Should Prince Harry go to Iraq? - Page 7

07-05-2007, 01:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

War of the Roses 1485

If it was at the time of Richard III isnt it more likely seeing as Dicky was killed before the end of the battle to be Henry Tudor later to be crowned Henry VII father of Henry VIII

TheDaddy · 07-05-2007, 02:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

If it was at the time of Richard III isnt it more likely seeing as Dicky was killed before the end of the battle to be Henry Tudor later to be crowned Henry VII father of Henry VIII

Don't think Henry did any killing, where as Dickey accounted for two of the few (perhaps only IIRC) nobles Henry lost that day

ginge51 · 15-05-2007, 13:52

what makes him any different from any1 else in the army?
hes there to be used when called upon in wartime,were in a war in 2 countrys so hes in the army.

use him
he does absolutly naff all for the country as a royal except spend tax payers WELL EARNED money for nothing.

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by ginge51

what makes him any different from any1 else in the army?
hes there to be used when called upon in wartime,were in a war in 2 countrys so hes in the army.

How many other soldiers would be singled out in a deliberate attempt to kidnap them?

TheDaddy · 15-05-2007, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

How many other soldiers would be singled out in a deliberate attempt to kidnap them?

All of them, the only difference is how we would react to it and the effect it would have on our publics moral, there will be even louder calls for US withdrawal if anything happens to the three soldiers being held and it appears on internet sites, imagine what would happen here?

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

All of them, the only difference is how we would react to it and the effect it would have on our publics moral, there will be even louder calls for US withdrawal if anything happens to the three soldiers being held and it appears on internet sites, imagine what would happen here?

Really? There are concerted efforts to kidnap every single British soldier?
So far the only public threat the insurgents have made regarding such a thing that I have seen only relates to Harry.

TheDaddy · 15-05-2007, 15:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Really? There are concerted efforts to kidnap every single British soldier?
So far the only public threat the insurgents have made regarding such a thing that I have seen only relates to Harry.

Every soldier is a target and if they could take them alive them so much the better, it's so obvious the terrorist's don't need to say it

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Every soldier is a target and if they could take them alive them so much the better

What concerted efforts have there been to specifically attack vehicles with the objective of kidnap rather than death in mind?
Would there be more effort to kidnap Harry than any other soldiers?

TheDaddy · 15-05-2007, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

What concerted efforts have there been to specifically attack vehicles with the objective of kidnap rather than death in mind?
Would there be more effort to kidnap Harry than any other soldiers?

Why kidnap the three Americans the other day then, if all they were interested in was killing

Who knows about the amount of effort they put in, seems to me there is little organisation to it, which is probably why it's so hard to deal with, could such an operation even be mounted, I wouldn't have thought so, not without them having access to information

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 15:51

Is there any evidence that the recent kidnapping was anything more than oppertunistic?

TheDaddy · 15-05-2007, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Is there any evidence that the recent kidnapping was anything more than oppertunistic?

Is there any evidence that any attempt on Harry would be anything other than opportunistic? All there is at the moment is wild claims about having informants in bases and having a special squad to kidnap him, please, if these are what his deployment is based on then we might as well disband the army and hide under our beds forevermore, I wonder how the army view these claims?

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 16:04

They've specifically said they plan to kidnap him.
Given that he's being allowed to go (last I heard anyway) the MoD don't believe the threat to be too great.

What I was trying to get across to ginge51 is that unlike most soldiers, there have been specific threats against Harry, and as such he is different from most soldiers, so the MoD would have to assess the risk before allowing him to go there.

TheDaddy · 15-05-2007, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

They've specifically said they plan to kidnap him.
Given that he's being allowed to go (last I heard anyway) the MoD don't believe the threat to be too great.

What I was trying to get across to ginge51 is that unlike most soldiers, there have been specific threats against Harry, and as such he is different from most soldiers, so the MoD would have to assess the risk before allowing him to go there.

We said they had weapons of mass destruction, doesn't mean they did, talks cheap, although in this 24 hour media world such claims will be beamed around the world no matter how wild, so I surpose they fill the terrorists purpose, that said I agree with you and have said all along he shouldn't go, at best his presence will put others at risk, at worst we'll see his beheading on YouTube

You know it surprises me there haven't been more attempted kidnappings or even taking the bodies of dead soldiers, when you look at the effort America has gone to (and rightly so I add) recover those three, surely those thousands of troops looking for them have been taken of duties elsewhere or having their rest times cut at least, that's not even taking into account the impact it's having on the American public

Xaccers · 15-05-2007, 16:23

I'd guess it's related to the disorganised form of the insurgency.
Small cells that are loosly linked in beliefs and name, but no real structure or guidence.
IED's like most mines are oppertunistic in nature, they rely on your target being in the right place and the right time, and driving over the damn things. If the insurgency was united in actuallity rather than in just a cause, then they could get organised and start making well thought out attacks.
The other thing is, didn't we kill the guy who was promoting beheadings and kidnappings much to the annoyance of other insurgance leaders as it was costing them muslim support in the middle east?

Xaccers · 16-05-2007, 16:53

Well, he isn't going now

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6663053.stm