His "version" is simply a product of his imagination, based on some vague (and incorrect) allusions to the sources. While it's worth making a post here and there for the benefit of less experienced readers, I wouldn't bother getting too far into it. Earlier he was claiming even bolder things about the war that don't exist in the source material in any form whatever. The guy hasn't given the sources more than a cursory and superficial glance so he can rile people here.I don't want you to repeat what you've said. I want to know why you believe your version is more likely. From what you've said here - and in other threads - it seems you simply like to believe things because they go against the majority opinion. Is that what's happening here?