"I do refuse to treat political extremist sites as reliable hitorians, just as you would."
You are a political extremist, you are not treated seriously by anybody, not because of your political extremism but because of your stupidity, your dishonesty and your failure to make your point
You have displayed all those qualities here.
You talk about "high profile historians" as if you have read them, you haven't that is dishonest, you say all of them agree with you as if you have quoted from them, you obviously haven't, that is both dishonest and stupid, you refuse to point out where "they all agree with me", That is dishonest, stupid and a shambolic failure to make your case, as is persisting in hiding behind historians you haven't read to make your case.
Your stupidity is compounded by your "highest profile historians".
Max Hastings is well known - as a tabloid journalist, but other than him, these historians are totally unknown to the general public, and even within historical circles, as far as their own peer profile goes, their notoriety is based on the fact that they have challenged the accepted view of the war.
Not only have you lied about their supporting your claims and have prevaricated by trying to give the impression that you have actually read what they say, you are deliberately still claiming Hastings' line supports you after his arguments have been systemically taken apart by The Spectator and slated for saying exactly the opposite - that the British military were not fit for the job.
Your value here has long been one of light relief and entertainment, but speaking personally, I can only take so much knockabout fun.
For you, the war is over Tommy.
You can, of course, make your case by actually producing what you claim these people have said, but you have avoided doing so so far and that will continue to be the case.
Jim Carroll