Should Harry be sent to the front lines? [Archive] - SV650.org

Balky001

29-04-07, 07:32 AM

Yes he should. He can't play soldier he needs to be one and giving him preferential treatment demeans the value of other troops. Plus he must be very use to getting shot at after living with Shotgun Prince Phillip and Trigger Happy Charles!

29-04-07, 08:02 AM

He's not a Prince, he's a bloody soldier - of course he should go if that's where his Reg is deployed.

Supervox

29-04-07, 08:09 AM

I really don't see the problem here -

Prince Andrew was 2nd in line to the throne when he went to the Falklands.

Prince Harry is 3rd in line - why the great debate ?

Could it be that we were certain that we could beat the Argentinians - which was very nearly NOT the case having seen having seen a recent documentary - whereas a 'win' in Iraq is a pretty slim bet ?

To be fair to the guy he has said he wants to go & apprently has 'threatened' to resign if he's not allowed to. Although, a cynic might say it's easy to say you want to go if you're fairly certain they're not going to let you !!

The other question of course is - is it fair to troops who may be serving under him ? They are obviously going to be far more heavily targeted than those serving under any other officer - & it's not like they have a choice as to who their commander is.

Viney

29-04-07, 09:00 AM

Yes. If he doesnt then that just makes a mockery of all the other soldiers that are currently serving. What was wrong was the ammount of publicity that it got from the UK press. It shuld have had a reporting enbargo on it. Then no one would have known if he was going out.

kitkat

29-04-07, 09:06 AM

he should go, he wants to go. if he doesnt get to go he might as well give up, noone serving under him will have any respect for him if he doesnt go.

bless him

ASM-Forever

29-04-07, 09:14 AM

I would not worry about the media being informed of his possible deployment....so many leaks in the MOD nowadays :)

I think in theory he has to be deployed if he is an army officcer, although lets face it, the insurgents will go to any lengths to capture him.

The only way his deployment could be feasible would be to treat his capture(which personally i think is quite likely!), as that of any other soldier. Unfortunately with the media and so forth it may prove impossible to do that.

If he is deployed the best resolution is preventing people from knowing where he is, but is that possible?

In summary :) , theoretically he has to be deployed, but in reality it is not worth the extra headache!

Red ones

29-04-07, 09:19 AM

I dont think he should.

I think it quite acceptable to pay our taxes to train soldiers to do their job, then to turn round and say that it too big a risk.

Sorry, I have changed my mind.

Of course he should, otherwise what was the bloody point of me paying my taxes to train him? I want my money back, just as my employer would want their money back if I choose not to use the training they pay for!!

Alpinestarhero

29-04-07, 09:45 AM

Yea, stick him in the deep end. If he's a worthy soldier, hell have no problems (and I dont doubt he would be a worthy soldier - our boys in the armed forces are the best in the world IMHO, exceptionally well trained).

I also like runt's idea is also good - if harry is there, then the "enemy" will go for him. Hence we'l know where the enemy is, and well come prepared with...everything. Bye Bye terrorists.

If only it was that easy!

Matt

Tiger 55

29-04-07, 09:50 AM

he has said he wants to go & apprently has 'threatened' to resign if he's not allowed to.
Resign! Brilliant! Iraq and Afghanistan must be leaping with guys and girls who wish they'd thought of that!

He should resign of course and so should Wills, but then what the heckety heck are they supposed to do? They're not coming round here on work experience, we're snowers as it is.

Alpinestarhero

29-04-07, 09:52 AM

Resign! Brilliant! Iraq and Afghanistan must be leaping with guys and girls who wish they'd thought of that!

He should resign of course and so should Wills, but then what the heckety heck are they supposed to do? They're not coming round here on work experience, we're snowers as it is.

I reckon they should be aprentice car mechanics where my dad works if they quit. Learn a trade, get a bit dirty. Can't be worse than the school drop-outs already working there \\:D/

Matt

DanDare

29-04-07, 10:31 AM

They'll probably send him somewhere safe like the deserts of Saudi and make up a make shift village with actors as soldiers and civilians and the enemy.

Then give him blanks and pretend he's in a war zone.:smt070

Something like the Trueman show:rolleyes: , you get the picture.

He'll been none the wiser.......................

29-04-07, 12:44 PM

Yes of course he should go. Why is a royal life worth more than anyone else's life?

fizzwheel

29-04-07, 12:55 PM

Yes of course he should go. Why is a royal life worth more than anyone else's life?

