Jim, it was you who decided that Paxman was relevant to this thread.
Rag, he was just the presenter.
The history content came from the University of East Anglia.

Not the perogative of either Historians

Er, it is history Jim. Who else's prerogative? (You think it is yours obviously!)

You've been given examples over and over again - why the hell should I dig out more for you to ignore

You have not. Quotes from the historians all support my views (that is where I got them!) and rubbish yours.

And Jim, in a four year war of a kind never known before, mistakes inevitably were made.
You will find no historian who finds the British leadership incompetent or less effective than that of any other of the armies involved.
You have your opinion, and the people who have studied all the evidence say it is shit.
Sorry Jim.