Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > May > 02
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Should Prince Harry go?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
While his father, Prince Charles, is off leading the war against climate change, a challenge he likened to Britain’s struggle against the Nazis, Prince Harry heads off to the real war. The 22-year-old second lieutenant, a tank commander who leads a 12-man team in four armored reconnaissance vehicles, will be deployed “in due course” to Iraq, according to an announcement this week by Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, who heads the British Army.
When or whether Prince Harry would go has been the subject of immense interest and speculation in the British press. His regiment, the Blues and Royals, is scheduled to leave within weeks for a six-month tour.
The question for discussion today is whether such high-profile, high-value terrorist targets should be dispatched to the front lines. My inclination is no. In a different kind of war, the value of having a member of the royal family demonstrating a willingness to accept the same obligations asked of others, would warrant his exposure. But in this war, he will certainly be targeted and the propaganda value of his capture or execution would damage the war effort far higher than any contribution he might make. Besides, having a “distraction” in the foxhole or in the unit who would potentially affect the actions of others under fire, poses another danger.
Frankly, if President Bush had a son eligible to serve on the front lines in Iraq, I’t argue against that, too, for the same reason. We saw already how the Brits responded to the capture of 15 sailors and marines. Prince Harry in the hands of terrorists would break the country’s will. That probably wouldn’t be the case with the son of an American President, but why take the risk?
Services »
