Thursday, 28 February 2008

Now, It's Personal

So, what is Prince Harry doing in Afghanistan? What, exactly, would constitute victory or defeat there? And why, exactly?

We merrily grow opium in our own country "for medicinal purposes". We are allied to Islamist smack-smugglers in Kosovo.

And the reviled "Taliban" are exactly the same people as the revered "tribal elders", depending on what we happen to think of them at the time.

On the same basis, the "Ba'athists" whom we are in the process of "rehabilitating" in Iraq are exactly the same people as the "Sunni insurgents" or the alleged Iraqi branch of that non-existent organisation, "al-Qaeda".

Answers, please.

Perhaps those of us demanding them should display pictures of Prince Harry to make the point?


  1. Here's a big question: who on earth made the decision to let him go, knowing that secrecy is impossible in the internet age, and knowing he'd have to be brought home while the other soldiers faced more danger as a result of his little trip.

    I'm hoping Harry will be back in time for the March 15 demo... If he cares about his comrades, he'll be marching.

  2. Why shouldn't he, in particular have gone? And why shouldn't he stay now? This is what he was trained for. And it's hardly as if the rest of them will be in no danger once he has been brought home.

  3. He shouldn't have gone because, naturally those seeking to get occupation forces out of Afghanistan see him as a big target to kill or kidnap - and in attempting to do so more attacks would take place on UK forces than is already the case. All of the service personel stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan should be brought home...

  4. Well, indeed. But which Talib would have been able to recognise him? And how are British forces in any less danger now that he's gone?