http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05 ... index.html

Story Highlights
• Britain's Prince Harry will not be sent to Iraq, says the Ministry of Defence
• Top UK general says "specific threats" on prince are behind decision
• Risk to prince and those around him too great, says general
• Harry, third in line to throne, has said he is serious about an army career

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Britain's Prince Harry will not serve in Iraq as a troop commander because of "a number of specific threats" against him, the UK's top general says.

A spokesperson for the 22-year-old prince says he is "very disappointed" by the decision.

Chief of the general staff Sir Richard Dannatt said Wednesday: "I have decided today that Prince Harry will not deploy as a troop commander with his squadron.

"I have come to this final decision following a further and wide round of consultation, including a visit to Iraq by myself at the end of last week," Dannatt said

"There have been a number of specific threats, some reported and some not reported. These threats exposed him and those around him to a degree of risk I considered unacceptable," he said.

Wednesday's announcement reverses a statement made in February by the Ministry of Defence and the royal family, which said that Harry would be sent to Iraq with his regiment.

Dannatt commended the prince on his determination.

"Let me also make quite clear that as a professional soldier, Prince Harry will be extremely disappointed. "

"He has proved himself both at Sandhurst and in command of his troop during their training. I commend him for his determination and his undoubted talent -- and I do not say that lightly. His soldiers will miss his leadership in Iraq, although I know his commanding officer will provide a highly capable substitute troop leader."

A statement issued by a spokesperson for the prince said: "Prince Harry is very disappointed that he will not be able to go to Iraq with his troop on this deployment, as he had hoped. He fully understands and accepts Gen. Dannatt's difficult decision, and remains committed to his army career. Prince Harry's thoughts are with his troop and the rest of the Battle Group in Iraq."

Harry would have led a troop of 12 men in four Scimitar armored reconnaissance vehicles, each with a crew of three, in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.

He is a 2006 graduate of Britain's prestigious Royal Military Academy Sandhurst and has been actively seeking the posting in Iraq.

Harry's older brother William -- while also a military officer -- is not eligible for combat service because he is the second in line to the British crown.

Harry has repeatedly said that he wants to be deployed with his men, but ministry officials have expressed concern that he could become a target for Iraqi insurgents, endangering himself and those serving under him.

Royal commentator Robert Jobson told CNN that it would be a "disaster" for the British Army if Harry was targeted by militants.

Jobson said he did not believe Harry would quit the army, despite being kept out of Iraq.

Harry would have been the first member of the British royal family to serve in a war zone since his uncle, Prince Andrew, flew as a helicopter pilot in the Falklands conflict with Argentina in 1982, The Associated Press reported.
____________________________________________________

Why this was up for debate in the first place, I don't know. I'm also uncertain of Harry's intentions of wanting to be IN Iraq in the first place. I'm glad this issue is over with.

I can see how it would be dangerous for him, but it wouldn't hurt anyone with power to see the reprocussions of war first hand.

part of me says if he wants to fight they should send him...

and the other part of me says if it is to dangerous for him then why the hell do we send troops everyday?? This war should end it is doing no good for anyone..

Well that's been the arguement in this debate in the first place.
pros: a royal figure gets to participate in combat first hand at his own discretion.
cons: he's putting many many others at risk because he's a gigantic target. his protection will affect battleground tactics. his death would be a huge victory for the enemy and a huge loss for the royal kingdom.

it really wouldn't. the majority of the population don't care for the royal family

this is a nice stab in the back to the "not so special" UK soldiers whom are going to or already in Iraq. apparently their live isn't special enough. Besides, forgive me if i'm wrong, but didn't he join voluntarily?

yes, just like the rest of the british army

And it can be viewed as being done to help protect the average soldier. Would you want to be in harry's company? Knowing that just about ever weapon the enemy has will be directed your way so they can try to claim the kill of a British royalty.

Here we go, liberals thinking Prince Harry going to Iraq is a good idea.

that's actually a good point.

How could anyone target Harry? Would the enemy know what battalion he was fighting with or where they were deployed?

He'd just look like any other soldier.

Didn't Kennedy look like just another American?

That's what I was thinking at first, but realistically, I doubt it would be very difficult to locate him. The enemy can obtain data about wherabouts very easily or just from speculation. Your idea is the best case scenario.

Well, unless Harry's travel itinerary is being posted in the local newspaper and his motorcade being driven down the main street in Baghdad ...

Maybe it's the cynic in me, but I think that the reason he was so publicly adament about wanting to serve in Iraq had everything to do with the fact that he knew all along that there was no chance of them actually letting him do it.

Have you seen who has the ultinmate responsibility for the troops? I would not put any fuck up beyond the abilities of this man.

Here we go, 'selectively sympathizing' Conservatives thinking some stranger's life is more important than any other person's life just because they are 'royalty'. Royalty really doesn't mean shit to me. Sure, he could be a target but he probably knows that risk and decided to go anyway because, unlike his father and Tony Blair, he has some balls and if he died, maybe people would finally WAKE THE FUCK UP and actually take action to find a way to better mobilize these troops and get better armor and stuff for them or get them the fuck out of a conflict that has gone from an 'invasion' to a 'civil war'. You're probably gonna knock me on that too but that's what this is.

Prince Henry has got balls, people.

BALLS.

i see what you're saying and i agree for a part. sure he's royalty, and not many people give a shit that he is, but he's also human. no humans should be sacrificed to create some sort of wake up call.