2007-05-20 04:23:46 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
Of course I empathise with the argument that he makes a high profile target and therefore his squad will be at further risk.
However,he signed up,He was allowed to sign up,he has been trained to cope with these risks and so has his squad.The morale of the armed forces during long term field exposure is precarious and thus should not be given any doubt as to the committment of those who lead them.
The propaganda prize would of course be denied to the enemy by an appropriate increase in security.Indeed ,tactical advantage could be gained with such a bait.
2007-05-20 07:37:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Harry was willing to do his bit, THE GOVERNMENT stepped in and said NO. The Queen and Prince Charles both supported his going BUT the government decided that it place his fellow soldiers at too great a risk to have him stationed there. Leave him be on this. I am sure you get more fodder to moan about soon enough.
2007-05-20 15:15:46 · answer #2 · answered by Julia B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, we're saying that we need to protect the others who would be forced to be with Prince Harry. He'd be bound to attract those who'd like to terrorize.
Why are there so many on here who don't seem to get that?
2007-05-20 23:21:08 · answer #3 · answered by kiwi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is such a controvercial topic... Harry apparently had no qualms about going to Iraq. In fact, he reportedly insisted on going and being treated like the rest of the troops. However, everyone in his troop would be in danger if he had gone. Imagine there was a kidnapping plot to get Harry, and no one could stand in their way to get him. They don't care who they kill in the process, so everyone around Harry would be in even more danger than they already are. Harry should have never been told he could go to Iraq in the first place.
2007-05-20 13:14:19 · answer #4 · answered by EvilFairies 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
He is a complete idiot. He should not join the arm in the first place, does he know what he wants in life, i wonder.
He is too naive to decide wheather he should be going to Iraq or not, this is not his war, it is Blair's war. Silly him
No one should risk their lives really, violence does not solve international issues, it only makes things uglier.
Anyway, who cares if prince harry is dead, he should do something more respectful in the society instead of showing off his fruitless army career. Hasn't he have something more constructive to do?
2007-05-20 14:54:09 · answer #5 · answered by Sexyboy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For nearly two weeks,you have used this site to post your anti-Royal views;we all know that you do not like them.Now,here's something you don't know:your great dislike is clouding your judgment;you are not able and not even willing to see other people's point of view.Several posters have given you reasonable answers;the added dangers of having a high-profile target in a regiment is too much for an over-taxed group to bear.The soldiers are in enough danger as it is without having a tempting target added into the mix.
2007-05-20 13:27:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Protecting Prince Harry would be protecting others...he
would draw bullets like molasses draws flies!
2007-05-20 23:58:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never said that. He just has an excused to not get shot. We can't have rich kids or princes getting killed in a war from oil and opium. They would rather it be some no name joe take one that The Dark Prince Harry.
2007-05-20 12:34:00 · answer #8 · answered by Ivan S 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No it is simply acknowledging that the enemy can read English and know how to aim for a propaganda magnet when they see one.
If I thought my husband /son/ friend etc, was going to have tostand next to him in the field of fire I would probably shoot Prince Harry myself and solve the problem for them!
2007-05-20 11:41:22 · answer #9 · answered by Christine H 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Nah. They're saying that while Harry is on patrol, he is more likely to be targeted -- therefore all his MEN would be at increased risk, too. If I were a Squaddie, I wouldn't want to be on patrol with a man marked for death for who he is, instead of for being the scourge of the enemy. Or do you WANT more Squaddies killed?
2007-05-20 11:42:55 · answer #10 · answered by Already Saved 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