Posted on 12/26/2006 5:21:20 PM PST by dogbyte12
Just the headline now.
Remember that he will be a troop commander, in charge of 11 others, and four tanks. They would be watching out for most any new, and moderately well liked, 2nd LT., that being the nature of things. Don't know that I'd want to be his troop Sergeant though. :)
What do you mean, Look Like???
Especially when he's inside a Challenger Main Battle Tank. Young Harry will be able to shoot back. With a vengeance! 120mm Main gun will strip the skin right off you, should you be a bit too close to the tank and the line of fire, not in the line of fire, if you are there, you'll be dead, just close to it.
I'll bet not many Brit Politicos have kids in their Military either. It's a Liberal thing, and even our Republicans have a touch of the disease.
As you can see from the posts above, twern't always so. TR junior served with distinction in Two World Wars, and his younger brother died in WW-I, he in WW-II, of a heart attack. (He was no spring chicken by then).
Although Prince Harry and the Army is brave and willing to fight in this war, the British people are lukewarm about Iraq and would rather have everyone just go home now.
While Charles is a stuffy old twit, he did fly fighters, the F-4 and Harrier among other aircraft. His brother Andy, aka Randy Andy, spent 22 years in the Royal Navy, flying "Exocet Decoy" missions in his helicopter.
IIRC, George Washington personally led the troops (militia mostly) that put down (kinda sorta, it also kinda sorta turned into a Quagmire, and the tax was repealed a bit over a decade later) the Whiskey Rebellion, and Madison led troops in the War of 1812, after being chased out of DC by the British. But that's the last time a US President led troops in the field. Still many Presidents served before becoming President, and others had offspring and other relatives that served. Some policritters kids still serve, although not so many any more, but then not so many kids of any sort serve any more. Our military is, by historical terms, tiny, as a fraction of our total population.
In fact, Britain should skip Charles in the line of succession and crown William upon the passing of Elizabeth.
And perhaps I'm old fashioned but I don't see being a politician conferring stature or notoriety. Everything else being equal, Roosevelt's son, or any other politician's child, going to battle is not the same as a monarch's child going to battle.
Thank you for the correction. I knew I didn't have it right, but couldn't think. I heard the 2nd Lt. part on the news last week.
Dashing good looks. Princess Di's son. The Queen's Grandson.
Anyone can see, he's not the type to demand a purple heart for a kernel of rice in your backside.
Is he in line for the throne?
Harry is currently third in line for the throne, but is unlikely to ever be King - any children his brother William has will come before Harry in the line of succession.
Are you an American?
I am a North Carolinian.
I'm a sandlapper...
I'm not sure you're as old fashioned as you think as you don't exhibit in your views the disdain our founding fathers had for monarchy or privilege gained by birth. The American ethos as I understand it is that we are at birth all equal in the eyes of God and history. In my simple mind the fact that any nationally elected official's son or daughter who went into battle to protect freedom and democracy far exceeds that of a demonstration of commonality exhibited by any monarch's child. I think you need to reconsider what being an American means. Royalty, monarchy, privilege mean nothing....its all about freedom in my humble opinion. My regrets if I interpret your meaning inappropriately.
Consider also what has been done to the Republic in the past 100 years compared to the original intention of the Framers. We were given a Republic but unfortunately were not able to keep it. What we have now is in no way comparable to what the Framers intended. As I said I am a North Carolinian and hold loyalty to my state which happens to be a member state in the current union.
I understand to a limited extent your views. As for my sandlapper heritage my family came to these shores in 1712. I suspect you must have similar heritage. That being said, I cannot neglect why my forebears came here...to escape European feudalism and its consequent ideology of privilege by birth. I share your concerns but I offer no deference to what some call a superior cast...royalty....as my family always said..."they can kiss my royal Scottish ass"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.