Prince William current events 22: May 2009-

[Mermaid1962]

I think that one problem with William is that he's not yet the heir to the throne. He's the heir's heir. He's in a position that hasn't occurred in Britain since Edward VII's day. Princess Victoria, on the other hand, is the direct heir to the throne of Sweden.

When Prince Charles becomes King, then we'll see both William and Harry take on a much more visible Royal role.

[Iluvbertie]

I agree that many people unfairly compare William to the Crown Princes/Crown Princess Victoria when he isn't in that position.

The fact that the British Royal Family have one way of preparing their heirs and other countries have others is immaterial.

The important thing is that in 30 or so years when he becomes King, if he becomes King, he has been prepared for the British system of government.

He will probably spend another 10 or 20 years behind the heir - by which time children like Christian of Denmark will be in the position he is now - the heir to the heir.

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, there's a feeling out there that William should be as visible and front-and-centre as Prince Charles or William's mother were at the same age. But they were both in an entirely different position, as Prince and Princess of Wales, respectively. And of course, at the age of 27, Prince Charles was in a very different position than his mother was at that age.

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

I agree that many people unfairly compare William to the Crown Princes/Crown Princess Victoria when he isn't in that position.

[muriel]

Am I sensing the general mood amongst some posters in relation to William is that this "crime" is probably big enough to demand that he be removed from the lines of succession?

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by muriel

Am I sensing the general mood amongst some posters in relation to William is that this "crime" is probably big enough to demand that he be removed from the lines of succession?

Definitely not.

He is not all that good a representative but he hasn't yet committed treason or murder or raped anyone and that is the only reasons I think he should lose his place.

He might turn out all right if given another 30 or so years to develop so I hope and pray that Charles lives as long as his grandmother and then William will be in his late 60s and might even be ready.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

I agree that many people unfairly compare William to the Crown Princes/Crown Princess Victoria when he isn't in that position.

The fact that the British Royal Family have one way of preparing their heirs and other countries have others is immaterial.

The important thing is that in 30 or so years when he becomes King, if he becomes King, he has been prepared for the British system of government.

He will probably spend another 10 or 20 years behind the heir - by which time children like Christian of Denmark will be in the position he is now - the heir to the heir.

That's a good point. I didn't think of that--that Crown Princess Victoria is the direct heir. But to be the "heir's heir" like William must be a frustrating position to be in. It's not "time" yet for you to be front and centre in royal duties, but you can't also go off and get an ordinary job or lead a private life. It doesn't seem like a very productive life and I wonder if it ever frustrates William.

[shanaz]

I think that's why he's pursuing an RAF career because it gives him something constructive to do while he waits. But he also has to do some royal functions so that he's not criticized and also to start helping because the Queen and Duke aren't getting any younger. It's a balancing act. But I think William will be a fine King when his time comes.

[Mermaid1962]

It's certainly not my feeling. I'm content to see William in the background until it's his turn to come forward. It was difficult for Prince Charles to come up with definable role--what does one do while waiting for one's mother to do die (although I'm sure that the Prince of Wales doesn't think in such crass terms)? It must be much more difficult when the next generation down is even further away from the job for which he was born. So what does he do? He can't go into business. He can't fight like a real soldier and risk his life. He can't do public duties all the time, or else he'd get the media attention that should go to his grandmother and father. All I want, really, is for William to establish a strong personal foundation and learn about his future role so that he'll have caring support and the knowledge he'll need in days to come--hopefully days that are far in the future.

Originally Posted by muriel

Am I sensing the general mood amongst some posters in relation to William is that this "crime" is probably big enough to demand that he be removed from the lines of succession?

[Iluvbertie]

I think he should be able to serve properly in the military as his great-grandfather did when he was second in line (in WWI) and his uncle in the Falklands.

It isn't as if there are no other heirs.

[lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by muriel

Am I sensing the general mood amongst some posters in relation to William is that this "crime" is probably big enough to demand that he be removed from the lines of succession?

Certainly not.
Prince Charles, Duchess Camilla, Prince Phillip and even The Queen have made mistakes like this at one point. It just doesn't look good for William to be honest.

