Would you send Prince William to the Falklands

[Scouse]

No Mabs. Quite obviously I'm making the argument that unlike all the other soldiers Harry is kept out of harms way as much as possible.

I've also posted evidence to back up that argument, just before you started with the personal insults.


Now, shut your yawning fishy cavern, you're stinking up the place.

 

[Mabs]

No Mabs. Quite obviously I'm making the argument that unlike all the other soldiers Harry is kept out of harms way as much as possible.

I've also posted evidence to back up that argument, just before you started with the personal insults.


Now, shut your yawning fishy cavern, you're stinking up the place.

nope, your saying he was and will be, evidence you provided was disproved
so fo

 

[Scouse]

nope, your saying he was and will be

Well done! I am saying "he was" kept out of harms way and he "will be" kept out of harms way. You're beginning to get it.

Beginning:

evidence you provided was disproved

No, the evidence his regiment provided, that was widely reported and commented on by the UK media, is a matter public record.

Unless you've got evidence that all this is "disproved" and reality didn't actually happen? Could you post it?


Look at the media bullshit around him!

The Prince, who gained his wings earlier this year, is said to be an “exceptional” pilot, even among the elite corps of airmen who are chosen to fly the £40 million two-man attack helicopter

Wow. Kim Jong Il much?

I also heard that Harry is a whizz at golf and once made twelve holes in one in his first ever game!

 

[soze]

Wow. Kim Jong Il much?

I also heard that Harry is a whizz at golf and once made twelve holes in one in his first ever game!

Sorry but how do you know he is not, they would not put him in charge of something that could kill a lot of people if he was shit would they? If he has made it into the best helicopter we have then chances are he is up there.

 

[Gumbo]

You reference a link, Scouse, which says how Harry didn't go with his Regiment when they left for Afghanistan and only went when it was safe to do so. Yep, he didn't go with his Regiment. A lot of his other duties mean that he wasn't at that time a 7 day a week soldier. When he did go, it still wasn't 'with his Regiment'. He trained as a Forward Air Controller and deployed with 52 Brigade. That Brigade saw a lot of action, especially during Harry's deployment. A Forward Air Controller, by definition has to be, er, at the front. He's the man who calls in the air support, and Harry did.

If he was not a gifted pilot, he would not be flying Apache. You are the one saying how Harry is not put in harms way. Do you realise quite how involved flying, let alone fighting, Apache is? If he was being kept out of harms way, he wouldn't be allowed to tool around in something that demanding for fear of him making a deep and smoking furrow in the fields around Wattisham.

You may be a rampant anti war Republican. You should, in my opinion, try to remove yourself from your broader feelings for a second and try to look a bit more objectively at the situation. It's not a given that Royals get cushy armed forces jobs. Look at Edward who got binned from he Royal Marines for not being able to hack it.

 

[Scouse]

I never said he was shit. I referenced a quote that said he was "exceptional even amongst the elites". And, yes, I know the entrance requirements for pilot very well - which makes that statement even more likely to be propaganda, not less.

I also posted two news stories that referenced not only his regiment but the UK prime minister making decisions on whether it was "safe enough" for him to go - a luxury the rest of the pilots don't get...

 

[mr.Blacky]

Wouldn't it be more of a plus point for royalty if some royal died in combat? The sympathetic feelings would go that way, I think. Neutrals would feel sorry for the family and become more pro monarchy etc and etc.

 

[Raven]

I know its tremendously fashionable to hate the royal family but I have quite a lot of time for Charles, William and Harry.

On topic. Yes he should do, if it's required of his unit.

 

[throdgrain]

Sorry Scouse, you're talking shite. He was based on The Invincible during the Falklands War, the primary target for the whole Argentine air force and navy. He was as much in harm's way as any man on that ship. He flew the first rescue flight on The Atlantic Conveyor, and he actually flew anti-Excocet decoy missions, which is about as "in harm's way" as you can get for an RN pilot. He may be a bit of golf-playing tool these days, but he did a real job when he was in the navy.

As usual Scouse I love your response to this total destruction of your arguement.

 

[Scouse]

As usual Scouse I love your response to this total destruction of your arguement.

I don't see how it's a "total destruction" of my argument? He posted an opinion, I posted an opinion with a couple of news stories (and one anti-royal blog) that support my argument...

??

Just saying "he did a real job in the navy" doesn't mean he actually did, any more than simply saying Harry did a real job in the army means owt, does it? Especially when there's evidence to show that he probably didn't.

Or does "scouse, you're talking shite, this is what happened (I was there!)" constitute a winning argument now?

 

[throdgrain]

He was in the Falklands, he did have an operational role, simple. You can now say a load of other bollocks as usual -- go!

 

[Gumbo]

/snip

any more than simply saying Harry did a real job in the army means owt, does it? Especially when there's evidence to show that he probably didn't.

Or does "scouse, you're talking shite, this is what happened (I was there!)" constitute a winning argument now?

Evidence?

 

[soze]

Evidence might mean the British press published a story saying he did really well. Which of course means he was shit and spent all his time making a stiff sock

 

[Scouse]

Evidence...

The point I made is that Harry is kept out of harms way. I then posted two well-publicised press stories about him being withdrawn because it was, and I quote, "too dangerous".

/cursorygoogle:
Harry withdrawn from Afghanistan
Prince Harry barred from fighting in Afghanistan
Prince Harry Banned from Afghan War Zone
Brit army won't send Harry to Afghanistan
Britain's Prince Harry Pulled from Afghanistan
Britain to pull Prince Harry from Afghanistan

Oh no! He's just like any other soldier. They won't protect him, or keep him out of harms way.

I'm *so* wrong...

 

[ileks]

The point I made is that Harry is kept out of harms way. I then posted two well-publicised press stories about him being withdrawn because it was, and I quote, "too dangerous".

/cursorygoogle:
Harry withdrawn from Afghanistan
Prince Harry barred from fighting in Afghanistan
Prince Harry Banned from Afghan War Zone
Brit army won't send Harry to Afghanistan
Britain's Prince Harry Pulled from Afghanistan
Britain to pull Prince Harry from Afghanistan

Oh no! He's just like any other soldier. They won't protect him, or keep him out of harms way.

I'm *so* wrong...

Obviously he isn't like any other soldier. Once the world knew he was out there he had to be removed because he would have been a target, putting him (and those around him) in much more danger than the average soldier. Before that it was fine.

edit- and no I haven't read all of those articles, but having a brief look at the second last one shows it completely undermines you. A quote:


"The British military should be commended for what they have done in sending Harry to the front. For a member of royalty to go through rigorous military training and be sent to the front lines to go head-to-head with armed Taliban forces is a very noble effort by the family. I wish our government leaders would send more of their children to conflicts they overwhelmingly approve, as it may make them think twice about sending our men and women into battlefields when it isn't absolutely necessary.

But Prince Harry being taken out of combat due to his cover being blown is by no means special treatment. Special treatment, to me, would mean he's relaxing in a palace somewhere far from the action while media outlets praise him as a brave soldier fighting valiantly for his nation. But the footage of Harry in action shows that he's in the dirt like a regular soldier, gunning at the enemy, calling in bomb strikes, not showering for four days, and eating meals out of a can. He was in danger of being wounded or killed just like the soldiers around him, and there's nothing "special" about that."

 

[Scouse]

So he's kept out of harms way then?

 

[Ormorof]

you are looking at it the wrong way (or at least thats what it seems to me from reading your posts) - from your point of view removing him was a special treatment that other soldiers didnt get, which is true, but in reality NOT removing him would be dangerous in the extreme for the other soldiers and everyone involved in the Afghanistan military operation, and seeing as its already a pretty dangerous place there is absolutely no reason to increase the risk of casualties.

He didnt choose himself to leave, he was ordered to leave. If he had requested an easier post and was handed it then I would agree with you 100%, but he didnt...

And anyways Britain has a volunteer army, they signed up knowing they might have to go to dangerous places, if they then are upset that they dont get pulled out when the heat is on they shouldnt have signed up in the first place.

Prince Harry goes where he is ordered to go, same as Prince William, and as has been mentioned he is just as likely to be rescuing argentinians as falklanders so i dont see what the big fuss is about, Argentina sabre rattling is hardly anything new anyways...

 

[soze]

The reason i choose to believe for Harry being sent home is when the press blackout failed it then put everyone else he worked with in even greater danger. When the Talibani learn that he is there it is going to become mission number one to kill or capture him. So every solider wearing the same uniform in the same area is then under more danger. Sending him home was the right move and not just for him.

 

[Gumbo]

Two of the articles posted by Scouse are from '06 when they were saying they wouldn't send him at all. They did. So are hardly relevant.

The rest are about him being removed after serving for 10 weeks, so a little shy of half of a full 6 month tour. If foreign press hadn't leaked it, he may well have stayed longer.

He was in harms way, until his presence meant that his entire unit would be placed in far greater danger than was necessary to carry out their mission. Then the decision was taken to remove him. He would have been seething at this, mad as hell.

You can keep saying it, but it won't make it true. He did fight, he did fire his weapon in anger, he did call in airstrikes. I have no doubt that he will go with his squadron to Afghanistan, probably this year, and will fight his helicopter supporting the troops out there.

Scouse isn't going to change his mind, that's pretty obvious. He clearly believes what suits his larger republican tastes, and can't quite grasp the definition of evidence.

 

[Raven]

So he's kept out of harms way then?

Yes and no. It's plainly obvious that such a kill would be a massive victory for the Taliban and it would not only be him but those around him in much more danger of attack, potentially not just RPG/small arms fire either.

Pulling him out was the best thing to be done after the spineless journalists decided they wanted a scoop to pad out the celebrity gossip.

 

[Scouse]

Yes and no.

So, yes, then?

 

[Embattle]

So, no, then?

 

[ECA]

Would I bring him back would be a better question.

 

[rynnor]

I'm a republican but I think that serving in the armed forces is a usefull thing for the royals to do.

They have faced great dangers but it makes no sense to expose them to specific threats of assasination like in Afghanistan.

I think its a bit rich for those of us who have never served in the forces to question those who have - irrespective of being royals.

 

[Scouse]

I think its a bit rich for those of us who have never served in the forces to question those who have

Really?

He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder

 

[soze]

For a man who gets credited with helping to build the atomic bomb that is pretty rich. (I know he was not directly involved but he did have a influence) (I think this will bit me in the arse)

"I hate people who fight for their country! I am OK with weapons that will wipe out a country though!"

 

[throdgrain]

Really?

You never cease to amaze me

 

[Scouse]

You never cease to amaze me

You mean Einstein never ceases to amaze you

 

[rynnor]

You mean Einstein never ceases to amaze you

He wasn't a patch on Newton - he's just hyped because hes the only clever man the US has any tenuous claim on.

 

[ileks]

FFS Scouse. What has any of this thread got to do with the morality issue surrounding the armed forces? You say things like:

Lol. I could tool around in a plane, or get posted to the main base in afghanistan, and never see anyone who would so much as fire a pea-shooter at me.

Just like Harry. What a hero he is. Just like all the other heroes. Royals - they're just so....heroic.

This to me is an ignorant statement. It's the sort of thing I think Rynnor is criticising.

You have this annoying habbit of throwing random quotes or news articles at people, none of which relate directly to what you have been saying.