Agreed.

He wants to go then he should go its what he signed up for. I'd have more respect for our royality if they lived in the bl**dy real world.

Tara

29-04-07, 01:01 PM

Agreed.

He wants to go then he should go its what he signed up for. I'd have more respect for our royality if they lived in the bl**dy real world.

Agreed

northwind

29-04-07, 01:18 PM

Oh, was my joke that bad :mad:

Since we're having a serious thread, I couldn't care less if he's put at risk, that's what being a soldier means- no point in training them if they just do parades and look pretty. Don't believe the adverts! But I understand the argument that he puts his unit at risk, he'd be an obvious target. That could even be an asset though, the problem with fighting terrorists/insurgents is that you never know where they'll attack- so maybe bait is what's needed? Still, I wouldn't want to serve beside him knowing that if anyone finds out who he is we'll all be in for it...

OTOH, his hypocrisy's amusing. "Yes, I want to be just like the lads. So when I don't like my deployment I call the Sun and my mummy and make ultimatums to my commanding officer. Just like they all do" Obviously he missed the "following orders" part of the training.

Cloggsy

29-04-07, 01:46 PM

:rant:

Yes, of course he should, he's in the Army... Why should he be treated any differently to everyother person in the Forces...

northwind

29-04-07, 02:05 PM

Yes, of course he should, he's in the Army... Why should he be treated any differently to everyother person in the Forces...

Answer as above- because he'd be a high profile target, potentially endangering others, and because losing him would be a publicity blow far beyond most soldiers (sad but true). A kidnapping, not very likely since he'd be in a warrior crew if memory serves, but possible, would be even worse. Not to mention the fact that he could destabilise a fighting unit just by his presence.

Not that I neccesarily agree, but these are the arguments against.

Jester666

29-04-07, 02:27 PM

I would send the whole family there, but i heard the germans have placed restrictions on where there troops can be deployed :)

Jas...

:winner: :smt046

Supervox

29-04-07, 02:54 PM

northwind

29-04-07, 04:08 PM

(Assuming you believe the press reports) he's moaning at the fact that he MIGHT NOT be sent to Iraq whilst the rest of his regiment will be.

Um, yes. But his response is to spit the dummy and take measures no other serviceman could do. He was allowed to play at being a soldier when nobody else was affected, now it's the real world and they have to think about the unit and the army as a whole, while he's just thinking about himself and doign everything he can to undermine their decision.

Razor

29-04-07, 05:48 PM

His father was in the military, I mean his ginger biological Dad...

http://www.sherlock-holmes.co.uk/news/harry.html

Pedrosa

29-04-07, 05:50 PM

CoolGirl

29-04-07, 06:27 PM

A significant proportion of his forefathers led the front line and died in the process. I'm no expert on historical military strategy, but I'm pretty surre they were targetted by the opposition as well. He'd be following a family tradition.

And he wouldn't be in the position he's in (socially) unless they'd done so.

neio79

29-04-07, 06:47 PM

i think he should go, like all other young officers. although He will attract a lot more attention and fire from the enemy. I can see the household calvalry getting a right spanking when they first get there as the enemy try to kill him. I would not like to be in that regiment out there!!

Also in my educated quess, i would think a lot the young lads of his platoon suddenly change into older more capable soldiers, cough cough!! wonder where they came from, Hereford perhaps??;) ;)

His patloon will (in my opinion) have at least a 4 man section of SAS in it armed to the teeth hidden amongst their ranks.

cuffy

29-04-07, 07:07 PM

I am bi curious :confused:
Really? i thought it was just rossi :rolleyes:

As hor 'Arry and the rest of the royals there all a waste of tax payers money :thumright:

sinbad

29-04-07, 07:24 PM

He can't go out there and fight "like a civi'" and he will increase the threat to his fellow soldiers for no good reason. So of course he shouldn't go, he shouldn't even want to go for that very reason!

The question really is:
"Should he (Harry) have been allowed to join the armed forces in such a role if he is of absolutely no bloody use?".

No.

timwilky

29-04-07, 07:54 PM

My honest opinion is that he should not be sent.

He would be too high a value target for the insurgents not to ignore. Therefore, he would be placing others in his unit at far higher risk than what they would normally be. He is therefore a liability to others.

I therefore suggest he be placed on latrine cleaning duties somewhere safe like Belize (With the inevitable tropical tummies) for the duration his unit is deployed in Iraq.

