DZJ 0 #1 February 28, 2008 From the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7269743.stm QuotePrince Harry in Taleban fighting Prince Harry has been fighting the Taleban on the front line in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed. Harry, 23, who is third in line to the throne, has spent the last 10 weeks serving in Helmand Province. "I finally get the chance to do the soldiering that I want to do," the prince said before he left. ... As someone going to a memorial service next week for a trooper killed in Helmand last year, I say it's good to see Harry taking the same risks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #2 February 28, 2008 I wish we had someone in our royal houshold who had the balls to actually go to a fight instead of doing everything they can to send the lower classes in their place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #3 February 28, 2008 QuoteI wish we had someone in our royal houshold who had the balls to actually go to a fight instead of doing everything they can to send the lower classes in their place. I take it that you will be voting Republican this fall? JM will most likely be the only candidate for president who has any combat experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 February 28, 2008 I already voted for McCain once.... you need to pay attention more there.... He and HIS Children are not cowards like the MOST of the current case of Chickenhawkism that permeates the Administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #5 February 28, 2008 Quote I already voted for McCain once.... you need to pay attention more there.... a) Did I say you didn't? b) Where in this thread did you say you had? Who do you consider a coward and why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #6 February 28, 2008 QuoteWho do you consider a coward and why? Those who fervently support war.. yet will run like muthfuckas when there is a war that needs people.. like MOST of this administration.. and those who did not run quite the same way.. had daddy find them a nice safe job in a national guard unit that had ZERO chance of deploying.. unless Texas was under attack. And now NOST of those same people have raised their whimp ass spawn to do the same thing. If they want to be the next generation of leaders.. let them LEAD from the Front, not let someone else do it for them... because they are TOO GOOD and too valuable to go to war themselves. THAT is my definition of cowardice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #7 February 28, 2008 Harry and his brother may or may not have wanted to join the military. The point is that it was expected of them; just like their father; just like their uncle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #8 February 28, 2008 A long tradition of Noblesse Oblige... something our ruling class in this country.. for the most part has no concept of. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #9 February 28, 2008 Quotehad daddy find them a nice safe job in a national guard unit that had ZERO chance of deploying.. Too bad the pilots who died in accidents while flying F-102 aircraft didn't know that it was a "nice safe job" with a "zero chance of deploying". Maybe you should have informed them? www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #10 February 28, 2008 QuoteToo bad the pilots who died in accidents while flying F-102 aircraft didn't know that it was a "nice safe job" with a "zero chance of deploying". Maybe you should have informed them? Sorry.. I was active duty during that time and knew far too many who DID go to Vietnam and did not come back. No matter how you spin it... Georgie Boy and Dan Quayle types abounded at the time.. and there was NO way in hell any of them was ever goign to Vietnam...period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #11 February 28, 2008 QuoteQuoteToo bad the pilots who died in accidents while flying F-102 aircraft didn't know that it was a "nice safe job" with a "zero chance of deploying". Maybe you should have informed them? Sorry.. I was active duty during that time and knew far too many who DID go to Vietnam and did not come back. No matter how you spin it... Georgie Boy and Dan Quayle types abounded at the time.. and there was NO way in hell any of them was ever goign to Vietnam...period. Irony score: PERFECT! No matter how you spin it, you can't rewrite history by denying facts. Flying 102s was neither safe nor was it without chance of deployment. Period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #12 February 28, 2008 DUDE.. did you actually READ that story....the numbers per 100,000 are still a hell of a lot lower for crashes.. compared to the number of those destroyed in combat.. You dont get it.. there were SOME 102 squadrons in the Nam... they were NOT the Champagne Squadrons made up of the scions of society. That is what they existed for.. to provide a safe way for the movers and shakers to have their sons serve... but dont believe for a minute that that unit would have gone to Vietnam...Republic of From Wiki.....FYI.. notice some of the numbers there..10 of your F-102 SuperHeros airplace were destroyed in Combat. Maybe if he had been flying an F-4 or a Thud history would have been different. F-4 Phantom II-- --445 total, 382 in combat -First loss was non-combat, F-4C 64-0674 (45TH TFS, 15th TFW) which ran out of fuel after strike in SVN on June 9, 1965; first combat loss F-4C 64-0685 (45th TFS, 15th TFW) shot down Ta Chan, NW NVN on June 20, 1965. 9 of the losses were parked aircraft struck by rockets. -Final loss 1973 F-5 Freedom Fighter-- -9 total -First loss 1965, final loss 1967 F-100 Super Sabre-- --243 total, 198 in combat -First loss 1964, final loss 1971 F-102 Delta Dagger-- --14 total, 7 combat -First loss 1964, final loss 1967. 4 of the combat losses were parked aircraft F-104 Starfighter-- --14 total, 9 combat -First loss 1965, final loss 1967 F-105D Thunderchief-- --335 total, 283 in combat -First loss 62-4371 (36th TFS, 6441st TFW) written off from battle damage over Laos August 14, 1964, at Korat, Thailand -Final loss 61-0153 (44th TFS, 355th TFW) shot down Laos September 23, 1970, pilot Capt. J. W. Newhouse rescued F-105F/G Thunderchief: "Wild Weasel," "Ryan's Raiders," "Combat Martin"-- --47 total, 37 combat -First loss EF-105F 63-8286 (13th TFS, 388th TFW) shot down by AAA RP-6 July 6, 1966, Maj. Roosevelt Hestle and Capt. Charles Morgan KIA -Last loss F-105G 63-8359 (Det.1 561st TFS, 388th TFW) shot down by SAM November 16, 1972, RP-3, crew rescued Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #13 February 28, 2008 I am NOT "Dude", ok? Glad we understand that. Yes. I did read the article. Did you? or did you just glance over it and automatically dismiss anything you didn't want to hear? The claim that those who flew for the NG were safely out of harms way is a liberal Bush-hater spin that completely ignores the facts. Yes, the chances of getting shot down were much greater than the chances of an accident. But it doesn't detract from the fact that F-102s