Quote:
Originally Posted by JSerena
Hey guys,
just read an article today in Daily Mail about Fauklands mission and Royal family, specifically prince William being a pilot there. Basically, it suggested that the army in Fauklands is not very pleased about having any members of Royal family there, since the safety requirements has to be 3x as strict as they would be otherwise.
What do u think about it? Do u agree that members of Royal family shouldnt serve in the war in Faukland Islands?
|
I didn't read that article but I do recall similar concerns being raised when it was first mentioned that the Household Cavalry Regiment (which Prince Harry served in at the time) was to be deployed to Afghanistan. It was feared that his presence in theatre would attract insurgents, thus increasing the risk to other soldiers. You may recall that when he did finally deploy there was a complete news blackout (which was finally broken by a blogger iirc, at which point he was quite quickly pulled back to the UK). I believe part of the reason he retrained as an Apache pilot was so he could avoid the same sort of issues in any future deployment as a helicopter pilot is more "anonymous" than a bloke on the ground (that same logic may have applied when Prince Andrew went to the South Atlantic in 1982).
However that was Afghanistan - as RN7 points out, Argentine sabre rattling / UN protests notwithstanding, I'd be surprised if the risks are judged to be particularly high in the Falklands.