Posted on 05/16/2007 10:35:29 AM PDT by bedolido
He is slightly eccentric, but he also does a lot for farmers, the countryside in general (neither very fashionable causes at the moment) and tries to protect our heritage which is important. He does a lot of charity work for young people, and is generally a decent sort of a person.
“Harry wants to go...”
His going would be the best thing for the Monarchy and British pride. It might put a little lead back in their national pencil.
When was the last time they had a Monarch that had actually been in an honest to God battle? Henry V?
Isn't every Coalition soldier in Iraq already a target for fanatics? In fact, given 9/11 and all that, aren't we ALL targets for fanatics? Why should Prince Harry be any different?
He is slightly eccentric, but he also does a lot for farmers, the countryside in general (neither very fashionable causes at the moment) and tries to protect our heritage which is important. He does a lot of charity work for young people, and is generally a decent sort of a person.
Charlie is rather more than slightly eccentric, he's starkers: a muzzie lover, rather Goreishly green, and (as is typical in the family) dumb as a stone. I'm sure he does charity work, as it's the only real job he has. How much would he do if he weren't being paid for it (on the Civil List)?
I don't have any thing in particular against your monarchy, and I'm probably more directly descended from some dynasties than Charlie is, but I think the House of Windsor has outlived its usefulness. Not sure who you should replace them with, the Stuarts are no prizes, nor are the various remaining continentals. I suppose one of the Scandinavian royal families (all of the are as related to Victoria as Charlie is, no doubt) might do. I know some of the Norwegian royal family, quite decent and down to earth people, not stupid at all or given to potty schemes.
George II was the last British monarch to appear on the battlefield, at Dettingen in 1743.
“Why should Prince Harry be any different?”
I know what you mean, but like it or not, he is different - not in the eyes of God, but to the people of Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc, he is. The majority of successions don’t pass to the next in line, for one reason or another, so he’s not really a “spare”, as such.
Also, his presence in Iraq would put the other servicemen in more danger, and I can’t think they would appreciate it. The most important thing is, he wanted to go, and that shows all we need to know.
“The Queen is one of al Qaeda’s top targets and the lengths they would go to in order to capture or kill Harry would be immense.”
Can you image a captive Prince Harry in an orange jumpsuit with a terrorist raising a sword over his head? Saying “You just made a fatal mistake” to the terrorists would be an immense understatement. We’d have to hold the Brits back.
He wants to go and he truly prepared himself to hit the ground running in Iraq. But I think we can all agree the moment he had arrived in Iraq he would have become target numero uno.
too juicy to pass up by the militant terrorists. He will be King someday.
His uncle, Prince Andrew, flew combat missions as a helo pilot in the Falkland's War Task Force and he got criticized for that too.
In Iraq, with the enemies we face, every "peasant" in Harry's unit would be at much greater risk as that particular unit would be specifically targeted by every suicide bomber in Iraq.
He isn’t that bad. Yes, he does try to “reach out” to the Muslim community, which does raise eyebrows in some quarters, however I don’t think it’s bad or stupid of him to try to prevent all British muslims from becoming ostracized - they’re not all nutters. As for the green side of things, I personally try to eat organic food and oppose GM crops, but I certainly wouldn’t consider myself “Goreish”, just healthy.
The royal family are not all stupid (certainly the Queen isn’t, nor William), but if you want to believe that, there’s not a lot I can do to dissuade you. They are also directly descended from Alfred the Great so I have no issues there, and they are loved all over the world, and provide security to many nations, so their usefulness is certainly not in question.
Because the terrorists think he is. Face it, given the choice they would rather saw off his head and post it on the Internet than yours or mine. He is famous and a symbol of Britain, we are not. It might not seem fair to you that terrorists want to kill him more than you, but never the less those are the facts as they stand right now.
Didn’t Al Gore go to Vietnam with a “handler”?
LOL! That would be a service worthy of a prince of the blood.
Well, perhaps he doesn't look so bad to you, but if he were anyone other than a prince, you'd be unlikely to give him so much benefit of a doubt. As to your muslims, an awfully large number of the are nutters, as it becoming unfortunately clear, and coddling them does not seem to have resulted in a healthy pro-Western muslim community in Britain.
The House of Windsor's (nee Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, nee Hanover) lack of (shall we say) intellectual distinction is a by-word in historial circles. Only the Romanovs after Catherine and perhaps the later Habsburgs are seen as having been more consistently stupid. This of course doesn't mean they're not decent enough, but there was a very good reason Charles was sent to boarding school in Australia and Scotland rather than Eton or Harrow. He certainly never took a first class degree from one of the ancient univerisities. And, even William went to Scotland to university.
I will say I have a great deal of respect for Elizabeth (Philip is another story) - she has played the role dealt her with grace, apparent good will, and a tremendous sense of duty that would make Marcus Aurelius or Epictetus proud. She has been dealt a rotten hand in her sister's romantic escapades, and in her childrens' unfortunate marriages. She has watched her dominions shrink from a world-wide empire into part of the British Isles (give the Scots the chance and they'll break away, as perhaps would the Welsh) and has behaved with dignity. She has borne socialist ministers with better manners than sense, and endured Margret Thatcher, whom she is said to have regarded as a parvenue but who did more for Britain as prime minister than anyone other than Churchill in the 20th century, Disraeli in the 19th and Walpole in the 18th.
We certainly do not “coddle” our Muslim community, and I can assure you that the number of nutters is extremely small - muslims in Britain total less than 2% of the population for a start. With all due respect, I doubt you know any British muslims, and yes, I am aware that they have their heads stuck in the sand, but then so did the Irish whilst we were being bombed by the IRA, yet we didn’t drive them out of the country.
I genuinely don’t care how the royal family score in the IQ stakes - I don’t suppose they are any more or less bright than the next. As for Charles going to school in Australia - don’t you think that has more to do with he fact that Australia share our royal family? And I don’t think the Scots would thank you for insulting their schools or universities.
Only a minority of Scots want independence, and even those who do, want to retain the monarchy - I think you’ll find the Welsh and Scots are unlikely to “break-away” anytime soon. I also think the fact that the Queen’s other 15 realms aren’t gagging at the bit to become republics says it all.
The Royal family used to toast Margaret Thatcher after each meal, and the truth is that many of our prime ministers have come from working class stock, so I very much doubt she held that against her. Also, not long ago, she spent an entire evening holding Maggie’s hand and helping her around at an event in Thatcher’s honour - hardly an act of contempt.
I don’t mean to sound so stroppy, but your comments are inaccurate to say the least.
One day Robert Byrd will be President of the USA
But don't the English hate eccentrics?
The University of SAt Andrews is the third oldest in the English speaking World, and highly regarded.
Even though that may not be known in the US where any buffoon can tack "Dr" in front of his name and found his own "Liberty University"
And, that was rather a cheap shot. But, why wasn't he at Oxford or Cambridge?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.