All Hail Prince Harry! The Man who Should be KING! He is Shutting down Brit Involvement in Iraq!

[symbolman]

I LOVE THIS KID!

He told them if they didn't send him to Iraq that he would QUIT the Military. SO they said, "Sure, we'll send you PRINCE Harry.."

NOW, all of a Sudden, Blair announces that TROOPS will be WITHDRAWN from Iraq, coincidence?

NOPE.

This tough little Royal Punk is KICKING their asses, calling their Bullshit, and FORCING WITHDRAWAL!

I LOVE THIS KID! He's doing more in one move, and with Grace, Honor, Integrity, and GUTS, than Millions have been able to do in Protest.

Did I say I LOVE THIS KID!

HE Needs to be KING - Take THAT Tony B-LIAR! LOL!!

[iconoclastic cat]

1. deleted

ah

[tridim]

2. I never thought of it that way

If true, whoa! Good work man! It'll be the first time in my life that I actually cared about a member of the royal family.. Not including Diana's work on land mines.

[Blue_In_AK]

122. I hadn't thought of it that way, either

but it does make perfect sense. I think I love that kid, too. ;)

[helderheid]

132. I hadn't heard he'd said that - right on Harry!

[Karenca]

3. k

[Karenca]

4. and R.

[malaise]

5. Bingo Symbolman

You get it. As I posted elsewhere, although Britain has been reducing troops, Blair will be strung up from the Tower of London if anything happens to Diana's son.

Don't miss the speech tomorrow - can't wait for the attacks from the other side.

Sp./Add.

[symbolman]

14. Now just THINK

What Jen and Barbara could do if they DEMANDED to be sent into Iraq..

Pretty Much the same thing, has anyone told the DRUNKS they could go DOWN IN HISTORY IF they showed a smidge of Honor and intelligence, like PRINCE HARRY?

Nope. Fashion shows and drunken frat parties..

The fruit doesn't fall far from the Tree, or Bush in this case. :)

[malaise]

15. They have no consciences brother

Harry rocks - he sure has a lot of his mother in him.

[Benhurst]

20. Not quite the same. If Jen and Barbara DEMANDED to be sent to

Iraq, we'd help them pack.

[malaise]

41. LOL

Good point. Ordinary Brits love harry and William and that would have been the death of the Labour party for a long time.

[Horse with no Name]

21. I think the Queen would make a nice pair of shoes out of Blair

so she could step on him all day long. Prince Harry ain't going...regardless. Diana's blood has already spilled, the blood of her son for a senseless war would start riots in the streets.

[symbolman]

50. LOL good one!

It would take a LOT of spit and polish to make B-LIAR shine..

Shoes and SEAT COVERS for the Royal ASS.. :)

Remember when Bush visited the Queen and talked with his mouth open, trampled all over her flowers, destroying them, AND part of the Palace as well - the SS wanted to drill holes everywhere, put up false walls and such..

He's like the visitor from HELL. :)

[symbolman]

46. The speech is tomorrow?

Thanks for the headsup, I'll be sure and watch that..

Flop sweat time for B-LIAR?

Lots of Brits SCREAMING at him while he gives a speech? I only wish Bush had to stand before the House of Commons and have people SHOUT BULLSHIT at him while he stammered and stuttered his lines :)

[no_hypocrisy]

6. * has no aces to trump a Prince. n/t

[MissMarple]

7. Quite remarkable. His mother's influence, do you think?

Good for Harry.

[Bucky]

40. Might be his father's influence.

The royals are fairly liberal on noneconomic matters--comparable to our Bidens in this country.
.

[WolverineDG]

127. Could also be his uncle Andrew's influence

Maggie tried to keep him out of the Falklands, but he said the same thing: "Send me or I quit."

He went, served, & recently revealed that he almost died and/or got shot down. (chopper pilot)

dg

[fasttense]

8. He's one spunky kid.

Too bad our twin bush princess can't put the booze down long enough to even visit the sick and wounded soldiers.

[SoCalDem]

11. They only like "hot" rich guys.. not handicapped soldiers n/t

[symbolman]

54. Those useless twits

"Yeah this is our new friend. My Dad is making us Hang out with him, just until the Surge PR is over, we call him 'Stumpy', he was, like, in an accident or something. Hey Girl! Push that Tequila over here!"

Just about their level, eh? Little poison BUSH berries.

[raccoon]

113. Yes, and so could their mommy and dad. nt

[babylonsister]

9. This was announced weeks ago; the only thing that wasn't was a definite

timetable.

[npincus]

10. great thinking....

that makes a damn load of sense. So now, how do we get Jenna and Barbara to enlist?

[Karenca]

12. They never will.

They'll have to be drafted.

[patrice]

13. Is that freaking IRONIC!!

Their almost King (whom we historically rebelled against) cares about his soldiers and troops. And our de-facto King doesn't.

[judaspriestess]

16. Yes, Good for Him and this a testament

to the values the late great Princess Diana instilled in her kids.

[Crayson]

96. i doubt that...

Great image stunt!
Volunteering for Iraq, knowing it will never actually come to it.

[ddbaj]

17. I refuse to "Hail" a foreign monarch.

Or any monarch at all. It's great the UK government is heading in the right path, but this blind leader worship is sickening. What about "HAIL the anti-war movement that has been working hard in the UK for years!"?

