Prince Harry and Iraq

Prince Harry, third in line to the throne of England, insists he wants to go to war in Iraq, despite serious concerns for his personal safety.

MOD top brass, worried that his deployment poses a heightened risk of abduction, injury or death, are reviewing the situation on a daily basis.

Harry on the other hand, is adamant that if he is not allowed to serve in Iraq with his men of the Blues and Royals, he will resign his commission.

Well said Harry! That he is the lowest of the low, a mere Subaltern, he is nontheless, making a stand against the very Establishment he represents.

If the Blues and Royals deploy to Iraq later next month, is the Prince really likely to be that much more of a target?

Are we saying that service in Iraq or Afghanistan is any more dangerous for Harry than any other serviceman or woman?

[edit on 27-4-2007 by fritz]

The guy (prince harry) should be allowed to go to Iraq and serve if he wants to, Just because he is a royal should not intevere in any missions he has to carry out while over there....

Just because he comes from a royal family, he should not be treated differntly from an other Soilder, service personell... What message would that send out to the families of those service personell killed in conflicts?

There children is worth less that he is. I do not think he sees it that way, and all this speculation about him threatening to resign from the army if he is stopped from going to Iraq, is hogwash. It has already been denied by his friends.....

Which ever way you look at it, he should be allowed to do the job he has been trained for...

Nicely put Spencer.

All this bloody crap about him being a bigger target well - the only way for that to happen is if the journalists find out where he is and draw attention to him and his troop.

I doubt that this will happen because like most journo's everywhere, they will be safely tucked up in a tent somewhere and can only speculate about what he will be doing.

How the hell can anybody identify him when he's wearing kevlar helmet, body armour and frigging Raybans?

If anybody gets him killed or kidnapped, it'll be the frigging journos!

the lot of 'em!

[edit on 27-4-2007 by fritz]

Good for the Prince! It is to his credit that he wishes to serve in the capacity he trained for. Kudos to him. Seems to me that this should bolster the Royal Family. Not allowing him to go especially when he has stated that he wishes sends a message to the families of the troops that his life is worth more then their kids and that is wrong. As always my prayers are with all troops who are sent into harms way.

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone

Just because he comes from a royal family, he should not be treated differntly from an other Soilder, service personell... What message would that send out to the families of those service personell killed in conflicts?

I suppose, technically, he could sue under Equal Right's or Human right's legislation for discrimination, if he is not allowed to go. The MoD are discriminating against him because of his background. This shouldn't be allowed.

Originally posted by fritz
Prince Harry, third in line to the throne of England, insists he wants to go to war in Iraq, despite serious concerns for his personal safety.

Throne of the UK, you mean - there hasn't been a King/Queen of England since the Act of Union three centuries ago

Originally posted by fritz
Are we saying that service in Iraq or Afghanistan is any more dangerous for Harry than any other serviceman or woman?

I suppose he will be at a greater risk - imagine the propaganda if he is captured (and he certainly will be a bigger target than the average British soldier). But that said, it would also be a victory for the insurgents (albeit smaller) if he wasn't sent - boasting how they managed to keep a Prince away and so on.

Regardless, I think he should be allowed to go if that's what he wants to do. Not that I think Royals should be able to 'opt out' of a battle - if you join the armed forces you should expect to go to war, Royal or not.

I give him a lot of credit and i wish him well.

Now just if the media could stay away from him and not call attention to him, he might make it back in one piece.

I agree, I have lots of respect for anybody who serves in the forces, but I really, really salute this guy...
....Makes me fell quite patriotic... as the Royal family Should!!(German or not!)
He is demonstrating why British soldiers are respected all over the world. They are true professionals who ALWAYS do their job, Well.
Most Respect.
(Press, F*** Off!!!)

Keep it Up Harry!

[edit on 27-4-2007 by MistahBear]

[edit on 27-4-2007 by MistahBear]

Throne of the UK, you mean - there hasn't been a King/Queen of England since the Act of Union three centuries ago

Wrong the current Queen is regarded as Queen of England AND Wales (Queen Elizabeth II, then after that the Queen of the UK (Queen Elizabeth the 1st in scotland), she has always been regarded as the Queen of England not the Queen off the UK, just thought I would clear that up....

