Prince Harry

Discussion in 'The Barracks' started by CTNana, May 16, 2007.

  1. CTNana

    CTNana Member Patron

    I'd be interested to know al of your views on the Prince Harry situation. Do you think sending him to Iraq would have increased the danger to other personnel?
    CTNana
     
  2. Peter Clare

    Peter Clare Very Senior Member

    I'd be interested to know al of your views on the Prince Harry situation. Do you think sending him to Iraq would have increased the danger to other personnel?
    CTNana


    In a word. YES. It was very selfish of him to think he could be treated the same as an ordinary soldier. How many of his troop would be looking out for him and not being able to do the job they are there to do. I understand there was an SAS group already out there ready to protect him. Lets face it, they all have enough to contend with without looking out for him.
     
  3. Cpl Rootes

    Cpl Rootes Senior Member

    I absolutly concur with Peter on this one. Sure it's his dream job, but if that is going to put the lifes of his men in danger then I tihnk that he should not go.
     
  4. Kitty

    Kitty Very Senior Member

    have to agree, but there are ways and means. and a bit hard on the lad saying he can do his job then pulling the carpet out.
    And he could have dyed his hair.....
     
  5. morse1001

    morse1001 Very Senior Member

    he is an army officer getting paid the queens shilling, why should he not serve with troops?
     
  6. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    He can't win. If he does not go, it makes a farce of the training and his detractors will call him nannies boy. If he goes, he is putting his men at risk.
     
  7. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    Best thing to do is have a high profile photo shoot of him of on holiday somewhere.
    Then quietly sneak him off to Iraq with his troop out in the desert, as I gather they aren't going to operate in urban areas anyway, who is going to know he's there.
     
  8. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist

    Can't see the problem. The Queen manned barrage balloons, Edward VIII and George VI were both Navy officers in the Great War, Prince Andrew flew in the Falklands war.........
    Harry should resign his commission and screw the Army right up. Let's see their PR wallahs explain THAT one away..........
     
  9. adrian roberts

    adrian roberts Senior Member

    The Queen manned barrage balloons, Edward VIII and George VI were both Navy officers in the Great War, Prince Andrew flew in the Falklands war.........



    In all these wars we were fighting for our freedom in wars that largely had public support. If any of them had died they would have been heroes. Of course the men and women dying in Iraq are heroes on a personal level, but the British and US governments are about to get humiliated and if Harry died out there it would be the final humiliation for the country as well as a tragedy for him. Shame his unit isn't going to Afghanistan, which we should have concentrated on before without getting distracted in Iraq.

    On the other hand, there is a long and romantic tradition of Kings and Princes leading their troops in war and it would be a shame if it was finally over.

    In our local paper this week, there is a story in the history section about Prince Louis Napoleon, the Prince Imperial, son of Napoleon III, who after his family were exiled here in 1870, joined the British Army and was killed in Zululand in 1879. He had insisted on going there; the British government were very reluctant and eventually let him go as an observer, with a platoon specially to protect him. It was one of the classic British military cock-ups that led to him being ambushed and cut down by a horde of Zulus. The British officer responsible was court-martialled and sentenced to death; he only got away with it when Louis' mother the Empress Elizabeth personally appealed on his behalf.
     
  10. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    ...if Harry died out there it would be the final humiliation for the country as well as a tragedy for him.

    Problem is not if he gets killed there, he'd have a Viking funeral, problem would be if he were caught alive! Can you imagine him being the guest star in one of Al Qaeda's videos?
     
  11. Kitty

    Kitty Very Senior Member

    I think quietly sneak him out, but the The Sun would get hold of it and splash it all over the red tops wouldn't they? They can't bloody well help themselves but put peoples lives at risk
     
  12. Cpl Rootes

    Cpl Rootes Senior Member

    I agree that it is a no-win situation. He can't do his dream job as it will put his soldiers in danger, yet not going means that the papers will have a field day.

    "Mrs X says 'Why is Harry more important than my Jimmy who is out in Iraq?'"
     
  13. CTNana

    CTNana Member Patron

    So will his men still go without him?

    If so do you think they will be relieved or angry that he is not with them?

    CTNana
     
  14. Kitty

    Kitty Very Senior Member

    they're still going out there, and not sure of their feelings. they all bought ginger wigs as an act of solidarity with them, but at the end of the day its one high profile target in their midst removed.
     
  15. sapper

    sapper WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Don't let him get within a thousand miles of Iraq. Nice bloke he may be but he would bring down far too much fire down, as he and his mates were sought out, it would soon get round there is no hiding place.
    Its bad enough without seeking trouble, and the lives of young men put in danger because of his presence,
    Sapper
     
  16. Donnie

    Donnie Remembering HHWH

    Why do they not attach Harry to a different unit, maybe send him on a tour of Kosovo. He will get his tour of a warzone but with no dangers to him or his troops.

    Donnie
     
  17. Gibbo

    Gibbo Senior Member

    With the benefit of hindsight, the error was assigning Harry to an armoured recce unit rather than a heavy armoured one. His role offers too many opportunities for his unit to be ambushed, putting the lives of other soldiers at even greater risk & giving the enemy a chance for a propaganda coup.

    In WWI the then Prince of Wales, later King Edward VII, wasn't allowed to go closer to the front line than Brigade HQ. He complained to Lord Kitchener, the Secretary of State for War, that he had enough brothers to ensure the succession if he were killed. Kitchener replied that he didn't fear the Prince's death but his capture.

    Since Kings ceased to lead their troops in person, members of the British Royal Family who've fought have generally been in the RN, where the risk of capture, as opposed to death, is probably less.
     
  18. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    Reminds me of churchill's desire to be present to view the Normandy landings. Leading to the necessity of a horrified staff persuading the King to inform the PM that he wished to be at his side onboard whatever ship was chosen.
    Alanbrooke seems to have felt that only the possibility of the monarch being killed combined with the social impossibility of directly denying the royal personal request could possibly deter him, which it did.
     
  19. morse1001

    morse1001 Very Senior Member

    they have ordered the army to find him a new job. propably put him into training!!!
     
  20. Cpl Rootes

    Cpl Rootes Senior Member

    Just wondering, if Harry was in the Navy or RAF do you think he would get to go on tour? I think he would.

    Maybe if he had joined a different regiment, like Royal Artillery he could have gone too.
     

Share This Page