The post you are reporting:
"Mayfield Road resident Brian Sayer has described the decision as disrespectful and upsetting after spending several years researching his uncle, Sergeant John Hulse, and his involvement with the RAF in the Second World War.
Mr Sayer, 73, told the Express: "I couldn't believe it when I received the letter to tell me my uncle, a Dover man born and bred, would not be named on the memorial."
This whole thing gets curiouser and curiouser. Had the original intent been to memorialise the 'Glorious Dead' whose bodies were not interred in home soil, all well and good. But, it states plainly the Memorial is to those who gave their lives for their country in (only) the two World Wars. [The prominence/significance of the Military Insignia may well make plain that this is for the personnel of the armed services alone, again all well and good.]
But to include armed services personnel from later conflicts while refusing to include the uncle of the chap above (Sergeant John Hulse) is most odd.
I have never been in the armed services and I am not big on War Memorials built and maintained for their own sake. [The one near me (WWI) is in the foyer of the purpose built Public Library]
But, the upkeep and addition to such memorials is an integral cost of warfare. If those who give their lives are not worthy, don't send them out to kill and be killed in the first place.
I suspect that the real living importance and significance of such memorials is for the local 'worthies' to big themselves up. (sorry for the vernacular)
My own father was RAF ground crew. The mere thought that he and his fellows were not worthy...while I am not too gentlemanly to comment...I choose not to.