should veterans like Sassoon go around poisoning the minds of children with romantic lies, why should soldiers like Tommy Kenny and Patrick Magill lie about their experiences - how could the history books, the schools, the writers, the social historians, and those simply interested in the subject got away with peddling all these lies for so long?
Why the **** should we reject everything we know on the basis of a few new kids on the block without actually knowing what they have to say?
Jim Carroll