France has withdrawn its ambassador to Italy due to being bantered off with shít...

[Burney]

It just seemed a strange (predicatble?) episode to mention, given the proud, unmatched history of the British military. From Agincourt to Tumbledown, we have consistently triumphed when we had no right to, which was my original point. Countering that with Dunkirk or Singapore or Hill 235 looks suspiciously like an attempt to do this reputation down, which, as I said, would be the leftist knee-jerk to which I objected.

I wouldn’t put Hill 235 in the same company as Dunkirk or Singapore. It may have been a tactical defeat (albeit a heroic one given that there were absolute hordes of bloodthirsty chinks), but the resistance slowed the Chinese down sufficiently to prevent a larger outflanking of the US forces and an advance on Seoul.

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Burney;4230475]I wouldn’t put Hill 235 in the same company as Dunkirk or Singapore. It may have been a tactical defeat (albeit a heroic one given that there were absolute hordes of bloodthirsty chinks), but the resistance slowed the Chinese down sufficiently to prevent a larger outflanking of the US forces and an advance on Seoul.[/QUOTE

What.

Ever.