"You have failed to produce one more."
Now you are lying again
You have tried to to wriggle out of all your claims by my having mistakenly confused two thread - they are part of the same argument
You claimed that troops went to war with the 'Land of hope and Glory' and @Gallant little Belgium' jingoistic bullshit under their belts and that something like 80 percent of them returned with the same opinions.
That was your statement and you trawled up tabloid journalist to back your arguments
You claimed that they knew what they were fighting for and you claimed that the list of reasons I presented for joining up was my own invention
Again - you used your tabloid journalist and a single quote from a veteran's notebook to make your case.
You called the soldier we recorded a "liar" because his account of things didn't match up with your own
I produced a large piece written by a wounded veteran after the battle of Loos - Patrick McGill - you ignored it because it didn't match up with your agenda
You did the same with all the soldiers who fought and wrote about their experiences - Sassoon, Owen - even established historians like Liddel- Hart - all "liars, romantics and revisionists".
"The war will be over by Christmas", "land fit for heroes to live in" "white feathers and other recruiting methods" "soldiers diaries", moral in the trenches, the war being a struggle between empires, who was to blame for the war, Belgian atrocities, recruiting posters
All this and more you have argued - all about World War one, whatever thread they were on.
How can you possibly claim you have only argued on three points - are you ****** totally insane?
You have contradicted the views of others on all these points and more, on this thread and the Armistice one - all WW1 and all part of your twisted jingoistic agenda.
These programmes have totally destroyed all your arguments on every single point you have made - you have now retreated to three of them (your own personal Alamo) and are attempting to save face (as you always do) by denying facts that are scuppering your arguments week-by-week.
Despite claiming that you have deeply "studied WW1", you have yet to provide one shred of your having a personal knowledge or even interest in the subject - nothing from your own reading - every singly one hastily gathered cut-'n-pastes.
Your performance on all these threads are little more than an egotistical display of knowledge that you do not possess - you have even claimed "infallibility" one one of your subjects and referred to your arguments as "casting pearls before swine" - you are a meglomanic nutter.
DO NOT CALL ME A LIAR WHEN I TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE ARGUED ON - your arguments you have retreated to are apparently the ones you believe you can bullshit your way out of- though Paxman and his crew manage to whip the carpet from under your feet every time he opens his mouth.
Wonder what tomorrow will bring - the Loos armaments blunder by Haig maybe?
You are obviously intending to ruin all the threads you appear on with your arrogance and ignorance - now you are making te a Mudcat version of the old Blackpool magazine 'Billy's weekly Liar'