To save such embarrassment in the future and to help protect our soldiers in any war, is it really necessary to put 'royals' in the forces if they are not going to fight as soldiers and officers do? Another government blundered descision perhaps?

Wasn't Prince Andrew on active service flying helicopters from his ship, the aircraft carrier HMS Invincible, during the Falklands War? I think Mrs Thatcher didn't want him to go because of the danger but Her Majesty insisted.

I can't help but feel sorry for the lad. He's obviously genuinely committed to his regiment and his men.

Of course members of the Royal Family should join the Armed Forces!

Then if they do David and have to go into battle, how does this affect the security of their fellow soldiers/officers?

I think the royals are so far displaced from the real world they need to stick to launching boats and opening hospitals. :P

Whatever happened to the days of the King of England leading troops into battle on a horse... ;)

Yeah but .....no but the king never used to lead his force into battle. He used to watch from the top of a hill silly.

That's untrue. George II was the last monarch to be present at a battle (Dettingen, 1742), but a couple of centuries before then even monarchs got actively involved. Richard III was actually killed at the battle of Bosworth (1485), if you recall; they only verified his death after it was all over by going trolling amid the corpses to find his body. Richard I was perhaps the most notorious for personal participation, although one might note that he can't have been that good since he was captured whilst on the Crusades and spent a couple of years in prison.

There's also, of course, Charles II, who during the Interregnum got about as personally involved as it's possible to be, since after the battle of Worcester (1651) he was on the run throughout the country until he escaped to the continent. Which those who participate in a forum dedicated to Shropshire & Shrewsbury really ought to remember, since part of his time was spent in this here county (most notoriously the Boscobel House/Royal Oak incident, now in Staffordshire but at the time in Shropshire...I think).

Thanks for the history lesson Rhassaris.

Okay some kings fought somewhat foolishly it seems but there must have been others who viewed from a far. What I'm trying to get across is the field day that terrorists may have if they were to capture a member of our royal family and how putting a royal in a position of combat may seriously affect fellow soldiers.

If you serve as a helicopter pilot or some such it's difficult for a terrorist to decide which helicopter needs attacking...one flying menace looks much the same as another. Same probably goes for Naval crews who don't do bordering and attacking with cutlasses any more. You could have a royal in a position of combat without necessarily affecting fellow soldiers, I suppose, on those terms.

Yes but dont you think the enemy (terrorists) would 'up the anti' if a royal was present therefore making the situation worse? I think this could spell the end for royals in the forces. Patrons yes but for everybodys sake,not soldiers

i do agree with you Andy! i think if we sent a royal in it would heighten the terrorists resolve and put his squad in more danger-is it really neccessary?

Well, Tony Blair was in Iraq the other day and nothing much out of the ordinary happened. And I fail to see why terrorists would feel the need to up the ante (or, indeed, how they could do so apart from setting off more bombs) if, to continue my example, Prince Harry was known to be on an aircraft carrier out in the Gulf. How exactly does it up the ante, in that circumstance? Isn't it just mpre of the same? If 100 bombs go off in a day instead of ten, the problem - and range of tactics available for a solution - hardly changes.

tony blair was only there briefly. i dont really see how that is anywhere near the same thing. surely we have intelligence to help our war effort-do you not think that maybe these terrorists have their own source of intelligence??
i would think they have the home advantage