The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #133984 Message #3589955
Posted By: GUEST,Musket
08-Jan-14 - 04:50 AM
Thread Name: BS: Christmas Truce (1914)
Subject: RE: BS: Christmas Truce (1914)
The real me is dismayed that these debates fall to this level, and I am guilty of exacerbating it, but being polite whilst doling it out doesn't make it any less abusive. To be honest, I still see my posts as a reaction, not a starting point.
Your attachment to a selected number of sources and proclaiming that any debate has to take them as read is not encouraging debate. I have read most of your sources, and before this and the other thread started. I too am fascinated by military history.
But I cannot accept selective sources as full stop "official so there" accounts. You do this in every thread where someone else notes a figure, statistic or source, you go out of your way to either find something to challenge it (good idea and not knocking it in principle) or misinterpret it, (again, perspective adds to debate.). But then you dig your heels in, which is where the debate turns to ridicule. I fail to see any alternative.
How you would deal with some real life conflicts in sources I don't know. As an aside, I have two reports on my desk, both December publications and both acknowledged by Dept of Health as the "official" figures. One set (Dr Foster) puts the hospital I am sat in as one of the best performers in the country with regard to preventable mortality. The other, (SHMI) reckons it is one of the worst. Using the same raw data, the same weighting etc. I suppose people waving "truth" at me washes off after a while.