NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6383747.stm

Now it would be a bit of a scandal if Harry bought the farm at the hands of the enemy (although we haven't had a decent royal funeral for a while now) but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire'). I don't think it would bode well for international relations.

but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire').

That's actually a valid risk and concern. :\

What happened the last time a royal of any nation was killed?

Yeah it's not good.

What happened the last time a royal of any nation was killed?

Yeah it's not good.

Nepal....last year...or was it the year before?

As for Harry...well at least he has the balls to volunteer...

Nepal....last year...or was it the year before?2001, actually. Time flies.

That's actually a valid risk and concern. :\

It's a very real concern. Sorry for my sounding flippant, it's just my way.
I doubt there would be any acceptance of excuses that evidence was 'classified' if such a thing occured.

That's actually a valid risk

Yeah,....might even get me going "USA,USA".....

I wonder how Tony Blair would justify that as a necessary casuality.

He'd tell us about the savings made on the Royal List and how the extra money was boosting the economy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6383747.stm

Now it would be a bit of a scandal if Harry bought the farm at the hands of the enemy (although we haven't had a decent royal funeral for a while now) but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire'). I don't think it would bode well for international relations.

I wonder how Tony Blair would justify that as a necessary casuality.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6383747.stm

Now it would be a bit of a scandal if Harry bought the farm at the hands of the enemy (although we haven't had a decent royal funeral for a while now) but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire'). I don't think it would bode well for international relations.


My wife was quite flabbergashted this morning seeing it splashed all over the news. Ohh well tell the world about it she mutterd.

I wonder how Tony Blair would justify that as a necessary casuality.

he wasn't a royal his father was James Hewitt

i bet his location in Iraq is going to be leaked at least once by the press. putting him at an even higher risk than any other soldier out there.

Isnt Harry the one nobody wants to be King anyway? :P
Im not a royal-watcher, but meh.

I would find it amusing (and moderatly horrifying, of course) if he were killed on the 4th of July.
Then we could resolve this silly 'Who won the war of 1812' arguement like responsible, grown up nations.

Nah :P

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6383747.stm

Now it would be a bit of a scandal if Harry bought the farm at the hands of the enemy (although we haven't had a decent royal funeral for a while now) but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire'). I don't think it would bode well for international relations.

More likely an IED but if he should die, then he won't be the third in line for the throne. Nothing extrodinary will happen as he is in the military and that is the risk of being in it.

I wonder how Tony Blair would justify that as a necessary casuality.

Soldiers! Die! In! War!

He signed up so he knows what the risks are.

Soldiers! Die! In! War!

but royals don't unlike everyone else he is a royal first and a soldier second you can’t forget that

Soldiers! Die! In! War!

He signed up so he knows what the risks are.

The question was what would happen if he was killed by the Americans. Sure soldiers die in wars but there has been more than one occasion in this war and others when soldiers have been killed by the Americans -

1991 - American A-10 in the Gulf War attacks British armoured personnel carriers killing nine British soldiers (the same number as were killed by enemy fire in the whole war).
2001 - American F/A-18 dropped 3 Mk-82 bombs on a friendly observation post killing six and wounding 11 at Al Udairi Range, Kuwait.
2002 - American F-16 pilot Harry Schmidt killed four Canadian soldiers and injured another 8 in the Tarnak Farm incident.
2003 - American aircraft attacked a friendly Kurdish & US special forces convoy killing 15. BBC translator Kamaran Abdurazaq Muhamed was killed and BBC reporter Tom Giles and World Affairs Editor John Simpson were injured. The incident was filmed. [11]
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down in error F/A-18C Block 46 Hornet 164974 of VFA-195 50 mi from Karbala, Iraq, killing the pilot.
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron
2003 - 190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - March 28, 2003 when a pair of American A-10s from the 190th Fighter Squadron attack four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing Lance-Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, during the invasion of Iraq.
2004 - Pat Tillman, famous American football player and friendly fire victim in Afghanistan
2005 - American soldier Mario Lozano is suspected of killing Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari and wounding Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad. Sgrena had been kidnapped and subsequently rescued by Calipari. However it is claimed that the car they were escaping in failed to stop at an American checkpoint, and US soldiers opened fire.
2005 - American troops opened fire on a Bulgarian convoy. Junior Sergeant Gardi Gardev was killed.

Soldiers! Die! In! War!

He signed up so he knows what the risks are.

Those signing up probably expect the wars to accomplish something though.

People are already unhappy about taking Britain into a pointless war just to please America and about the British deaths caused by doing so. If a Prince died, I expect that unhappiness would grow noticeably.

but royals don't unlike everyone else he is a royal first and a soldier second you can’t forget that

Be that as it may, he is a soldier. Signed up etc. He dies, Britain will have a state funeral.

Be that as it may, he is a soldier. Signed up etc.

no he's a royal doing his family service nothing more than a publicity stunt odds are his combat experience will be in a bunker

no he's a royal doing his family service nothing more than a publicity stunt odds are his combat experience will be in a bunker

I personally do not think he'll be satisfied with that :D

but royals don't unlike everyone else he is a royal first and a soldier second you can’t forget that
There are people selling dead animal parts out of street stands that are of greater social and economic value than a single member of any royal family. Now if the whole family were to be blown up, that would mean something, but on a singular basis they're expendable.
Those signing up probably expect the wars to accomplish something though.
Then they're remarkably stupid individuals who haven't been paying attention to Western history for the past 40 some-odd years.

2001, actually. Time flies.

Good grief...I could have sworn it was only a couple of years....!

he wasn't a royal his father was James Hewitt

No. The lads resemble each other far too much...

Soldiers! Die! In! War!

He signed up so he knows what the risks are.

Guess thats why Bushes kids haven't signed up...

Guess thats why Bushes kids haven't signed up...

And your point?

Bloody hell.

Sorry, but do the Americans train their troops...?
BTW how many friendly fire attacks have other people done? and can i get a source for this...?

Blue on blue incidents happen in war all the time. It does not necessarily reflect training (which is superb) but mostly out of lack of communication and miscommunication.

The question was what would happen if he was killed by the Americans. Sure soldiers die in wars but there has been more than one occasion in this war and others when soldiers have been killed by the Americans -

1991 - American A-10 in the Gulf War attacks British armoured personnel carriers killing nine British soldiers (the same number as were killed by enemy fire in the whole war).
2001 - American F/A-18 dropped 3 Mk-82 bombs on a friendly observation post killing six and wounding 11 at Al Udairi Range, Kuwait.
2002 - American F-16 pilot Harry Schmidt killed four Canadian soldiers and injured another 8 in the Tarnak Farm incident.
2003 - American aircraft attacked a friendly Kurdish & US special forces convoy killing 15. BBC translator Kamaran Abdurazaq Muhamed was killed and BBC reporter Tom Giles and World Affairs Editor John Simpson were injured. The incident was filmed. [11]
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down in error F/A-18C Block 46 Hornet 164974 of VFA-195 50 mi from Karbala, Iraq, killing the pilot.
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron
2003 - 190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - March 28, 2003 when a pair of American A-10s from the 190th Fighter Squadron attack four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing Lance-Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, during the invasion of Iraq.
2004 - Pat Tillman, famous American football player and friendly fire victim in Afghanistan
2005 - American soldier Mario Lozano is suspected of killing Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari and wounding Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad. Sgrena had been kidnapped and subsequently rescued by Calipari. However it is claimed that the car they were escaping in failed to stop at an American checkpoint, and US soldiers opened fire.
2005 - American troops opened fire on a Bulgarian convoy. Junior Sergeant Gardi Gardev was killed.

Bloody hell.

Sorry, but do the Americans train their troops...?
BTW how many friendly fire attacks have other people done? and can i get a source for this...?

no he's a royal doing his family service nothing more than a publicity stunt odds are his combat experience will be in a bunker

No. That is not how it works. For example Prince Andrew served in the Falklands as a Harrier Pilot...he flew combat missions....so they do get blooded...

And your point?

My point? Something called duty perhaps? Leadership? Talking the talk...and walking the walk...

My point? Something called duty perhaps? Leadership? Talking the talk...and walking the walk...

They do not call it a volunteer army for nothing.

Blue on blue incidents happen in war all the time. It does not necessarily reflect training (which is superb) but mostly out of lack of communication and miscommunication.

Shame that the US don't train their people to recognise allied vehicles...

(well up until '04....not sure if that has changed...I doubt it)

Bloody hell.

Sorry, but do the Americans train their troops...?
BTW how many friendly fire attacks have other people done? and can i get a source for this...?

"2003 British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke"

Thats one of the few U.K on U.K references I could find. Just google 'friendly fire'. I'm sure there are loads more.

Unfortunatly I think American arrogance has something to do with these events. Shoot first and ask questions later. That's why it is a bit worrying for international relations that Harry is going over to Iraq at the same time as a surge in U.S troops.

Then they're remarkably stupid individuals who haven't been paying attention to Western history for the past 40 some-odd years.

