RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq

RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LightHeartedMaam -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 7:27:59 AM)
Wasn't there also a plan to film him there as a documentary? I think it's good decision. He'd be a greater liability than an asset.

CrimsonMoan -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 7:39:30 AM)
You know i read the article and you know what? I agree with them pulling him. Prince Harry has done nothing but take to Military life. He could have easily not done so and now he's being pulled out becuase of the saftey of others. I am sorry but anyone who complains is an idiot. The needs of the many outweigh those of the few. In this case his unit is the many and he is the few. And I'm sorry if you think they don't know WHO he is you are sadly mistaken. It has been common knowledge that Harry was in the military and that his unit. People are so quick to judge those with power and wealth. Have all of you forgotten who is mother was? Diana was the most giving and caring of any royal family in the last century. Listen Harry wants to serve but you know what if keeping him out of Iraq will spare soldier live then so be it.

domiguy -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 7:58:55 AM)
Idiot? Hmmmm...Look in the mirror honey. There have been plenty of instances in the past where well known people political, sports etc have chosen to fight for their Country. Would I go?...Hell no!...And I would cite that I would imperile my troops as well as possibly cause a loss of morale nationwide if the Domidong were to fall into the wrong hands. Pat Tillman went....Have you seen these guys when they are decked out for combat? They are virtually unidentifiable....I think they are just worried that blue blood would not look nearly as nice spilled out on the Iraqi landscape, cause everyone has gotten so accustomed to the sight of the beautiful hue of crimson splattered across that land.

Alumbrado -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 8:38:50 AM)
As mentioned by others, royals, celebrities, politicians, and other high profile people have served in the past. The comic book scenario being offered in this instance has played out in real life how many times?

juliaoceania -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 8:44:55 AM)
I do not think it would be wise to send someone like him to be kidnapped and ransomed. In fact it seems rather stupid to send him to a place that he would have such a target on his back.

juliaoceania -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 8:46:58 AM)
quote: That's a great case for keeping the Royals /Presidents /Politicians children from being subjected to the normal rigors of conflict{ala Iraq} that us common folk are. I don't buy it though. Prince Charles did not start the war, did not engage the troops over there, that was Tony Blair.

OsideGirl -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 8:51:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave One law for the poor and another for the rich and all that. Prince Harry actually wants to go to Iraq. So under your theory, he'd still be going despite the threat it poses to his fellow soldiers. I agree with the decision, his wants are not more important than the lives of his countrymen.

Real0ne -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:16:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LightHeartedMaam Wasn't there also a plan to film him there as a documentary? I think it's good decision. He'd be a greater liability than an asset. the way people believe disinformation now days? he could be their greatest asset!

Real0ne -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:22:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I do not think it would be wise to send someone like him to be kidnapped and ransomed. In fact it seems rather stupid to send him to a place that he would have such a target on his back. anyone who advertises their rank openly on the battlefield is an idiot frankly. the worst he could do is attract attention to the whole division or whatever. he would talk to radio men or via computer which ever, radio men then pass th orders along, no one knows who is actually leading the attack. That is done to prevent snipers from taking out leaders. Then again from what i have seen in some of the iraq footage they probly are either to arrogant or not smart enough to remember lessons learned in ww2 and prev wars.

TheLegend -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:25:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave How would the baddies know that in amongst the goodies, both sides clearly identifiable, our 'Arry was actually present in any action. Would his amoured vehicle be surrounded by secret service long black sleek automobiles on loan from the Yanks ? Or maybe flying the Royal standard ? The Army has local civilian staff working in the Barracks as cleaners, bar and catering staff as well as interpeters they would know his every movement. Its not unprecedented troops marked for assasination in other theaters such as Northern Ireland have been pulled out and reassigned.

DomKen -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:29:47 AM)
Put yourself in the shoes of a private in his regiment. You know the insurgents want to kill/capture him more than just about anything. There is no way to keep the information that your unit is part of that regiment secret so you can expect the insurgents/terrorists to devote extra resources to attacking you and yours. For the safety of the men he would serve beside he shouldn't go. If he wants to serve he should go into special forces training and then join a British special forces unit.

CrimsonMoan -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:44:51 AM)
Domi kiss ok. First of Harry wants to go no one has ever said otherwise. Secondly as pointed out its not as if he's next in line and there is no one to follow after him. Secondly Pat Tillman was never DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY threatend and Prince Harry has been. And its doesn't matter if in uniform they all look the same. They don't have to be able to pick him out of the group. All they have to do is bomb the unit so hard andd then search the bodies from there. They have done it before to find living soldiers to hold captive and then eventually record their beheading. Think for a second ok why paint a BIGGER target on these men's back than there already is. WE have gotten many of our soldiers back from captivty and lost many more. IF they were to capture harry do you honestly think they wouldn't try and use that to the full advantage that his capture would pose. Personally this whole war is a giant load of bat guano and i'd rather see us doing somthing more contructive, but you know what doens't look like thats gonna happen anytime soon. I don't think Harry is anymore important that the common man or ever our own soldiers. I do THINK however and its clear you don't that we should put them at more risk than they already are. I said it before and I will say it again if keeping him out is gonna keep his unit a bit safer and alive so be it.