But yes I do keep forgetting that he is the heirs heir like Prince Christian, Princess Catharina-Amalia, Princess Ingrid-Alexandra, Princess Elisabeth.
(this has just made me realise there is only two male heir to heirs)


I do think he should be able to serve like his gret-grandfather and his uncle.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by muriel

Am I sensing the general mood amongst some posters in relation to William is that this "crime" is probably big enough to demand that he be removed from the lines of succession?

Have I missed something, I don't read that into any of the posts? Whilst it was not a 'crime' to miss the fact that he was talking to a grieving father and not a war veteran, it was a stupid mistake to have made, by anyone, least of all a member of the royal family and a serving officer.

Things such as this do matter, especially to the bereaved parent.

[Patra]

Insensitive and uninformed? YES

Criminal and Malicious? NO

[Zonk]

Time to move on.

Any additional posts regarding William's offense at the Memorial Service will be deleted without notice.

[cd255]

Originally Posted by lumutqueen

I do think he should be able to serve like his gret-grandfather and his uncle.

But they weren't heirs to the throne at the time. I don't think the govt. (or the Queen) would allow William to go to war for obvious reasons. But there's nothing wrong with doing Search and Rescue. I think it's very honorable to do a job saving people's lives.

[Skydragon]

When Andrew served in the Falklands, he was the 2nd in line as William was not born until the following month. AIR, HM insisted Andrew be allowed to stay with his ship during the conflict.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by cd255

But they weren't heirs to the throne at the time. I don't think the govt. (or the Queen) would allow William to go to war for obvious reasons. But there's nothing wrong with doing Search and Rescue. I think it's very honorable to do a job saving people's lives.

However at the time that they were serving they were 2nd in line to the throne, as William is now.

There are also plenty of other heirs - he has a brother and six cousins as well so it isn't as if if something happened to him the monarchy would have nowhere to go like it did when Princess Charlotte died.

In addition one of the two mentioned above, 2nd in line when serving, went on to become king so they obviously weren't too worried about losing him. His older brother was also serving on the Western Front at the time (although not in the trenches) so the actual heir to the throne was seeing active service. Why shouldn't William?

People seem to want to put him in cotton wool because he is the heir's heir rather than let him have a life and take the risk - so what if he dies - there is still other heirs (not that I want to see him die but more that I see people being overprotective.

[Marsel]

The very concept of war has changed over the years. In past, even during Andrew’s time, it was a more or less ‘honest’ fight: your personal courage and probably the equipment were what mattered most. It is different now: do you remember the headlines when one of the Taliban leaders threatened to target specifically Prince Harry, should he be sent to the frontline? I’d imagine the price for William’s head would be even higher.

I don’t think parents of any soldier serving in Iraq or Afghanistan would be happy if William and/or Harry served in the same regiment: their very presence would expose other soldiers to unnecessary additional risks.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Marsel

The very concept of war has changed over the years. In past, even during Andrew’s time, it was a more or less ‘honest’ fight: your personal courage and probably the equipment were what mattered most. It is different now: do you remember the headlines when one of the Taliban leaders threatened to target specifically Prince Harry, should he be sent to the frontline? I’d imagine the price for William’s head would be even higher.

I don’t think parents of any soldier serving in Iraq or Afghanistan would be happy if William and/or Harry served in the same regiment: their very presence would expose other soldiers to unnecessary additional risks.

I don't think that they are unnecessary risks if the press simply aren't told that they are there.

[Marsel]

And how long will it take some bright lad to understand he can earn $$$ if he sells the story to any news agency?
I was impressed all the newspapers did manage to keep their word even for such a short time during Harry’s deployment. But I suspect William’s deployment would be even more tempting. And even if they do keep their word, there could always be the risk of terrorists accidentally finding out, or buying such information.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Marsel

And how long will it take some bright lad to understand he can earn $$$ if he sells the story to any news agency?
I was impressed all the newspapers did manage to keep their word even for such a short time during Harry’s deployment. But I suspect William’s deployment would be even more tempting. And even if they do keep their word, there could always be the risk of terrorists accidentally finding out, or buying such information.

Terrorists can attack anywhere - they are just as likely to attack them in London. In fact they are probably an easier target in London - at the various nightclubs they frequent - than they would be in Afghanistan.