Prince Harry and the Likelihood of Serving in Iraq

[Elspeth]

What did they think they would gain by killing Harry?

[Duchess]

i don't quite know how to feel on this one. while i feel badly that by not sending harry to iraq it makes it appear as though his life is worth more than the men and women who are already there or will be sent in the future. however, his being there would definitely add to the danger for the others. i'm sure harry wanted to go but it's a double edged sword.

[Duchess]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

What did they think they would gain by killing Harry?

i suppose by killing him they wouldn't gain anything but by holding him hostage they'd certainly have the upper hand.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by selrahc4

This is easy to say in retrospect. But no one knew at the start of the Falklands War how long it was going to last or how dangerous it was going to be.

However, MOD and we knew it two years ago, last year, six months ago, last month and know it now. So the two can't be compared knowing then and what we know about the Iraqi War today. That's why I don't think that the two can't be compared in today's world using today's understanding about the two different wars that the Royals encountered back then and would encounter today.

[Alison20]

Harry wants to be a career soldier - that is what many from the RF have been in the past. He has wanted it since he was a little boy. It was not a move to rehabilitate the Windsors. (IMO they did not need to be rehabilitated.).

I think there was always the intention that he would be treated as much like the others as possible. The Duke of Kent and Prince Michael of Kent (the Queen's first cousins) both had careers in the military. Luckily for them, the media largely left them alone - and there weren't wars against such unbelievably cruel and vicious combatants. Prince Andrew was also a career sailor, and did pretty well everything other Naval officers did.

However, General Sir Richard Dannatt, the most senior operational officer in the British Army, went out to Iraq a few days ago to learn at first hand of the new threats to Prince Harry. In the short press conference he gave, he said there were several very specific threats. These showed not only a specific risk to Harry, but also brought a much greater risk to his men, and units attached to his. The General also indicated that he felt these increased threats were partly due to the media highlighting Harry's impending posting to Iraq, and even indicating where he would be based and what he would be doing.

I got the firm impression that the media were going to find it difficult from now on to get information on what Harry was going to be doing - and they have no-one to blame but themselves for this. A headline was more important to them than many young soldiers' lives.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

What did they think they would gain by killing Harry?

To show that they are all powerful and able to kill him, even in one of the heavily fortified camps.

[MARG]

Wow, my PC goes on the fritz for a couple of days and a whole new thread started without me.......

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Was he duped, IMO, no, were the MOD, the government, Chiefs and Harry bloody idiots, you betcha!

Got to agree with you there. Even with Harry being naive.

Originally Posted by Warren

How, precisely, does Harry not going to Iraq "rehabilitate the Wales family"?

The whole Wales family needs "rehabilitation"? Did I miss another "very important something" yet again? In this instance I'm guessing not!
The Wales family are conducting themselves in a perfectly proper and acceptable way. Look at the way they haven't sued all of the yellow and at least half of the supposed credible media in Britain over these last few years.

Originally Posted by alison20

I got the firm impression that the media were going to find it difficult from now on to get information on what Harry was going to be doing - and they have no-one to blame but themselves for this.

I am reliably informed, via various (creditable) news sources and my very own crystal ball, that there is a long overdue recognition by the government that the laws pertaining to some types of reporting may be in urgent need of a revamp.

Ah yes, lets just reinvent the wheel.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by selrahc4

This is easy to say in retrospect. But no one knew at the start of the Falklands War how long it was going to last or how dangerous it was going to be.

Yet, we are looking at history and present day and see that there isn't any comparison between the two wars. Harry faces a very fierce enemy that uses uncivilized and inhumane treatment towards their enemy, whereas the Argentinian behavior towards enemies would not be as those in the Iraqi theatre. The enemy against Britain was almost of the same culture and civilized understanding whereas the Iraqi's have a very different culture and civilization that their mode of living and society is so much different and allows such inhumane treatment towards their own people much less an "enemy".

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by Alison20

The Duke of Kent and Prince Michael of Kent (the Queen's first cousins) both had careers in the military. Luckily for them, the media largely left them alone - and there weren't wars against such unbelievably cruel and vicious combatants. Prince Andrew was also a career sailor, and did pretty well everything other Naval officers did.

And Prince Andrew also didn't face "such unbelievably cruel and vicious combatants."

