BS: Jingoism or Commemoration

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 11:00 AM

Very good, Keith. You are getting the knack of the difference between theory and fact. Trouble is with your example is that the world of swans has, I think, been fully explored. All the histories of WW1 written recently have not been, Well, not by you, me or anyone here at any rate.

Teribums. I think if anyone was to look back through the thread they would see who is doing most of the the abusing. There is also the fact that it was Keith that said that all historians agree etc. It is therefore up to Keith to prove his claim, not for someone to disprove it.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:48 AM

For the record, I agree with the first, and whether something was written 20, 50 or 100 years ago has no bearing on its validity.

A statement of astonishing ignorance!
Knowledge increases.
Understanding moves on.

On the issues we have discussed there is now a consensus.
All the history books say the same thing.
To challenge that, all you have to is produce one that differs.
Until you can, there is nothing to discuss.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:19 AM

"What's the criteria"

Silly question Raggy the criteria has been given often enough - only thing is none of you are prepared to accept that if you want an accurate and comprehensive view of the period in question you read the works of an historian who has specialised in that period ( It is roughly the same as if you want a complex fault fixed on your central heating you go to a specialist to sort it out - you don't go to the village handyman). So far none of those you and your pals have put forward meet the criteria - go away and find someone who has specialised in the period and subject of the First World War who subscribe to your tired, cliched, and disproven beliefs - you've been asked it often enough all you lot have to do is come up with one name.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:13 AM

This thread has only been going since November 10th, so its unlikely that it has wasted three years of anybody's time. Also, does nobody else see inconsistency in the following statements (from the same post):

"History is based on hard facts and knowledge."

"I have only ever claimed that consensus for the last twenty years.
Anything older is irrelevant to anything I have ever claimed, so why mention it?"

For the record, I agree with the first, and whether something was written 20, 50 or 100 years ago has no bearing on its validity.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:11 AM

Go back and check who it was that introduced the "It Ain't Half Hot Mum" theme to the discussion GUEST - 14 Dec 15 - 07:05 AM.

Simple rule in throwing invective around on this forum nameless GHOST if you can't take it then don't start it. I will treat anyone as respectfully as they threat me.

But that is the thing I found out about bullies and I learned it at a very early age - they don't like being hit back and complain loudly when they are. After making idiotic statements the Joms, Musktwats, Raggy, the Daves all they have left to resort to are personal attacks and made up shit, don't really object to any of that as it illustrates to everyone what complete and utter prats they actually are.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:08 AM

If history is based on hard facts and knowledge, why do the commentators disagree and present alternatives?

Keith's little list isn't consistent, so such a naive statement is rather concerning really.

I'm sure if they knew people of such dismal intelligence were to read their book in the same silly way they read the bible, they'd write differently.

Talk about a little knowledge being dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 10:07 AM

Shows how much you know Keith:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/ait/ait08.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:54 AM

Me,
"There are no red swans."

Dave the Gnome,
"How many swans exist? Have you seen them all? Just because no-one has ever seen one...."

There are no red swans Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:48 AM

Not QED Greg.
You have demonstrated nothing.

I have never claimed any consensus until about twenty years ago.
That is not a spurious reason for rejecting shit older than that.
I have always acknowledged that some historians used to believe it.
You have just demonstrated what I had acknowledged anyway from the start of all this.

Dave, I do not know or care how much stuff has been written, just that none of it contradicts my expressed views.
That is why none of you have found anything in three years of this one sided debate.

Unless and until one of you does find something, which you won't, STOP WASTING OUR TIME!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:45 AM

At the risk of repeating myself, just how much of what has been written in the last 20 years have you read? If I remember rightly you do not even know how much has been written in the last 20 years so how do you know it ALL supports you?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:40 AM

Me.
"Nothing written in the last twenty years supports your views."

Dave,
"Here is something written fifty years ago that does."

So what Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:39 AM

Q.E.D.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:37 AM

History is based on hard facts and knowledge.
It has nothing to do with fashion, being trendy, or protecting long dead people.

It used to be possible to make something of a case for what you believe, and a few did.
Current historians have all the knowledge available to them, plus a lot more that has become available since.
It has led to that rare thing, a consensus, at least on the issues we have discussed.

I have only ever claimed that consensus for the last twenty years.
Anything older is irrelevant to anything I have ever claimed, so why mention it?

So, can you produce anything written in recent times?
No.
I can. Lots.