[symbolman]

23. Oh get a grip

is just a figure of SPEECH.

MAN, do you believe someone would actually SAY that and MEAN IT?

Sheesh, are you MISSING the POINT OR WHAT?

Amazing.

[cool user name]

28. There was a thread not too long ago ...

... the premise of the thread was whether it was appropriate for an American to bow (I think) to British Royalty.

I, of course, said I wouldn't because I wouldn't bow before anyone. However, I must rethink my position. I wouldn't bow to Prince Harry's royalty. I'd bow to his honor and integrity.

[ddbaj]

32. My point was

That Harry does not deserve this glory, the UK anti-war movement does. However, if you want to worship the elites and pretend that the only thing that can save us is the pity of our rulers, then go ahead and keep on hailing and bowing down to authority.

[symbolman]

43. ANYONE that gets RESULTS

and is HIGH Profile has my gratitude, as a Veteran I am DEEPLY Impressed that this Man Harry who could DIE or be blown to bits has stepped up to the plate..

WHo the hell is saying that all those in the Protest trenches aren't to be thanked as well?

I'm sure they'll be GLAD that Harry has used his notoriety and fame to GET THE JOB DONE.

CHECKMATE.

Bowing to authority, is HE bowing to authority?

Horseshit.

[Bluebear]

"worship the elites"

:crazy:

You just can't go for a "moment" here without someone pissing in your cornflakes!

[symbolman]

73. They'd better be careful

I check my cornflakes for Al Queda every morning, and my wife checks the bathroom before I shave :)

[Fridays Child]

111. Al Qaeda in the cornflakes...

...something about that visual...

...tiny terrorists rappelling down the front of my cereal box...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Seriously, though, I haven't followed British developments too closely, over the last several days. Do you think this move was calculated, by Prince Harry, to shut down his country's involvement in the war? Or is it an unintended but extremely fortunate result of a royal tantrum?

Either way, if lives are saved and it helps to bring this sorry debacle to a close, it's a good thing but I'm curious about what actually motivated young Harry.

[symbolman]

143. LOL

Now you have ME laughing, tiny terrorists :)

Someone should do a series of collectable dolls "Lil Terrorists" like when they are kids, all the bad guys, with Hello Kitty grenades, it would be hilarious..

Y'know, who the hell really KNOWS what is going throught Harry's mind, maybe he's matured and used his Notority to SAVE lives, either way it's cool with me, but it is just SO coincidental, and you KNOW the Queen MOther would have B-LIARS head on a pike if he harmed one hair of that kid's head, for a BS war started by the MORON in CHIEF.. :)

[AikidoSoul]

49. "Glory"? That's your word bud. I think the right word is "admiration"

for being a royal pain in the ass to the fucking war machine, the Busheviks, and that jerkoff Tony Blair.

The anti-war movement deserves a lot of admiration too, and they get it.

[FredStembottom]

116. A simple case of "credit where due".

If this theory is correct, then Prince Harry is the bravest, noblest anti-war activist of them all.

Causing change through direct threat to his own life and limb.

[ieoeja]

142. Speaking of bowing... I have a question.

A few years back I saw some guy bow to the presiding individual over the House before delivering a message from the Senate. I was outraged. We're Americans. We bow to noone (man or god, but that's another topic).

This past weekend I was watching something that included JFK's introduction to a joint session of congress. The man who made that introduction did NOT bow.

I can credit the Republics with a lot of shit, but I can't imagine they actually instituted THIS after they took control of Congress. Yet, I saw no such bow in a forty-five year old clip, while I did see it just a few years ago on C-SPAN.

Can someone explain?

[cool user name]

29. Delete (double post)

Deleted by author

[Annces]

18. Great

Mayor Daley's son wanted to go too.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. That's an interesting idea.

The crown can't just come out and condemn the war, legally I think.

But then Blair can't let the prince get killed in Iraq.

So maybe this was some sort of political maneuvering.

[malaise]

22. You're correct

Genius idea from Harry.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Well, if it's true...

and that's a big IF, but if it is I wonder if it was Harry's idea.

[conscious evolution]

52. His brother has been whispering

in his ear while Harry sleeps.
"Go to Iraq.I want to be king. Go to Iraq.I want to be king."

Just kidding!

As a person who isn't a fan of royalty I have to give Harry a nod for this.

[MonkeyFunk]

57. His brother WILL be King...

presuming nothing happens to him. William is older than Harry.

[conscious evolution]

64. oopps!

Just go to show how much attention I pay to them.

[SemperEadem]

150. there was once a second, red-haired son named Harry who became king

It's happened before.

[TheBaldyMan]

102. he is not a genius - just a soldier wanting to do his duty

no politics at all.

[Coexist]

25. I know - the political repercussions of a dead Prince - yikes

he would be tarred and feathered.

[symbolman]

55. Then the Queen

DEMANDS that the British declare WAR against the US, for having her grandson killed...

Hey, could happen, the world gets wierder every day :)

[Richard Steele]

26. That is quite possibly a correct assessment of this situation.

But do we have any actual PROOF that this is what has happened?

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

27. I have always thought it will be Harry who is King.

sorry, for the off topic post.