Real0ne -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:55:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrimsonMoan They don't have to be able to pick him out of the group. All they have to do is bomb the unit so hard andd then search the bodies from there. They have done it before to find living soldiers to hold captive and then eventually record their beheading. Think for a second ok why paint a BIGGER target on these men's back than there already is. come on insurgents simnply do not have bunker busters and a stealth bomber to deliver them

Real0ne -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:57:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Put yourself in the shoes of a private in his regiment. You know the insurgents want to kill/capture him more than just about anything. There is no way to keep the information that your unit is part of that regiment secret so you can expect the insurgents/terrorists to devote extra resources to attacking you and yours. For the safety of the men he would serve beside he shouldn't go. If he wants to serve he should go into special forces training and then join a British special forces unit. Hey they can "say" he is anywhere!!! Even commanding the americans if they want to! Like i said the way people believe disinformation now days its the best defense. Oh wait thats right we arent talking about americans here are we? The insurgents arent that dumb maybe?

seeksfemslave -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 9:58:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Senator: The war's over. Our side won the war. Now we must busy ourselves winning the peace. And Fletcher, there's an old saying: To the victors belong the spoils. And never send a Prince when you can send the paupers. Fletcher: There's another old saying, Senator: Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining. Fletcher must have been to Hampden Park or Ibrox Park in Scotland during a Celtic/Rangers football match. There is vicious not to say muderous sectarian rivalry between the supporters and lots of drinking. Many a red blooded Scot came to a sticky end when the source of the Amber nectar flowing down the back of his trousers was identified. If it was down the front he blamed himself. Football is a War when Celtic/Rangers or England/Scotland play each other lol

popeye1250 -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 11:34:12 AM)
Send him. In the old days Princes were the first to go. I was in the Navy during Vietnam. About 40% of my Boot Camp Company went to Vietnam either directly out of boot camp or to ships that later went to Vietnam. The rest went to "A" schools and some of them later went to Vietnam. One of the guys in my Company was killed when the Cruiser Newport News had an explosion in the number two 8" gun turret. I was sent to a Fleet Oiler that went to the Mediterainian instead but had gotten back from Vietnam two years earlier so it's all in "the luck of the draw." About half of the "new guys" we got aboard were guys who had 18 months left on their enlistments and were returning from Vietnam. If you were commng back from Vietnam and had less than a year left on your enlistment you could request an "early out." I think just about all of us on that ship were "working class guys". I don't know if many Senators or Congressmen's sons were in the military then, probably not too many. They were probably in the National Guard. You had to "know" someone in those days to get in the National Guard. It was very unlikely that any National Guard Troops would be sent to Vietnam in those days because they had the Draft. If they needed 25,000 guys they just drafted them. When I was in the U.S. Coast Guard years later I had a CPO who said he joined the Coast Guard "so I wouldn't have to go to Vietnam." "Guess where they sent my ass?" "On a Gunboat in the M..r F...g Mekong Delta!" Yup, the Coast Guard went too and saw some of the heaviest fighting on those Gunboats. And they had very high casualty rates because they were totally exposed to gunfire from the jungle. You can't dig a foxhole in the water. If you sign up for the job and you're sent, you should go, period. It doesn't really matter what your "position" is in civ land.

Arpig -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 12:18:33 PM)
he wants to go, he should go...lord knows there are plenty of folks who don't want to go who are going. I don't buy the crap about putting his troops in extra danger, and I bet his troops don't buy it either. Let him go I say, Princes and Kings have served in many capacities throughout history, and I see no reason to put a stop to that.

selfbnd411 -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 1:00:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I do not think it would be wise to send someone like him to be kidnapped and ransomed. In fact it seems rather stupid to send him to a place that he would have such a target on his back. Kidnapped and ransomed is better than the bullet in the head that any other coalition soldier would get if captured in that civil war.

UtopianRanger -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 3:09:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig he wants to go, he should go...lord knows there are plenty of folks who don't want to go who are going. I don't buy the crap about putting his troops in extra danger, and I bet his troops don't buy it either. Let him go I say, Princes and Kings have served in many capacities throughout history, and I see no reason to put a stop to that. Domiguy, Alumbro, Arpig,Popeye, et al........ Maybe the women are right.....maybe he would endanger the troops if he was in a forward landing area /fighting position in Iraq. So let him push paper in a heavily fortified area of the green zone.{Hell Bono and many other celeberties spent time there} That way he'd still have an opportunity to drink Halliburton water and breath pulverized dust, ala depleted uranium. Then maybe in ten years he'd come down with some weird, anomalous form of cancer like some of the other good people who've served over there will. And then both the British and American goverments could deny the whole thing - After all, that's what they did in the first Gulf war [;)] - R

slaverosebeauty -> RE: Prince Harry to not serve in Iraq (5/17/2007 3:21:33 PM)
I think it is in Harry's best interest and safetey not only for him but those who would be serving with him that he stays. He is an easily recognizable figure and the snippers and terrorists would LOVE to get their weapons on him or kidnap him and use him as a pon for thier evil exploits. I applaud Harry for wanting and desireing to serve with his troops, yet, in his heart, he knows that he would be exposing them to more danger if he went. Even though he could colour his hair and stay well 'guarded' it will still make him a target. The best thing he can do, is to pray for those he has commanded and work on bringing them home ASAP.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.699707E-02