Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Harry NOT Going To Iraq

UPDATE: The Army's chief-of-staff admitted that press reaction was one of the reasons he decided against sending Harry to Iraq. Way to go, fellow muck-rakers!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketThe army has finally accepted what you and I have known for months - that not only would Prince Harry be in danger in Iraq, so would everyone in proximity to him. The notion of a soldier in a war zone needing bodyguards (which was suggested) is ludicrous.

It was probably all a ploy anyway, a bit of sabre-rattling. Maybe Prince Harry even wanted to serve, but the inevitable camaraderie of Sandhurst must be tempered by the possibility that the threats received against his person would have been carried out.

[S O U R C E]

Previously, on the Pop Culture Institute...

- Britain Offering Terrorists Plum Hostage
- Egregious Paranoia Department - HRH Prince Harry
at

4 comments:

  1. DanielWednesday, May 16, 2007 at 3:42:00 PM PDT

    Hmm. What are they going to give him a medal for then, I wonder? The whole thing smacks of a mockery. War is war, this 'operation' is no more dangerous than any other (less so, probably, for an officer) and I don't know of another royal who's been exempted. You probably do, of course, so please enlighten me...

    ReplyDelete
  2. michael sean morrisWednesday, May 16, 2007 at 11:34:00 PM PDT

    I began to suspect a ruse even as I was typing the last post I made on the subject.

    Prince Andrew - who was then second in line to the throne - served in the Falklands (and under very perilous conditions). But then there hadn't been any specific threats against his person by Argentina.

    In Iraq, of course, the usual rules of engagement don't exist, and a famous redhead would be too prominent to protect.

    I think Harry wanted to serve, but he is technically the property of the state (as are all royals, who technically have to get the permission of Parliament to travel outside the Commonwealth, marry, divorce, etc.)

    Home-front morale is bad enough; I'd hate to think what would happen if one of Diana's sons was kidnapped and tortured.

    ReplyDelete
  3. GavinFriday, May 18, 2007 at 6:56:00 AM PDT

    I'm happy he's not going. Indeed, if he were captured and/or killed the war would have widened exponentially. I think he would better serve his country by staying home. His staying home is no reflection on his bravery or willingness to participate in the military.

    ReplyDelete
  4. michael sean morrisFriday, May 18, 2007 at 11:43:00 AM PDT

    There's some talk he may be involved in the war on the home front, working with soldiers on their rehabilitation, for instance.

    ReplyDelete