Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register)



2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Prince Harry's Deployment To Iraq
slushpuppy
post May 18 2007, 02:16 PM
Post #1


Newbie [Level 2]
**

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7-September 06
Member No.: 29,569



Prince Harry deployment Iraq was blocked by the ministry of defense(?) although past royals have served in the army and fought battles. The reason being that the Iraqi insurgents have formulated plans to capture Harry and they may use him against the British government or other government of the multinational force in Iraq also, Harry may put his unit in danger.

I believe that harry should not be sent to Iraq not because of his life but the lives he is going to endanger, what are your opinions?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mermaid711
post May 18 2007, 04:39 PM
Post #2


Super Member
*********

Group: [HOSTED]
Posts: 377
Joined: 27-April 07
From: Texas!
Member No.: 42,252
Spam Patrol



Well I must agree.

Harry said that he would hat to be responsible for the death of his boys. That he couldn't live with himself. It's a good thing they found the plans aand foiled it before he got deployed. Go Brits!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Saint_Michael
post May 18 2007, 07:40 PM
Post #3


$p4m 0n j00 $h4m3 m3 0nc3 $p4m 0n m3 $h4m3 m3 7\/\/1c3
*********************

Group: [HOSTED]
Posts: 6,304
Joined: 21-September 04
From: 9r33|\| 399$ 4|\|D 5P4/\/\
Member No.: 1,218
T17 GFX Crew



All I have to say this is hte smartest thing anyone has done about this war so far, I been keeping tads on this since it was first announce late last year. Of course you can say the media did the right thing by just mentioning the fact a member of the royal family was going to Iraq especially as a tank commander in the front lines. Who knows what could have happen if Harry would have been taken hostage? Of course when your a royal, famous, rich and wealthy and with the right connections you don't have to worry about such things, however, I would say Harry was sincere about not being able to go war and fight amongst his fellow soldiers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FolkRockFan
post May 18 2007, 08:00 PM
Post #4


Super Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 305
Joined: 12-February 07
From: Texas
Member No.: 38,593



The guy's admirable for wanting to go. He didn't try to worm his way out of his commitment or anything like that.

But still. It's a huge security risk to send a highly-recognizable, super-important guy into the middle of a war zone. Especially when the enemy refuses to just shoot you dead (opting instead to take people captive and, after several rounds of torture, behead them on camera).

I'm sure that Prince Harry can still serve in the military - just not on the front line (or whatever passes for a front line in the urban war zone environment).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
slushpuppy
post May 19 2007, 01:50 AM
Post #5


Newbie [Level 2]
**

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7-September 06
Member No.: 29,569



QUOTE(FolkRockFan @ May 18 2007, 08:00 PM) *
The guy's admirable for wanting to go. He didn't try to worm his way out of his commitment or anything like that.

But still. It's a huge security risk to send a highly-recognizable, super-important guy into the middle of a war zone. Especially when the enemy refuses to just shoot you dead (opting instead to take people captive and, after several rounds of torture, behead them on camera).

I'm sure that Prince Harry can still serve in the military - just not on the front line (or whatever passes for a front line in the urban war zone environment).

Pretty much recently, when the UN Korean chief visited Iraq and was meeting the Prime minister in the "green" zone, a bomb still went off on the building adjacent to the building where they were meeting in. Number of times, terrorist managed to attack fortified areas, "safe zone", of the Americans so I believe in Iraq, no where is safe.

This post has been edited by slushpuppy: May 19 2007, 01:52 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JasperIk
post May 19 2007, 05:37 AM
Post #6


Super Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 334
Joined: 28-December 05
From: California
Member No.: 16,259



I have mixed feelings.

One thing i am not mixed about however, is my respect for someone like him saying he is willing to go to war. That takes courage (takes courage for anyone, regardless of their political/social status but someone in his shoes, that is very admirable).

I think it'd be good to send him in, since what makes him any different to go to war? but a point was brought up about how the 'enemy' could use him going to iraq against the british. But i mean, why is it that people would be so concerned about saving his life, when theres others who go in, and no one seems to be in a hurry to get them out when they are in trouble (if that makes sense?). I hate how the world today values certain peoples lives over others, it isn't fair.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kasm
post May 19 2007, 09:59 AM
Post #7


Super Member
*********

Group: [HOSTED]
Posts: 297
Joined: 27-July 05
From: Melbourne Australia
Member No.: 9,909



QUOTE(slushpuppy @ May 19 2007, 12:16 AM) *
Prince Harry deployment Iraq was blocked by the ministry of defense(?) although past royals have served in the army and fought battles. The reason being that the Iraqi insurgents have formulated plans to capture Harry and they may use him against the British government or other government of the multinational force in Iraq also, Harry may put his unit in danger.
I believe that harry should not be sent to Iraq not because of his life but the lives he is going to endanger, what are your opinions?

- He would attract attention of the media and put his fellow soldiers in greater danger.

- He would be a fat prize for terrorists.

- Let us think reality. We all see what secrecy and security was taken when Blair , Bush or any secretary or minister make very short visit to Iraq.

- Imagine the disaster if Harry is captured and held for ransom, or executed. I remember in Suez Canal Crisis and the triple aggresion on Egypt [Britain,France and Israel]. One of the Royal family in low degree was abducted. But the Egyptian Resistance was Legal and play with the rules. But Harry is in the third in the British Thorn and the enemies is not playing with the rules. So why the risk.

- It is not matter of equity.. How many parentage of the British military personel are serving in Iraq?Then why Harry who will put burden on the army and not give any benefit.

- In Chess, the prince and king are usually the last in line. He is not ordinary solider but ceremonial soldier.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reelkill
post May 19 2007, 08:17 PM
Post #8


Member [Level 1]
****

Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 27-April 07
From: US
Member No.: 42,296



I think that is a cool thing for him do it really shows his dedication to his country,now back home I doubt anyone from our high command will be trying to join the military and go on the front line. I tried to join but I guess with my previous criminal charges I was denied enlistment. I was confused about that though because they were only juvenile charges and they were for fighting when I was in school. I guess any back to back charges are recognized as red flags. All I can say is congrats Prince Harry have fun and good luck
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
slushpuppy
post May 22 2007, 08:30 AM
Post #9


Newbie [Level 2]
**

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7-September 06
Member No.: 29,569



It appears that Harry would be going into a less "volatile" area, Afghanistan. I hope the Taliban do not hatch a plot to kidnap
him.