Unless and until you can find one single historian who still believes that old debunked shit you cling to, STOP WASTING OUR TIME!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 09:24 AM

What's the criteria you may ask ............. hmmmmm ........ don't really know...

Keith has explained the criteria at some length: not dead, "mainstream", books available in regular bookshops, work for the tabloid press, only English-speaking need apply, pick their noses with the left hand & etc & etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 08:47 AM

That's because they don't fit the "criteria"

What's the criteria you may ask ............. hmmmmm ........ don't really know because it changes on a regular basis and is known only to the select, nay chosen, few.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 08:20 AM

So Mayer and Schroeder don't make the grade, but Max Hastings does??? Dear oh dear.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 07:45 AM

Dave,
There are plenty of current historians who do not agree with the Keith/Teribus/HiLo assessment.

We all know there used to be some historians who used to believe those now debunked myths.
That is why I always refer to everything written in the last twenty years. Neither of your two have written anything on WW1 in that time.
Older than that hardly counts as "current" Dave!

No historian still believes those old discredited myths you cling to.
Unless and until you find one, please stop wasting our time.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 07:29 AM

Still awaiting the evidence of my posting nonsense about history, HiLo. Are you too busy giving out the personal abuse that you are so against? As to "I shall leave you all to it". Well, many others have said the same before. I suspect you will not keep your promise either :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 07:18 AM

For God sake guest , have you not read the thread at all? As for Raggy, same old nonsense.
In any case , I shall leave you all to it, you can,t educate pork.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 07:11 AM

So yet again one, nay two, historians bite the dust.




And another one's gone
another one's gone
another one bites the dust


I'll have to stick to reading The Good Soldier (The Biography of Douglas Haig) by Gary Mead.


Interesting viewpoint to kick it all off though. Its entitled "THE" biography not "A" biography.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 07:05 AM

"Keith and Teribus presented facts"

Anything to back that assertion up other than the views they quote agreeing with your prejudice HiLo?

Even they occasionally concede that history narrative concludes with an opinion assessing the evidence.

Very occasionally.

When taken off guard.

I love the bit above where Teribus accuses Dave the Gnome of personal attacks and then immediately calls him Lofty!
😆

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 06:58 AM

I did not comment on jingoism or commemoration simply because I had not seen the programme that prompted that debate. Thread creep took the conversation in two other directions....... 1) tithe reliability of historians. A grossly misinformed person made the erroneous and sweeping statement that historians did not do their homework..the second path the debate took was on specific facts regarding the first war wherein both Keith and Teribus presented facts.
My first posting on this thread came well after the jingo and commem. Theme had been left. My responses have been largely to do with the defence of historians against the suggestion that they are all hacks.
I did observe on several occasions that teribus knew his history and went rings around some very very stupid arguments. One would not have to be genius to see which side of the debate presented facts and which side not. simple really.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 06:56 AM

Whereas you and your mates have contributed what Raggy?

GUEST Dave Mayer and Schroeder!!!! Is that who you come up with? The former a Marxist Historian who believed that Britain in 1914 was on the verge of a revolution and civil war (I'd like to see his proof of any evidence for making that assumption) and the latter who blamed the war on Great Britain Not taking the Austro-Hungarian Empire seriously enough - How bloody idiotic can you get?

"Churchill and Lloyd George were of course part of the ego-driven political class of the time, for whom the need was to whitewash their own past."

Very true GUEST Dave - yet those are the men who sought for the very motives you detail to blacken the name of a man who could not defend himself - they rather cowardly waited until after Haig died to come out with their "Butcher of the Somme" label that you and your pals latch onto and give credence to.

There are plenty of current historians who do not agree with the Keith/Teribus/HiLo assessment.

Please name them - Mayer and Schroeder don't make the grade, neither have specialised in the history of the First World War, Mayer in particular seems to come from a starting point located and fixed somewhere in cloud cuckoo-land.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 06:37 AM

Funnily enough, I thought this section of the Mudcat was called BS because it was for, well, BS... Where else would bullshit belong? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 06:24 AM

"Perhaps it is time for this bullshit to be put where it belongs and allow people to have rational discourse!"

Interesting point coming from your posts Hilo. You have now posted 33 times to this thread and have added nil to the debate on either jingoism or commemoration and the same amount about WW1 in general.

