Prince Harry won't go to Iraq: UK govt.

max Headroom · Post by **max Headroom** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:54 am

I have no intention of offending anyone here, this matter could have been made easier by not telling anyone that he was going there, australia has troops in a couple of countries now and their identity is kept under wraps.

The life of a soldier from any country serving in any of these countries is in jeopardy should they be captured by these extremists, however their life is just as precious to their families as much as the royal family, , it was acceptable for Prince Andrew to serve in the falklands war, to risk his life.

The military carreer of Prince Harry to me seems to have been a waste of time and I think he is very disappointed, I say let him go.

===============================================

Prince Harry will not be sent to serve in Iraq after military commanders decided it would be too dangerous, Britain's Ministry of Defence says.

Insurgents have made specific threats against Harry, saying he could be a kidnap target.
"I've decided the risk to Prince Harry is too great," Richard Dannatt, the head of the British army, told reporters.

"I've also decided that the risk he brings to his troop and his squadron ... is also too great."

Harry, 22, the third in line to the throne and a junior officer in the army, had been due to be deployed in Basra, in southern Iraq, with his Blues and Royals regiment in the coming weeks as part of the latest British troop rotation.

Harry has repeatedly said he wanted to be deployed with his men, but Ministry of Defence officials were fearful that he could become a target for Iraqi insurgents, endangering himself and those serving under him.

Dannatt said he knew that Harry, as a dedicated professional soldier, would be greatly disappointed by the news, but said the risks outweighed those considerations.

"There have been a number of specific threats, some reported some not reported, which relate directly to Prince Harry as an individual," Dannatt said.

"These threats expose not only him but also those around him to a degree of risk that I now deem unacceptable."

In a statement released on behalf of Prince Harry by Clarence House, the prince said he was "very disappointed" but would not quit the army as a result. He said he fully understood the decision taken by Dannatt.

Cornet Wales, as Harry is referred to in the army, has long said he enrolled at Sandhurst military academy where officers are trained because he wanted to serve on the front line.

As a junior commander in the Blues and Royals "A" Squadron Harry would have patrolled Basra and the deserts north and west of the city in a Scimitar light reconnaissance tank.

Scimitar squadrons operating in and around Basra have repeatedly come under attack in recent weeks - among the dozen British soldiers killed in Iraq in April, two were blown up when a Scimitar vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb.

Dannatt said the widespread knowledge about Harry's impending deployment had contributed to his decision.

"It is a fact that this close scrutiny has exacerbated the situation and this is something that I wish to avoid in the future" he said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

captain beefheart · Post by **captain beefheart** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:46 am

Its the right decision in stopping him going, apart from extra danger to those in his troop we would have our stupid press reporters following him around or at least trying to report in his actions in Irag, no doubt he will be posted somewhere out of the main public eye in a few months, possibly Afghanistan. No doubt he is feeling a bit miffed about the whole affair

max Headroom · Post by **max Headroom** » Fri May 18, 2007 10:10 am

No doubt he would be disapointed, history and tradition dictates his path in life what if in years to come he may inherite the throne, how could his armies be true to their duty when their leader was told to stay home because it was too dangerous, how could he send troops overseas, I hope that something is done to right this.

Bushmermaid · Post by **Bushmermaid** » Fri May 18, 2007 11:18 am

We have been discussing this on the Aussie forum.
viewtopic.php?t=12098&start=0
All we know is what has been said in the press.......which I presume is your official palace or government statement/s........and we have commented on that basis.
I would be interested to see what the Brits have to say about it then compare notes from the 2 different perspectives.

kitten · Post by **kitten** » Fri May 18, 2007 3:52 pm

I am in two minds about this, yes he should serve like everybody else does.
But on the other hand my Son has been away and may have to go again soon, if he does no way would I want him to be any were near Prince Harry, if they are going to look for him and try to kill him we wouldnt want our Boy in the same place..
I know they can be killed any were and they have been, to many of them.
Its a sad situation, Prince Harry is upset not to be going I saw on tv.
Also I really do not think that our Prime Ministers Son down here would have to go to war.
Just wish they all could come home.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:36 pm

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:41 pm

No, still cannot understand anything you write,
Spell check mean anything to you.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:47 pm

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:52 pm

You pathetic fool, I see it is all right for you to have a go at me,
but when I retaliate you go running and crying to the moderators.

Now what you going to do? you normally delete your posts, so that no one can read your drivel.
Do you want a hanky to wipe the tears away.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:54 pm

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:57 pm

So you did not go crying to them, eh.
Be careful how you reply.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:00 pm

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:06 pm

This is part of a PM I received from a moderator this week.

" jake give me a break, can you remove northern from your sig as hes not to happy "

Well, Mr Liar?

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:14 pm

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:21 pm

Northern, Wrote " Jake you cannot go around calling people what you called me
it was down right insulting and above and beyond the boards
needs. "

He also wrote, " Jake....the No comment ...... Dip stick..... u are one mothers *ucker thats an F in front ucker. Your beers going to your head sad sad person "

As well as, " No still dont understand a word you say. .... d*ck head..... "

I will leave it to others to decide on this issue, except for this,
I very rarely, if ever use bad language on the boards, unlike the above.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:24 pm

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:26 pm

No English monarch or heir has been in harm's way since Richard III in 1485. The last English king to lead his troops in battle was George II in 1740-odd. So I doubt if future kings will worry about it, Max.

Royals don't go into the services (always as officers) to fight in the front line. They do it because it's a non-controversial role. Think of the problems with Edward.

Harry is barely out of training. I'd say he'd be a liability in the front line in any case. And suppose he got kidnapped? It doesn't bear thinking about.

Yes, I know Andrew flew a helicopter in the Falklands, but that wasn't regarded as dangerous.

If you let the royals stick their heads over the parapet in wars round the world, the casualty rate would mean we'd get down to Emma Bunton (103rd in line I believe).

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:27 pm

Idiot.

Ugly Betty · Post by **Ugly Betty** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:28 pm

I must echo much of what Kitten said. If Harry proves an extra desireable target, then the men serving with and under him will be placed at greater risk than they would be already. No one's children should be serving in Iraq. It was a fool's mission from the start.

By the way, Jerry, it was my understanding that Prince Andrew flew decoy missions in the Falklands. Am I wrong? If he did, I fail to see how that is not dangerous.

northern · Post by **northern** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:31 pm

Jake wrote:Idiot.

you said it jake