More Active Posts
Front Page
A British retreat?
 |
 10 Comments |
When an Australian magazine–and subsequently the Drudge Report–exposed Prince Harry’s secret tour of duty in Afghanistan, the British government wasted no time in whisking the 23-year-old home, citing enormous risks to the prince and his fellow soldiers if he stayed. But Christopher Hitchens over at Slate seems to think it was the wrong decision to make:
The extraordinary thing–and also the alarming thing–about the hasty withdrawal of Prince Harry from his front-line duties in Afghanistan is the way in which everybody seems to assume that it was the only right thing to do. It was all very well, apparently, for the junior of the two royal princes to share in the risks and duties shouldered by his fellow soldiers in the Household Cavalry, yet not for a moment longer than his valor could be kept a secret. At that point, he was supposed to make a rapid exit and take his valor with him.
Hitchens goes on “to examine the nonlogic that supposedly underlies this decision,” and even argues that Harry’s rapid removal was “a hugely advertised scuttle or a retreat” that was probably “vastly encouraging to the Islamist gangsters.” Did the British government act wisely in sending Harry home, or should he have stayed in Afghanistan to finish out his tour like the rest of his unit?
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |  |
Share this: |
Gloomy conservatives
Oh Hitchens, I used to love to read Hitchens, but now he seems more bent on being contrary than anything else.
He seems to want to play a little fast and loose with other people’s security. If he wants to send a message to the Islamic gangsters let him carry it himself.
You might as well have painted a black and white circular bull’s eye on his front and back. Hitchens is an idiot anyway. Doesn’t believe in mysticism yet fully supports Bush. So, why are we in Afghanistan? Oh yea, to get the guy behind the attack on 9/11. How many years ago was that? The first Bush success.
Now, what are we doing in Iraq? Oh yea, we are creating a free democracy with Islam written into their constitution as the “National Religion”. Looks like we are on track. The second Bush success.
Bush put the suc in success.
I think if anything Cornet Wales should be reassigned to a unit that trains up and resets units to return to IRAQ from their UK bases.
When I left for Iraq this last time the Division CSM and Commanding General ea were on the tarmac to shake hands as we boarded the aircraft. (They were there as well when we walked off the plane onto the same tarmac 15 mos later!)
You might scoff but I think having Harry there to train, equip and then send’em off– or welcome’em them back when their tour concluded—would in some way ignite among his countryman a recollection of Diana.
Betcha Wills is now wishing he were the spare.
RDean, any thoughts on Prince Harry?
In light of the fact that fingers belonging to our hostages have been received, only a sick person would suggest leaving Harry openly in a place where bloodthirsty thugs operate. I give this kid a lot of credit for serving, and it shouldn’t be diminished by someone who hasn’t put his own life on the line. All these guys are targets; being with Harry was an added risk that could be minimized by his leaving. Even if Hitchens is willing to sacrifice Harry, he should at least thing of those other young men.
Sawgunner’s idea for Harry sound terrific. This way the young man can continue to serve in a meaningful way, and I think his mother would approve, too. She’d be the first to welcome these boys home.
Adios’ idea is a good one, too, with respect to Mr. Hitchens.
Hitchens is nuts.
But it had occurred to me that the Brits may have let the info on Harry leak to the press as an excuse to bring him home. And three cheers for Harry whatever happened.
The only good line in the entire article;
Are we certain that our obsession with “security” is not in fact making us insecure?
In an earlier post on Prince Harry, I pointed out the irony of a monarchist gov’t who has a member of the elite serving as a grunt whereas in the US, a republic, the children of the elite are partying in Argentina and riding a motor home across the country.
#4: RDean, any thoughts on Prince Harry?
Like I said, “You might as well have painted a black and white circular bull’s eye on his front and back.” Once it was out that he was available.
Some people relish living in the spotlight, others detest it. I think Harry is one of those that detest it. Just being away from England and his crazy inbred family probably offset any feeling of danger of being in Afghanistan.
They needed to get him out. I don’t think Harry would have been injured, but the suicide attacks targeting the Prince at that British base would have killed and wounded other British soldiers.
HRW, we have a volunteer military. That some of our “elite” children don’t volunteer doesn’t take away from those who do. I think one of McCain’s sons is in the military. Moreover, it is standard procedure in the Royal family for its male members to join the military. Prince Charles recently said this was what he wanted for his boys. I don’t think either son had much of a choice with respect to joining. I give them both credit for wanting to serve along with their fellow soldiers, even if William couldn’t go.
NJL
All English speaking countries have a volunteer military including the UK. Its the irony and the image that appeals to me. My comment is not to be taken as moral criticism.