Balky001

29-04-07, 07:57 PM

I am be curious why so many peoples suggest greater position of risk for your young Prince? I mean your Generals and other high ranking peoples would never ,ever be placed at the same kind of risk you suggesting...so why your Prince?:confused:

You make a good point Mr Pedrosa but I think you are doing yourself a disservice. You are arguably the MotoGP Prince and King in waiting yet you are on the front line risking all whereas Tanaka-san, Leitner-san and Puig-san are well behind the pit wall directing your achievements. But ss this not the right thing for them to do?

slark01

29-04-07, 08:14 PM

Like most people in the army, you want to be where the action is, this goes with the prince.
The chief has to treat Harry the same as any other soldier otherwise every soldier could request that they not be put into a combat zone as their lives are just as valuable as Harry's.
I come from a long line of soldiers ( Kingo's ), and have always been brought up, that no matter what your status is outside the army, your treated the same while your inside.
That's my say, for what it's worth:salut:

Stingo

29-04-07, 08:31 PM

On the fence me...:rolleyes:

or should that be...amidships.

Richie

29-04-07, 08:55 PM

Demonz

29-04-07, 09:25 PM

For Queen and country eh. I would think his troop would be happy to stand next to him. Royals have been going to war from the start of time and even more have died because of them.

454697819

30-04-07, 07:31 AM

sorry but if i was in his group he can stay at home.... i wouldnt want to be stood next to him

Well Oiled

30-04-07, 12:35 PM

I don't think he should go because it's a good call to arms for brainwashing more young muslims into becoming extremists - "The filthy imperialists have sent their infidel prince to conquer our holy lands". Some people actually believe this type of stuff.

Point taken about royalty being in the thick of it through history, but this ain't Agincourt - things have changed.

Then again, all this was known when he joined up, so he shouldn't have been allowed into a role that could put him in the front line in the first place.

Oh - and I do think Harry himself is a brave lad and his threat to resign is one of genuine frustration at training up for war and not being allowed to go.

northwind

30-04-07, 12:46 PM

Oh - and I do think Harry himself is a brave lad and his threat to resign is one of genuine frustration at training up for war and not being allowed to go.

And he didn't see it coming? Hard to believe it wasn't discussed til now at least.

Well Oiled

30-04-07, 12:50 PM

And he didn't see it coming? Hard to believe it wasn't discussed til now at least.

Probably, but they let his Uncle Andrew go to the Falklands, so he probably thought they'd let him go to Iraq. I don't think he's insisting he should go as false bravado because he knows they won't let him. Do you?

Stingo

30-04-07, 01:20 PM

picture the scene...held to ransom when captured - pull all the Western infidels out or we chop his head off...not sure I wan't to even think about any consequences either way...I know there's folk that have little or no regard for the Royals, but there's them what has...even in foreign lands far far away. I for one would rather that he were returned to the UK in one piece and alive - that kind of puts me on the 'don't go' side of the fence.

northwind

30-04-07, 02:14 PM

Probably, but they let his Uncle Andrew go to the Falklands, so he probably thought they'd let him go to Iraq. I don't think he's insisting he should go as false bravado because he knows they won't let him. Do you?

Nope... Personally I reckon that this was probably raised the moment he suggested joining up in a ground role, and he assumed he could get round it, but who knows, it might all be a case of poor planning or some such.

Prince Andrew's case is a bit different, since that was fighting a conventional war where, if captured, he could expect to bne treated as a POW. Also, the risks to him were different as a pilot- it'd be impractical to specifically target him, and wouldn't have achieved much anyway. The rules are pretty different in Iraq.

Flamin_Squirrel

30-04-07, 03:24 PM

Point taken about royalty being in the thick of it through history, but this ain't Agincourt - things have changed.

Other than Britain becoming a country full of sissys, how have things changed?

Don't buy the "it's not fair to his troop, they'll become a greater target" line either. If the insurgent rabble somehow managed to get the required intel on where he was, there's no garuntee they could capitalise on it.

