Letters - Friday February 12, 2021

The highly successful roll-out of vaccines in the UK is masking the underlying perilous economic stagnation that this present and previous lockdowns is causing.

By February 15, the Government hopes to have vaccinated the top four tiers of the most vulnerable of our society in this pandemic.

We surely have to start a fast road to economic recovery two weeks after this date when the vaccine protection kicks in.

Now is not the time to attack the Government: an inquiry when we’re out of this nightmare to learn essential lessons for preparedness and action – hopefully that won’t be required for at least 100 years.

I don’t know anyone in our group of relatives and friends who are not completely at wits’ end with this latest lockdown and are on the edge.

My wife and I have been confined to home-prison since a year last December.

We are convinced we had coronavirus as we were so ill, and we imposed our own lock-in. It took us a couple of months to recover, then the first lockdown was implemented.

We escaped briefly for four weeks in July when we tentatively went shopping off-peak. In August, I had a heart attack.

Was this caused be the unhealthy home-prison?

I’ll never know.

This must be the final lockdown: the Government has tried all options and have now protected us, the vulnerable.

Britain and hundreds of thousands of businesses must open again.

The Government’s economic strategy must not be decided by fear and blame.

We want our lives back.

Keith Massey

via email

second world war

Operation Sea Lion

Dr Barry Clayton wrote that “Contrary to myth, it (the Battle of Britain) did not stop the invasion of this country for we now know that Hitler was bluffing” Your Say, February 8). We actually know nothing of the sort. If I may be permitted to quote from Hitler’s Directives:

1). “The C. in C., Navy, having reported on July 31 that the necessary preparations for ‘Sea Lion’ could not be completed before September 15, the Fuehrer has ordered:

“Preparations for Sea Lion are to be continued and completed by the Army and Air Force by September 15. Eight to 14 days after the launching of the air offensive against Britain, scheduled to begin about August 5, the Fuehrer will decide whether the invasion will take place this year or not; his decision will depend largely on the outcome of the air offensive...

“In spite of the Navy’s warning that it can guarantee only the defence of a narrow strip of coast (as far west as Eastbourne), preparations are to be continued for the attack on a broad basis, as originally planned” (August 1, 1940).

2). “The Fuehrer has decided: The start of Operation Sea Lion is again postponed. A new order follows September 17. All preparations are to be continued.” (September 14, 1940.).

The first reference to ‘Sea Lion’ being a ‘bluff’ was on October 12, after the September 17 date had slipped, when Hitler wrote: “From now on until the spring, preparations for ‘Sea Lion’ shall be continued solely for the purpose of maintaining political and military pressure on England. Should the invasion be reconsidered in the spring or early summer of 1941, orders for a renewal of operational readiness will be issued later.”

By this time, however, as part of the ‘bluff,’ the German Navy had assembled, in French, Belgian, and Dutch ports, 159 transport vessels, 1,859 converted river barges, 397 tugs, and 1,168 motor boats.

Rather a strenuous effort was put into something which Dr Clayton thinks was never really intended.

In one sense, he is correct, however. The Battle of Britain was not the deciding factor. The overwhelming naval superiority of the Royal Navy in Home Waters was always, from the German point of view, insurmountable.

Geoff Hewitt

address supplied

Response

‘Not refugees’ at Napier barracks

The constant invective against the Tory government by your correspondent Royston Jones (Your Say, February 8) really needs to be challenged.

His most recent diatribe against Priti Patel is the latest left wing slanted one. Putting aside the fact that surely any conditions in Britain (the Napier barracks) are better than the war-torn areas these so called ‘refugees’ have fled from, how is it that 99 per cent of them are fit, young men (all with smart phones and the latest trainers) who have in effect left their ageing parents, brothers and sisters etc etc behind to face their doom.

These men are not refugees but economic migrants and in my opinion should be grateful that they have even been allowed into our country under the flimsiest of excuses.

Kemal Tayib

via email