Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Not even that, considering that Harry would have been going to the South, where he's about as likely to bump into al-Qaeda as he is to ride into town on the back of Barney the Purple Dinosaur.

Remember there isn't an 'insurgency' as such, there's a small but unpleasant bunch of mainly foreign Sunni fighters who call themselves al-Qaeda, a larger Sunni bunch who are weed off about losing power and being ignored and several Shia groups, mainly linked to legitimate political parties in Iraq, and in a number of cases Iran. It's these latter guys that are killing our troops in larger and larger numbers, which, since they're the guys we're supposed to be *helping*, is the dirty little secret. After all, if Harry got blown up by a group allied to the Iraqi Prime Minister, that might just reveal that things aren't quite 'Us Versus The Terrorists'. Given that, it's unsurprising that he's being kept on a leash.

Of course, if it was a group allied to *Iran* that got him, what would be the result there? That would be a *really* hard decision (think about it).

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Well, fuel prices would go up, so I guess rather than keeping my 2.1TD, I'd stick with my 1.9TD and run it on veg...
Tough choice though, as you say ;)

At least if he doesn't go, we won't have Zee on here claiming he's raping Iraqi women.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

For my 2c -

Harry should not go to Iraq, not because he is a royal, but because the media have already said (and it is a matter of public knowledge) which unit and which area he is likely to serve in.
This means that the insurgents will target him specifically (and in fact the British Intelligence units have already detected specific threats/plans to attack him and his unit) and that would put those serving under him under even more of a threat than they would be normally.

I expect that he is actually gutted not to go - there is no feeling worse than being left behind when the men you lead/know/trust are going into action, except perhaps the feeling that men have died specifically because you are there.

If I was serving with this unit, I would be feeling a mix of relief (one less reason to get shot at) and sadness (getting a squadron leader we do not know or trust).

This may have been said before - but I thought it worth stating an opinion as one who who has been to where they are going.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:17 ----------

Sorry BB - have to disagree a bit on this one -

The insurgents from further North have already been quoted as saying that they would love to get at Harry - this would increase the risk in our zone (which, despite recent events is still a damn site safer than the US area of control) and put not just his unit, but all UK forces under increased threat.

Depending on your opinion - Al-Qaeda is either non-existant, a kind of "rent a terrorist" organisation, or came into true being post 9/11 - to most, it is a rallying call for anti-western fighters of any faith (we caught a number of non-muslim insurgents in Iraq).

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

They've been quoted as saying a lot of old rubbish, as you know this is an area where hyperbole and propaganda are the norm. I still think (and the BBC's defence correspondent was on the radio earlier saying much the same) that it's not the local al Qaeda franchise up North that prompted this decision, but the extent of Iranian influence in local militia, who know the area, don't have to watch their backs quite as much as an AQ cell trying to operate in the South and who have seen the mess we made of the RN/RM capture the other month. The consequences of being faced suddenly with a choice of either starting something with Iran (impossible) or letting the killing/capture of a royal go unpunished (unthinkable) must be the reason behind this. In many ways that's worse than if an AQ franchise got him, since that would be easier to spin - after all they're the official bad guys.

[by al-Qaeda I mean Sunni groups with substantial external influence from Saudi, Chechen, Pakistani etc. radical Sunni groups - whether they're directly run by bin Laden (unlikely) or are largely autonomous (likely) is irrelevant here - the Iranians or their local proxies will shoot them on sight if they rock up in Basra. The real issue is the local militia groups who see us as getting in the way of control over the massive amounts of oil smuggling out of Basra and want us out of the way. The risk to UK troops is increasing all the time whether or not Harry goes out there. It's worth keeping an eye on shenanigans in the Basra government and the main Shia factions, just to keep your knowledge of who they all are up to date].

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

I agree that the risk is increasing, and that the militia groups are an issue, however the militia groups also know that they only have limited resources to stop other groups coming in - and the chance of snagging a royal with such a high profile would be irresistible to most of the other groups, thereby giving them a further headache in terms of keeping control of their areas.

I also believe that the <alleged> links to Iran are an issue, however this is not the first time a high profile soldier was kept from the front line, merely the first time it has been done with so much press coverage.

Had the press not been printing every word and movement made on this issue, I honestly believe that he would have gone. I also honestly believe (and I have met a couple of the officers on his course) that he not only felt that he would go, he felt that it was his duty to go and was keen to do the job for which he had been trained.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

he would be better off in the boy scouts, at least he would get going to camp every year.:disturbd:

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

you are spot on :tu:

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Apart from the fact that the Royal Family have a history of serving their country at times of war.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Harry shouldn't go to Iraq, not because he's a "royal" but because he's a big frikkin target.

Not only does it put his life in danger unnecessarily but it also put the life of his colleagues in danger too.

I appreciate that he wanted to go and good on him for it but its an unnecessary risk especially as the press will constantly circle him like vultures.

And what if he did die, its a HUGE coo for the insurgents, people start asking questions, the press have a field day selling loads of papers etc... And all the two faced idiots who wanted him to go in the first place start to attack the Army for letting him get killed, calling for enquiries, looking for scapegoats.

Forget it, crazy idea - this isnt like "other" wars.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

:tu:

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Turns out he went to Afganistan and has been out there for months

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7269743.stm

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

Technically he's not in Iraq

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7269743.stm

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

I will await with baited breath the retorts from all the "he won't be going so he don't get hurt the royal family will see to that" brigade.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

I couldn't give two beeps if he get's blown up tbh.
Save us taxpayers money in the long run.
They get money handed to for absolutly doing nothing to merit it.

Re: Should Prince Harry go to Iraq?
 

He is a serving member of the armed forces, does a lot for charity and you do what ginge ???.