John McCririck, Ross Kemp, Jimmy Savile, Eddie Izzard, Gary Lineker, Kenneth Williams, Clare Balding your boys took one hell of a beating.
Sorry a, no insult intended. One's patience is simply stretched by the left's knee-jerk belittling of this country's achievements, hence my reference to The Boy Owen.
I was railing, not against you, but against those who detest myt country - Bastani, Milne and Grandpa Semtex. That sort.
OK, ty. So given that the presence of a moat around the country is not a disputed fact, and neither is the reality of the strategic withdrawal from France, I can only imagine it was the suggestion that the enemy could have come down a little harder on the evacuation procedure that you felt was contentious.
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.
[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.