I got the firm impression that the media were going to find it difficult from now on to get information on what Harry was going to be doing - and they have no-one to blame but themselves for this. A headline was more important to them than many young soldiers' lives.

It's only seeing is believing that this will be the case. There's always someone that might be a "mole" at the MOD that may disseminate information to the enemy and back at the press.

[Roslyn]

I just found something I think is interesting and maybe others will too. I originally posted it in the current event thread, but snapped it away from there because this seemed a more appropriate place.

I am reading The Last Nizam, a biography of Mukarram Jah, the 8th and last Nizam of Hyderabad. Jah graduated from Sandhurst in 1957 and was commissioned into the Royal Engineers' Corps at the age of 24. Hyderabad was now part of India and not a separate kingdom and he had to find something to do. Soon afterwards India and China were fighting over their border. Jah enrolled for active service but his application forms were deliberately lost. The author suggests it was probably at Nehru's instigation.

According to Jah, "A senior general later told me that there was never any question of sending me to war. He told me that while they didn't so much mind the idea of a prince being killed, they were reluctant to see him taken prisoner by the Chinese. The propaganda surrounding such a capture would have been most unpleasant."

Different time, different place, different battlefield, different prince, same issues.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by MARG

I am reliably informed, via various (creditable) news sources and my very own crystal ball, that there is a long overdue recognition by the government that the laws pertaining to some types of reporting may be in urgent need of a revamp.

Ah yes, lets just reinvent the wheel.

Hopefully what you have been privy to is going to happen soon. The media has now been reporting on that poor "Harry look-a-like" soldier patroling along the Iranian border. Hopefully he isn't seen as Harry and either killed or taken alive for torture.

It would be interesting to find out, after the tour-of-duty, that Harry went down with Blair and was delivered somewhere in Iraq for his tour of duty there, unless Harry been spotted during this past week.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

I just found something I think is interesting and maybe others will too. I originally posted it in the current event thread, but snapped it away from there because this seemed a more appropriate place.

I am reading The Last Nizam, a biography of Mukarram Jah, the 8th and last Nizam of Hyderabad. Jah graduated from Sandhurst in 1957 and was commissioned into the Royal Engineers' Corps at the age of 24. Hyderabad was now part of India and not a separate kingdom and he had to find something to do. Soon afterwards India and China were fighting over their border. Jah enrolled for active service but his application forms were deliberately lost. The author suggests it was probably at Nehru's instigation.

According to Jah, "A senior general later told me that there was never any question of sending me to war. He told me that while they didn't so much mind the idea of a prince being killed, they were reluctant to see him taken prisoner by the Chinese. The propaganda surrounding such a capture would have been most unpleasant."

Different time, different place, different battlefield, different prince, same issues.

That is interesting and indeed follows today's issue regarding Prince Harry. I will have to read that book as it sounds interesting. And, pointing out the situation regarding the Chinese and propaganda does fall in line with the insurgents and their plans to grab or kill the prince. Thanks for your input.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

To show that they are all powerful and able to kill him, even in one of the heavily fortified camps.

Indeed. The once 'safe' green zone has been punctured as of late, thus showing somewhat lack of security and safety that once was almost solid from attacks.

Originally Posted by Sister Morphine

I trust no one. Those sailors/marines could very well have been executed, thankfully they were not. If they got a hold of Harry, Lord knows what they might do to him. A prince in captivity has a certain cachet.

I wonder what the British gave up under the table. Whatever it was, if there was anything, what would they want after they captured Harry?

[lyndaW]

All Prince Harry ever wanted to do (since very young age) is to be a soldier...the "Military Brass" knows (or should know) in the event of war (and how many are now going on in the world (thanks to a couple of leaders of world peace) a soldier ---fights---. That is what he does and wants to do. I think the news Media that continues (any Media around the world) who puts their stories first, and endangers the soldiers should be tried for Treason. As far as the "Big Shots" leaking information, they should also be charged with Treason. This would "slow" down the leaks. Poor Prince Harry, at this time he probably knows he was-----duped-----. I doubt if you will see him serve past his enlistment, he and Chelsy could (and probably would) do a wonderful job in the Chariety Field. My hearts go out to all the soldiers in the field, world wide, as well as their family. Wars are usua;;y by, and for the Politicians. As terrible as it sounds (now don't start yelling at me..just think about it)
Follow the oil
Follow the armaments
Follow the drugs
Follow the politicians (and their special interest groups)
and you get:
----------------------------war-----------------------------------
lots and lots of money in war (always have been, and probably always will be)

