Quote:
| Originally Posted by the goat Why not?
Adifferent kind of war?
A different kind of dying?
Not wishing to be controversial but as I remember Prince Andrew served aboard HMS Invincible as a helicopter pilot, a fact reported around the world .Now I m sure an aircraft carrier would be a fine target anyhow , but with Royalty on board? whoopy doo!
Perhaps Andrew was excused from frontline duties, I don t know,Perhaps Harry has been pulled from his frontline duties by the same people.One things for sure,
We aint privvy to the information
ATB
Lee |
Well, not a different kind of dying - not wishing to be facetious, but more British people die on the roads every year than in Iraq - they're just as dead.
Different kind of war I would say. The Falklands, it seems to me, was fought in a different spirit altogether. If Andrew had died (a
highly unlikely event), it would have been regrettable, but probably seen as a bad
PR move by the Argentinians, not to mention that it would have been very difficult to specifically target him. His ship (without which we would probably would have had to go home) was well protected by others, indeed those other ships would place themselves physically in the way of possible attack. His helicopter would have been difficult to single out.
In Iraq, on the streets, it would be literally impossible to hide him away. His position would be quickly known, and just as quickly targetted. In contrast to the Falklands, anything happening to him would be a
huge victory for the opposition.
I've always thought that having royals in the military is a bad idea. These questions will always arise, and the risk will always be too great. So what's the point?