Prince William Current Events 21: January 2010-January 2011

[Sereta]

Sure they could send William to fight in a war zone, however my thinking is, why take unnecessary chances like that? I don't think it would be a prudent thing to do.

 

[Opal]

Indeed Shanaz - that's a good point. Why take the risk? I'm sure the govt., the Queen and the monarchy would never do such a thing. It would be rather foolish.

This brings a question to mind - does anyone know of any other royal family member (including from other countries) who actually went to war while in the military?

 

[Lumutqueen]

Prince Andrew fought in the Falklands War.
Prince Harry fought in Afghanistan.
Prince George, Duke of Kent died whilst flying for the RAF.
Prince Maurice of Battenberg, a grandson of Queen Victoria, was killed near Mons in 1914 as an officer in the King's Royal Rifle Corps.
The Queen donned uniform as Second Lieutenant Princess Elizabeth, in the ATS (Auxiliary Territorial Service, the women's branch of the Army during the war.
Prince Phillip aswell.

 

[muriel]

Sure they could send William to fight in a war zone, however my thinking is, why take unnecessary chances like that? I don't think it would be a prudent thing to do.

Exactly the point I was making. Whilst there are "spares", there is no need to expose William to unnecessary risks. It is true that in history, spares have bneen called to the line of duty, but it was never the intended plan for the BRF.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If we are going to go back to WWI then George VI has to be included as he fought at the Battle of Jutland in that conflict and Edward VIII also served as a Staff Officer.
The Crown Prince of Germany also served as a frontline general during WWI.
Prince Charles also served in the Navy but had left before the Falklands conflict. I have read that he has always regreted the fact that he couldn't serve in that conflict due to having left the navy.

 

[muriel]

If we are going to go back to WWI then George VI has to be included as he fought at the Battle of Jutland in that conflict and Edward VIII also served as a Staff Officer.

.... though George VI was very much the spare during WW1.

 

[Lady Ann]

Of course it is never the intended plan for the BRF to have their hiers die, but it is their intended (or should I say back-up) plan to have the spare there incase this does happen (which it has many times before)...personally I would hope William be aloud to serve as the rest of the men in his unit serve...

 

[Opal]

^^
I've always thought that spares are only for 'unforseen' circumstances. Purposefully sending someone into a war zone is not what I would consider an unforseen circumstance.
The monarchy has probably invested alot in William. It has been reported that they have their hopes on him for the future. It wouldn't make sense to me to invest in someone and then send them to war. Doesn't seem like a wise thing to do. But that's just my opinion.

Thanks for the replies about other royals going to war. I meant to put "heirs of royal families" though. Sorry about that.

 

[Iluvbertie]

.... though George VI was very much the spare during WW1.

But the heirs to both the German and British empires were on the Western Front and the heir to the German Empire was very much a frontline officer who earned the respect of his men in that capacity.

The British seem far more conservative keeping Edward in the chateaux behind the lines (where some died due to shelling) and now William being protected - what a waste of British taxpayers money to train him and then not let him serve.

If I was a British taxpayer I would be insisting he serve or repay the cost of his training in these times of financial stress there they really can't be affording to spend millions of pounds training a guy who simply can't do the job for which he is being trained.

But that is the British for you ....

And another reason why I have become a republican - a future King allowed to train but not serve is not who I want as a Head of State. I want one who has been able to do things in his life and William simply doesn't meet the bill (any more than Charles or the Queen do).

 

[Russophile]

And another reason why I have become a republican - a future King allowed to train but not serve is not who I want as a Head of State. I want one who has been able to do things in his life and William simply doesn't meet the bill (any more than Charles or the Queen do).

What exactly is an Australian Republican if you please?
I'm sure it is very different than the American Republicans and as Russo is a rabid Capitalistic Pig I'm am sure that they do not mean the same thing at all!

 

[Iluvbertie]

An Australian Republican simly wants an Australian to be our Head of State not a foreign woman who got the job because she was the eldest daughter of the previous Head of State. In other words we want to get rid of the Queen as our Head of State.
It has nothing to do with which side of politics you follow. Until quite recently the leaders of both major political parties in Australia were both Republicans although political one would be more in tune with your Republicans and the other with your Democrats.

 

[Lady Ann]

...The monarchy has probably invested alot in William...

I agree that they would not want to send William for all the reasons you listed here.... but I think they should make it his chocie ...

 

[Lady Ann]

"But that is the British for you ....

And another reason why I have become a republican - a future King allowed to train but not serve is not who I want as a Head of State. I want one who has been able to do things in his life and William simply doesn't meet the bill (any more than Charles or the Queen do).[/QUOTE]"


Im sorry but I believe the Queen did serve her Country in the military during war time maybe not on the front lines but she did use her training to complete a job...and in many other ways....

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Queen and Charles have both served in the military but they don't really do anything worthwhile.
William will cost the British taxpayers millions to train him and then he will do nothing with that training - anymore then the Queen did or Charles did.

The Queen drive trucks - hardly rocket science and not all that expensive to train a person to do. Charles commanded his own ship (although from some reports more as a figure head with others actually making the decisions he was supposed to make because he didn't have what it takes to make those decisions and almost ran the ship aground - reported by people on the ship by the way).