[SoCalDem]

48. What's funny too, is that there are stubborn rumore that hint

that he's not even Charles' son :evilgrin:

http://www.nndb.com/people/104/000031011/

[SoCalDem]

56. Harry & his "Dad"?

[MonkeyFunk]

65. yeah

Harry's too good-looking to be a Windsor. Even William is starting to get the Royal Fugly about him.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

66. He takes after the Spencer side, looks Alot like his Uncle

My own son looks a great deal like my brothers. My genes seem to have dominated a great deal within him.
Hence, When I look at Harry, I see Diane's brothers' likeness standing there. I'll always believe Charles is Harry's Dad. Charles genes were weak, when it came to Harry.

[SoCalDem]

67. Did you see the pics I posted of Hewitt? n/t

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

68. Yeah, Did you post any pics of Diana's brother? nt

[dancingme]

103. He looks like Diana's brother and father

Hewitt just happens to have the same coloring as Diana's brother.

[erpowers]

133. Sorry

I am sorry, but look at the kid. He looks just like Hewitt; almost like his twin. He has Hewitts eyes, hair, and maybe his lips. I know the Spencer's have the read hear, but Harry in my opinion look a little too much like Hewitt. Maybe Harry really does look like Diana's brother, but he sure does look a great deal like Hewitt.

[SoCalDem]

134. Check these two out..

compared to this one (on the left) of Hewitt (in younger days)


and the fact that he claims to have met her after Harry's birth.. That may be the "official" story, but who's to say that she had not met him earlier, had a tryst and then the two of them came up with the riding lessons as a way to justify them seeing each other ..

Couples who have liasons, usually do not tell the truth..

[erpowers]

163. Feel Sorry For the Kid

I feel sorry for the kid, but every time I see pictures of him and Hewitt I think he looks so much like him. I think Harry has Hewitt's nose, eyes, and lips. I think they even have the same smile. I guess that would be nature if they have the same lips, but I just wanted to point that out.

[1monster]

70. While Harry mostly looks like Di, as does his brother, I see some

resemblance to Charles too... The royal family seems to be quite sure that Harry is Charles' son. If there were any doubt at all, there are ways and means of finding out. Personally, I've always thought it was really nasty of the gutter press to speculate on whether or not Harry was the son of Charles or not. It must have been quite hurtful to a boy growing up in the spot light.

Prince Harry http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/01/26/prince_harry_narrowweb__300x449,0.jpg Prince Charles

[Pithlet]

125. He has Charles' eyes.

He definitely takes after his mother's side though, and Hewitt looks like he could be in that family as well, hence the rumors. But those eyes are his dad's, Charles.

[GreenZoneLT]

79. Oh, no doubt he's a royal bastiche

He looks nothing like Charles, and is a dead ringer for one of Diana's acknowledged lovers.

[bklyncowgirl]

86. Would that be the riding instructor that Diana ended up er riding?

I read somewhere that she decided to take horseback riding lessons so that she and Charles could have something in common--and to compete with Camilla of course. Turned out that she didn't much care for horses but that hot dude of an army officer in those tight britches--oooh baby.

There is something sort of fun about these royal scandals--but I do prefer the Tudors.

If Harry's insistance on being sent to Iraq helped bring about the withdrawal good for him--if that was his intention.

[daveskilt]

128. screw the tudors - house of Stewart baby!

there must be an heir to bonnie prince Charlie somewhere, right?

[bklyncowgirl]

149. Aw c'mon there's no comparison. Henry VIII, Bloody Mary, Elizabeth the "Virgin" Queen

You got a king who broke his country away from the Catholic Church because the Pope wouldn't let him divorce his wife and marry his mistress.

You got the same king who once he married that misstress had her beheaded on trumped up charges of adultery. He married a total of seven women, two of whom he beheaded, two divorced one died of natural causes and the other (just barely--she was under investigation) survived him.

You got a Queen who fell head over heels in love with her cheating Spanish husband and was ready to send her own sister to the scaffold.

That same sister, the queen who "lived and died a Virgin", kept a collection of young studs hanging around until the day she died and played her hand in the royal marriage game like a riverboat gambler.

Sure, the Stewarts were fun but the Tudors RULE!

[daveskilt]

156. mary queen of scots and the first man in the bible

Mary who got into three political marriages and even killed off one of her husbands. Not to mention James "the wisest fool in christendom" who is the first man in the bible (King James).

sure bonnie prince charlie was a small (4'10") effeminate Italian when he tried to rally Scotland in the Jacobite rebellions but c'mon... we need a scotsman in power.

[ohioINC]

30. Not a hero

Harry's publicist had the forsight or foreknowledge that the British would be pulling out of the war. He could have just thrown his name out their at the right time. He is going to get so much exposure from this that he is going to be the new angry bald Britney's boyfriend.

[Horse with no Name]

33. How many tours have you served?

I mean...after all...you say he isn't a hero even though he is WILLING to go fight this war...surely you must be a hero yourself?

[symbolman]

37. HERE HERE!

All HAIL the Veterans, of which I am ONE myself :)

Yeah it's all PR isn't it? It's not like he's laying his fucking LIFE on the LINE or anything.. sheesh..

Right on Horse! :)

[Richard Steele]

39. You got a LINK to back up that assertation?

[brettdale]

31. Wow I didnt click

But heck, has soon as little Prince Harry is to be sent to Iraq, Blair pulls the troops.

