Prince Harry being deployed to Iraq

[wicket]

LINK

Prince Harry, the third-in-line to the British throne, will be deployed to Iraq, the Ministry of Defense said Thursday.

His regiment, the Blues and Royals, is expected to deploy to Iraq this spring, and he could become the first royal to see combat since his uncle, Prince Andrew, served in the Falklands war against Argentina in 1982.

Harry -- a second lieutenant -- has expressed his desire to serve alongside his comrades in Iraq, saying that there was "no way" he was going to undergo rigorous training and then stay away from the battlefield. He graduated last year from Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst.

Britain's Ministry of Defense has previously said that Harry could be kept out of situations where his presence could jeopardize his comrades. The 22-year-old prince, known as Troop Commander Wales by his regiment, has trained to command 11 soldiers and four Scimitar tanks.

In joining the military, Harry followed a royal tradition: his father, Prince Charles, was a pilot with the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and a ship commander, and Harry's grandfather, Prince Philip, had a distinguished career in the Royal Navy during World War II.

[LynneSin]

1. Good for him!

It's nice to see that the English royality don't feel it's beneath them to serve like the Bush Twins do

[LiberalEsto]

8. Don't forget George P. Bush

Wonder where he's hiding these days.

[wicket]

9. You forgot Poland!

:P

[LiberalEsto]

10. Is THAT where George P is hiding?

:evilgrin:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. As admiral as it might be, this is foolish.

I feel sorry for his platoon. They will have a gigantic bullseye on them the entire time that they're in Iraq. I don't see how having him there is anything less than a complete distraction, if not a whole lot worse.

[Oleladylib]

4. I think it is very admirable and I think the bush twins should go and represent us.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. I don't. I think that's extremely foolish.

You don't put a high-value hostage in one of the most hostile environments in the world. Would YOU want to have to negotiate the release of the daughters of the President of the United States? Think, for just a moment, about how horrible that would turn out. We'd have to cave on pretty much every one of their demands.

And you don't endanger more troops just to make a petty political point. Much as I would love to see ANY Bush actually deal with the consequences of this clusterfuck, it's a horrible, horrible idea.

[LynneSin]

11. It's not like the guy has a giant neon sign over his head saying "5th in line for English throne"

My only concerns would be the press making a big deal about where he's located. I think he should be offlimits when it comes to his service in Iraq, at least while he is actually in Iraq

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

12. He's still a very high value hostage, any way you cut it.

I mean, if Bin Laden's family were caught in the United States after 9/11, you don't think we'd want to keep them around as a "just in case"? Wait, bad example... :D

But seriously, what could possibly be a better media event than the kidnapping, and possibly very public execution, of the direct descendant of the royal family of your enemy?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

3. This is odd as I thought I heard that no more Brits were being deployed.

I hope he isn't going to be a sacrificial cow of the BFEE.

:tinfoilhat:

[MonkeyFunk]

6. but.. but...

that's unpossible!

I read here that Harry's brilliant gambit forced the withdrawal of British troops!

[DinahMoeHum]

7. Heh, in royalty they don't refer to him as a "spare" for nothing.

n/t

[wicket]

13. kick

:kick: