HARRY TO FIGHT IN IRAQ - Confirmed

Sky News ^ | 2/22/07

[areafiftyone]

Prince Harry will be deployed to the danger zones of southern Iraq, it has been confirmed.

The third in line to the throne is to become the first royal to serve in a war for a quarter of a century.

The 22-year-old's uncle, the Duke of York, flew helicopters in the Falklands conflict 25 years ago.

Army officer Harry will join his regiment, the Blues and Royals, in Iraq as part of a long-planned rotation of troops.

The Ministry of Defence and Clarence House confirmed the deployment in a joint statement.

Cornet Wales, his Army rank and name, will take command of a troop from 'A Squadron' of the Household Cavalry Regiment later this year.

The statement said he will be leading "12 men in four Scimitar armoured reconnaissance vehicles, each with a crew of three".

It continued that speculation about precisely where Harry will serve was "potentially dangerous".

Harry in a Spartan armoured reconnaissance vehicle

Reports claimed the prince had threatened to quit the Army, if he was not allowed to serve abroad in a war zone.

But there are fears that having such a high-profile target as a member of the Royal Family in Iraq could spur on insurgents to attack the Army.

When asked whether the prince was putting troops at risk, royal commentator Alastair Bruce told Sky News Online: "All British soldiers are at risk.

"Prince Harry will know that his team is more important than him and the commanders will ensure no extra risk is placed upon their soldiers by the decision to deploy him."

The news comes a day after Prime Minister Tony Blair outlined a phased withdrawal of British forces from the country with the return of some 1,600 troops within months.

The rank of Cornet is used by a small number of Cavalry units and is the equivalent to 2nd Lieutenant.

[Miss Marple]

England has a long tradition of members of the royal family going to war, going all the way back to the Norman Conquest, when King Harold was killed by the invading monarch, William the Conqueror.

A study of British history will show many monarchs on the battlefield, including the famous Prince Hal of the St. Crispin's Day speech in Shakespeare's play (which was based on a real battle), the Black Prince, and King Richard the Lionheart. It is long part of their tradition, and the men of his company will consider it an honor to serve with him.

God bless Prince Harry and keep him safe. He is a good young man and will do his nation proud.

[Miss Marple]

Right you are! I should have included the Queen! Thanks for the correction!

[Shimmer128]

You know, that's right. Thanks for the reminder. It sure is scary though, i think they will focus on him, there's never been so much publicity, you have to admit.

[popdonnelly]

"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger"

- Shakespeare, Henry the Fifth

[Miss Marple]

In a way, that's true. However, in history, there was no shortage of knowledge of who the royals were in battle. If you will remember, King Richard was held as a hostage for over two years (allowing the usurpation of power by evil Prince John of Robin Hood fame). Archers were taught to seek out the important people (easily spotted by better armor and horses) and shoot at them, much as snipers do now.

I think it is a healthy thing that "important" people go to war. It means that the cause is one believed in and that the monarch shares the burden. While I have no doubt that President Bush has the courage to do so, our modern Secret Service is simply unable to allow this, and in a way it is a shame. I do think it is one reason President Bush did the carrier landing and the two trips to Iraq and the one to Afghanistan.

[Vanders9]

I'm sure that fact could be heavily used against them.

[dannybob]

Great move, publicizing his assignment like this. Every terrorist and general nutcase in the ME will be looking for Harry. Can you imagine what will happen if they manage to kidnap him?

[areafiftyone]

I don't even want to think about that! You're right it was a dumb move.

[Sam Franklin]

War is hell.

[Iris7]

It used to be that the individual members of the "English Aristocracy" sought to be "aristos", which means "the best" in ancient Greek. The old Chinese used a word meaning much the same thing, a word usually translated as "the superior man". The "crat" part in "aristocrat" means "one who rules", as demo"crat", rule by the demos, the "people", "autocrat", rule by one person, etc.

The aristo, the superior man, leads by example. The aristo will do his duty wherever duty leads. The aristocrat takes care of his men. The aristo is able to lead because he has earned the respect of his people. The aristo pursues Virtue above all else in time and space.

Looks like our young Harry is a fellow who knows his duty and does it. He has earned my personal respect. It seems we see a true Aristo third from the Crown.

Too bad about Charles, not much, him. Let us have Henry IX!

[NCC-1701]

Now it's clear why Tony Blair pulling out of Iraq. Wouldn't want to run the risk of an extended tour of duty for Harry. Something bad might happen to him.

[areafiftyone]

He's a Royal to be proud of.

[Conservative4Ever]

Seems he has turned his life around and turned out just fine. God speed Prince Harry.

[Conservative4Ever]

Excellent...that particular picture is priceless.