Just pointing that out.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 06:17 AM

Churchill and Lloyd George were of course part of the ego-driven political class of the time, for whom the need was to whitewash their own past. There are plenty of current historians who do not agree with the Keith/Teribus/HiLo assessment. Mayer and Schroeder, whose political views are at opposite ends of the spectrum, are examples.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 05:13 AM

Teribums - Is that really the best you have got; imitating my ideas? Tsk, tsk. 0/10 for effort.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 05:09 AM

you post nonsense about history

I haven't posted anything about history, HiLo. You really need to do some research before you make (more of) a fool of yourself. I suggested you provided evidence last time. You still have not done so.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:38 AM

People make personal attacks because they know you are a pompous ass.

A bit rich coming from you Lofty.

GUEST,Dave - PM
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:05 AM

The reason that more recent histories are kinder to the perpetrators if WWI is that those writing them are too young to have heard many first hand accounts of its horrors. They may have read war diaries, but largely not these either. Also, the point raised by Guest is pertinant, there is a conscious effort by modern politicians, and Gove is but one, to whitewash the past in order to strengthen their justification for repeating its mistakes."

GUEST Dave, the one who appears to know nothing, historians who have made it their life's work and their specialisation in studying the period in question know a great deal more about it than either yourself, your pals, and Eric Bogle. They have had access both written and oral to a vast amount of material that is only accessible to accredited historians undertaking research - don't dismiss it so lightly.

Can either you or nameless GHOST (He/She of the pertinant (sic) point) provide any sane, reasonable or logical explanation for there being any need to whitewash the past? I can tell you very very plainly and simply why the likes of David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill wrote what they did during the revisionist period.

On your quote from Bogle's "No Mans Land", these two snatches from by Stephen L. Suffet's "Willie McBride's Reply" are more accurate than Eric Bogle's "No Mans Land"

1: "Ask the people of Belgium or Alsace-Lorraine,
If my life was wasted, If I died in vain,
I think they will tell you when all's said and done,
They welcomed this boy with his tin hat and gun.


2: It's easy for you to look back and sigh,
And pity the youth of those days long gone by,
For us who were there, we all knew why we died,
And I'd do it again, says young Willie McBride"

If you've got a month I'll go through the glaring inaccuracies and errors contained in Bogle's "No Mans Land" and "The Band Played Waltzing Matilda".

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,HILo
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:37 AM

Just let me get this straight mr gnome....... You are clearly ignorant on the subject of history, you post nonsense about history and yet Keith is the pompous ass... And furthermore he is worthy of contempt because he knows more than you do. Have I got this mr gnome?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:20 AM

All you people can do is make personal attacks because none of you know anything.

Not at all true, Keith. People make personal attacks because they know you are a pompous ass.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:10 AM

Dave, the brand new purpose built Hertford library is magnificent! You should pay a visit.
There are two other library branches within 3 miles (Ware and Hoddesdon) and for 60p I can ask for any book held in any library in Hertfordshire to be delivered within two working days.

What a nasty, pathetic attempt to denigrate me Dave.
All you people can do is make personal attacks because none of you know anything.
You have the conceit to believe the history books are wrong and you are right.
~Ignorant fools.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:06 AM

"Meanwhile, on this thread.. Teribus reckons that the early accounts, fresh and by many caught up in the war are all lies and only the more recent ones are accurate. "

More lies, more misrepresentation.

The early accounts, written by those who actually took part I have described as being personal memoirs and as such they are factual accounts of personal experiences and are totally one-sided, giving only snap-shots of what was going on. The writers of those memoirs had no access to material that was classified and would remain secret for 50, 60, 70 and 100 years, they had no idea of what drove events from the point of view of their own side let alone what drove them from the perspectives of their French allies and the German enemy.

Jom and Musktwat then invented atrocity stories and made extremely serious allegations against those in command of the British Army, first it was the Military Police and then it was officers who were ordered to summarily execute British Soldiers for not getting out of their trenches quickly enough, then according to Musktwat it was a crowd that he laughlingly referred to as "The REDTOPS" what did it, then Jom's "Special Groups of Military Police" whot dun it. Oddly enough to substantiate this all they (specifically Jom) can offer up are verbal accounts by two veterans - one of whom was definitely a veteran but who contradicted what he said he saw, and another who Jom did not not even verify and satisfy himself that he even ever served in the Army at all. Having made the allegations and presented them as indisputable fact on this forum, I spent a great deal of time researching for ANY evidence of it - I FOUND NOTHING. So are all those accounts "written by those who actually took part" in the immediate aftermath of the war all wrong? Are they all liars? You see GHOST in all those memoirs there are no accounts of any such summary executions - And before you quote Harry Patch at me remember his recollections, far from being "fresh", were given to the BBC when Harry was over 100 years old - nearly 80 years after the event.

