Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Prince Harry in combat

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by dakota
    If it requires the collusion of every major news editor in the country to keep secret the identity of one soldier every time he might see active combat . . . .
    Apparently that's exactly what happened.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/busin ... ei=5087%0A

    Comment


    • #17
      It's such a red herring though this hand wringing about whether the press has been irresponsible and has endangered troops by reporting the news.

      Militarily the issue isn't what the public knows, it's what the enemy knows. The media is full of it.

      With all due respect, I doubt Al Qaeda gets their intelligence from the front page of The Sun.

      If every major media outlet has known about this for weeks, then the information was out there in the intelligence community, to be bought and sold or given away or whatever.

      It's also totally hypocritical of the British media to keep talking up what they heroically did to help the war on terror by not reporting the news. The moment the story broke internationally they couldn't help themselves. They knew they were sitting on a big story and whipped themselves up into a ridiculous frenzy, one that then invited the paranoia about censorship.

      I bet the military would be perfectly happy to treat Harry as a normal soldier if it wasn't for the general hysteria of the British media.

      Think of it this way. If the mere knowledge that Harry was in Afghanistan was a dangerous thing, would it make more sense for the military to A) organise a vast conspiracy to conceal the whereabouts of the third in line to the British throne, or B) send somebody else?

      They didn't think there was a problem at all, but struck a deal to keep the gossip to a minimum. In the process the media got their claws in with various deals. Once the British news cycle finally cannibalised itself and went into greedy meltdown, the military had no choice but to get the Prince out of there, because of the bad publicity.

      You have to seriously ask, to what extent was Harry a target before the British press blew up a media storm about how much of a target he was? And how much more of a target is he now, after the British press has decided how much of a target he is by telling everybody how much of a target he is?

      Matt Drudge had nothing to do with any of this.

      The whole thing stinks of being a propaganda exercise anyway, although for what purpose it's hard to say.

      I bet that BBC documentary is going to be very heart rending when it finally emerges.

      And in a way, it is touching that the prince wants to fight for his country. But in this day and age, his profile and his status seems to preclude him from being able to do that. What if he wanted to be a spy? Should the media be leaned on not to report that Prince Harry is a spy? It's ludicrous.

      It doesn't matter whether Harry's participation became known now, or after he was safely back on British soil - except perhaps if you are the director of a documentary looking for a dramatic conclusion to your film.

      What they need to realise though is that the symbolism of the third in line to the throne fighting on the front line is going to mean different things to different people.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by tandfman
        Originally posted by dakota
        If it requires the collusion of every major news editor in the country to keep secret the identity of one soldier every time he might see active combat . . . .
        Apparently that's exactly what happened.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/busin ... ei=5087%0A
        If the NYT says so, it's probably NOT what happened.

        Comment


        • #19
          http://www.newsweek.com/id/117793

          Comment


          • #20
            Nor was he the first global outlet to reveal the story. The Australian women's magazine, New Idea is said to have published the story as early as January 7. I can't see any record of that, but a January 15 piece was headlined "Prince Harry: War Lord" and on February 14 there was an article headlined "Prince Harry Goes to War in Afghanistan". However, those stories - revealed in a search of New Idea's website - appear to have been taken down. Clicking through to either of them now takes you to a bland Prince Harry biography.

            http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/greenslade/ ... media.html

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by jazzcyclist
              Originally posted by Kevin Richardson
              while this brave young man is recognizable to all who read the tabloids (and even that ultimate tabloid, The Drudge Report!), I am doubtful that many of the Taliban regularly subscribe to those magazines. :?
              Amen! Afterall, how many Bollywood movie stars would be recognizable to the average American, despite the fact that some of them outdraw any Hollywood movie star?
              Aishwarya Rai is ALWAYS RECOGNIZABLE!!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Prince Harry in combat

                Originally posted by Friar
                http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...icle860997.ece

                Taliban fanatics were last night feared to be hunting down Prince Harry after he secretly fought in the Afghan badlands for ten weeks
                Well, he got in, called in some air strikes, got some good footage of his bit, got out in jig time. Probably got an account of the casualties thereof, too, but prob'ly not the civilian part. Harry's "separate war." Call me cynical, but I smell stage direction. :roll:

                jim

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Prince Harry in combat

                  Originally posted by jamese1045
                  Call me cynical, but I smell stage direction. :roll:

                  jim
                  There's nothing wrong with being cynical, Jim. :wink:

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Prince Harry in combat

                    Originally posted by jamese1045
                    Originally posted by Friar
                    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...icle860997.ece

                    Call me cynical, but I smell stage direction. :roll:

                    jim
                    I am not a royal worshipper. I have looked askance at some of Harry's youthful peccadillos. I have no idea whether this is a staged event or if so, to what end.
                    But ya gotta give the young man credit for having the balls to go into a dangerous areas, sheltered or not, when he had a legitimate excuse to not do so.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Prince Harry in combat

                      Originally posted by lonewolf
                      Originally posted by jamese1045
                      Originally posted by Friar
                      http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...icle860997.ece

                      Call me cynical, but I smell stage direction. :roll:

                      jim
                      I am not a royal worshipper. I have looked askance at some of Harry's youthful peccadillos. I have no idea whether this is a staged event or if so, to what end.
                      But ya gotta give the young man credit for having the balls to go into a dangerous areas, sheltered or not, when he had a legitimate excuse to not do so.
                      I have an "idea," why he and his people might do such a thing, but no evidence--film at 11. If there's no follow up film or exploitation of his "Harry's balls" exploits, so to say, following, then I will further admit to my cynical comments. It's part of the gig of the royals to be screwtinized, and good on him for trying to work in a bit of rough-and-ready .... image.

                      jim

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        He deserves kudos for going there, imo, not cynical comments. My brother's best friend has been Harry's bodyguard for much of the last 20 years and says he's a good guy without any particular airs and graces. Also, remember that Prince Andrew was a helicopter pilot during the Falklands and saw active service - as a decoy against exocet missles targeting the HMS Invincible.

                        (NB I have never been a fan of the Royal Family; I regard them as a useful tourist attraction and that's about it. I was once introduced to the Queen, Prince Phillip and Prince Andrew. My mother was aghast afterwards when I told her I refused to bow to them...)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I dunno, Mark. I would bow to the Queen and her family if I were in that situation, and I'm not even British.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Hell, I bowed to the maids in the hall at my hotel in Osaka last year; wouldn't find my much problem in finding a bend in there somewhere for HRH (seems the least one can do for Helen Mirren!).

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I will bow to any waiter who brings me another large Sapporo.
                              phsstt!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by gh
                                Hell, I bowed to the maids in the hall at my hotel in Osaka last year; wouldn't find my much problem in finding a bend in there somewhere for HRH (seems the least one can do for Helen Mirren!).
                                Oh, I'd certainly bow to Helen!

                                My lapse in respect for the crown occured when I was a bolshie 20yo....!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X