Will Prince Harry be now regarded as a weak soldier no that he is being protected from going to Iraq?

Question

So now, while he is living his royal life of luxury his comrades will be under constant attack in Iraq. Typical British hypocracy.

Answer 1

listen, war is for the poor plain and simple, 99% of the people that sign up for the army do it to receive the benefits, and if you ask me they are dumb as hell to sign up now when we are in a war that shouldn't be.....as far as the prince he didn't have to sign up at all, i never thought he would be sent to the war but he should be applauded for showing that he cares.

Answer 2

It is not a question of Prince Harry being regarded as weak, as the decision to deploy is clearly out of his hands. The problem is that how can both the Princes justify their role within the Armed Services if they are to be non-combatant. The cost of training young Officers is not cheap! The only people being protected are the senior military commanders and civil servants in Whitehall.

The MoD has proven once again that, being sat for too long in Whitehall leads to complete dislocation from the realities of being in the field Army. After a short visit by the CDS to Iraq last week, he obviously felt uncomfortable himself, and decided that it is an unsafe place to be. Fortunately the field Army under CDS command are trained to be in such places, in fact a soldiers one aim in life is to go into an operational environment, otherwise what is the point of training.

In the forces there is no such thing as 'peace time' only Operations, and preparation for Operations / war. Harry owes nothing to the troops he commands, they would be deploying anyway, he is not weak, but should resign, to highlight the incompetence of those above him. The only weak element in this fiasco of hype has been the MoD, who have made a laughing stock of the Army, and handed a propaganda victory to the insurgents in Iraq.

Answer 3

No Prince Harry should not be regarded as a weak soldier as this decision has been decided not by him but by higher power. If he was given the choice he would go, especially after under going the officer training. I think the decision was made because if the Iraq's get wind of royal blood being posted there it could cause or risk fellow soldiers lives. I think it should be Prince Harry's choice though.

Answer 4

Prince Harry will not be regarded as weak by his soldiers because they will be aware that his hands are tied when it comes to this matter. The Prince has consistently said that he wants to command his troop in Iraq and rightly so. The decision to prevent him from serving in Iraq is partly political and is based on avoiding a propaganda coup by the insurgents should any harm come to the Prince. It also diplays some thoughtfulness on the part of the CDS that he has realised that the presence of the Prince would increase the threat to soldiers under the Princes command. Soldiers in Iraq are already under immense threat - would you want that threat to your son or daughter to increase significantly because Prince Harry has joined the fight? I believe that it is because of this, the increased threat that his soldiers would face, that the decision to not send the Prince to Iraq has been made. I believe that Prince Harry should serve in Iraq but not as a troop commander because of the point already raised, having said this if I were in the Princes shoes I would be threaders about not being able to do the job I was trained for.

Answer 5

Not hypocrisy, but stupidity. It's obvious, isn't it, that if the army is ever used in a conflict, people will want to shoot at British soldiers. It's also obvious that a Royal makes a juicy target, so, by definition, Harry would always be a target if he was ever to be taken seriously as a soldier. So, then, why was he ever permitted to join? This outcome appears to have been inevitable. If Harry has an ounce of gumption, instead of just a wild streak, he will make this case and resign his commission. He has attracted a great deal of admiration for wanting to go to Iraq. Now that he won't be allowed to go he should make his objections a point of principle. Otherwise he will go down in history as just a rather loud toy soldier.

Answer 6

I agree with everyone who said the tabloids, and media in general, should have never run this story. That they know about it at all is disgusting, as it basically made the decision about whether or not Price Harry could serve a foregone conclusion. This man has put himself through intensive training and expressed a desire to serve with his comrades in arms. He must be gutted to be treated so differently.

And to those of you who complain about the Royals not serving, cast your mind back just 20 years, and remember his uncle. The Duke of Yorks ship was targeted by the Argentinians more than any other in the fleet. And he fought with honour.

I hope this is a ploy by the Army to provide Prince Harry an opportunity to serve without the media breathing down his neck. And if some fool trying to make a name for himself blows the whistle, give him a gun and send him out to the front lines!

Answer 7

The plain fact is that if the whole war wasn't followed so intensely by the media Harry would be deployed without general public knowledge and allowed to complete his tour of duty. As things are his deployment would be followed 24 hours a day thus greatly assisting the enemy in knowing exactly what the poor chap was doing. Okay, let’s have some media coverage of the war but to a certain sensible extent and not treating the whole thing like a soap opera with little regard for the safety of our troops

Answer 8

I don't think Prince Harry will be regarded as weak, when hopefully his character will not be questioned by those who are incapable of seeing the immediate issue.

Why should Prince Harry's presence add more fuel to the fire if the men serving under him become targets

Enough serving in the British Army have been killed.

Regardless of an individuals opinion of this war, fight for oil or over throwing a dictatorship. Why are people so concerned about sending more people, royalty or not. When more energy into getting them home safely is needed?

Answer 9

My first response to the question was to be "yes he would and should be regarded as a weak soldier" but this was based on my thoughts that a royal would never be allowed to be placed in a situation of any danger anyway. However, listening to news reports and turning these over in my mind I now feel that to send Prince Harry with his comrades would only considerably increase the danger to his troops. Right or wrong I really don't feel that it is worth taking this sort of risk.

Answer 10

If were not for the inherent dangers for those around him, it would have been a powerful message to have sent him in. It would have raised the respect level for Harry and the royal family a hundred fold. However, I think it would have been madness to send him and I'm sure his comrades see this result as preferable to being a target for every group or individual out there.
That does raise the question that surely this could have been considered earlier. This would always be the danger in any war, the real question is should he have joined the armed forces when there was never any chance he would see armed combat?

Answer 11

No he wont be, its not his choice and everyone saying he should make the choice seems to forget that someone higher than him has made that decision. And like it or not being in the army means taking and following orders. He has been told dont go he has no right to question that because it was an ORDER made in the interest of keeping soldiers other than him safe. Cool he wants to go very admirable. But he is making far less fuss than everyone eles. Please people a little common sense and a lot of thought for the men that would have had to fight against such an obvious target. Keep safe all the guys over there in both iraq and afghanistan our thoughts are with you.