The purest admission yet that the "assymetrical warfare" malarkey has been an excuse not to achieve any concrete purpose. No lines, they say: we can't just "move" the natives; gotta wend our way through 'em and hope they don't get us in the back.

And there are HQ posters that swoop in from time to time to put lipstick on the pig (screehawk), but it's still a pig. Without at least two battle lines (better yet, 3) and secure logistical lines, we might as well go home. We're sitting on an anthill.

Yeah I know: we're basically guarding and patrolling around US construction sites, and chasing the latest crew that got the drop on us. Sad. You think #3 to the Crown is going to be put out as bait?

The news media was successful in making him a bigger target than the pope would be if he held mass in a public square in Bagdad. Actually they were delighted to set him up to be killed, just for the story. If anyone says 'i work for ???? media, give them a wide berth and keep your mouth shut. Say no and they'll tell the world you said yes. Liars to the core.

I can imagine how he felt, given it was described, understatedly, as 'very disappointed'. Still, good for him to know that there are authorities higher than he.
=====================

bD, it's endgame over there and Saddam is gone. Have you any more missions for the Iraqis to accomplish?

Hey, check out Chalabi, the Master of the Bazaar.
================================

Good. I'm glad he's not going.

AQ would have done anything, ANYTHING, to get him on videotape for a beheading.

His desire to serve is admirable; and in his family's tradition.

But it's totally unfair to put other soldiers at risk to satisy his desire.

In this day and age, royals have no place in battle.

Soldier on, Harry. There's plenty more you can do elsewhere.

Good. I'm glad he's not going.

AQ would have done anything, ANYTHING, to get him on videotape for a beheading.

His desire to serve is admirable; and in his family's tradition.

But it's totally unfair to put other soldiers at risk to satisy his desire.

In this day and age, royals have no place in battle.

Soldier on, Harry. There's plenty more you can do elsewhere.

bD, it's endgame over there and Saddam is gone. Have you any more missions for the Iraqis to accomplish?

Hey, check out Chalabi, the Master of the Bazaar.
================================

Posted by: kim

Chalabi was sponsored by Bush to be Iraqi caliph at the instigation of Wolfowitz and Feith. Too bad he was an Iranian spy. And stole at least $1 BILLION dollars upon assuming office in Baghdad. Plame's CIA busted him. Then, last I heard he was fluttering loose again, avoiding INTERPOL. Hazy about the last part. Down the neocon memory hole.

bryanD[elusional]

Without at least two battle lines (better yet, 3) and secure logistical lines, we might as well go home. We're sitting on an anthill.

So what are you saying, that with no "secure logistical lines" the U.S. troops aren't getting what they need?

Got proof of that?

Time and CNN can't go so far as to hide from reality any longer.

But you... you'll find a way to do it.

bD, those are lame out of date talking points. The last I saw Chalabi was deep in the negotiations over the oil revenue sharing legislation. The Master of the Bazaar. You misrepresent him from fear, and underestimate him from ignorance.

And look at the mission he accomplished deposing Saddam. That alone gets him the undying gratitude of four fifths of the Iraqis.
==============================

In this day and age, royals have no place in battle.

True. But, he could take after his Gran, and be a truck/jeep mechanic. You can say what you want about Her Majesty, but She can fix a carburetter. :)

We have air superiority. In conjunction with search and destroy missions, it's wasted. The air is too vulnerable to ground fire.

And look at the mission he accomplished deposing Saddam. That alone gets him the undying gratitude of four fifths of the Iraqis.
==============================

Posted by: kim

CHALABI deposed Saddaam???? Are you, or have you ever been, a member of Likud?

Is your true name Shaha Riza?

Do you were a fedora, even if only in private?

typo: wear!!

marc, trucks running the guantlet is TECHNICALLY a supply line, but running the same PERMANENT gauntlet is bad. The roads should be clear of enemy combatants, and since no one wears uniforms, that will include everyone. They can make a road in the desert or make a street detour. Who cares? Requisition buildings.

From what I understand, they're supplying the same semi-permanent installations and sites. So allowing L-shaped ambushes and IED sets is BS. Of course, we need more troops, like Shinseki said in 03. Now it's seat of the pants.

That's a shame, because I believe Harry really wanted to serve over there. A kid that young, they think they will live forever. Kudos to the kid for serving at all.

Well, bD, isn't Chalabi the one who hornswoggled Judy Miller into sweet-talking Pinch into ordering the Old Grey Dame to lie us into war?

These agoric deals take special handling. Saddam was a putz.
=====================================

The prince would have been a juicy target for kidnapping - at which point it would turn into a media circus for months, if not years.

Sending him to Iraq was bonehead idea, and while the decision to send him may have been P.R. motivated the big bad media (you know - the same evil MSM that scares the twinkies out of Scrappy) didn't make that decision -- it was probably some moron conservative who decided the boy needed to serve.

What a moronic thought, Lee. The soldier volunteered.
===================================

>> In this day and age, royals have no place in battle.

In this day and age, royalty has no place in society.

God, Larkin, don't tell Kerry or his Teresa that.
===========================

Lee ~ Actually, the tradition in UK has been one of passing those decisions along to the military, which has rarely had to make a difficult one.

The Prince will no doubt, in time, appreciate the risk he would create for his comrades.

If anything is to be questioned here, it is the military decision not to deploy Harry. These risks should have been obvious from the beginning - did the brass delay their decision to allow him some good PR over his determination to go with his unit?

Once again the British surrender without firing a shot.
The Brits should have told the media to 'bugger off' and sent the Prince to Iraq.
They should have prepared stunt doubles for the Prince and baited several traps for the terrorists.
But no.
the Brits surrendered without firing a shot.

"What a moronic thought, Lee. The soldier volunteered."

Brave guy, but irrelevant. He doesn't make that decision.

British Defense Secretary Des Browne is expected to announce February 26 that the prince, third in line to the throne, will accompany his troops to southern Iraq, according to CNN's source and the source quoted by the Mirror.

Every soldier decides.
==============

"These risks should have been obvious from the beginning - did the brass delay their decision to allow him some good PR over his determination to go with his unit?"

'Zactly. Even *I* thought it would have been a dumb idea right from the start. If I could reach that conclusion as soon as I knew Harry had joined, then the military certainly did.

Thank you, O. He chose to go; someone just now summoned the authority to stop him.

And I agree, he should have been allowed to go. You think he wouldn't have been protected?

My latest theory. When Sadr the Lesser's gang started in on Sunni Baghdadians in earnest, our military defended the Sunni, whose relatives in the boonies heard and wondered if the oddly accented among them weren't beyond the pale. Note the recovery of Anbar and Diyala. Note that Sadr the Lesser is over the border in Iran. Note that the other big Shia deathsquad just threw in with Sistani who'd expressed exasperation with Sadr.

It this ain't endgame, I'm a roomful of monkeys.
==============================

I can hardly do better than quoting Steyn on this.
> it confirms that one of the last credible militaries in the western world is helpless not just in the face of gangster provocations but in the mere threat thereof.

... it calls into question the whole point of Royals in the Armed Forces, which is true. But it also calls into question the whole point of the Armed Forces

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDBmZWIxZGY4NWY5ZGM3NzEyOThmZDVmMDM5NzcxYzU=

I think the Brits missed an opportunity on this one. Announce that he is there (whether he really is or not) and you have just set up the biggest flytrap in Iraq. Of course you have to be prepared to take care of the flies you attract, but I think they could handle that.