Take our user survey and make your voice heard.

Here
and
Now

opinions

Brexit reinvents the Dunkirk myth

6 Comments
By Paul Wallace

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

6 Comments
Login to comment

First of all, let me state my point of view:

As a british citizen, I was shocked and horrified at Brexit. I have since changed my mind.

Although Britain eventually boarded the European train in the early 1970s, it did so on terms already decisively determined by France and Germany that included the political vision of “ever closer union.”

Well, that's it right there. Either we are in or we are out. Was the UK ever going to accept being part of one European country? Probably not. Most likely federalization would have never been accepted by the majority of the british public.

Churchill, cast into opposition, hankered after Britain’s past glory as a great power belonging uniquely to all three of what he sonorously called in 1948 the“three great circles” of America and the English-speaking world, Europe and the Commonwealth.

The 3 great circles Churchill was talking about were the US, a United Europe, and the nations of the commonwealth led by the UK. Europe is well on its way to becoming a single nation, and I for one would applaud that. I don't believe at all that federalization would erode the cultures of Europe. I strongly believe in EU federalization, but I just don't think that the UK should be a part of that.

Which brings us to the 3rd great circle: the commonwealth. Today, that is being represented by CANZUK- A proposed union between the UK, Canada, OZ and NZ. That would bring Canada, OZ and NZ into the group of 3. If the UK had remained in the EU, there would have been 2 western superpowers: the US and the EU. Brexit and the possibility of CANZUK means that there can be a 3rd tier that can cooperate and work with the US and the EU. That is a good thing. Brexit and the formation of CANZUK doesn't mean the end of trade relations with the EU. Rather, Canzuk would another trading bloc that would be mutually beneficial to both Canzuk and the EU.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Brexit means that Canzuk will come into being, then the decision to leave was the best thing ever to happen to the UK. If the UK decides to go at it alone, then Brexit will be the biggest disaster ever for the UK.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

“Darkest Hour” tugs at Britain’s national sense of pride because the British had a good war, not just on the winning but the right side.

On the right side, yes but it was hardly a good war for the many innocents bombed out of existence, citizens or those serving.

And Churchill's behaviour was not always exemplary during said war. But once again, he is deified and people buy into the myth.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I have many thoughts on the subjects of the Dunkirk evacuation and Brexit.

As for Dunkirk, its importance is hard to overstate. Almost 200,000 British troops were evacuated, and they were almost the pre-war trained troops. They became the core of the rebuilt British army. Without them, Britain would not have been able to fight on land in the Mediterranean theatre, and Rommel could have taken the Suez Canal.

The Dunkirk evacuation would not have been possible without Hitler's meddling in operations in France. He insisted on the tank forces being redirected toward Paris, instead of first eliminating the Allied pocket around Dunkirk. The German forces remaining to do the job were sufficient to defeat the Allies, but not before over 300,000 were evacuated. Of the French evacuees, most were repatriated back to France before the end of hostilities in that country, where they became prisoners and laborers of the Germans.

As for Brexit, I can't help but wonder how much effect the Russian internet trolls had in the election, as they did in the later American election. The vote to withdraw from the EU passed with 52%. Without Putin's efforts to weaken the EU, would Britain have withdrawn?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The difference between Dunkirk and Brexit is the leadership - Churchill was there for Great Britain, Theresa May and Jeremy Corban are both doing everything they can to tear down the once Great Britain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites