GUEST - 24 Dec 15 - 10:49 AM

Defence of the people seems to have meant sending them over the top in waves followed by rounding up those traumatised by the experience and sentencing them to death.

Teribus stated in some of his random keystrokes that those who wrote about the war first off were the revisionists and his Johnny Come Lately establishment apologists aren't revisionists, but err.. are revising....

Ehmmm GUEST - Do you have problems with reading and understanding the English language? As you certainly appear to I will say it again as clearly as I possibly can.

Three "sets" of writers have written about the "Great War":

1: Those who fought and/or lived through it, who because of the timing could only really write about their own personal experiences, as in 1918 a whole host of documents were still classified. They would also have no knowledge at all of the war from "foreign" perspectives.

2: Those who wrote about the war after the death of Earl Haig - these writers followed their own agendas to besmirch the name of the man who when all said and done took over a tiny army in 1915 which had suffered terribly incorporated into it Britain's first ever citizen army and with it took on and defeated what was considered to be the best army in the world at that time. He did so by introducing new tactics made possible by innovation and a readiness to accept new and revolutionary ideas and put them into practice. His main detractors waited until after his death so that he would be unable to defend his name and reputation and to blow a smokescreen over their culpability in mistakes that they had made. Those who wrote about the Great War between 1929 and 1969 "revised" what had been written by those described in 1 above so they were referred to as "The Revisionists", they too wrote without the benefit of classified government documents and a lack of access to foreign material which only started to become available in the 1970s - So are we perfectly clear who I am referring to as "The Revisionists"? - one of them nameless GUEST, Alan Clark, even admitted years after the publication of his book "The Donkeys" that he just simply made stuff up to ensure that the book was controversial so that it would make him money.

3: Those who wrote about the Great War in the period 1970 to the present day who have had access to documentation both foreign and domestic that neither of the other groups has had, and guess what nameless GUEST they, with the aid of all that material had disproved and discredited much of what was written by The Revisionists and Keith A is perfectly correct when he states that so far on this forum in discussions relating to the First World War nobody has been able to come up with any historian who can counter what todays historians have said on the subject.

Out of an army of ~5,300,000 around 266 were executed for desertion care to work out what they represent as a percentage? Pretty minimal I would say, but there again up until know you have never let FACT, KNOWLEDGE OR PERSPECTIVE interfere with you "revisionist" drivel.