It seems there's a row between Royal Officials, military commanders, the Ministry of Defence and Prince Harry over whether the Prince should be sent to frontline duty in Iraq with the rest of his regiment. The Prince last year said:
Royal Officials and military commanders have expressed concerns that the Prince's presence might put him and his regiment at undue risk, but Defence Secretary John Reid said that Prince Harry should be allowed to fulfill his duties "as far as is possible". He'd follow in the footsteps of his uncle, who served as an airman during the Falklands War."If they said 'no, you can't go front line' then I wouldn't drag my sorry arse through Sandhurst and I wouldn't be where I am now. ... The last thing I want to do is have my soldiers away to Iraq or wherever like that and for me to be held back home."
Even the staunchest republican (no, not the US political party) can appreciate the commitment to duty the Prince is demonstrating, but should he be allowed to serve and potentially put his regiment at greater risk than would otherwise have been the case? A dead Prince would certainly be an unimaginable victory for those pulling the strings of the more violent aspects of the insurgency...
Bookmarks