Prince Harry Current Events 17: March 2007
 

The UK doesn't have a policy on family members serving together, not even in WWII when many families lost all male family members.

Prince William and Prince Harry
 

Nither dose the USA however the commander oficers would ave prefured that the Sullivans not served on the same ship.
HRH Kimetha:I never really knew about the Sullivan Act in its entirety. Thanks kpusa1 for explaining it. But, it did give me another perspective of sending William to the battle zone, if Harry was already there. Then again, as you pointed out, Harry would be out of the zone by the time William can go. So, William can also go to the battle zone whether he is the 2nd in line.never really knew about the Sullivan Act in its entirety.


What do you mean?

Just because they haven't issued an order making it mandatory doesn't mean it doesn't happen. A lot of times commanders will try and have family reassigned to other units if it's possible BECAUSE of what happened to the Sullivan family.

It may or may not happen in the US, but Harry is in the British Armed Services and they have no such directive.

Prince William and Prince Harry
 

I was olny trying t [oint out to HRH Kimetha that there no such Act of Congress ever pasted and that the Sullivan Brothers did not have to write a letter FDR .They did their service and did die like serivcemen in WWII.
They are in the same regiment but different squads and William is not even done with his training. Since Harry is going to be deployed in May and come back in October. William will be done training in September so could possibly be deployed to Afghanistan.

Thank you Skydragon you are always so helpful in these and other matters aas well.

I thought the MOD had already made it clear that William would not be deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, that they are considering allowing a deployment to NI, which although far from 'safe' is not as dangerous.
As with Harry, the decision does not lay with the individual and it doesn't matter what William wants, the fact is that as the son of the heir (I did not use the 2nd in line deliberately), he is not considered dispensable.

Than what is the use of letting him do armoured recce training if can't be deployed? Why not just make William just join the mounted regiment?

There is no such act or law. However, after the Sullivan brothers were killed, there were several bills introduced in Congress that related to family members serving in a military unit together. None of these bills were enacted into law. However, there are military policies and directives to discourage immediate family members from serving together.The facts: The five Sullivan brothers of Waterloo, Iowa, enlisted in the Navy on the same day, January 3, 1942. The brothers were assigned to the U.S.S. Juneau, which was torpedoed and sank on November 13, 1942, killing all but 10 crew members. Although an existing Navy regulation forbade the assignment of the brothers to the same ship, their request to serve together was granted. The existing regulation was issued in July 1942, and was certainly influenced by the loss of the U.S.S. Arizona during Pearl Harbor, with three brothers among the casualties.

Source: U.S. Senate

Correct me if I'm wrong here, Skydragon, but couldn't William serve IF his country needed him? Perhaps, not in the Iraqi war, but if there was let's say a WWIII (God forbid that should happen). I am sure there are situations were he could, I guess.

Sometimes I type too fast and forget to go back and reread, so there may be sintax and grammatical errors in my posts, etc. What I meant was, I thought there WAS such an act, but there is not.

In reference to William and Harry being posted in Iraq, I never thought that as one came home, the other could go and not have both brothers over there at the same time (which isn't related to any Sullivan Act). :smile:

I asked my sons and daughters why they wanted to join the armed services and they all said they wanted to follow in their fathers footsteps, to 'make them proud'.

We are very proud of them, but it would have saved us so much money if they had become accountants or veterinary surgeons! :rolleyes:

What is the protocol?

When will he go to irag?

May or June, I believe it is.

Prince Harry: The Saviour of Basra?
 

Prince Harry: The Saviour of Basra?

interesting article;)

Well, it certainly covered all the bases! :flowers:

I think they are expecting rather a lot from someone they probably won't get a chance to see or talk to, unless we are back to the 'Harry is here' flag, as for rebuilding Basra.....:rolleyes:

No, lets not do that lap again. :wacko:

Though I have to admit, it is interesting to hear the spin put on his mere presence in the war zone. If that does generate any positive PR I am all for it, as for the rest ..... well Harry has been quite specific as to his role.... With his men, in the field. :ermm:

Somehow I don't think Sandhurst does a module on "Politics and the exceptionally junior officer in the war zone".:rofl:

They do 'Defence and International Affairs'. :rolleyes: