Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
Red Neck Man

Prince Harry

Recommended Posts

Agree with Jan and Stripey.

He joined the Army - his choice - and should available for any posting, regradless of the circumstances or geography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone told me that it's a 'royal duty' to serve in the army to some degree. Is this true or complete bollocks?

I personally think he should be treated like every other troop. I mean, what did he expect to happen? "Hey, better not attack those chaps over there, I hear Prince Harry is amongst them"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In war, as in chess, each piece has an assosciated value. Pawns are worth less than bishiops, bishops less than rooks etc... As the game progresses the value of these pieces change (as a pawn gets nearer to queening its value increases.) Like it or not Prince Harry is a very valuable piece (not directly, but if he was killed it would be a huge blow to the morale of the country and troops and let's not forget a huge boost to the morale of the enemy.) As such, I think utilizing Prince Harry as if he was worth the same as a normal soldier, when in actual terms he is worth more, just to prove a point would be foolish.

Am I saying that a regular soldier is worth less than Prince Harry?

On the battlefield as a target for the enemy in the context of this war, yes.

Off the battlefield, no.

However, if the people in charge judge that proving this point (the point being that Harry isn't getting special treatment and is just like everyone else and the Iraq war isn't a mistake etc...) is worth more than the potential loss of Prince Harry then they will send him anyway.

In conclusion: if Harry stays they lose a little; if he goes and survives they gain a lot; and if he goes and dies they lose a lot. Will they take the gamble for a big win or settle for the small loss?

It shall be interesting to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, it'd probably be a boost to moral if Prince Harry died in combat. Someone born into wealth giving their life for their country is pretty admirable. Not sending him out sends out a message to your regular soldier that he or she is worth less than someone with a nice title. Obviously he's not a foot soldier, but I'm sure there are other tank commanders who have to risk getting splattered. That'd certainly make me hate my own country a little bit.

Plus, no-one gives a fuck about the Royal family anymore unless they're having sordid sex or splitting up with gorgeous women, so sod it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In war, as in chess, each piece has an assosciated value. Pawns are worth less than bishiops, bishops less than rooks etc... As the game progresses the value of these pieces change (as a pawn gets nearer to queening its value increases.) Like it or not Prince Harry is a very valuable piece (not directly, but if he was killed it would be a huge blow to the morale of the country and troops and let's not forget a huge boost to the morale of the enemy.) As such, I think utilizing Prince Harry as if he was worth the same as a normal soldier, when in actual terms he is worth more, just to prove a point would be foolish.

Am I saying that a regular soldier is worth less than Prince Harry?

On the battlefield as a target for the enemy in the context of this war, yes.

Off the battlefield, no.

However, if the people in charge judge that proving this point (the point being that Harry isn't getting special treatment and is just like everyone else and the Iraq war isn't a mistake etc...) is worth more than the potential loss of Prince Harry then they will send him anyway.

In conclusion: if Harry stays they lose a little; if he goes and survives they gain a lot; and if he goes and dies they lose a lot. Will they take the gamble for a big win or settle for the small loss?

It shall be interesting to see.

Do you play a lot of Real Time Strategy games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never really been a big fan of RTS. My small mind is incapable of holding keeping track of what all my little dudes are doing. I prefer FPS where I only have to worry about my main guy not getting shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In war, as in chess, each piece has an assosciated value. Pawns are worth less than bishiops, bishops less than rooks etc... As the game progresses the value of these pieces change (as a pawn gets nearer to queening its value increases.) Like it or not Prince Harry is a very valuable piece (not directly, but if he was killed it would be a huge blow to the morale of the country and troops and let's not forget a huge boost to the morale of the enemy.) As such, I think utilizing Prince Harry as if he was worth the same as a normal soldier, when in actual terms he is worth more, just to prove a point would be foolish.

Am I saying that a regular soldier is worth less than Prince Harry?

On the battlefield as a target for the enemy in the context of this war, yes.

Off the battlefield, no.

However, if the people in charge judge that proving this point (the point being that Harry isn't getting special treatment and is just like everyone else and the Iraq war isn't a mistake etc...) is worth more than the potential loss of Prince Harry then they will send him anyway.

In conclusion: if Harry stays they lose a little; if he goes and survives they gain a lot; and if he goes and dies they lose a lot. Will they take the gamble for a big win or settle for the small loss?

It shall be interesting to see.

Well said. It's also worth mentioning that putting him in combat would automatically increase the risk for every soldier anywhere near him. It's possibly more to do with that particular risk to morale than anything else. Imagine finding yourself in a foxhole, you look round to guy on your right, and it's him. Ohhhh shiiiiittttt.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were an iraqi militant, and you heard that the commander of a particular troupe of soldiers happened to be 3rd in line to the throne of one of the countries responsible for the iraqi occupation, would you not try and take that troupe out in hope of killing the Prince?

His being there would put the lives of his troops in danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So why on earth did he join? my question is: Surely he must have known the outcome - so why join the army?

He's a thick shit, he probably actually thought they would let him go.

Even if he did go, he'd be miles from the most dangerous areas, and he'd have huge protection. Anyone who seriously believes they would treat him as an "ordinary" soldier isn't so wise. As people have said, he'd be a huge trophy for any self-respecting insurgent, and would put his men's lives at risk too.

As an aside, don't you think people saying "Tony Blair killed my son" are idiots? It's called the army. Fighting is their general reason for existing. If Joe Bloggs' son really really didn't want to risk dying, he should have applied for a job at Specsavers. It doesn't matter if the war was justified or not - the army is dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plus, no-one gives a fuck about the Royal family anymore unless they're having sordid sex or splitting up with gorgeous women, so sod it.

I think quite a lot of people in Deeside would disagree with your statement - considering that their very existence has led to a lot of tourist money coming in - which keeps a lot of people in employment.

Also, if no-one gives a fuck about the Royal family anymore, why do MORI polls over the last 14 years consistently state that around 70% of the population prefer having a monarchy, compared to around 20% support for a republic?

MORI - Monarchy Trends

Has anyone considered that Harry might just have wanted to go out there and get stuck in himself?

Edit : I see Dave's pointed that out already.

I have a faint hope that the real reason for him not being allowed to go is that Brown is planning on a unilateral withdrawal from Iraq once he becomes PM - and thus there's little point sending Harry out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think usually if they're directly in line to the throne they do let them serve on the front line, hence they didn't let William go.

Prince Andrew was a RN helicopter pilot in the Falklands war, but that's a bit different from being an infantry soldier on the ground in direct line of fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think quite a lot of people in Deeside would disagree with your statement - considering that their very existence has led to a lot of tourist money coming in - which keeps a lot of people in employment.

Also, if no-one gives a fuck about the Royal family anymore, why do MORI polls over the last 14 years consistently state that around 70% of the population prefer having a monarchy, compared to around 20% support for a republic?

MORI - Monarchy Trends

Has anyone considered that Harry might just have wanted to go out there and get stuck in himself?

Edit : I see Dave's pointed that out already.

I have a faint hope that the real reason for him not being allowed to go is that Brown is planning on a unilateral withdrawal from Iraq once he becomes PM - and thus there's little point sending Harry out.

My tongue was in my cheek, so leave your raging chubby at the door man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside, don't you think people saying "Tony Blair killed my son" are idiots? It's called the army. Fighting is their general reason for existing.

True. People who willing sign up to be professional murderers can't complain when they get killed themselves. No sympathy from me for dead british or american soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joining the army is not the brightest thing anyone will ever do but it's just as well that there are people willing to do it or we wouldn't have an army which I imagine is a necessity. National service anyone? Same with being a doctor. I certainly couldn't be arsed with the hours but I'm glad not everyone thinks like I do. We need people stupid enough and clever and hard working enough to maintain our great nation and I will live in peace, prosperity and good health thanks to these geniuses and idiots. I extend my thanks to those working in the army and the NHS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jake Wifebeater
True. People who willing sign up to be professional murderers can't complain when they get killed themselves. No sympathy from me for dead british or american soldiers.

Very well said, no sympathy from me either, they're legitimate targets.

There was never any chance that the pampered little shit would be put in any danger anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True. People who willing sign up to be professional murderers can't complain when they get killed themselves. No sympathy from me for dead british or american soldiers.

Exactly. What do people expect when they join the army, puppet shows and getting tickled with feather dusters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Were any royals posted to N.Ireland? The image of people directly fighting the reason for their anger is pretty good.

Not to my knowledge and certainly not according to Tim Pat Coogan - the authority on the Troubes.

Prince Andrew did a tour of duty during the Falklands crisis, again it was more of a PR exercise.

Just noticed that Rachie mentioned Randy Andy's 'involvement.' I'll post anyway as confirmation of the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was a good idea to keep him in the UK.. this way through the likes of the Sun newpaper we can see him get pissed more often.

Harry, changed, do shut up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think quite a lot of people in Deeside would disagree with your statement - considering that their very existence has led to a lot of tourist money coming in - which keeps a lot of people in employment.

Also, if no-one gives a fuck about the Royal family anymore, why do MORI polls over the last 14 years consistently state that around 70% of the population prefer having a monarchy, compared to around 20% support for a republic?

MORI - Monarchy Trends

Even if the revolution came and the royals were taken in to the forest and shot at point blank range, the Deeside economy would still be robust. Tourists tend to come to Scotland for the scenery not for a glimpse of the royals, Americans especially to research their ancestral roots.

What was the population for these MORI polls on the issue of monarchy/republic?

A random sample isn't necessarily indicative of the country's population as a whole.

If Harry did serve in Iraq or Afghanistan and was shot, would there be a national day of mourning like there was for his mother? Another day of sycophantic sympathies and pandemonium? Christ, I hope not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×