another Royal Arse heard from...
Posted on 02/06/2008 3:10:52 AM PST by the scotsman
'Prince Andrew came under intense criticism in Washington yesterday for his attack on George Bush's Iraq policies.
The prince, whose ten-day trade mission to the U.S. starts today, said America had failed to heed British advice about the war.
His extraordinary departure from protocol brought accusations of "shooting from the hip".
Nile Gardiner, of the Heritage Foundation think-tank, said: "His remarks will only undermine the image of the Royal Family in America.
"They were totally inappropriate and a significant diplomatic blunder. They will cause offence here."
A senior Pentagon officer involved in Iraq said: "Prince Andrew should know better.
"What did he hope to achieve with these remarks? At best they were thoughtless, at worst insulting."
In Britain, Labour MPs called his intervention in sensitive Iraq policy careless and unprecedented.
His thoughts echo those of many of the British population. If anything, they appear mature and considered - not something we usually expect from him.
But what on earth is the House of Windsor's ageing playboy doing lecturing the U.S. administration on its foreign policy?
We can only marvel at the state of the Duke of York's mind when he set out to give the International Herald Tribune a few pearls of wisdom on the Iraq war this week.
In essence, he said, George Bush cocked up the endgame, refusing to take post- conflict advice from the British Government. Result - the disaster that is Iraq today.
Nothing wrong in that, you might think - except that Prince Andrew is heading off this weekend to garner support from American business for the British export effort.
It brings into focus the suitability of allowing such a heavy burden of responsibility to fall on the shoulders of a man more generally known as Airmiles Andy.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Maybe Prince Charles converted him.
He's a twit, a bloody German twit. His brother Chuck is a worse twit who will either never be king, or will be the last king if he does succeed his mother. A bit sad really, but what do you expect from that family? Not one of them has had a functioning brain since Mad George, and he went round the bent - the strain of thinking was undoubtedly too much for him.
Interesting sales techinique. He must think we’re still Colonials.
another Royal Arse heard from...
Who is Prince Andrew and why would I care about his opinion?
Maybe I misunderstood something in grade school but I was under the impression that we had expressed our displeasure with these dimwits back in 1776.
Are they still around? Would someone please (politely) invite them to go away?
‘Tis better to keep you mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Good advice for Andy there! Once a dumbass, always a dumbass.
To say we didn’t “listen” is just plain rubbish.
I’ll add:
What would have the worldly British done about Saddam if left to them?
Nothing.
And that’s the bottom line. It’s easy being a critic and doing little to nothing compared to actually putting it all on the line and doing something that is both dangerous and uncertain.
I thank the Brits for helping when asked but we could do without the knife in the back politically.
This rag is still selling the “quagmire” theory, when it is so obviously wrong. The Brits want desperately to be right about something...anything, at this point.
I wonder what this noble prince thinks of the wholesale Islamifacation of his country?
It seems that the charming prince has a lot of support at home according to the comments made by Telegraph readers. The comment are “eye opening” too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/05/nandrew105.xml#form
Another interesting thought: 25 % of Brits believe Winston Churchill to be a literary character only. Tis true the sun never sets on the British empire - they are all sleeping way too late.
Do you have Prince Andrew in a Can?
What’s that? Albert ?!?
Prince Albert in a Can?
Oh - well then tell Andrew to can it!
I find that every british site that I go to the “nasty” level is going throught the roof. I am sick to death of the Brits telling America what it should do and how it should do it. The site below should be Britain ON America.
http://britainandamerica.typepad.com/britain_and_america/2008/01/britain-still-l.html#comments
22 years in the Royal Navy, flying helos, flying missions in the Falklands War where he saw his friends and comrades killed (where helos were shot down and ships sunk).
Twit? Doubtful.
Just come out and say that you’re an anti-royalist and be done with it?
Prince Andrew of the UK should be compared to Kennedy relatives with the hyphenated name.
Andrew has a failed marriage, he’s marginally good looking, he holds no position of power - more like George Clooney or Bono - but without independent means.
Ignore him and he’ll go away.
Outspoken criticism of the US from Prince Andrew has raised serious concerns about the impartiality of the royals, Republic claimed today.
Spokesperson Graham Smith told reporters: "Because they are entirely unaccountable for their actions protocol demands the royal family refrain from public comment on sensitive or political issues."
"Regardless of the rights and wrongs of what he said, Prince Andrew should not have commented on US policy in Iraq."
"Andrew, like his older brother, seems not to care for royal protocols. He has been given a position as a representative of the UK, without ever having to prove himself or compete for the job against a field of candidates. It is a privilege which means he must keep his opinions to himself."
"Both Charles and Andrew are directly engaging in highly contentious political issues. They must decide if they want to be princes or politicians. They cannot be both."
I’m not so much an anti-royalist as anti-Welf (as you no doubt know, the progenitors of the Hanoverian line), Saxe-Coburg und Gotha, and von Battenburg. Seriously, though, the current British royal family is perfectly fine as long as they’re merely decorative and ceremonial. The entire lot of them are an advertisement for republicanism as soon as they try to say anything substantive. They are dim bulbs all. I’ll grant you a history of reasonable courage (going back to the George II who was the last British king to lead his troops in Battle), but brains? Hardly.
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.