The French have the Exocet, the Yanks have the Cruise Missile - but Britain has SuperWills !

The news that William has visited troops in Afghanistan (for 3 hours !!!) is quite baffling. Was it kept secret because they feared the Taliban would flee on hearing the news?

He's been "in" the RAF (part-time) for about 3 months, only got his wings last week, and we are told he "flew" the plane for part of the journey !

We're also told that its to boost troops' morale. How? Surely pointing out to the troops that HE cannot be exposed to danger, and has to be secretly flown in and out, only points out even further how expendable they are?

Royal Diplomatic Protection Officer Ken Wharfe (speaking on News 24 a few minutes ago) admitted this is yet another PR disaster !

What exactly do you want ITK?

You criticise the princes if they don't go to a war zone. You criticise them if they do. If it's only for a few minutes it's a publicity stunt. If it's for a longer period it's also a publicity stunt. If they do nothing, they are a waste of space and money. If they do something they are merely pretending not to be a waste of space and money.

Damned if they do, and damned if they don't.

Is your life so empty?

JC is spot on...

Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Eh, ITK...?

As I've said before, this messageboard is your false beard.

JC wrote:
What exactly do you want ITK?

You criticise the princes if they don't go to a war zone. You criticise them if they do. If it's only for a few minutes it's a publicity stunt. If it's for a longer period it's also a publicity stunt. If they do nothing, they are a waste of space and money. If they do something they are merely pretending not to be a waste of space and money.


A waste of space and money? ... That's about it !
(Actually I never criticised them if they "do" - because we all know they never have !)

We've all read of the kit and equipment shortages etc (many many times) yet the powers-that-be allow such a waste as this - purely for PR purposes.

We all know that they are only in the Forces to keep them off the streets, but that they will never do a proper job (in or out of the Forces !)

It's all smoke and mirrors. Still at least he brought a stiff home with him (I'm sure that boosted troop morale no end !!!)

Prince Andrew served with distinction in the Falklands campaign.

Several Royals served in WW2.

Prince Harry served in Afghanistan.

I was in the Falklands, and my nephew is in Afghanistan. We can both vouch for the presence of Royal comrades.

It is a shame that those without proper knowledge choose to try and paint a maliciously false picture.

It would take seconds for a bullet or bomb to kill them, so it matters not how long they served in a war zone. The fact that they went at all, when they did not have to, shows courage and loyalty which we who stayed at home have no right to criticise.

There is no doubting the bravery of those who risk everything in the service of their country.

My own perception of Harry is he is a young man of immense courage, and is deserving of far more credit than ITK's ignorant witterings would suggest.

Pete Clarke wrote:
My own perception of Harry is he is a young man of immense courage, and is deserving of far more credit than ITK's ignorant witterings would suggest.

There is no doubt that Harry was out in the wilderness - nowhere near any action (if there had been he'd have been whisked out quicker than ever !)

Never thought that I'd rely on Maxie, but here is what he told the BBC -

Publicist Max Clifford said the Afghanistan trip had been "a good public relations exercise".

It follows recent criticism of Prince William when it emerged he had used a military helicopter to land near his girlfriend's home and to go to a stag do on the Isle of Wight.

The Ministry of Defence accepted there had been a degree of naivety in the planning of these flights.

Mr Clifford told BBC News the trip would get "some good headlines".

"It is a good public relations exercise for William, in view of the bad publicity last week where he was dropping in on Kate Middleton's family in an RAF helicopter.

"Bad week last week, good week now."

Former royal protection officer Ken Wharfe said William would have been in no real danger during his visit to the war zone.

He also thought the visit was a public relations exercise.

"I'm slightly sceptical about this. I think the cynics amongst us will say it's an attempt to cover up the Chinook jollies," he said.

Meanwhile, Andrew Bergin, of the Stop The War Coalition, branded the prince's trip a "shameful waste of public money".

He said: "It belittles the very real problems soldiers face in Afghanistan. The resources devoted to this trip would have been better spent providing decent equipment for the troops and aftercare for injured soldiers."

And he accused the MoD of "manipulating the media to try to cleanse the Prince's joyriding, tarnished image".

All taken from - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7374589.stm

I agree with ITK. The "Firm" sends Wills and Harry off to "war" for publicity reasons. Bravery doesn't come into it. What choice do they have, and what is actually achieved in real terms by such posturing? They could get unlucky and be shot at but largely, I imagine, they are in a protected and privileged bubble.

I should point out that I bear no members of the royal family any animosity. They cannot help being born into such anachronistic privilege any more than someone can help being born into abject poverty, but to take any supposed contribution they make to society seriously is foolish.

You're quite happy to rubbish Max Clifford when it suits you, and quote him when it suits you.

Where do you think the fighting takes place in Afghanistan, ITK? It mostly takes place in the wilderness, as most of Afghanistan is wilderness. Prince Harry was as close to the action as any other serviceman. He did go by choice. The government were against his going, but The Queen pulled a few strings to allow him to go. He was not in a protective bubble.

Being anti-Royal is one thing. Sticking stubbornly by untruths is another.

There's an old saying. When the hole begins to get too deep, stop digging.

Al wrote:
You're quite happy to rubbish Max Clifford when it suits you, and quote him when it suits you.

Where do you think the fighting takes place in Afghanistan, ITK? It mostly takes place in the wilderness, as most of Afghanistan is wilderness. Prince Harry was as close to the action as any other serviceman.

Until everyone knew he was there - he was back in London 24 hours later !

You CAN choose which part of the wildneress to go to (one where there are NO Taliban !) This was clearly a publicity stunt. Don't you suppose, that IF there had been any REAL action, the media (who covered the event although did not publish till later) would have been clamouring (at the Royals' behest) to publish it?

As for Max - I think you are confusing me with JK - I don't believe I have EVER made a previous comment about Max (good or bad). How's that for twisting facts, eh ?

Being anti-Royal is one thing. Sticking stubbornly by untruths is another.

There's an old saying. When the hole begins to get too deep, stop digging.

More and more commentators - from Max to Royal Protections officers - all agree that this was another stunt (to cancel out the previous 2 weeks' bad publicity). Who is really digging, eh ?

Let's look at it factually.

Is Prince Harry a member of the armed forces?
Yes.

Did Prince Harry get posted to a war zone?
Yes.

Are there any serving soldiers within the war zone who can confirm that Prince Harry was there while fighting took place?
Yes.

Is Prince William a member of the armed forces?
Yes.

Has he been learning to fly?
Yes.

Is touching down in a field a part of the learning process?
Yes.

While touching down, did Prince William alight and drop in for a cuppa at his girlfriend's parents house, or socialise in any way?
No.

Do members of the armed forces fly back and forth to war zones?
Yes.

Would it be unusual for a person of William's rank to fly there on a brief mission?
No.

If William had been an ordinary Jo Bloggs doing exactly the same thing, would anyone have seen anything remarkable about his actions?
Unlikely.

Harry and William have acted in the normal line of duty. SoHarry was back in London 24 hours later? So were the other servicemen who came over with him. Planes can travel quite fast now.

Al wrote:

If William had been an ordinary Jo Bloggs doing exactly the same thing, would anyone have seen anything remarkable about his actions?
Unlikely.

... and would anyone else have been allowed to do it?
NO !

You overlook the fact that they are "part-time" members of the Forces - joining whenever it suits them but having huge amounts of time off for "other duties" (like stag do's in the IOW !)

Oh, good grief!

Al, don't waste your time on this numpty. It's like having a conversation with a two-year-old.