Even if they could and half his troop did get blown away, they're soldiers, it's the job they chose and we should respect that. For all we know, they could be quite eager to stand shoulder to shoulder with Harry anyway.

neio79

30-04-07, 03:34 PM

although i accept that it is our job etc etc, i have done a couple of vehicle patrols out there ( in signals so did not do foot ones in the towns) , and even though you expect or are on alert for it being possible i would not think that any of the men would really relish the chance to be in his patrol, due to it being a sure way to attract all the fire the insurgants are going to dish out.

a bit like wanting to go and play a footy match in a mine field.

northwind

30-04-07, 04:29 PM

"insurgent rabble"

The same rabble that's killed 112 british troops on active and (apparently) 3300 US troops? :rolleyes: They know what they're about, and they've shown organisation and effective planning and observation... Some rabble.

Pedrosa

30-04-07, 04:32 PM

You make a good point Mr Pedrosa but I think you are doing yourself a disservice. You are arguably the MotoGP Prince and King in waiting yet you are on the front line risking all whereas Tanaka-san, Leitner-san and Puig-san are well behind the pit wall directing your achievements. But ss this not the right thing for them to do?

Ooh Mr.Balky....I wasnt be thinking about it like that. I now be think you having point.

Flamin_Squirrel

30-04-07, 06:02 PM

The same rabble that's killed 112 british troops on active and (apparently) 3300 US troops? :rolleyes:

Those are tiny numbers.

They may have some strategic organisation, but I doubt they have any reliable intel on the movements of individual allied units.

neio79

30-04-07, 06:38 PM

Those are tiny numbers.

They may have some strategic organisation, but I doubt they have any reliable intel on the movements of individual allied units.

you would be surprised. The police out there are the bigest problem. by day they are going on patrol with us, by night they are mortaring us!! :smt071

we were told to be carefull what we divulged around them and the iraqi army. its a well known fact they have members in their ranks.

northwind

30-04-07, 06:54 PM

They may have some strategic organisation, but I doubt they have any reliable intel on the movements of individual allied units.

They hit the Black Watch fatally twice within a fortnight of their relocation to Camp Dogwood... And I know a lot of people don't consider it a coincidence that it was a controversial and unpopular deployment here.

Well Oiled

30-04-07, 07:55 PM

Other than Britain becoming a country full of sissys, how have things changed?

Don't buy the "it's not fair to his troop, they'll become a greater target" line either. If the insurgent rabble somehow managed to get the required intel on where he was, there's no garuntee they could capitalise on it.

Even if they could and half his troop did get blown away, they're soldiers, it's the job they chose and we should respect that. For all we know, they could be quite eager to stand shoulder to shoulder with Harry anyway.

It's changed because he will be used as a figurehead for US/British imperialists in drumming up anti US/British fanatics. It's changed because if killed his death would be heralded as a great vistory for Islam against the infidel and pictures of his death would appear all over the internet, and if captured he would be paraded by his captors, videod in captivity, maybe even videos of his beheading posted. It's not a case of being brave versus being a sissy, it's a case of using your head and not giving your enemy a potential political coup.

Flamin_Squirrel

30-04-07, 08:13 PM

It's changed because he will be used as a figurehead for US/British imperialists in drumming up anti US/British fanatics. It's changed because if killed his death would be heralded as a great vistory for Islam against the infidel and pictures of his death would appear all over the internet, and if captured he would be paraded by his captors, videod in captivity, maybe even videos of his beheading posted. It's not a case of being brave versus being a sissy, it's a case of using your head and not giving your enemy a potential political coup.

You do realise politics isn't a new thing, don't you? Popular politics maybe, but not politics.

30-04-07, 08:15 PM

I do believe that we may be having precisely this debate over Prince William soon...

Harry didn't ask to be a Prince, it was an accident of birth. Nor does he ask to be wrapped in cotton wool. He's a soldier, so he should be deployed.

northwind

30-04-07, 09:26 PM

Yep, but this isn't a conventional war... If Andrew had been shot down and captured in the Falklands, he could expect to be treated as a POW. If Harry gets captured in Iraq... Well, being executed on camera's probably one of the less bad options really.

Well Oiled

30-04-07, 09:52 PM

You do realise politics isn't a new thing, don't you? Popular politics maybe, but not politics.

Yes, but they didn't have beheadings on the internet in Henry V's day

Tiger 55

01-05-07, 06:48 AM

Well according to the radio this morning, he's off. Good luck to him and everyone else. They'll need it.

"Cry God for England, Harry and St George!"

Demonz

01-05-07, 10:25 AM

Yes, but they didn't have beheadings on the internet in Henry V's day

Consider what happens next though. British government use this as an excuse to slaughter the lot of them. There are always to sides to this story and the government will use it to further there cause anyway. Bottom line - if he is killed it will cause more outrage and support to a war that is being lost.