Yeppers.

[kitty1]

34. The Queen would never accept her grandson sacrificing his life...

because of a dipshit president who coerced Blair and co into joining him in this masquerade called a war on terror.
It's no secret that the Queen despises Bush. It was evident on his trip to England a few years ago. She probably regards him as a pompous ass. Not only would it be tragic to have Harry possibly die so soon after his mother, but the families of any soldiers in his unit who died as a direct result of a hit on him would be infuriated. Not to mention all of Britain. They already want to skewer Blair as it is over Iraq.

[symbolman]

44. Yep

anything happened to that kid and B-LIAR would be the first man sent to the TOWER in a LONG time :)

KING HIM, he WON :)

[WritersBlock]

78. (O/T) Reminds me of my all-time favorite joke:

While on a state visit to England, George Bush meets the queen and proclaims, “As I’m the President of America, I’m thinking of changing how my great country is referred to. It should be called a kingdom.”

The queen replies, “I’m sorry, Mr. Bush, but to be a kingdom, you have to have a king in charge, and you’re not a king.”

George Bush thinks for a moment and then asks, “How about a principality then?”

The queen replies, “Again, to be a principality, you have to be a prince, and you’re not a prince, Mr. Bush.”

Bush thinks long and hard and comes up with another option. “How about an empire?”

Getting a little annoyed, the queen replies, “Sorry again, Mr. Bush, but to be an empire you must have an emperor in charge, and you are not an emperor.”

Before Bush could utter another word, the queen offers solace. “Don’t worry, Mr. Bush, under your leadership, America is perfect as a country.”

[leftchick]

35. that is exactly the first thing I thought when wolf announced this

I thought, damn, they can not afford to have Harry killed! He did it! Remember just one month ago bliar was saying any troop reductions would be "disastrous"! You rock Harry! I only hope this puts the nail in the US mission as well.

[ginnyinWI]

36. It will be a phased withdrawal--

3,000 by the end of 2007. Half now, half at the end of the year. That will leave 4,000 British troops in Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

[symbolman]

38. Wow

Good news, and like LeftChick says, we can only hope this is the final NAIL in the Coffin that is Bush's BLUNDER.. :)

[Horse with no Name]

60. With no more (including Harry) being sent in

:applause:

[Duppers]

152. The withdrawal announcement came before Harry's

Symbolman's theory popped into my head the first instance I heard it, BUT I knew the phased withdrawal announcement from
Jan. 11 came first (The withdrawal was announced today AS IF it had just broken---they ignored the fact that it had already been announced weeks ago!):

CNN: Tony Blair just announced that he is WITHDRAWING 3,000 BRITISH TROOPS FROM IRAQ!!!

UK to cut 3,000 troops from Iraq by May
Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:27 AM GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will cut troop levels in Iraq by almost 3,000 at the end of May, the Daily Telegraph reported on Thursday, citing a timetable for withdrawal the newspaper said it had seen.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-01-11T002655Z_01_L10510752_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BRITAIN-IRAQ-TROOPS.xml&WTmodLoc=Top+News-C1-Headline-6


Because this announcement came out not long after boosh announced his 'surge,' I sent this announcement out in Jan. with the note, 'Does this fact not trash bush's creditability in escalating the war with more troops now?!!'


Sorry, Symbolman, I think your theory's wrong because Harry didn't make his pronouncement until Feb. 16th or 17th and the withdrawal announcement came a month ago.

[PhilipShore]

42. Is a he a liberal?

[Horse with no Name]

61. He's awfully young and has made some pretty juvenile mistakes

such at the Swastika.
Give him time to assert himself on the world. I think even though some turned their eyebrows up at the kid that Harry was...they might applaud the man he becomes.

[Catchawave]

45. Where are the Bush Twins?

We need them now more than ever!

[symbolman]

47. Yeah

Someone should be working this like the old Space Race.. "ARE we going to let the Brits outdo the Americans?! I propose the Bush Girls DEMAND they be sent to Iraq, and to show those Brits how it's done, we'll Pull 100,000 TROOPS within a MONTH.."

Take THAT Brits! :)

[Yukari Yakumo]

81. E-mail something like that to Sen, Webb.

He can use this and his own son being in Iraq in a speech to shame Repukes who support the war yet their own spawn aren't involved in the fighting, much less the military.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

107. Personally speaking, I don't want anyone over there, even the twins. I don't believe in the sins of

the father either.

[etherealtruth]

147. Agreed

I don't want anyone's children dying for the Chimps insanity (including the Chimp's)

[girl gone mad]

51. He was (or still is) going to Iraq,

but there was never a chance that he would be put into an active area. The risk of kidnapping is just too great. He is surely well aware of that, and I don't think he would want to put his unit in that kind of danger.

I really doubt that the withdrawal had anything to do with Prince Harry.

[symbolman]

53. Nope

he specifically demanded that he NOT be given some cushy duty there, he wants to get into the action, and since they must comply, he's got them cornered.

No, this is way too coincidental.

Sometimes things are just what they are, he's ACED them.

B-LIAR is now his PAWN. :)

[girl gone mad]

62. He could make demands all day long...

the Ministry of Defense is under no obligation to comply. The public might see his demands as selfish, since he would be putting his comrades lives at increased risk so he can be 'one of the boys'.

