"ten million young soldiers and eight million civilian deaths (1.92% of the total population of those involved) all over a family squabble for land."

Ehmmm Jom I asked for examples where as you claim "historians" made moral judgements? That above is a quote from Jom isn't it. Leaving me to draw the conclusion that "historians" do not make moral judgements but Jom does and then attempts to attribute them to "historians" - i.e more Made Up Shit.

"THe Soviet Union and Britain were allies in the war - Britain did not come to its assistance"

Belgium and Britain were allies in the both the First and Second World Wars - As for Britain not coming to the assistance of the Soviet Union? - Could you explain Jom old son how Soviet losses of thousands of tanks and aircraft during the summer and autumn of 1941 along with the loss of hundreds of thousands of men could be made good to such an extent that 75% of the Soviet armour that faced Hitlers forces as they stood outside Moscow was British? If that isn't assistance I do not know what is. Perhaps you could also explain what it was that all those Arctic Convoys carried to Murmansk and Archangel - each convoy carried enough in terms of arms, equipment, explosives and raw materials to equip an army of 50,000 men? If that is not assistance I do not know what is. The Soviets recognised the contribution but Jom doesn't.

Oh Jom there was never going to be conscription in Ireland - the rumour that it was going to be introduced was one of the many lies Pearse told the volunteers in order to trick them into taking up arms in 1916 and sending them off to certain defeat and possible death - what was it he said? The cause needed a blood sacrifice or something to that effect.

Ah Musktwat - The vote tomorrow on Syria will in all probability vote that action should be taken now that Corbyn has been forced by his own Shadow Cabinet to allow a free vote, the four replacement submarines to replace our existing SSBNs will be built and work to extend the operational life of the Trident II D-5 missiles until 2040 will go ahead.

Care to give any examples of people on this thread gloryfying anything - I honestly do not think we'll hear anything on that from Musktwat.

"Military techniques and equipment mean three fifths of fuck all in today's issues."

If you are looking at Ukraine and the situation in IS held parts of Syria and Iraq those issues very much count on military techniques and equipment - unless of course, you Musktwat are going to bore them into submission. Besides what we are discussing here and what you keep butting into albeit against your better judgement (Primarily as every time you do you make a complete and utter TC of yourself) is the First World War - nothing whatsoever to do with today's issues.

On one side we have people trying to defend a load of myths, half-truths and lies and on the other side people providing substantive fact and detail that destroys those myths, half-truths and lies.

The following statements relating to Great Britain's participation in the First World War are 100% correct:

1: For Great Britain the was was one of necessity not choice.
2: That the population of Great Britain understood why the nation had to go war and for the entire period of the war they supported the Governments decision.
3: That in general (i.e. overall) compared to the armies of the other combatant nations of 1914 the British Army was well led.

All the facts currently known based on what we do know about that conflict now support those conclusions and not one single thing that has been stated on this thread or in any of the other WWI threads can alter that.