Go Back   Trackpads Community > General Discussions > Point/Counterpoint

Point/Counterpoint Debate newsworthy and other 'hot-button' topics here. If it can be debated, this is the forum for it. Can't be thin skinned - people will disagree with you. No flaming or personal attacks.

Point/Counterpoint

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-21-2007, 01:18   #1 (permalink)
NCO
 
leobold1's Avatar
My Awards Rack
Silver Staff Service Medal Silver Reputation  Medal Silver Commanders Coin Marine Corps Service Button Army Service Button Bronze Community Medal 1 Blue Star Silver Threads Medal 
Total Awards: 8
My Mood
My Mood:
Status
leobold1 is offline
Post Count
4,752
My Photos
My Photos: 17
Staff Title
Moderator Commander
Member Flags
United States us texas
My Referrals
My Referrals: 0
Personal Guestbook
Reputation +/-
leobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud ofleobold1 has much to be proud of
Social Networking View Member's YouTube Profile
Other Swag
T-Bucks: 12,203.11
Bank: 154,323.59
Total T-Bucks: 166,526.70
     

 
Default Editorial: Should Prince Harry even be in the army?

Should Prince Harry even be in the army? - MSNBC TV - MSNBC.com

Other than tradition, keeping Harry in the British Army makes little sense

COMMENTARY
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
Military analyst
MSNBC
Updated: 7:36 a.m. CT May 17, 2007

The British Chief of General Staff announced on Wednesday that Prince Harry, or in this context more properly Lt. Harry Wales, will not deploy to Iraq with his unit, a squadron of the Blues and Royals Regiment. The prince is a reconnaissance troop commander in charge of four Scimitar armored vehicles and 12 soldiers.

Several months ago, soon after it was announced that the prince’s unit was scheduled for deployment to Iraq, insurgent groups – both Sunni and Shi’a – threatened to kidnap (some threaten to mutilate) the young royal. Harry, to his credit, insisted that he be allowed to serve as any other British officer.

That’s admirable, but naïve. Harry is not “any other British officer;” he is third in line to the throne of the United Kingdom. The ramifications of him being taken hostage far outweigh his desire to serve.

The threats go beyond the prince himself. His presence in Iraq would put at risk anyone around him. His unit would be singled out for increased attacks in an attempt to get at him. British forces in Iraq have come under increased attacks in the recent months, and units that use the Scimitar armored vehicle have been attacked repeatedly. The fact that Harry was to command four of these vehicles has been widely reported. It is no secret that if you want to kill or capture the prince, these are the vehicles to hit.

Given the threats made specifically against the prince and the risk that his presence would be disruptive to the British units in Iraq, removing Prince Harry from the deployment roster was the only decision the Ministry of Defense could make.

This decision raises a whole host of questions about “the royals” and military service. The British monarchy has a rich history of military service. Harry’s uncle, Prince Andrew, served as a Royal Navy helicopter pilot in the Falklands War. His grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, trained as a driver during World War II, and his grandfather, Prince Philip, saw combat while serving in the Royal Navy. Harry’s father, the heir apparent to the throne, served for a total of five years in the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.

Prince Harry/Troop Commander Wales was commissioned in 2006 after attending a year-long course at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst. After that, he attended British Army training schools to become a troop commander. He was assigned to the Blues and Royals, he trained and bonded with the men he was to lead. Now those men will either not deploy to Iraq, or they will deploy without their commander and have to re-bond with another officer.

The British military is small, considered too small by some to meet Britain’s international commitments. Therefore, the British forces must be used effectively. Having an officer that cannot deploy to certain areas complicates planning for commanders. He trains with his unit, but cannot serve with them when needed.

Another consideration is perception. The British are perceived in the Middle East to have backed down in the face of threats. It sends the wrong message, not only to the insurgents, but possibly to a segment of the British population as well—our sons and daughters can serve, but not Harry? Inside the British forces, he will be regarded as someone who wants to play soldier, but can’t be a soldier.

I applaud the prince for wanting to serve, for insisting that he deploy to a combat zone, that he be treated as any other British officer. The reality is that he is will never be – maybe “cannot be” is a better phrase – treated like any other officer. It is a factor of genealogy, not honor or integrity. That fact places an unfair burden on his commanders and fellow soldiers, now and in the future.

Other than tradition, keeping him in the British Army makes little sense.
__________________
Compel others: Do not be compelled by them
Sun-Tzu



leobold1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Trackpads Information
Click to Visit
Old 05-21-2007, 13:03   #2 (permalink)
Monkey Mouse
 
Woodmonkey's Avatar
My Awards Rack
Gold Staff Service Medal Gold Reputation Medal Bronze Referrals Medal Bronze Magazine Medal Silver Gallery Medal Gold Donations Award Silver Donations Award 2 Blue Star 
Total Awards: 12
My Mood
My Mood:
Status
Woodmonkey is offline
Post Count
58,263
My Photos
My Photos: 108
Staff Title
Trackpads XO
Member Flags
United States us connecticut
My Referrals
My Referrals: 15
Personal Guestbook
Reputation +/-
Woodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond reputeWoodmonkey has a reputation beyond repute
Petz
Other Swag
T-Bucks: 91,184.94
Bank: 1,341,109.03
Total T-Bucks: 1,432,293.97
     
     
     

 
Default Re: Editorial: Should Prince Harry even be in the army?

Seems silly to put royalty in the military in a combat role when they can't go in combat. If they want them to have that experience, but not let them go to war, they'll have to find a safe job with no chance of deployment.
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How May I Help You?





PM me through this link if clicking on those banners doesn't help with your questions

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Woodmonkey is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Britain's Prince Harry in Afghanistan leobold1 Point/Counterpoint 1 03-01-2008 16:51
Prince Harry Will Not Be Going To Iraq leobold1 General Military Discussions 5 05-16-2007 20:40
I like Prince Harry already! Hannibal Army 17 04-12-2006 08:27
[News Feed] Prince Harry In The Army Forum Mouse News Articles 0 05-09-2005 22:00
Prince Harry told to Shape Up USMC5831 Point/Counterpoint 24 04-20-2005 02:05


Community Information
Options
Quick Options
Trackpads Non-Commercial Ad
Copyright Information Click to Visit
Time
Server Time
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29.
Copyright
Copyright Information
The header is based off of work by Vipixel.com and modified by this site. Trackpads and the Trackpads Logo are both Registered Trademarks of Jason Edwards and cannot be used without prior written permission.  The only exception is as a link back to this site. Trackpads is a private website run by a small legion of volunteers, 3 dogs, 12.5 cats and an army of small, super smart, bio-engineered mice with pointy hats and tutu's. Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7
Archive Links
Archive Links
Page generated in 0.66095 seconds with 22 queries