[AikidoSoul]

58. Where does it say that the Brits are pulling out of Iraq? Do you have a link?

I thought I saw something on the Brits pulling out in TruthOut earlier yesterday, but it's not there now.

The CBS story below is the latest I could find that mentions Harry (6 hrs ago) and his possible assignment to Iraq. No mention of the Brits pulling out.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/20/world/main2494154.shtml

[ohioINC]

59. The withdrawal of the British is not a surprise

Right before an election and right before a new war with Iran. I do not think the Queen or Prince Harry had anything to do with it. I do not know if Harry is sincere however his pledging to serve right before the withdrawal announcement is very suspicious. The royal family depends on their celebrity to maintain their position

[jannyk]

80. So wrong about Harry's motives

The US media has only now picked up what Harry had been saying for nearly a year. I saw these exact quotes in the AP story - they neglected to mention they were made months ago. Harry has been insisting on going all the while Blair was insisting the troops were staying. However, you are correct that the Monarchy have nothing to do with the withdrawal.

From the April 24th, 2006 edition of the Times:

...<<Prince Harry, 21, who recently passed out from Sandhurst as a Second Lieutenant, has said that he intends to serve with his men wherever they are sent and was reported yesterday to have threatened to resign if he were not allowed on the front line. ...snip...

...Prince Harry will soon start an intensive five-month training course at Bovington Camp in Dorset where he will learn to become a platoon commander of 11 soldiers for an armoured reconnaissance role. His publicly declared insistence on being with his men at all costs appeared previously to have been backed by the MoD. ...snip...

...Prince Harry said in an interview to mark his 21st birthday last year: “There’s no way I’m going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country . . . That may sound very patriotic but it’s true.”>>

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article708666....

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Octafish]

69. He must've changed his stripes.

[girl gone mad]

72. I doubt it.

I think he's still a risk taker and he wants to have an adventure in Iraq. He's very close with his comrades and doesn't want to be left out because of his royal status. His mom raised both William and Harry to be less isolated than previous Royals.

I don't believe that he had any intention of ending British involvement in the war.

[InvisibleTouch]

71. By accident or design.

I have to say I was pretty impressed when Harry insisted he be sent to Iraq, rather than trying to weasel out like certain others we could name. I didn't get the impression it was because he supported the war, so much as that he felt a sense of obligation to his classmates. He felt it wouldn't be right to stay safely home simply by virtue of his birth, while others put their lives on the line. That's worthy of respect!

I'm not sure he was calculating the result - as in, "Gee, if I volunteer, it'll create such an uproar that my country will have to pull out, and I won't actually be sent over, but it sure will look good that I made the offer." I certainly can't peer into his head, but I don't think that was his agenda. I took his intention at face value. (I'm not saying you didn't, btw - just pointing out how it might be interpreted.) But making such a bold move has forced others to respond, and I think your interpretation makes a lot of sense - if the UK is pulling out, this is at least one major reason. Good on him!

[Beausoir]

74. Quite the coincidence. Exceptional timing.

[lala_rawraw]

75. interesting... i had not considered this:D

[Greeby]

76. It's not like that

The royal family has a tradition of male members serving in the military whether Britain is at peace or war. Among the members alive today:

Prince Phillip gave up his title as a Prince of Greece and Denmark to join the Royal Navy, in which he saw service throughout World War II.

Prince Charles trained with the Royal Navy and RAF in the 70's, when Britain was not involved in heavy conventional war.

Prince Andrew was a helicopter pilot during the Falklands War, which included acting as a decoy for Exocet missiles which were being launched against British ships

Prince William was commissioned as an officer in the Household Cavalry back in December. Of course, the media made a big fuss of his girlfriend being present.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6181761.stm

Prince Harry was commissioned as an officer in the same regiment back in April 2006

[nam78_two]

82. Precisely.nt

[Catherine Vincent]

77. I thought it was a coincidence too, Symbolman.

That would be great if that is what his plan was all along. Forget trying to upstage the 1st heir. :)

[nam78_two]

83. As an aside- I cannot believe that a democracy still has "royalty" with so much powerts

If that is indeed what this withdrawal is all about...a "prince's" life having more value than average Joe's if I read this right :eyes:.

But hey whatever works to end this war.

I don't think much of these "royals" and their "House of lords", but whatever..I don't live there. I find it strange/archaic that a democracy wants to explicitly elevate certain people (even symbolically) merely for being born into certain families, but again whatever. And I will take even these people, such as they are, over Tony Blair at this point.

Good they are withdrawing their troops whatever the reason.

[Reterr]

85. From my stints in the UK- I gather that the "royals" are the equivalents of their Anna Nicoles.

(well a slightly classier version at any rate).

I don't think the vast majority of educated/grounded people care much for them or the feudal system they represent.

They are good for the gossip rags and so on. Its only over here, that so many educated people even seem to revere them so much :shrug:

I agree with you that of this is the reason they are withdrawing their troops (which I doubt actually): a) the end effect is great and b) that is really a shame that they value a "prince" over an average person in this day and age.

[Joe Chi Minh]

91. I suspect it's more about serious injury and disfigurement, rather than

death in the field.

Quite apart from the family's loss and the loss of self-esteem of a royal victim of the war, appearances are fairly crucial to royalty, at least as still viewed in the UK, and since the monarchy underpins the British Establishment, and Harry, as an amputee, possibly multiple amputee, couldn't be secreted away from the public gaze, the Establishment would, I think, be very anxious to prevent Harry's deployment there in that cauldron of dismemberment that is Iraq.

If Andrew's helicopter had been hit in the Falklands War, I would imagine it would have been curtains for him, but also, because of Diana, her life and death, I think everyone feels a little more protective towards her sons.

[Crayson]

98. Last I checked it was still a "Constitutional Monarchy"...

if you think, Great Britain was a democracy, you're wrong.
Sorry.

Look this up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy

Also check the list of those monarchies at wikipedia!!!
There's still tons of countries that aren't actually democracies, many of those U.S. allies!

[jannyk]

99. If you read your own link, you'll find this paragraph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy#Constitutional_monarchy_in_England
<<In representative democracies that are constitutional monarchies, like the United Kingdom, the monarch may be regarded as the head of state but the prime minister, whose power derives directly or indirectly from elections, is head of government.>>

note the words democracy and monarchy in the same sentence - clever buggers aren't we?

[foo_bar]

148. can't the monarch fire the Prime Minister, or did that end with Charles I?

Although I imagine the threat of decapitation puts a bit of a leash on executive power.

[muriel_volestrangler]

159. In theory, yes

though the post of Prime Minister didn't exist in Charles I's time; in fact, it came in (though not with that as its official title, at first) when George I was given the throne by Parliament (being the nearest branch of the family it was felt sure wouldn't turn Catholic). George barely spoke English (he was the Elector of Hanover), and day-to-day power ended up in the hands of the politician who dominated Parliament - Robert Walpole.

In theory, the monarch invites someone to be Prime Minster, and lead the government, and so could dismiss them too. No monarch has ever tried to dismiss a PM since George III, I think (though you can ask Australians about how Gough Whitlam was dismissed in the 70s by the Governor General, who is the monarch's representative in countried where they're the head of state, but not resident). I think Victoria refused to accept a new PM after an election, right at the beginning of her reign (about 1840), because the new one wanted to dismiss some friends of hers from some posts.

[foo_bar]

160. thanks

So much for my Charles I/George W analogy ("The present King of France (is bald)").

[yvr girl]

157. Oh, please!

If it's not just like America, it's not a democracy? Canada IS a democracy and we have a monarch. Same for the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden etc. The monarch serves at the pleasure of the people. Each country could abolish the monarchy by changing their constitution. The current King of Spain is credited with helping to turn Spain into a democracy.

[jannyk]

84. Is this an 'Onion' skit or have I

entered the 'Twighlight Zone'? You are all spoofing - right?

Blair is pulling the UK troops for a number of reasons, none of which have anything to do with Harry or his regiment.

Firstly, Blair will be stepping down in a few months (very few if party insiders get their way). He will be replaced by Gordon Browne who will then have to win his party's support and a general election in fairly quick succession.

The war is as unpopular (maybe more so)in the UK as it is here. Gordon Browne will pull the troops or lose all support, but by him doing so, he makes Blair look like the plonker he is. So probably, Blair is doing a pre-emptive 'pull'. That way, Blair can say it was his decision. He's just cleaning up his mess before he leaves - more than likely at the behest of the Labour party who'd really like to win the next election.

Harry going or not going would have NO effect on policy. It may be controversial because of the particular circumstances, but most Brits, including and maybe especially, his family, would expect him to do his duty.

Harry is to be admired for his stance and sense of duty. But please, get a grip on reality, he did not, nor could not machinate a troop withdrawal.

[Tormenta]

120. I totally agree with you

Your assessment is right on. I also thought the OP was kidding.

[Pithlet]

126. I agree.

I don't think there's any connection either, for precisely the reasons you mentioned.

[Hatalles]

130. I thought the OP was kidding.

nt

[LeftishBrit]

87. I honestly doubt that Prince Harry is the main reason

Royals have risked their lives in wars before now; e.g. Prince Andrew in the Falklands; and it did not result in an end to the wars. Though it wasn't on the battlefield itself, the current Queen's parents, George VI and the Queen Mother, remained in London during the Blitz, despite the fact that they could have been targeted.

Harry is not likely ever to be king; his brother William is ahead of him in line; so I don't think he's seen as 'crucial' in that sense. Not that people want harm to come to him, but they wouldn't stop a war just for his sake.

The real reason IMO is that the war has always been unpopular; is becoming more so; and there is the real risk that it could cost Labour the next election. It is really Blair who has the messianic urge to fight this war at all costs, and now that he's about to go, he has less power over what the rest of the government does..

[B Calm]

88. If what you say is true, then it's time for the Bush Twins to do their patriotic duty

[Joe Chi Minh]

89. His mother's own son! I don't think it would have been quite Diana's

way of campaigning against the laying of mines, but it's the result that counts! She must be laughing her socks off in heaven! Dat's ma boy!!!!

[MiniMe]

90. Don't forget, this "kid" wore a Nazi uniform to a costume party and thought it was funny

I'm glad his father took him to take for it, but he shouldn't have done it in the first place.