Stingo

01-05-07, 11:07 AM

Consider what happens next though. British government use this as an excuse to slaughter the lot of them. There are always to sides to this story and the government will use it to further there cause anyway. Bottom line - if he is killed it will cause more outrage and support to a war that is being lost.

I'd be surprised if there was more support for the war. I'd have thought that the public would be downright livid and would demand an end to the 'hostilities' - at the very least a swift withdrawal of British troops.

hovis

16-05-07, 04:00 PM

hes not going then, its offical

Tiger 55

16-05-07, 06:01 PM

Well according to the radio this morning, he's off.
See, this is why I don't listen to the radio.

Kinvig

17-05-07, 06:41 AM

What's the point for him in an army career if he's never going to fulfill his training. How is that lack of experience going to prepare him to be an effective officer? If I was him I would have to take a long look at whether I would want that cotton wool wrapped career.

DanDare

17-05-07, 08:27 AM

Yet another wasted use of my tax payers money.:mad:

Fizzy Fish

17-05-07, 09:04 AM

yeah like in the olden days it was the king who lead troops into battle, and they often met a sticky end there. so why the change now??

i kind of understand why they don't want to send him but FFS he signed up for the army, he's trained for this, he wants to go, his troop want him to go - so can't they just let him go?! blimin nanny state and all that...

The Basket

17-05-07, 09:07 AM

Typical military FUBAR.

the_runt69

17-05-07, 09:08 AM

If theyd kept it quiet and just sent him things would have been a lot easier but the press have to open thier big gobs again so the bloke wont have a chance to prove himself. Feel sorry for the pampered little prince i really do

Steve H

17-05-07, 09:13 AM

Forget Harry, the British Army fullstop should not be in Iraq.
We invaded a sovereign state. Totally out of order in my books.

Sorry if this point has already been made!

Tomcat

17-05-07, 09:51 AM

SVeeedy Gonzales

17-05-07, 11:07 AM

Yes he should. Can;t see why they're so bothered about a royal getting done in out there... he ain't one, so what's the problem?

Steve H

17-05-07, 11:24 AM

Yes he should. Can;t see why they're so bothered about a royal getting done in out there... he ain't one, so what's the problem?

What, like, James Hewitt is his dad? (allegedly;) ) :silent:

MiniMatt

17-05-07, 11:38 AM

This is going to sound really horrible and I kinda don't mean it (and kinda do). I kinda think he should go, and then get shot up - lose a limb or two or his life.

As it stands, we have young kids coming back in body bags on a weekly basis and countless more coming back with their life shattered - limbs lost etc. But we just don't pay much attention to these, it's only when "someone important" gets killed/wounded that we, the press etc, sit up and take notice and realise that war is truly a diabolical hell and not the armchair version of Counterstrike. Gunshots and explosions rarely kill quickly, dieing in excruciating pain in the desert is not glorious, it's hellish.

If our leaders (and by that I'm really referring to politicians, but in times past that would include royals) are not prepared to risk their nearest and dearest then I don't see how they have the right to gamble with the lives of others.

I don't think I'm going to heaven for that comment :(

Baph

17-05-07, 11:43 AM

I don't think I'm going to heaven for that comment :(

I don't think you are either. Treason isn't punishable by death these days. :rolleyes:

I agree though. There was once a time when the King himself was expected to lead his army on to the field in battle.

Where does Harry come in the pecking order agian?

Another war fought by propoganda. "Oh you send Harry & we're going to be kind, we'll send him home without his ears!" (Vague reference to beheadding to my mind). Scare tactics & nothing more. Send the boy!

The Basket

17-05-07, 12:35 PM

I think the thing is that he would be a target and so would increase hostility and therefore a risk to others.

Also he would be a real prize for the bad guys.