Well, I could hardly do a good job of predicting the outcome of a hypothetical situation if I assumed that everyone was well educated and intelligent.

My point? Something called duty perhaps? Leadership? Talking the talk...and walking the walk...
Why should Bush's children have to suffer for Bush wanting to blow things and people up? The person who suffers most from death is the former inhabitant of the newly minted corpse, not the whiners left wandering about afterward.

They do not call it a volunteer army for nothing.

Oh please....that is just a waste of ascii....

Why should Bush's children have to suffer for Bush wanting to blow things and people up? The person who suffers most from death is the former inhabitant of the newly minted corpse, not the whiners left wandering about afterward.

You may as well ask why do people suffer in war....

Oh please....that is just a waste of ascii....

What? That our army is completely voluntary? If they don't want to sign up, that's their choice. I honestly do not care if they do or don't.

"2003 British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke"

Thats one of the few U.K on U.K references I could find. Just google 'friendly fire'. I'm sure there are loads more.

Unfortunatly I think American arrogance has something to do with these events. Shoot first and ask questions later. That's why it is a bit worrying for international relations that Harry is going over to Iraq at the same time as a surge in U.S troops.

Ah ok thank you...But it still seems that America love blowing up itself and allies...:( :p

There are people selling dead animal parts out of street stands that are of greater social and economic value than a single member of any royal family. Now if the whole family were to be blown up, that would mean something, but on a singular basis they're expendable.

The fact they are expendable (which their not) doesnt change their value. If a common person dies then their isnt a huge state funeral costing a fortune, but at the same time pumping money into the economy in some way or another.

You may as well ask why do people suffer in war....
I think it has something to do with bullets most of the time.

What? That our army is completely voluntary? If they don't want to sign up, that's their choice. I honestly do not care if they do or don't.

it was a waste because it really has nothing to do with what we are talking about...but you are more than welcome to think otherwise.

I think it has something to do with bullets most of the time.

glib...very glib.

glib...very glib.
What did you want me to say? I find war disgusting and view every life lost to it as a murder perpetrated by the people in command, but I don't see how anyone can claim that killing someone who is connected to a criminal by accident of genetics is at all a legitimate punishment.

I think it is healthy for a nation to expect it's leaders to serve it in a real military capacity before taking up the reigns of power. I have always admired the UK for that fact.

I also have no problem with a nation that does not compel military service or require it, although I think it a healthier choice to take up the Swiss model of conscription (2 years for everyone, if I recall correctly). It certainly might change some attitudes in the USA if everyone were required at age 18 to serve a two year term in the military (regardless of sex or sexual orientation).

I think Prince Harry is simply doing what is required of him as a Royal. It would be nice if the press remembered to keep their mouths shut as to where in Iraq he is going, but nonetheless he is doing his Royal Duty and I'm glad.

Best wishes to him.

Schwarzchild

it was a waste because it really has nothing to do with what we are talking about...but you are more than welcome to think otherwise.

Oh it has everything to do with what we are talking about. Prince Harry volunteered to be in the service.

Isn't it shocking that Tony Blair's mess has to be sorted out by a member of the Royal family?*

What did you want me to say? I find war disgusting and view every life lost to it as a murder perpetrated by the people in command, but I don't see how anyone can claim that killing someone who is connected to a criminal by accident of genetics is at all a legitimate punishment.

Oooookay. Sadly reality is different. My point is that armchair chickenhawks who yell for bloodlust are equally as guilty. They usually think otherwise when its their kids on the line....

except in the US.

Isn't it shocking that Tony Blair's mess has to be sorted out by a member of the Royal family?*

:rolleyes:

Oh it has everything to do with what we are talking about. Prince Harry volunteered to be in the service.

And you think he had a choice?

Oooookay. Sadly reality is different. My point is that armchair chickenhawks who yell for bloodlust are equally as guilty. They usually think otherwise when its their kids on the line....

except in the US.

Which is rather stupid as my grandfather worried about my father all the time when my father's ass was on the firing line defending the innocent.

Which is rather stupid as my grandfather worried about my father all the time when my father's ass was on the firing line defending the innocent.

"defending the innocent" where?

Wasn't there a number of queries as to why a believer in the shite your forefathers are supposed to have fought for like yourself hasnt walked the walk?