Little info I found out:

Since that date the title King (or Queen) of England has been technically incorrect, though has remained in wide usage to the present day. The subsequent union with Ireland in 1801 was amended in 1922, and the current full name of the state is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

On another subject thought, A group off insurgents in Iraq have issued a statement saying they would kidnapp P.Harry if he is deployed over there.... Oh great.... is this just media hype, or do yall think this will force the M0D to stop Harry from going??? Either this is adding fire to the fuel.

I still do not think that this should stop him from going, he is a serving officer in the UK Armed forces, he should be allowed to carry out his duties no matter what his status is...

[edit on 28-4-2007 by spencerjohnstone]

So it's incorrect, as the little snippet you posted (not sure where from) shows... which is exactly my point. The current monarch's full official name (when used in a British context, as opposed to any of the other nations she is the head of state of) is Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. Just because people use something doesn't mean it's right... it's like all those people who say 'England' or 'Great Britain' when they mean 'UK' - people use those terms, but they're wrong

Or people using apostrophes wrong, too - just because a lot of people use them in the wrong place (if at all) doesn't make it right. You see my point.

Back to the issue of Harry, like I said before, he should be allowed to go if that's what he wants to do - though perhaps the people serving under him should be asked if they're happy to as well? They are potentially at greater risk.

[edit on 28/4/07 by Ste2652]

Prince Harry should be treated the same as any other servicing member of the armed forces, and it seems that this is now the case.

If the statements are correct, and that Harry threatened to resign his commission if he was barred from travelling to Iraq with his unit, good on him.

Is Harry at any greater risk in Iraq? Who knows. I certainly agree that life will be easier for Harry and his troop is the media keep off his back.

I suppose the big question is how secure are things on the ground. How much pressure will be put on those Iraqs who work with the British Military to reveal information.

And what would be the reaction if something were to happen to Harry while on duty in Iraq?

The news is saying that he will be going to Iraq and that the insurgents have put a bounty out on him.

Not to be crass - but this is an easy way for the Crown to be rid of Diana's son, of whom Charles is not the father. Have him die in battle so he's out of the line for the throne .. and have the royals look good having a son die in battle.

However, I give Harry a and wish him well.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Not to be crass - but this is an easy way for the Crown to be rid of Diana's son, of whom Charles is not the father.

But there's no actual proof of that, is there? It's all just speculation.

No proof that the public is aware of. None at all.
The speculation is based on loose evidence ...
if there were REAL evidence, I'm sure the palace
would cover it up. What better way to cover it up
than to be rid of the prince himself?

Originally posted by fritz

All this bloody crap about him being a bigger target well - the only way for that to happen is if the journalists find out where he is and draw attention to him and his troop.

That's probably the biggest risk. Journalists, particular those working for the tabloids, aren't exactly renowned for their sensitivity in things like this. Hopefully a stearn warning by the Security Services will keep them at bay..

If Harry's to be treated like everyone else, then he shouldn't have gotten all the publicity.

I think he should have been deployed quietly, without fanfare. The media has just put a big(er) target on Harry and his comrades, IMO.

Taking a leaf from the film "Spartacus", soldiers are heading to Iraq sporting these new T-Shirts, available on ebay..



Love it!

That is so typical of EBaY. Out for a quick killing - if you'll excuse the pun!

Originally posted by fritz

That is so typical of EBaY. Out for a quick killing - if you'll excuse the pun!

why the ? I don't understand? I think is kinda funny. If soldiers want to buy the t-shirt, why shouldn't they?

That's very good!

British humour at its best!

You simply can't admire our boys and girls in uniform enough. They've got an amazing sense of humour in the forces... not sure if you heard but they call the Defence Secretary (Des Browne) 'Swiss Tony' as he looks like the Fast Show character.

Image: Swiss Tony

Image: Des Browne

[edit on 3/5/07 by Ste2652]