Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?

[Action Jackson]

Apparently the MoD have just realised that there is a war going on in Iraq so may not send Harry incase he gets injured.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6594223.stm


His father, James Hewitt, must be really delighted at this news.

[Xaccers]

James Hewitt has a son called Harry who's not going to Iraq too? What a coincidence!

[Action Jackson]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

James Hewitt has a son called Harry who's not going to Iraq too? What a coincidence!

Yes he has, which is more than Prince Charles has.

[Damien]

Theres no point, Its just a security risk and he has had a lot of targets. If one solider had so much attention from the terrorists then that solider would not be sent to Iraqi because they would not want the added consideration and risk. Remember its risking the people around him as well.

They just dont know what to do because they do not want to appear as if he is a special case, but he is a special case and they should adjust to it. Why risk the attention, the fellow soliders, and the victory the insurgents would feel?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Action Jackson

Yes he has, which is more than Prince Charles has.

Oh is Prince Harry now able to go to Iraq? He'll be pleased I'm sure

[TheDaddy]

I am in two mind's over this, it's what he signed up for after all however if his presence put's his men at increased risk perhaps he shouldn't go, its also worth considering the propaganda the enemy would get if they were to kill or capture him, probably best he stays imo

[punky]

Didn't Andrew serve in the Faulklands? Not much different.

To not go out there makes a mockery of the royals and the armed services. He wants to serve, and should. He's a grown man, royal or otherwise.

I don't think he'll attract any more attention as he'll be unrecognisable.

Let's face it, He wasn't recognised by the US army without all the gear on when he went in to the US shop at Lakenheath recently.

[BBKing]

Why don't we ask the people of Iraq, it's their country after all?

[Action Jackson]

Originally Posted by Gavin

Didn't Andrew serve in the Faulklands? Not much different.

To not go out there makes a mockery of the royals and the armed services. He wants to serve, and should. He's a grown man, royal or otherwise.

I don't think he'll attract any more attention as he'll be unrecognisable.

Let's face it, He wasn't recognised by the US army without all the gear on when he went in to the US shop at Lakenheath recently.

I think that Andrews involvement was greatly exaggerated at the time.


But I agree with your point about the whole thing making a mockery of the royals. To train to go to war then be told to stay home for his own protection is just ludicrous.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Gavin

Didn't Andrew serve in the Faulklands? Not much different.

To not go out there makes a mockery of the royals and the armed services. He wants to serve, and should. He's a grown man, royal or otherwise.

I don't think he'll attract any more attention as he'll be unrecognisable.

Let's face it, He wasn't recognised by the US army without all the gear on when he went in to the US shop at Mildenhall recently.

We aren't actually at war with anyone here though, technically we are a peacekeeping force and the insurgents have already indicated that they will him a special target, the question has to be will his presence there do more harm than good, admittedly it's a question that could be thrown about the British presence there in general but in this specific case I would say his presence isn’t required

[Damien]

Originally Posted by BBKing

Why don't we ask the people of Iraq, it's their country after all?

Do you ask the ones blowing everyone up or the ones being blown up? Might get a different answer

[Xaccers]

His paternal grandad's military record is pretty good too, wasn't best pleased when his wife became Queen, end of Naval career.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Action Jackson

I think that Andrews involvement was greatly exaggerated at the time.


But I agree with your point about the whole thing making a mockery of the royals. To train to go to war then be told to stay home for his own protection is just ludicrous.

I don't think it was, helicopter pilots have one of the most dangerous jobs in war and btw his grandfather was mentioned in despatches in WWII

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I don't think it was, helicopter pilots have one of the most dangerous jobs in war and btw his grandfather was mentioned in despatches in WWII

Originally Posted by Wiki

On 1 May 1939, Prince Philip began his naval career at Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth as a Special Entry Cadet. In his training year, Philip won the prestigious King's Dirk and the prize for best cadet of his entry. The start of the Second World War meant that Prince Philip was soon on active duty. During his early days in the army he famously tussled with then Austraian Navy sailor Jonathon Altham, the feud resulted in a sword fight. Phillip won convincingly.

In 1940 he served on HMS Ramillies in Colombo, Ceylon, as a Midshipman, patrolling the Indian Ocean and escorting troops from Australia to the Middle East. In 1941 he was transferred to HMS Valiant, a battleship stationed in Alexandria, Egypt. Philip acted as the searchlight control on the ship, helping to sink two Italian cruisers. Later service in the war saw Philip promoted to the rank of Lieutenant and serving during the invasion of Sicily. Philip was also present onboard HMS Whelp at the surrender of Japanese army and naval forces in Tokyo Bay.

[Action Jackson]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I don't think it was, helicopter pilots have one of the most dangerous jobs in war and btw his grandfather was mentioned in despatches in WWII

Yes, I agree, but how close did he actually come to the 'real' action?