The question was what would happen if he was killed by the Americans. Sure soldiers die in wars but there has been more than one occasion in this war and others when soldiers have been killed by the Americans -

1991 - American A-10 in the Gulf War attacks British armoured personnel carriers killing nine British soldiers (the same number as were killed by enemy fire in the whole war).
2001 - American F/A-18 dropped 3 Mk-82 bombs on a friendly observation post killing six and wounding 11 at Al Udairi Range, Kuwait.
2002 - American F-16 pilot Harry Schmidt killed four Canadian soldiers and injured another 8 in the Tarnak Farm incident.
2003 - American aircraft attacked a friendly Kurdish & US special forces convoy killing 15. BBC translator Kamaran Abdurazaq Muhamed was killed and BBC reporter Tom Giles and World Affairs Editor John Simpson were injured. The incident was filmed. [11]
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down in error F/A-18C Block 46 Hornet 164974 of VFA-195 50 mi from Karbala, Iraq, killing the pilot.
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron
2003 - 190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - March 28, 2003 when a pair of American A-10s from the 190th Fighter Squadron attack four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing Lance-Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, during the invasion of Iraq.
2004 - Pat Tillman, famous American football player and friendly fire victim in Afghanistan
2005 - American soldier Mario Lozano is suspected of killing Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari and wounding Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad. Sgrena had been kidnapped and subsequently rescued by Calipari. However it is claimed that the car they were escaping in failed to stop at an American checkpoint, and US soldiers opened fire.
2005 - American troops opened fire on a Bulgarian convoy. Junior Sergeant Gardi Gardev was killed.

And Terry Lloyd, the ITV reporter. He was killed by "friendly" fire from American troops whilst in Iraq a few years ago.

And you think he had a choice?

To be honest, I'm not 100% sure but if I had to guess, probably not but I have no information either way.

"defending the innocent" where?

Do you want a list? I can give you many places where he defended the innocent. Why should you care anyway?

Wasn't there a number of queries as to why a believer in the shite your forefathers are supposed to have fought for like yourself hasnt walked the walk?

Oh I will walk the walk if I am given the chance. However, since a draft is not forthcoming (which is about the only way I'll be able to serve), I probably won't be able to. :(

Maybe he'll draw some aggro from the enemy/ Yanks away from our lads. When Prince Edward was a sea-King pilot in the Falklands his job was to act as a decoy to divert exocets away from the task force, more of the same.

He won't be in a bunker he's in formation reconnaisance in a Scimitar- interesting to see where they put him, wouldn't expect to see CVR(T)s rolling through Basra, guess he'll be in the less built up areas somewhere.

To be honest, I'm not 100% sure but if I had to guess, probably not but I have no information either way.

Fair enough...kudos on your reply...

He had no choice. Royals serve. Hell in a way the Queen serves by being Col in Chief of the various household units (Black Watch, Royal Greenjackets, Royal Dragoon Guards, Household Cavalry....these are off the top of my head and most likely wrong as they have recently integrated a number of regiments).

The only one that did not serve fully was Edward, mainly because he would have been an utter and complete shower on the battlefield. His IQ is put to shame by a rabid weresnail.

Maybe he'll draw some aggro from the enemy/ Yanks away from our lads. When Prince Edward was a sea-King pilot in the Falklands his job was to act as a decoy to divert exocets away from the task force, more of the same.

He won't be in a bunker he's in formation reconnaisance in a Scimitar- interesting to see where they put him, wouldn't expect to see CVR(T)s rolling through Basra, guess he'll be in the less built up areas somewhere.

Andrew....not Edward....Edward was too young and stupid.

Also it was a Lynx...I was wrong as well...I thought he was a Harrier jockey...

You mean this Rommelesque looking guy? I would say judging from his desertfox uniform he has been planning this for some time already.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a364/DS16/PrinceHarryNazi.jpg

You mean this Rommelesque looking guy? I would say judging from his desertfox uniform he has been planning this for some time already.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a364/DS16/PrinceHarryNazi.jpg

It was a freakin' fancy dress party. Ok, so it was a terrible choice of costume for him, but from what I remember from the time it was a themed party. Come on. The guy's young. Don't tell me you haven't done something you've regretted while enjoying yourself. Only his problem is that wherever he goes the press will hound him because of who his parents are and that's just not fair on him.

Guess thats why Bushes kids haven't signed up...

Someone is forgetting something. President Bush has twin daughters. Although females can join the army and so on, it is still unusual, even in this day and age. If Bush had blokes, then maybe one could ask questions

Isn't it shocking that Tony Blair's mess has to be sorted out by a member of the Royal family?*

Tony Blair has been a flaming twit ever since Bush was elected President. Maybe he was twit before, but he has gone so far downhill that I am shocked that the Conservatives didn't win last time out. Perhaps it is the fact that Howard was an even bigger twit than Blair that saved Tony's bits from the fire last time out.