[Joe Chi Minh]

92. It's easy to read too much into the behaviour of some young people,

particularly extraverts. Young extraverts can be dopey like that. Immature, callow. Of course, there are the sons of rich far right-wing families who behave like louts later in life, all their life, in fact, but I believe in the royal family, Harry has had much, much more beneficial influences bearing upon his growth as a human being. So, it doesn't mean that, in Harry's case, for instance, had he been an ordinary Joe, he would have baulked at risking his life to help to save a Jewish family under Nazi occupation.

The royal family are often accused by a rabidly envious MSM (probably more the press barons that own them, than even the journalists) of being a dysfunctional family. So what? When you analyse it, there aren't many families who aren't dysfunctional in some way or other. They can still be largely great people.

It's not that I'm a royalist. I'm not. The appeal of royalty mystifies me. However, I do think that we are very lucky to have such a warm and pleasant family in the box seat. And the Blairs - who evidently deeply resent the fact that he is not the Head of State and she, the First Lady - have made me astonishingly grateful that we DO have at least the monarchy we have.

[sampsonblk]

93. Yep. Good catch

The good prince has put the Brits on the road home.

[Crayson]

94. my thoughts exactly

... or the other way around.

He probably knew about the withdrawal anyway and started to volunteer for Iraq even more.
Makes for a great image boost for the "bad guy" of the two princes.

[malaise]

95. The reduction and ongoing live coverage

The Lib-Dem leader is speaking now - great questions.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6380933.stm

[BlueIris]

97. Less praise, more PRAYER.

Well, okay, praise all you want. He and others need the positive energy. But, seriously, y'all, add him to the list of folks in combat whom you pray for. He's going to a war zone.

[Fire Walk With Me]

100. Should someone give the twins a bag of money to enlist?

[JAbuchan08]

101. Him AND his hitler costume n/t

[Bitwit1234]

104. Well in that case send the twins.

Maybe then bush will pull the troops out.

[samsingh]

105. i think you're right. the timing is too coincidental.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

106. And I don't believe in coincidences! It was pointedly mentioned on the news

that no new UK military would be going to the UK, and I immediately thought of Harry!

I was afraid that if he went, the BFEE would make sure something would happen to him, making him a martyr to get the UK behind the war again. Especially since he was supposed to guard the border between Iraq and Iran.

[GrantDem]

108. Interesting observation.

I never put the two together.

[Javaman]

109. Sadly he's third in line behind charles and william. nt

[IronLionZion]

110. I want Euan and Nicky Blair to serve in Iraq immediately

Why doesn't anyone want Tony Blair's sons to serve?

I suppose I'll give his daughter Kathryn a free pass since she is a girl and his youngest son Leo is only 6 so he may have to wait for Iran or North Korea.

But I want Euan and Nicky in Iraq ASAP. Make it happen DU.

[raccoon]

112. No, let's ask Harry to come to the US and be OUR King! nt

[bobbie]

118. Hah! I like the way you think.

We've had more than enough of the madness of King George.

[Flaxbee]

114. I agree that it was probably Harry's insistence on going

that hastened Britain's withdrawal from Iraq. I don't know if Harry was calling Blair's bluff, so to speak, though from what I've read about Harry I think he probably felt strongly about being treated the same as his 'men'. But I also think that perhaps the Queen told Blair that he would be ripped into tiny little pieces if he sent Harry to Iraq. I think perhaps the Queen put her foot down on this one - ain't no freaking WAY her grandson was going to go.

[theboss]

138. I find it hard to believe a Windsor would seek a way out of service

That doesn't seem to be their way. As mentioned, there is a long history of the royal family serving in the military (and in military conflicts at that).

[Castleman]

115. Ahhh, he ain't even real royalty...

the fargin' Windsors are a bunch of usurpers, the REAL royal family is the Stewarts of Scotland....Long Live Bonnie Prince Charlie!
As a Scot, just had to put that bit in...
Seriously, Bravo Harry! I don't think he did it expecting Blair to start pulling troops, more to force the Brits to re-examine their presence in Iraq. Either way, if it pulls the Brits out and leaves the "Coalition of the Willing" as the US only, it's making it damn near impossible for us to stay.
For those taking him to task for his "nazi" bit, he was a young, dumb kid. Who here never did anything stupid at that age?

[bobbie]

117. Dang symbolman I never would have noticed that

It would be a helluva coincidence wouldn't it?

Nice work.

[PVnRT]

119. It does make sense, doesn't it?

For one, I admire him for having the honor to say that one who leads troops into battle should be in the shit serving with them.

Two, if this is a ploy to get a British withdrawl, it's done brilliantly.

[T_i_B]

121. If you believe that then you will believe absolutely anything.

.

[geiger]

123. duh, I can't believe I didnt immediately link the two events. Interesting.

[Cell Whitman]

124. Excellent point - travels nicely with this note sent ot TPM:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/012566.php

Josh, one of the arguments made by Cheney in the interview (and others such as John Howard) is that the British withdrawal is good news because it reflects improvement in the situation in the South. Well, if this is the case, then why aren't the British troops being moved to where they are needed instead of being withdrawn? Why is nobody asking this question?

[WI_DEM]

129. So do you think if the twins threatened to enlist and go to Iraq--Bush would withdrawl?

[erpowers]

141. No

The answer to your question is no. The twins since they are females would not be in that much danger, in that in most cases women cannot be in the infantry or on the front lines. If the twins joined the military they would probably end up doing some kind of public relations, intelligence, cryto, or logistics. So it is different for the twins. Whether they want to or not they would not be able to stop the war in that they would most likely not be in any danger.