were a handful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #14 February 28, 2008 QuoteYes. I did read the article. Did you? or did you just glance over it and automatically dismiss anything you didn't want to hear? The claim that those who flew for the NG were safely out of harms way is a liberal Bush-hater spin that completely ignores the facts. Yes, the chances of getting shot down were much greater than the chances of an accident. But it doesn't detract from the fact that F-102s were a handful. AS opposed to the fascist right wing Bush lovers spin who trot out how great a warrior he is for having served in a Champagne Squadron and could not even finish out his duties because he would have recieved a dishonorable discharge had the cocaine he was snorting been found in his golden flow portion of the flight physical he refused to take. OOOPS you forgot that part didnt you. Anyone else who refused to take their flight physical.. and did not show up for duty... which is called AWOL.. and deriliction of duty.. would have gotten a dishonorable discharge....well except for those whose daddies were congressmen or CIA Directors or the very rich who could expunge all kinds of bad doo doo from their precious little spawns records.. no matter what kind of crap they pulled. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DZJ 0 #15 February 28, 2008 Wow, 13 replies and only one of them about the topic of the original post... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #16 February 28, 2008 QuoteHarry and his brother may or may not have wanted to join the military. The point is that it was expected of them; just like their father; just like their uncle. In this day and age, probably not much more than it is expected in any family with a strong military tradition. And to be fair to the guy, in his statements and actions he has always seemed to be very enthusiastic about his military career and it sounds like he's pushed quite hard to be allowed to deploy with the rest of his unit. He deserves as much respect for that as any other soldier serving out there.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DZJ 0 #17 February 28, 2008 And, in a victory for multiculturalism and diversity, he's serving alongside Gurkhas - probably at once the scariest but also most decent and upstanding soldiers you could ever hope to meet. Here's to hoping he gets to finish his tour and comes back safe and sound. [Cheers, btw, for a relevant post] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #18 February 28, 2008 Go Harry! Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #19 February 28, 2008 QuoteQuoteYes. I did read the article. Did you? or did you just glance over it and automatically dismiss anything you didn't want to hear? The claim that those who flew for the NG were safely out of harms way is a liberal Bush-hater spin that completely ignores the facts. Yes, the chances of getting shot down were much greater than the chances of an accident. But it doesn't detract from the fact that F-102s were a handful. AS opposed to the fascist right wing Bush lovers spin who trot out how great a warrior he is for having served in a Champagne Squadron and could not even finish out his duties because he would have recieved a dishonorable discharge had the cocaine he was snorting been found in his golden flow portion of the flight physical he refused to take. OOOPS you forgot that part didnt you. Anyone else who refused to take their flight physical.. and did not show up for duty... which is called AWOL.. and deriliction of duty.. would have gotten a dishonorable discharge....well except for those whose daddies were congressmen or CIA Directors or the very rich who could expunge all kinds of bad doo doo from their precious little spawns records.. no matter what kind of crap they pulled. Where did anyone say he was a great warrior? I think you just made that up. You post is merely opinionated interpretation of events. Too bad you let your resentment and hatred govern your life in such a manner. It's also a shame you felt you needed to hijack a thread about a brave soldier who deserves respect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #20 February 28, 2008 QuoteWhere did anyone say he was a great warrior? I think you just made that up. You post is merely opinionated interpretation of events. Too bad you let your resentment and hatred govern your life in such a manner. It's also a shame you felt you needed to hijack a thread about a brave soldier who deserves respect. You need some cheese with that there Bubba? Oh by the way http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3138832#3138832 How about you... need a link to a recruiter there BUB?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #21 February 29, 2008 Quote Quote Where did anyone say he was a great warrior? I think you just made that up. You post is merely opinionated interpretation of events. Too bad you let your resentment and hatred govern your life in such a manner. It's also a shame you felt you needed to hijack a thread about a brave soldier who deserves respect. You need some cheese with that there Bubba? Oh by the way http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3138832#3138832 How about you... need a link to a recruiter there BUB?? I told you already that I'm not "dude". I am not "bubba" either. Your link adds nothing to the discussion. It is just an older thread about Harry. I'm not the one whining, you are. "Our President only served in the National guard but is sending troops off to war". Oh boo-hoo-hoo and waa-waa-waa. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #22 February 29, 2008 QuoteWow, 13 replies and only one of them about the topic of the original post... Well, it's pretty close to the topic - our last two Presidents completely dodged any military obligation, though neither side (Clinton or Bush) seem willing to admit it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #23 February 29, 2008 QuoteI told you already that I'm not "dude". I am not "bubba" either. Your link adds nothing to the discussion. It is just an older thread about Harry. I'm not the one whining, you are. "Our President only served in the National guard but is sending troops off to war". Oh boo-hoo-hoo and waa-waa-waa. Ah.. got it.. another Patriotic Young Republican in the Dan Quayle Wing of the rePUBICan Party.... well done..... Now where did I put that WAV file of the right wing chickenhawk call to arms. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #24 February 29, 2008 Well done the UK press for voluntarily not running the story even though they'd known about it from the start. All running the story's likely to do is getting soldiers on the ground killed who would otherwise have survived. Well done the US press for running with it the first moment they get a sniff of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #25 February 29, 2008 Yeap, I'm pleasantly surprised by our press - good on them. Fuck the wankers how did break the story (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