Politics runs in cycles and Labour is in very serious trouble if Cameron is even halfway competent. I don't think Mr. Brown can survive as Labour leader, he is about as exciting to watch as paint peeling, it certainly hurts Labour that Cameron is young and telegenic and Brown seems like early Al Gore in front of the camera.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6383747.stm

Now it would be a bit of a scandal if Harry bought the farm at the hands of the enemy (although we haven't had a decent royal funeral for a while now) but what the hell would happen if he had his cork popped by trigger happy Americans (sorry - 'freindly fire'). I don't think it would bode well for international relations.
Ah Armicide, Blue on Blue(Doubly funny because of his Royal Blood) if you will.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a364/DS16/PrinceHarryNazi.jpg

I really hope this slime dies in Iraq, ideally in a friendly fire incident. ANything that has the double whammy of offing a parasitic windsor and making the war less popular is fine by me...

Isn't it shocking that Tony Blair's mess has to be sorted out by a member of the Royal family?*

No more shocking than the effect you seem to think one soldier will have on the war.

No more shocking than the effect you seem to think one soldier will have on the war.

Precisely. We had General Rob Fry in last week at KCL, and he said quite openly something along the lines of

'We'll put him in a Scimitar (light recon tank) on the border, doing patrols away from any enemy'

I'd stress that this was obviously an off-the-record type comment, but it stands, I think, for how Harry will be there, but not 'there' if you know what I mean. And yes, he's a Royal, but its good to see this happen; might put a bit of faith back in that the Royals aren't too above it all.

No more shocking than the effect you seem to think one soldier will have on the war.
Haven't seen much Rambo have you?(Though they were battles, it still effected the war...)

Haven't seen much Rambo have you?(Though they were battles, it still effected the war...)

Pfft, Rambo is more than a soldier, he's some kind of super-soldier. And Prince Harry is no Rambo.

Pfft, Rambo is more than a soldier, he's some kind of super-soldier. And Prince Harry is no Rambo.
He might be.(At least in the sense that he'll be ratted out by his Government,bloody Bliar)

Precisely. We had General Rob Fry in last week at KCL, and he said quite openly something along the lines of

'We'll put him in a Scimitar (light recon tank) on the border, doing patrols away from any enemy'

I'd stress that this was obviously an off-the-record type comment, but it stands, I think, for how Harry will be there, but not 'there' if you know what I mean. And yes, he's a Royal, but its good to see this happen; might put a bit of faith back in that the Royals aren't too above it all.


"on the border, doing patrols away fromt he enemy" Is that like sarcasm or something? Patrolling the borders isn't exactly "away from the enemy". One of the major parts of the war are the insurgents coming from over the border into Iraq. So if he work at a border it wouldn't be a free ride.

He might be.(At least in the sense that he'll be rated out by his Government,bloody Bliar)

That would be awesome, Prince Rambo.

That would be awesome, Prince Rambo.
He'll find all the British POW's that were meant to have died in insurgent hands but Bush and Blair will cover it up.

And when he goes home they'll call him a hippy so he'll waste the Bobbies.

He'll find all the British POW's that were meant to have died in insurgent hands but Bush and Blair will cover it up.

And when he goes home they'll call him a hippy so he'll waste the Bobbies.

God I hope this is what really happens.

Precisely. We had General Rob Fry in last week at KCL, and he said quite openly something along the lines of

'We'll put him in a Scimitar (light recon tank) on the border, doing patrols away from any enemy'

I'd stress that this was obviously an off-the-record type comment, but it stands, I think, for how Harry will be there, but not 'there' if you know what I mean. And yes, he's a Royal, but its good to see this happen; might put a bit of faith back in that the Royals aren't too above it all.

and take 20 sas goons out of circulation to keep an eye on him....

Someone is forgetting something. President Bush has twin daughters. Although females can join the army and so on, it is still unusual, even in this day and age. If Bush had blokes, then maybe one could ask questions

Rubbish. Females serve. Males serve.

If the powers that be in the US decide that his death in Iraq will strengthen British involvement in the war then I would expect him to die.

What happened the last time a royal of any nation was killed?

Yeah it's not good.

I think he's safer with his unit than anywhere else on the planet.

He'll have more men with guns and tanks guarding him than at any time in his life.

On the plus side, he's offering himself as willing to take the risks of more ordinary men - which I think is an indication of character.

Not that it matters much - the royals really aren't the government of the UK, and he's third in line for the throne at the moment.