If you do not find it strange that men of a particular platoon did not know each others names - I DO. If you do not find it strange that men of a particular platoon did not know the names of the officers and NCOs that they would have to report to every single day - THEN I DO. If you do not find it strange that those giving accounts of such summary executions cannot name a single victim or the name of a single officer who was supposed to have carried out such an execution - I DO. If you can look at a picture of a front line trench (Make sure you are looking at the trench from which attacks are mounted) and tell me where there was room for a line of Military Policemen, or indeed ANYBODY, to position themselves behind those about to go over the top then you will have found a rather unique photograph. Keith A and myself are accused of always slavishly accepting the side of the establishment, well it would appear from the above that while you are prepared to accept any cock-and-bull story because it feeds your prejudices and bias, Keith A and myself challenge stories told to us and demand proof - proof which so far has yet to be offered.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 04:05 AM

The reason that more recent histories are kinder to the perpetrators if WWI is that those writing them are too young to have heard many first hand accounts of its horrors. They may have read war diaries, but largely not these either. Also, the point raised by Guest is pertinant, there is a conscious effort by modern politicians, and Gove is but one, to whitewash the past in order to strengthen their justification for repeating its mistakes. Eric Bogle summed it in the verse, disgracefully omitted by Joss Stone and the British Legion in their sanitised version of No Mans Land:

"And I can't help but wonder, now Willie Mcbride,
Do all those who lie here know why they died?
Did you really believe them when they told you 'The Cause? '
Did you really believe that this war would end wars?
Well the suffering, the sorrow, the glory, the shame
The killing, the dying, it was all done in vain,
For Willie McBride, it all happened again,
And again, and again, and again, and again."

Killing and Dying will always be done in vain whilst the outcomes are dictated by the egos of politicians. Modern Historians are just their useful idiots.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 03:53 AM

That's tragic! I bet Keith hadn't coloured them all in yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 03:51 AM

HiLo has a rather interesting debating style, when he/she is faced with a point they cannot answer, they post a couple of sentences of invective against their questioner, followed by "I hate bullies".

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 03:47 AM

If Keith only reads books available in Hertford Library his choice will be pretty limited since it abandoned its rather splendid premises that I (and no doubt he) spent many hours in and moved into a rented broom cupboard in Maidenhead Street.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 03:08 AM

I would not say 'used to those' HiLo as it only happens on here. I would say that I could not give a shit what certain people on here say about me as it is obviously a load of bollocks. I would also suggest you look back over the thread for evidence that I insist I am right on something I know nothing about. It has never happened and it never will so your comments puts you as close to the load of bollocks category as those others. Are you going to provide that evidence? I am pretty sure I know the answer :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 15 - 03:05 AM

Rational discourse?

This coming from someone who thinks Teribus is right when he says only recently written historical accounts are historical and anything written before is revisionist. He can't even grasp the meaning of words in plain English, and that's before you analyse the absurd fantasy he promotes.

Presumably you also defend Keith's provisos, added to whenever his silly make believe is found out. Let's see now.. Historians have to be living as of today's date, published somewhere or other in the last twenty years, their books available in Hertford library, oh, they have to be eminent too. Last and most certainly least, they have to support the political stance dreamed up by Michael Gove who, when education secretary decreed that WW1 history should be about success, victory and what a smashing bunch of people the military top brass are and were.

Everybody on here questioning that abomination merely remind us that the graves are the elephant in the room. That the stratified society 100 years ago had a very different take on soldier welfare and that duty and jingoism were the driving factors, not agreeing with the factors that made up the diplomatic mess Europe found itself in.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Hiloo
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 06:51 PM

Well, guest, you are a perfect example of my point. As to comments about Dave theGnome, he has admitted to little knowledge of the subject but insists on dozens of posts that he is right! How is that defensible ? As for personal "despicable" comments, well, I am sure that DtheG is used to those.
No one has attempted to smear Muskket. He just insists on setting himself up for ridicule then cries foul when it happens ! I hate bullies and he is one, thrives on ignorance, his own , and bellows when shown to be lacking in knowledge. He is not alone here. Perhaps it is time for this bullshit to be put where it belongs and allow people to have rational discourse!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 06:08 PM

I dislike bullies too.

Musket can defend himself but a swift butchers at the Onward Christian Soldiers thread shows Keith's appalling attempts to smear Musket.