 

[Sereta]

Well they are still training. Perhaps we should wait until they are finished and see what steps they take next before we unfairly judge or criticize them.

 

[rmay286]

I somewhat agree that if William isn't actually going to serve in the army, he shouldn't be doing military training at all. But if William and Harry are such liabilities, why was Prince Andrew allowed to take part in the Falklands War? He might not have been directly involved in the fighting, but he still could have lost his life. Prince George, as lumutqueen pointed out, did lose his life while flying for the RAF. Why were these princes allowed to see active military service, but William and Harry are discouraged from fighting? (I understand the concern about William to some extent, but Harry is third in line to the throne.) Does the nature of today's wars make military service riskier, or is the royal family just being more cautious?

 

[Iluvbertie]

Statistically the German Crown Prince had a greater risk of being killed in the 1914 - 1918 war than anyone has today. He also had a greater chance of being captured. However the Germans had no concerns about having the heir to the throne serving in the front line in the most deadly war of the 20th C for soldiers.

The British have allowed the second in line to the throne fight in naval battles with obvious risks to their lives (George VI and Prince Andrew - sure William was on the way but Andrew was still Charles' heir while serving in the Falklands). I tend to think that the British are way to cautious considering the risks compared to the number of servicemen who have served and been captured/injured/killed.

 

[Lady Ann]

The Queen drive trucks - hardly rocket science and not all that expensive to train a person to do. Charles commanded his own ship (although from some reports more as a figure head with others actually making the decisions he was supposed to make because he didn't have what it takes to make those decisions and almost ran the ship aground - reported by people on the ship by the way).

I was under the impression that the Queen reparied the trucks as well, this is a very useful skill and something she was trained to do...so to use your training and not waste tax payers money is one thing, rocket science is a very diffrent thing ...lol........just kidding you Iluvbertie...I don't know much about Charle's service but just the Queen's I would beg to differ ..IMO of course.

 

[Russophile]

I tend to think that the British are way to cautious considering the risks compared to the number of servicemen who have served and been captured/injured/killed.

Not to mention what a coup it would be for the Taliban and Al Queda to capture a member of the BRF. There is also the unsettling and unsavory thought of a public beheading on Al Jezzera with such a prize.

 

[RoyalistRiley]

Following his trip to Australia, Prince William is reported as offering to help a group of Indigenous Australians to trace the skull of a resistance leader that was sent to the UK in the 1800s. Prince William helps search for Aboriginal skull - Times Online

 

[muriel]

Not to mention what a coup it would be for the Taliban and Al Queda to capture a member of the BRF. There is also the unsettling and unsavory thought of a public beheading on Al Jezzera with such a prize.

Quite right, Russo

 

[Wisteria]

I can´t help wondering how and where he is going to look. It sounds like a lot of research work, I hope he can fit it into his busy schedule.

 

[queenofthelight]

Prince William joins the hunt for missing skull of Aboriginal warrior | Mail Online (01/04/2010).

 

[Opal]

Well they are still training. Perhaps we should wait until they are finished and see what steps they take next before we unfairly judge or criticize them.

That's a sensible statement shanaz.

 

[Sereta]

They are in line for the throne - They are 11th and 12th respectively.
I can imagine only Beatrice or Eugenie on the throne.
Or Princess Anne.

No thanks on Beatrice or Eugenie. Then we'd have to endure Fergie as the "mother of the Queen".
And if by small chance they did then they would have to have military training of some kind for their role.

Not to mention what a coup it would be for the Taliban and Al Queda to capture a member of the BRF. There is also the unsettling and unsavory thought of a public beheading on Al Jezzera with such a prize.

Not to mention the terrorists have stated through the press they would actively seek them out.

 

[Opal]

^^
And let's face it, they would get a lot more press/recognition (which they seem to seek) if they brought down the future King of England then some unknown Joe Smith. Can you imagine the headlines. Then of course the ransom they would probably demand.
I think in many ways the war being fought today is much more dangerous than WWI or even the Falklands war that Prince Andrew fought in. This war on terrorism is much more tricky and complicated. It's not so straightforward. Sometimes we don't even know exactly who the enemy is.
Then throw in the media which is far more prevalent than 60 or even 20 years ago and more easily accessible with the advent of the internet. It would've been much easier to fight in WWI without the world finding out about it.

 

[Sereta]

No thanks on Beatrice or Eugenie. Then we'd have to endure Fergie as the "mother of the Queen".
And if by small chance they did then they would have to have military training of some kind for their role.

I hadn't thought of that but you're right, they would need some type of military training if it ever came to that. Afterall even the Queen had some military experience. I wonder if people would expect them to serve in the war, if it were still going on?

 

[karla64]

Prince William will attend Royal gala reception at Christie's

Search future engagements

click list of search select Prince william.. and click view engagement on below

 

[Opal]

^^
I think this event at Christie's ties in with the portraits being auctioned off that William did with the former homeless guy, Jeff Hubbard.

 

[Sereta]

I hadn't thought of that but you're right, they would need some type of military training if it ever came to that. Afterall even the Queen had some military experience. I wonder if people would expect them to serve in the war, if it were still going on?

I don't think people would expect them to go to war since they are female.