General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
Will Prince Harry become the next black prince?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
Originally posted by Patroklos
Wow, to be so hateful so young ![]() He has served 10 weeks in one of the unstable areas of Afghanistan, which in other words means in that time he has risked more an accomplished more for a cause he believes in more than you will ever do in your lifetime. False. He has accomplished nothing except good publicity. Britain's contribution to Afghanistan is negligible to the point of being laughable. He patrols deserted villages for 10 weeks, which is about 10% of the average first tour of duty of most soldiers down there. |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
False. He has accomplished nothing except good publicity. Britain's contribution to Afghanistan is negligible to the point of being laughable. He patrols deserted villages for 10 weeks, which is about 10% of the average first tour of duty of most soldiers down there. 1.) look up Helmand province on a map and then burn yourself on a the stove in penance.
2.) why do you think those villages are abandoned? 3.) the normal deployment (in the US) is not 100 weeks. Check how many weeks are in a year and then burn your other hand on the stove for good measure. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
Originally posted by Patroklos
1.) look up Helmand province on a map and then burn yourself on a the stove in penance. 2.) why do you think those villages are abandoned? 3.) the normal deployment (in the US) is not 100 weeks. Check how many weeks are in a year and then burn your other hand on the stove for good measure. Many US soldiers have spent in sum in excess of 100 weeks in Iraq and Afghanistan, though not consecutively. The idea that this kid -- who, judging by his coverage before this stunt, was widely known as a complete douchebag -- is risking and accomplishing heroic things is beyond naive. In fact, the idea Britain is risking or accomplishing anything in Afghanistan is a bit optimistic . In seven years, Britain has lost only 85 troops in Afghanistan. That's like twelve troops a year. The horror. Don't buy into this crap about how this kid is risking everything and going to war for something he believes in. This isn't even a war in Afghanistan anymore. Iraq was too dangerous for this stunt however. And now that his handlers have released this story, he can come home having spent only 10 weeks in the province. Nice deal for a tool with flagging popularity. |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
Originally posted by Oerdin
Yes, I heard the Drudge report leaked the information that Prince Harry was with British military forces in Afghanistan. I think it was most irresponsible of Drudge, almost treasonous, to leak leak such information and to put the lives of our British allies at risk. I've heard Drudge claim Democrats in America are traitors for working to end the war in Iraq but now he reveals sensitive information about British forces which they had specifically asked them not to disclose? Occasionaly, you might wish to read the last post before you post. |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
Originally posted by PLATO
Occasionaly, you might wish to read the last post before you post. The very fact that the Prince was serving in Iraq is sensitive information which even a dunderhead like drudge must have known the British would not want him to disclose. It was irresponsible and put the lives of our allies at risk. |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
Originally posted by Oerdin
The very fact that the Prince was serving in Iraq is sensitive information which even a dunderhead like drudge must have known the British would not want him to disclose. It was irresponsible and put the lives of our allies at risk. Occasionally, you might wish to read any post before you post. He's in Afghanistan. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|