Are there two legitimate sides to the debate or is the evidence clear in one direction or the other?
Note: It's been suggested by some of you that this post breaks the 20-year rule because it's asking about modern conversations about the event. That sort of post is in fact allowed and not considered to break that rule since we are open to discussions about the discussion of events, if that makes sense. Take it as a form of historiography.
This post is fine and not in violation of the 20-year rule.