[erpowers]

131. Pretty Good Guy

I do think Prince Harry is a pretty good guy. However, I think he may not have purposely stopped the British from fighting this war. I did think that maybe the British were leaving Iraq in order to keep Harry out of the war. However, I think he was just one of those kids who comes along and does not use his/her privilege to get out bad situations. Now, I will admit that maybe I am wrong and Prince Harry had a plan all along and realized that if he pushed to go to war the British troops would be pulled out of the war.

[earth mom]

135. So would * stop the war in Iraq if the twins wanted to join up? Hell Yeah!

So, c'mon on Jen & Barb, do something good for once in your life!

[Madspirit]

136. Jen and Barbara

Yay Harry! What a good young man.

That said, I do wish people would leave Jen and Barbara out of it. I remember once, Rush Limbaugh insulted Chelsey and even the Repugnants yelled at him and he apologized.

I partied that hardy when I was their age. I probably partied hardier. We had acid and stuff. I would HATE to be blamed for who my father was. ...and I wouldn't want to be sent to war because of who my father was. In other words...

"LEAVE THEM KIDS ALONE."

It's about Bush, not his children.
Lee

[Madspirit]

139. Also

I don't want any kids to die, not even Bush's...
Lee

[theboss]

137. Except he still may be going...

He will know Thursday as to whether his unit is called up or not.

Also, the Brits are still in until 2008. It's not like they packed up and left today.

[muriel_volestrangler]

144. BBC: "Harry will almost certainly be deployed"

Last Updated: Wednesday, 21 February 2007, 20:32 GMT

Prince Harry will almost certainly be deployed to carry out a tour of duty in Iraq, according to Whitehall sources.

The prince would be the first senior royal to serve on the front line since Prince Andrew in the Falklands in 1982.

His regiment, the Blues and Royals, is expected to be told it will serve in Iraq as part of the latest round of UK troop deployments.
...
The BBC's political editor Nick Robinson said the prince's regiment would be deployed.

"He will almost certainly be part of that," he added.

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

[jannyk]

146. But the gullible don't want to hear facts Muriel

- they want to create a 'saint'.

I had never understood how, our supposedly intelligent and informed elected representatives, believed Bushco's rationale for invading Iraq.

After reading these posts, which cling to and propogate a ridiculous supposition, in spite of all the 'facts' that exist to dispel it, I now have more insight as to how it may have occured. It's like mass hysteria. No-one wants to hear or can be bothered to hear, the truth. They are too in love with the 'myth'.

So all, now explain yourselves. Blair is drawing down the UK troops. Harry is still going to Iraq! Do you feel just a little foolish?

:tinfoilhat:

[girl gone mad]

151. This thread is very bizarre.

I don't get it at all. There isn't a shred of evidence to even support the idea that Harry is opposed to the war, let alone that he doesn't want to fight in it or that Blair is withdrawing troops to keep this one man out of harm's way.

What are DUers thinking?

[nam78_two]

155. Not one shred and yet already

Harry is the "noblest anti-war critic" of them all...The noble young prince "risking his noble, princely self"...
Very bizarre....
Now I understand why these people are kept around on tax-payer money...its all...so romantic...
Princes and queens and their nobility and tragedies and all....:eyes:

The many many racist statements made by this family just a few decades ago don't seem to be recollected by many. I despise the British "royals".

[oblivious]

162. "Prince Harry will be deployed to Iraq this spring...could be sent on frontline missions"

It also emerged last night that troops from the Blues and Royals - including Prince Harry - would be deployed to Iraq this spring as part of a Household Cavalry detachment as 1 Mechanised Brigade replaces 19 Light Brigade, which is returning home after a six-month tour of duty. The extent of the prince's duties remains unclear, but he could be sent on frontline missions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2018287,00.html

[Initech]

140. This is awesome news! Take that, Blair!

:woohoo:

[BluePatriot]

145. I never thought of it that way but maybe you're right

If so, good for him. I am sure Diana would be proud of him.

[tabasco]

153. The man who should (if he had any self-respect) get off the public dole,

throw off the trappings of "royalty," and get a real life.

[nam78_two]

154. Well said

:applause:

British "royals"...feh...

[yvr girl]

158. He's not ON the public dole. Neither is his father.

(Unless you count his military pay.)

You might want to get your facts straight.

[tabasco]

161. Whatever you say. Sorry to insult your little heart throb.

The Royal Family are hard-working wage earners with no perks in life, I'm sure. I hear the Queen has been taking in laundry to make the rent payments.

You are being silly if you think they earn their lifestyle. If you think Harry has it the same as your average army lieutenant, I have some bridges I'd like to sell you. The "royals" are kept by the British people just for entertainment value like clowns. If any of them developed an ounce of self-respect, they would denounce their unearned titles and seek a normal life.

[yvr girl]

164. Prince Harry is a kid - not my heart throb

I was stating a fact. Prince Charles and his children do not receive money from the government. The Queen, as Head of State does.

Are they privledged. Yes. I wasn't denying that. They haven't been deposed yet, so perhaps the British people feel they're getting their money's worth.