Meanwhile, on this thread.. Teribus reckons that the early accounts, fresh and by many caught up in the war are all lies and only the more recent ones are accurate.

Oh, and Teribus's despicable personal comments aimed at Dave the Gnome above are beneath contempt.

They cannot argue with reality, and HiLo can't credibly defend their preposterous stance.

Donkey meat anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 05:16 PM

And where Oh GHOST has anybody ever denied that millions were killed - I believe that everyone has belaboured the point. Even to the point of noting that according to all records that those who fought under Haig tended to die less frequently than their counterparts in the French or German armies fighting on the western front.

Well said GUEST,HiLo - 13 Dec 15 - 04:35 PM I share your dislike of bullies and it was the mobbing of Keith A on a WWI thread about two years ago that drew me into all this.

Ah my barely passable, shorter, fatter, balder "Lofty" Gnome the only other cross you have to bear of course is that, unlike you, Don Estelle could sing.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:52 PM

BTW - Did you know that quote is attributed to Oscar Wilde and the full version is "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness". Too true...

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:45 PM

Still using my ideas then, teribums? Ah well, they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Thank you :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:35 PM

Guest. Kieth is not saying anything contrary to what happened.e is presenting a point of view taken by modern historians. I am both disagreeing AND castigating Musket. He has presented NO historical perspective and he appears to be bereft of any historical knowledge. He and some others here, who admit to knowing n history, go on and on in these threads about how Keith knows nothing. Not so, he does know things about history, far more than some of his detractors. So why this bullying and , frankly, quite ugly, attacks on someone who quite a lot on the subject ?

This is not about Keith at all. This is about people who , in spite of ignorance of the subject at hand, insist on denigrating people who clearly know more than they do.
I dislike bullies and I find that there are a few here who just don't admit to being misinformed. And hence, attack those who are informed.

Muskets stance is not that of an informed person, and he is not alone in this, it is the stances of someone who refuses to consider an alternative view.
Muskets position, as you call it, has nothing to do with history and everything to do with " I know nothing, but I am right. That is what is so galling about this constant bullying.
I would not suggest that soldiers are liars, nor has Keith ever suggested they were, however, first hand accounts are sometimes not as accurate as they could be.
Good history is based on meticulous research, not on disagreeing with Keith because you don`t like him.

   As an historian I do not always agree with Keith, but his facts are solid. Those who are underinformed ought to read more and shout less.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:32 PM

By the way GUEST - 13 Dec 15 - 03:03 PM perhaps you should get your terminology right with regard to who wrote what about the First World War and when it was they wrote it:

The Revisionists wrote their works between 1929 and 1969 and what they wrote contradicted the works written immediately after the war. It is those works that fostered the myths, lies and misrepresentations believed wholeheartedly by Jom, Musktwat, et al.

The "Historians" wrote their works after 1970 and have used information not available to The Revisionists to disprove and discredit the works published by them and the conclusions drawn by them. The work of the these writers is believed to present a fuller and more accurate picture of the period and the events, by the likes of Keith A and myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:29 PM

Are the soldiers there liars or are trendy commentators defending the establishment liars?

The historians believe the words of the soldiers.
Words they left in tens of thousands of letters, journals and personal documents.
Words they wrote at the time.

Overwhelmingly, they knew and understood what they were fighting for, and they believed it the right thing to do.

The "establishment" of 1914-18 are long dead and no-one feels the need to defend them, trendy or otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 04:16 PM

Quite simple. Millions of men were killed.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 03:54 PM

"Keith A of Hertford is saying something contrary to what happened"

Really GHOST - care to tell us all what that something is? - Somehow I don't think you will - Why do I think that? - Because you are just spouting meaningless drivel - like you always do - Now come on and confound and amaze us - It would make one hell of a change, a forum first in fact - But it ain't going to happen is it.

Oh Dear, How Sad, Never Mind.

PS: The Gnome would make an excellent "Lofty" - shorter, fatter, balder but still needs must when the devil drives.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 15 - 03:03 PM

Ate you disagreeing with Musket or castigating him?

To me, Keith A of Hertford is saying something contrary to what happened and Musket is saying his revision of history is a slur on the memory of fallen soldiers and debasing the principle of "lest we forget."

From Musket's position, Keith's stance is everything Musket says it is.

If Musket is wrong, then not so.

Who is right? Are the soldiers there liars or are trendy commentators defending the establishment liars?