View Full Version : So, Harry isn't going to Iraq then.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6663053.stm
So then, I guess the MoD finally saw sense. I was discussing this, as you do, in the back of a taxi while in America, and we came to the same conclusion - that he'd have put both himself and his unit in danger by going.
One thing I picked up on, and the reason for this thread...
Mr Keys added: "It would appear that Harry's life is more valuable than my son or the other nearly 150 service personnel who've given their lives."
On a personal level, I'd think that was pretty obvious, but then I don't have family in Iraq, and I certainly don't personally know anyone who has been killed in Iraq. I can certainly see how either of these would bring a different perspective to things.
It all depends on your perspective I suppose. I think he should have gone. If there was never any intention of allowing him to serve and perform his role fully then he never should have been allowed to join. If this is going to be the attitude from now on I sincerely hope they stop anyone from the royal family (or anyone who could be seen to have high profile connections of any kind) joining the armed forces again.
This was entirely caused by the media. There will have been news reports out there saying that the future king of England is coming over. Cue just about everyone trying to have a pop at him.
If they really seriously wanted him to go, initiate a media blackout until he gets back, then tell everyone. Don't even let them give the hint that he could be off to Iraq. It would have been far more controlled and less of a risk would have been posed. Still the media love a good story and if he really wanted to go then they have ballsed this up for him.
Not a bad decision, he'd have been a missile magnet and so would anyone around him.
Justsomebloke
16-05-2007, 20:46
This was entirely caused by the media. There will have been news reports out there saying that the future king of England is coming over. .
He's not the future King though is he. I remember Andrew flying choppers at the Falklands & Harry is the brother of the future king as was Andrew. In my mind there is no difference in risk.
What this says to me is things must be Way out of hand over there for them not to let him go, way way out of hand.
Agreed, but I was making the point that the media out there will be putting it that way. I do agree that its probably a lot worse than what we are hearing.
semi-pro waster
16-05-2007, 22:20
I reckon he should have gone (or should go) because he is a professional soldier. Combat is what he has trained for and that was the deal when he signed up, if he doesn't go then it sets a bad precedent. I can understand the reasoning (I think) but ideally his position in society shouldn't make for different treatment. I'd agree with Muban, if soldiers from high profile positions aren't going to be allowed to actually do their job then they shouldn't be allowed to join.
This quite probably was nothing to do with the boy himself though and if reports are true he will be absolutely fizzing about it.
Von Smallhausen
16-05-2007, 22:33
Whether he's disappointed or not .... collatorally it's the right decision. No question he would have put thos around him at risk by him just being there and it would have taken a lot of personnel to protect him if he went.
I just think this could have been planned better with a media blackout.
I just think this could have been planned better with a media blackout.
Me too - you don't get to hear about it when top UK or US politicians visit until they're actually there, so why on earth didn't they do the same for Harry?
Because those in power didn't want him to go?
What better way to get this than create a media frenzy on him going and then say he can't because it puts others in too much risk.
They could have had a media blackout if they really wanted to.
It all depends on your perspective I suppose. I think he should have gone. If there was never any intention of allowing him to serve and perform his role fully then he never should have been allowed to join. If this is going to be the attitude from now on I sincerely hope they stop anyone from the royal family (or anyone who could be seen to have high profile connections of any kind) joining the armed forces again.
I agree entirely. As far as I'm concerned it's laughable that's he joined tharmy and cannot serve in a war (not that there should be one at the moment but that's a different discussion.).
Yes I'll admit he would have probably been more of a focus for the Iraqi army - who wouldn't kidnap a Prince?! But frankly I don't believe in the royal family, I do respect them out of being a British person but I see no need for one bar tourism and tradition. The hardly have any power left anyway - this is also another debate.
Either he should quit the army, or become a clerk or something else - I agree with Mr Keys comments it does lower the value of the lost men and women that we have suffered in Iraq.
I agree it's probably the right decision - heck I'd go in for the shot myself if I was an enemy sniper, or at least try and capture him - it's pure genius to do that. However it was foolish of the media and him to make a big deal about going there in the first place.
It's only the right decision for the safety of his brothers around him, NOT his own safety. That's just pathetic.
Matblack
17-05-2007, 09:25
Interesting.
I bet that if this had been a legitimate war i.e. UK vs Agentina over the Falklands (although I expect some would argue whether this was legit) that they would have flown him in without a moments thought. After all a Royal leading a troop would probably increase moral and if he died there would be general outrage amongst the country and the tabloids would stir up a whole load of rightous vengence amongst the civilian population.
However if he snuffs it in a confused, morally dubious war zone without the sanctions of the rest of the world, dying not properly engaged in battle but in a seady side road taken down by an improvised pipe bomb then its just going to call the war into even more question and the tabloids are more likely to push the public into pressing for a pull out.
Time was that the royals led the troops into battle fighting from the front and providing a spearhead of loyal troops, but the fact is that our wars are never this simple anymore, rather than defend our homeland we go out looking for a fight so we can justify our spend on weapons and retaining a large military who if dispanded/ reduced would cause an increase in the unemployment figures :/
MB
LeperousDust
17-05-2007, 13:39
Wow, never thought of it in that light MB, thanks :)
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.