I lost interest before reaching page 30. If these poorly researched ramblings by an armchair general qualify as a thesis, then this type of academic work is clearly not my cup of tea.
Jakko pointed out a couple of weaknesses in the beginning of this work, and the rest of it confirms the first impression.
It seems that facts do not matter, but as long as you present you paper as challenging supposedly established historical conclusions and quote enough books you will get your PhD.
Yuck