[Stultis]

So, if Harry doesn't serve then the royals are "chicken hawks". If he does serve then he's putting the troops at risk. Sounds like the same thing Bush has to put up with over here: damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

[jmc813]

Outstanding post.

[naturalman1975]

To put Harry's service into some context:

Military Service of the British Royal Family in the 20th Century

Current Generation (Grandchildren of Elizabeth II)

Zara Phillips: No military service

Peter Phillips: No military service

Lady Louise Windsor: Too young to serve

HRH Princess Eugenie of York: Too young to serve

HRH Princess Beatrice of York: Currently at university. Technically old enough to serve, but it would be expected she would complete her education first under normal circumstances. No indication exists, however, that she intends to serve.

HRH Prince Henry of Wales: Army. 2005-present. Shortly to deploy to Iraq.

HRH Prince William of Wales: Army: 2006-present. Peace time service only. Unlikely to be allowed to serve in combat.

Last Generation (Children of Elizabeth II)

HRH Princess Anne, the Princess Royal: Honourary Positions only (Highest Honourary Rank - Rear Admiral, Royal Navy).

HRH Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex: Royal Marines. 1983-1987. Often unfairly derided as a military failure, the Prince's service with the Royal Marines was genuine, even though he was unable to complete an advanced training course and resigned his commission thereafter. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Rank - Colonel)

HRH Prince Andrew, Duke of York: Royal Navy. 1979-2001. Active Service 1982. South Atlantic Campaign ('The Falklands War'). Currently last member of the Royal Family to see active service. Reached the rank of Commander while serving. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Ranks - Captain, RN, and Colonel)

HRH Prince Charles, the Prince of Wales: Royal Air Force. 1971. Royal Navy. 1971-1976. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Ranks - Vice Admiral, Lieutenant General, Air Marshal)

Her Majesty's Generation (The Queen, Her Siblings and Cousins, the Grandchildren of George V)

George Henry Hubert Lascelles, 7th Earl of Harewood. Army. Active Service World War II. Captured 1944, Prisoner of War 1944-1945.

The Honourable Gerald Lascelles: I'm not sure of his service, if any.

HRH Prince Michael of Kent: Army 1961-1981. Rose to rank of Major while serving. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Rank - Rear Admiral, RNR)

HRH Princess Alexandra. Honourary Positions only (Highest Honourary Rank - Colonel).

HRH Prince Edward, Duke of Kent: Army. 1955-1976. Rose to rank of Lieutenant Colonel while serving. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Rank - Field Marshal)

HRH Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester. Honourary Positions only (Highest Honourary Rank - Air Marshal).

HRH Prince William of Gloucester. No military service.

HRH Princess Margaret. Honourary Positions only (Highest Honourary Rank - Air Commodore).

HM Queen Elizabeth II: Auxiliary Territorial Service. 1945. Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Rank: Lord High Admiral) and as Monarch is Commander-In-Chief, giving her the ranks of Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet, and Air Marshal of the Royal Air Force).

The Generation of Edward VIII and George VI (children of George V)

HRH Princess Mary, the Princess Royal: Auxiliary Territorial Service. 1940-1945. Also held Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Rank - General)

HRH Prince John: Died too young to serve.

HRH Prince George, Duke of Kent: Royal Navy. 1926-1940. Royal Air Force. 1940-1942. Active Service Service 1940-1942. Killed on Active Service, 25th August 1942. Currently last member of the Royal Family to be killed on Active Service

HRH Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester: Army 1919-1937. Rejoined Army 1939. Active Service 1939-1941. Mentioned in Dispatches, 20th December 1940. Rose to Field Marshal and Marshal of the Royal Air Force

HM King George VI: Navy 1913-1919. Active Service, Battle of Jutland, 1916. Mentioned In Dispatches). Also holds Honourary Positions (Highest Honourary Ranks: Admiral, General, Air Chief Marshal) and as Monarch was Commander-In-Chief, giving him the ranks of Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet, and Air Marshal of the Royal Air Force).

HM King Edward VIII (HRH The Duke of Windsor): Navy. 1911-1913. Army 1914-1936. Rejoined Army 1939Active Service, World War I, Mentioned in Dispatches, Awarded the Military Cross. Active Service, World War II, Mentioned in Dispatches

What Harry is doing is no more than other members of his family have done for generations. People see the Royals as if they are privileged without responsibility. Whatever you think of the idea of Royalty (and it is easy to see it as anachronistic), as people, they have always been among the first to serve their country. Perhaps, because in a very special way, it is their country.

[Maeve]

God bless the lad. I fear someone wants him gone.

[Greenpees]

I guess he "IS" the one.

[Shimmer128]

Thank you very much for this info and I stand corrected and proud of your prince, but I don't want to be on a ping list.
Thanks.