I think treason is still a punishable offence by death

MiniMatt

17-05-07, 12:46 PM

I think treason is still a punishable offence by death

Nah, we're now fully ratified signatories to the european convention on human rights which specifically prohibits the death penalty, except in times of war. Hmm, seeing as the "war on terror" will never actually end, I still may not be safe :)

Edit: ahh, no, looks like we've ratified protocol 13 too which specifically bans the death penalty in all circumstances. Don't recall us making too much fuss about Saddam's execution mind, though I do remember Mr Blair dodging the question :)

carlos

17-05-07, 01:06 PM

Send him, only don't deploy him with us 'ordinary' folk instead team him up with a bunch of other like-minded posh commisioned t***ers, say 250th in-line to the throne and up or something, and give 'em a big bag of silver spoons to spit at the 'savages'. Alternatively he can follow the old colonial way of sitting in a big tent while little Manuel from the local tribe fans him with a big leaf and feeds him grapes:smt013

Seriously though, my bro-in-law has just returned from his second tour of Iraq and he lost good mates on both tours, its very sad. The thing is if Harry goes he will just attract extra attention for his regiment from the al-quieda and I think our lads/lasses over there, and their families here, have enough to worry about as it is. We're lucky Steve came back, he made it through plenty of crap including a mortar attack which landed directly on his bed whilst, luckily, he was out of the tent on the phone to his fiance.
Anybody who really thinks he should go has clearly had no close friends or family go and IMHO are talking out of their exhaust-holes so to speak. To think that they could die for some stupid royal publicity stunt is more scandalous than us being there in the first place.

Best place for Harry is in the Army careers office, end of.:rant:

Steve H

17-05-07, 02:54 PM

In August 1914 Prince Edward joined the Grenadier Guards. Lord Kitchener refused to allow him to serve in the front line. Kitchener told him his presence
would mean an added danger to those around him.
The Prince apparently told him that he had no fear of dying for his country, to
which Kitchener replied I'm not worried about you dying, we can't afford to have you captured by the enemy!

Mogs

17-05-07, 03:20 PM

I dont think he should go because of the risk he places on the others, but not because he is less expendable that any other soldier. The army has made the right decision.

17-05-07, 04:30 PM

As it stands, we have young kids coming back in body bags on a weekly basis and countless more coming back with their life shattered - limbs lost etc. But we just don't pay much attention to these, it's only when "someone important" gets killed/wounded that we, the press etc, sit up and take notice and realise that war is truly a diabolical hell and not the armchair version of Counterstrike. Gunshots and explosions rarely kill quickly, dieing in excruciating pain in the desert is not glorious, it's hellish.

Matt - this is one of the best points in the entire debate. A dead soldier might get an inch of column space for a day, a wounded one might get half a line. But to that soldier, his or her life is shattered, and the consequences on a day to day basis are more than most of us could imagine, besides having to deal with all the bureaucracy for a pension.

We seem to have sanitised the bloody and disgusting reality that is happening in Iraq and in Afghanistan on a daily basis. I'm not saying that we should withdraw - not at all, simply that we really do owe our soldiers more. Like recognising that whilst our policiticaians make the most appalling errors of judgement and get away with it because of toadies in the House of Commons, our soldiers do not have the same luxury.

dizzyblonde

17-05-07, 04:36 PM

I think he should go, let the lad know what real life is. Wrapping him in cotton wool cause he's a royal is wrong, its what he did his training for.
Personally i don't think anyone should be there, If he went it may give a reason to pull the whole damn lot out.

Raiden

17-05-07, 04:51 PM

My thoughts (as a Challenger 2 Commander) is that he should go. He wants to and it should be allowed. Anybody who thinks the insurgents are just going to stop targeting CVRT's because he isn't going would be wrong.

To these people we are the infidels and we must be lying about him not going.

Plans will already be set and they will just pick a random troop to attack.

I thank god I have a Challenger 2 and not a CVRT. That said one of my boys lost a leg a few weeks back when they attempted to destroy the wagon he was driving.

Currently being repaired :D the tank not his leg :(

northwind

17-05-07, 06:11 PM

What's the point for him in an army career if he's never going to fulfill his training.

'zackly. TBH I think this is the right decision, but how come they didn't see it coming? The question isn't just what to do now, it's how was the mess allowed to happen...

Tiger 55

18-05-07, 07:09 AM

I kinda think he should go, and then get shot up - lose a limb or two or his life.
That would be ideal, preferably in the first 5 minutes with nobody else getting hurt...

Anybody who really thinks he should go has clearly had no close friends or family go and IMHO are talking out of their exhaust-holes so to speak.
Sorry old boy, can't agree with you there. I have lost two friends and have another one out there now.

War is a filthy, nasty f*cking horrible business and if it takes a dead or disfigured Prince to get our people home then that is a cheap as chips price to pay. In fact for that reason alone he should be on the next plane [/rant]