October 23rd
home arts/entertainment business/finance politics/current affairs science/technology sport/leisure other

Politics/Current Affairs

Prince Harry To Be Kept Behind Front Line In Iraq

Monday, February 19th, 2007 at 10:21 by Howard Spencer-Mosley

It has been revealed, just days after the announcement that Prince Harry will be shipped off to Iraq, that he will in fact be kept out of danger. His Household Cavalry unit as part of ‘1 Mechanised Brigade’ (androids and that) will be posted to the British Headquarters in the Maysan province instead of patrolling the Iranian border like most of the unit’s forces. It is believed that Harry may be seen as a “trophy target” for insurgents, being the third in line to the English throne.

Harry has previously threatened to quit the Blues and Royals (part of the Household Cavalry) if he failed to be assigned to an actual mission. Ohhh, get her. I think that while he is stationed out of harm’s way somebody should just shoot him in the leg to stop his constant complaints and ensure he sees some kind of ‘action’ so as not to make the thousands of pounds spent on his training a total waste.

Surely the commanders of this young chap, previously known as the ‘party-prince’, were aware that this would be the case; his high-profile presence attracting unwanted and dangerous attention. It begs the question, why bother training him at all? A royal in war will always be a major target for assassination, more so than a politician or a journalist, especially to an enemy that is coming from a (previously) monarch and/or dictator ruled society. As long as he is there he will be, and put those around him, at risk.

His brother, Prince William who is also in the Armed Forces, will not be seeing any action (unless Kate’s really up for it) due to the tradition of the ‘heir and spare’ arrangement, by which a direct ascendant to the throne must be kept out of danger during war-time. It is for this same reason that Prince Charles has spent his entire Naval career in Portsmouth harbour while his brother Andrew was involved in real battles during the Falklands.

Keywords: , , , , , , , , ,

8 Comments on “Prince Harry To Be Kept Behind Front Line In Iraq”

  1. theo Says:

    The fact that the second in line to the throne would be present in an occupied country makes a statement of overwhelming arrogance to the occupied population - the last time a potential heir was on occupied land must have been over a 1000 years ago plus. And what if like Richard “cour de lion” Plantaganet he is kidnapped or worse killed? As a young man working in the army he may have an image problem’ if he is coddled and kept away from action, amongst his peers but the British people are massively against the war in Iraq. What of Afghanistan ? Nato are supported by legal process of the U.N and there is a strong legal international presence. He should serve there where the vile elements of the Taliban can be confronted on a wholly unquestionable moral front.

  2. Span Ows Says:

    Firstly he’s 3rd in line after his older brother William and their father Charles, secondly if he was mollycoddled into some safe corner away from his regiment it would play hell on overall moral of our soldiers and probably damage the Monarchy more than merely trying to allow a higher level of security with his regiment, thirdly he will immediately become more of a target because of who he is and so I’m sure all his Household Cavalry colleagues understand any special attention…forthly (!!) the press have instantly made the situation worse…

  3. theo Says:

    Third in line , not bad considering his DNA is totally different too! Ding Dong!

  4. DannyMackay Says:

    Are you sure its a thousand years ago? Surely various royals visited Germany in the late 40s. And that was far more comprehensively occupied than Iraq.

  5. theo Says:

    Yes I do believe that the Royals never visited occupied Germany. they visited India for example but that was not a nation in the true sense of the word’s modern meaning - the sub continent was a collection of fiefdoms. I cannot recall an occupied country oh hang on maybe Egypt counts here - because they were well established as a nation but we may have got over the embarrassment of occupying her by calling her a Protectorate or some such sophism.

  6. DannyMackay Says:

    ah - but if we can overcoming the problem on technicalities - then technically Iraq is an independent country that has invited UK and US troops to help it establish order.

  7. theo Says:

    Yes your right! But only after the nation voted in the rigged elections.

  8. DannyMackay Says:

    Actually the elections were remarkably free and fair compared to the first elections held in occupied Germany after WW2.

    Of course that says more about German democracy in the late 40s and early 50s than it does about Iraqi democracy in the new millenium.

Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Build Your Own Website
Easy Website Builder

 © 2006 - 2007 The home | arts/entertainment | business/finance | politics/current affairs | science/technology | sport/leisure | other