wow his going so let him, he wont die cozz of protection, but if accedents happen like to the family that lost a loved one to a friendly fire, war hasnt stopped, but if it happened to harry, do you think uk would pull out its troops??? cud it stop the war???
2007-02-23 19:24:06 · 14 answers · asked by emzo2000 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
donk: you say who cares, i say i care about ending the pain n suffering of war!!
2007-02-23 19:31:25 · update #1
stop clenching: no i am no, i am a student in the UK, who cares about life, i wouldnt want Harry to die as i think just like all troops it takes guts to go to war!!
2007-02-23 20:53:07 · update #2
lol OH that Harry.
How funny. I wondered what random Harry you were talking about. I honestly thought it was your cousin or something or this was some kind of weird joke.
No.... if he goes at all he'll be protected. (like you said) If he's protected he CAN'T get killed or injured by either friendly or hostile fire...
He won't be out there in the middle of it all. And even if it did NO, it would not stop the war. If it did, there would be BIG trouble. Why is he more important then any other man (or woman) out there?
2007-02-23 19:40:59 · answer #1 · answered by Fluffy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'friendly fireplace' casualties, or Blue on Blue's, by using fact the British (and probable American) armies call them, are an inevitable component to present day conflict. In previous wars, much less sturdy munitions and weapons structures brought about lots extra of them. in the 1st international conflict, getting hit via artillery 'falling short', and killed via your man or woman gunners replaced right into a real risk. A acquaintances grandfather - a gadget gunner throughout WW1 - reported that as quickly as confronted with a massed infantry attack it have been needed to place down non-stop fireplace in the direction of the enemy, even while it replaced into sparkling that the fireplace could kill a lot of your man or woman troops between the gadget weapons and the enemy. In WWII, for the duration of the attack on Berlin, a large artillery fireplace plan replaced into achieved via the soviets on a timber full of their own forward troops. in the Falklands, undesirable visibility at night blended with tight operational risk-free practices, ended in 2 communities of particular forces (marines and SAS) eye-catching in a fireplace-combat. it is tragic, and unavoidable. what's contemptible is while people attempt and make political capital out of those incidents, and while people who could run a mile in the previous intervening in a schoolyard combat or helping a policeman in a pub brawl, use the possibility to criticise those in the army. Armchair generals look getting youthful. -
2016-12-17 17:42:38 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah I really think they would. Simply because in a lot of situations, it takes someone high profile to get injured, or in some way harmed by the events taking place before the authorities do anything to stop it.
Good for Harry for going in there!
2007-02-23 22:21:08 · answer #3 · answered by @>-- Dee --<@ 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It wouldn't stop the war, but you don't have to worry about Harry getting hit by friendly fire because his tank will have a flag on it the size of a tent with the letters HRH on it.
2007-02-24 05:21:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Pfft lol, theres no chance the war would end buddy..sorry. I really hope your not a serving squaddie out there thinking of a way to come home...
2007-02-23 20:11:43 · answer #5 · answered by hobo_soup 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He won't go where there's any danger of fire, friendly or otherwise.It's all a stupid publicity stunt.
I think they're probably probably nice people, but in general the royal family are a waste of money and space.
2007-02-23 20:39:56 · answer #6 · answered by mistyblue 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No - I don't think they would stop the war. There would be a huge outcry - he is 3rd in line for the British throne after all.
I say good on him for going - he wants to fight for his country.
2007-02-23 19:28:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Friendly Fire is just part of the risk. That is just a part of life. the life of war.
2007-02-23 19:27:08 · answer #8 · answered by lorno5378 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, and i think the goverment are conspiring to get him killed so they can justify sending even more troops and spending even more taxes in revenge. quite a good ploy to gain support in a failing war if you ask me. they had to send someone like harry, who would care if they sent GB or Mr Blair and they got killed. its all tatics really.
2007-02-23 20:51:07 · answer #9 · answered by mark d 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Harry insisted he be treated exactly like the other guys, he will not be protected, he is a wonderful guy due to his wonderful mothers teachings. And no, it will not stop the war, think
2007-02-23 19:29:47 · answer #10 · answered by spuds_suds 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