"You can find no hjistorian who still believes that old shit you cling to."
You've been given them - even from your own unread historians - you ignore them - you are lying.
A historian is ot a god he/she provides to things - researched facts and opinions.
If the facts are well researched - they are unchangeable - without having read any historian, you have challenged enough of them (stupidly arrogant)
I have no problem with researched facts - I have a great problem with opinions - they are not the domain of historians - not their specialty.
The war was fought as one of attrition - throwing young men at each other until one or the other gave up.
Historians who say it was a well led war accept that this is a good, acceptable thing to do to use men as numerical cannon fodder are, in my mind wrong and by today's standard - wrong - it is both inhuman and immoral to treat young men that way, especially as they were given no choice in the matter.
No war is fought like that today - and claiming it was well led is applying a morality dating to the beginning of the twentieth century to today.
By today's standards it was wrong and utterly evil to sacrifice lives in that way.
Even by yesterday's standards, there were horrific undeniable cock ups which indicate it was poorly led - men being told the war was a forgone conclusion and being defeated in battles like Loos - the Gallipoli fiasco, the murderous miscalculation at the opening of the Somme offensive, wrong ammunition - and many others which led to the unnecessary slaughter of many young men.
That is not good leadership by any standards.
The same applies to the justification of the war.
The war was about controlling and retaining colonies - it was an Imperial war in name and nature - and it was WRONG - then and now and it is not the job of any historian to claim otherwise.
You have largely either lied or misquoted your historians - how could you do otherwise - you haven't read any of them - just selected the juicy bits.
That is an extremely stupid thing to do - both Hastings and Kineally blew up in your face, and the extent you were prepared to use two writers (one a historian proper - on a right wing tabloid journalist) has shown you to be stupid, dishonest and entirely lacking in humanity or morality.
You are a mess.
You will not respond to any of this in any depth - not your style, and you will continue to use historians whom you haven't read - to back views that have nothing whatever to do with history - most certainly your style.
Yours is an extremist, right-wing jingoist campaign - if you were interested in history, you would read it.
Jim Carroll