I never thought they would let him go, but it looks like he'll be deployed this spring.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2502498.shtml

It is pretty noble of him wanting to serve, but in the grand scheme of things it is a bit foolish. Wouldn't insurgents just want to capture the Prince and get a ton of leverage?

I thought they recently decided to withdraw from Iraq?

Indeed, makes perfect sense. Send him there for a bit of publicity and then make the grand withdrawal before he can get his ugly mug blown off.

Got to find something for him to do.

Actually, that would make for a publicity suicide.
"Oh, so it's all right if the peasants die by the dozens, but god forbid the third-in-line for succession come to harm!"
Respect to Harry for sticking to this, but I have a bad feeling about this. It means that the UK will stay in Iraq for atleast the length of Harry's tour.
Atleast they're not invading Iran.

I doubt they'll expose him to live combat. Maybe it'll make the guy grow up a little. :rolleyes:

Of course he's never going to go anywhere near anything actually dangerous. Even if he does get to go within twenty miles of a danger zone, it'll be at the heart of a damn regiment.

I can't help but feel taht they'll try and protect him too much and get other people killed in doing so...

Why? Prince Andrew (then second in line to the throne) was a helicopter pilot during the falklands war and was in the thick of action. Southern Iraq is 'quieter than Baghdad but still dangerous.

Wow i just got to thinking, im so glad that Bush doesn't have any son to continue his reign