[MARG]

Originally Posted by lyndaW

Wars are usua;;y by, and for the Politicians. As terrible as it sounds (now don't start yelling at me..just think about it)
Follow the oil
Follow the armaments
Follow the drugs
Follow the politicians (and their special interest groups)
and you get:
----------------------------war-----------------------------------
lots and lots of money in war (always have been, and probably always will be)

Ah..... a cynic after my own heart.

I don't think Harry was duped. I am, however, persuaded that he is the victim of incredible MoD incompetence and almost unbelievable political naievity.

[caterpillarandcat]

The main idea is that he is at a much, MUCH less risk of being killed. As far as "duped" is concerned, I am not entirely aware as to what that term and/or concept actually means. As an American civillian, I have to actually search online for any news pretaining to the Royal Family. They do not seem to be of much intrest around here and I would actually have trouble recognizing any of them anyway honestly. I am only intrested in their well being and political role, and of course, their equines. Concerning "Harry's" situation and the deployment topic, he is a young man, in the Service and due to his status in the media was denied the chance of driving around in some kind of tank popping off rounds at large or small furry Iraqies or Afghanies, risking his life. It is not like we were gonna get live footage of that event occuring anyway. I wouldn't want to see the bloodshed, personally. It's a shame that people are suffering mentally over a decision that was decided in everyones best intrest. What if you had a loved one in "Harry's" "brigade"? (or whatever it is refered to as). Those young people work hard to achieve their rank, and did anyone else give this any thought: Mabey it's not all about him, mabey it's about them, and mabey he is sacrificing his fight to protect the lives of his commrades. There is some noble reason involved, surley, it is, still, after all that fairy tale kingdom in the hearts and minds of so many.

[kpusa1981]

Originally Posted by caterpillarandcat

The main idea is that he is at a much, MUCH less risk of being killed. As far as "duped" is concerned, I am not entirely aware as to what that term and/or concept actually means. As an American civillian, I have to actually search online for any news pretaining to the Royal Family. They do not seem to be of much intrest around here and I would actually have trouble recognizing any of them anyway honestly. I am only intrested in their well being and political role, and of course, their equines. Concerning "Harry's" situation and the deployment topic, he is a young man, in the Service and due to his status in the media was denied the chance of driving around in some kind of tank popping off rounds at large or small furry Iraqies or Afghanies, risking his life. It is not like we were gonna get live footage of that event occuring anyway. I wouldn't want to see the bloodshed, personally. It's a shame that people are suffering mentally over a decision that was decided in everyones best intrest. What if you had a loved one in "Harry's" "brigade"? (or whatever it is refered to as). Those young people work hard to achieve their rank, and did anyone else give this any thought: Mabey it's not all about him, mabey it's about them, and mabey he is sacrificing his fight to protect the lives of his commrades. There is some noble reason involved, surley, it is, still, after all that fairy tale kingdom in the hearts and minds of so many.

He worked just as hardtoearn his rank and was even trained up to go. However, I have to agree with you halfway.

[asma]

Personally, I'm not fond of "Conspiracy theory ".I think it's a simple matter the Prince was intended to serve in Iraq and when there were specific dangers on his life ,this was cancelled.However,I think the British adminstration or whoever responsible made a big mistake by announcing the intention of sendig Hurry to Iraq.

[marezdote]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

What did they think they would gain by killing Harry?

Who knows what goes on in terrorists heads but I suppose that they thought that by killing someone who is a very well known public figure maybe they would scare the British into withdrawing troops.

[Elspeth]

I think if they actually killed him, they'd have more of a fight on their hands. However, if they just threatened to kill him unless Britain withdrew its troops, it could make things awkward for the government. And if they really did go ahead and kill him, it would turn a lot of British public opinion against Iraq and Muslims in general, which wouldn't be a good thing for international relations but might be a very good thing for the terrorists.

Of course, it would also maybe put Tony Blair in the position of having to choose between his allegiance to the Queen and his allegiance to George Bush...