Prince Harry's wartime role draws reprisal fears
LONDON (AP) - Prince Harry's admission that he killed Taliban fighters while working as a helicopter gunner in Afghanistan drew intense British media coverage Tuesday and sparked concerns about possible reprisals.
The 28-year-old prince spoke in a pooled interview published late Monday after he was safely out of Afghanistan. He had spent the last 20 weeks deployed as a co-pilot and gunner in a heavily armed Apache attack helicopter.
Asked if he had killed from the cockpit, the third-in-line to the British throne said: "Yeah, so, lots of people have."
The response was immediate Tuesday: The Daily Mirror tabloid ran a page-one headline "Royal Sensation Harry: I Killed Taliban" along with a photo of a macho-looking Harry in combat gear and designer shades.
Other newspapers ran similar gung-ho stories about the prince's military exploits. "Harry: I Have Killed" was the story in the Daily Mail.
Video shot during the prince's deployment was shown dozens of times on Britain's major news networks.
In Parliament on Tuesday, Defense Minister Mark Francois praised Harry, saying the prince should be commended for his bravery.
He "has done well for his country," Francois said, offering kind words for a prince who has occasionally embarrassed the royal family, most recently by being photographed naked as he played strip billiards at a Las Vegas hotel.
Many in Harry's family have also seen combat - most recently his uncle, Prince Andrew, who flew Royal Navy helicopters during the 1982 Falklands War. Prince Philip, his grandfather, served on Royal Navy battleships during World War II.
Not everyone was applauding the soldier-prince.
Lindsey German, leader of the Stop the War Coalition, called Harry's comments "arrogant and insensitive" and raised the prospect that Harry might have accidently targeted Afghan civilians.
Former officer Charles Heyman, who edits a yearbook on British forces, said the prince's words may raise the already high threat level against him.
"The royal family are all targets, and he now probably becomes the prime target, royal family-wise," Heyman said. "But he can live with that. He's a soldier, he knows what he's doing."
Heyman said it was commendable that Harry had undertaken such a dangerous and demanding military job.
"By and large, the world's elite make sure their sons and daughters go nowhere near the firing line. So it brings credit to the royal family, and it's good for army morale, that Harry's not sitting back in London saying, 'Well done, boys!'" he said.
Heyman said as an Apache gunner, Harry would have opened fire when directed to do so by a ground controller who would most likely have been under enemy fire. The prince typically would have been firing at Taliban forces in bunkers or protected in some way, not at troops out in the open, said the former officer.
"They would have been opening fire to relieve pressure on the ground, maybe even to rescue people on the ground," Heyman explained. "If he was using machine guns, there is no way he could say categorically he destroyed the target. But if he was using the Hellfire missiles against a bunker, he would be able to say categorically that he destroyed the target."
If there's a large explosion and no more enemy fire from the target area, the gunner can be "pretty sure" the enemy has been killed, Heyman said.
Col. Richard Kemp, a former British commander in Afghanistan, said the fevered press response to Harry's words reflected a certain naivety about the realities of war.
"He's flying an attack helicopter armed with missiles and machine guns, and its purpose is predominantly to come in and provide fire support for troops fighting the Taliban, so it would be very, very surprising if he didn't swoop in and kill," Kemp said.
He said Harry's tone was appropriate in the interview.
"I know it's a delicate subject, but I'm surprised by how much people have seized on what he said," Kemp. "If he'd been bragging about killing, that would have been wrong, but he didn't brag about it."
The 28-year-old prince spoke in a pooled interview published late Monday after he was safely out of Afghanistan. He had spent the last 20 weeks deployed as a co-pilot and gunner in a heavily armed Apache attack helicopter.
Asked if he had killed from the cockpit, the third-in-line to the British throne said: "Yeah, so, lots of people have."
The response was immediate Tuesday: The Daily Mirror tabloid ran a page-one headline "Royal Sensation Harry: I Killed Taliban" along with a photo of a macho-looking Harry in combat gear and designer shades.
Other newspapers ran similar gung-ho stories about the prince's military exploits. "Harry: I Have Killed" was the story in the Daily Mail.
Video shot during the prince's deployment was shown dozens of times on Britain's major news networks.
In Parliament on Tuesday, Defense Minister Mark Francois praised Harry, saying the prince should be commended for his bravery.
He "has done well for his country," Francois said, offering kind words for a prince who has occasionally embarrassed the royal family, most recently by being photographed naked as he played strip billiards at a Las Vegas hotel.
Many in Harry's family have also seen combat - most recently his uncle, Prince Andrew, who flew Royal Navy helicopters during the 1982 Falklands War. Prince Philip, his grandfather, served on Royal Navy battleships during World War II.
Not everyone was applauding the soldier-prince.
Lindsey German, leader of the Stop the War Coalition, called Harry's comments "arrogant and insensitive" and raised the prospect that Harry might have accidently targeted Afghan civilians.
Former officer Charles Heyman, who edits a yearbook on British forces, said the prince's words may raise the already high threat level against him.
"The royal family are all targets, and he now probably becomes the prime target, royal family-wise," Heyman said. "But he can live with that. He's a soldier, he knows what he's doing."
Heyman said it was commendable that Harry had undertaken such a dangerous and demanding military job.
"By and large, the world's elite make sure their sons and daughters go nowhere near the firing line. So it brings credit to the royal family, and it's good for army morale, that Harry's not sitting back in London saying, 'Well done, boys!'" he said.
Heyman said as an Apache gunner, Harry would have opened fire when directed to do so by a ground controller who would most likely have been under enemy fire. The prince typically would have been firing at Taliban forces in bunkers or protected in some way, not at troops out in the open, said the former officer.
"They would have been opening fire to relieve pressure on the ground, maybe even to rescue people on the ground," Heyman explained. "If he was using machine guns, there is no way he could say categorically he destroyed the target. But if he was using the Hellfire missiles against a bunker, he would be able to say categorically that he destroyed the target."
If there's a large explosion and no more enemy fire from the target area, the gunner can be "pretty sure" the enemy has been killed, Heyman said.
Col. Richard Kemp, a former British commander in Afghanistan, said the fevered press response to Harry's words reflected a certain naivety about the realities of war.
"He's flying an attack helicopter armed with missiles and machine guns, and its purpose is predominantly to come in and provide fire support for troops fighting the Taliban, so it would be very, very surprising if he didn't swoop in and kill," Kemp said.
He said Harry's tone was appropriate in the interview.
"I know it's a delicate subject, but I'm surprised by how much people have seized on what he said," Kemp. "If he'd been bragging about killing, that would have been wrong, but he didn't brag about it."
So what if he killed the enemy, that's his job. Congratulations for doing your job. Lindsey German needs to get real, Harry doesn't glorify his role. What has she done for her country? Spoiled whinny beeach.
"By and large, the world's elite make sure their sons and daughters go nowhere near the firing line."Â That's because they believe they are better than the rest of us. IF he did it and behaved as any other soldier than whatever, he was doing his job. IF he weren't one of the worlds so called "elites" this wouldn't even be news.
Kudos for his service and putting himself on the front line with the rest of the military.Â
Â
Killing the Taliban? That was his job in Afghanistan.
Â
It is curious how so many reporters like to raise questions about targeting civilians. "well maybe this, well maybe that..." A lot of interesting questions from the arrogant who think everyone needs to answer.Â
Â
I'm beginning to think we have too many analysts and urchins making a living as analysts.
Kumbaya my war lords.
When did being a warrior become a bad thing? Â Just goes to show how out of touch with reality a lot of people are these days. Â Sitting in comfy, safe chairs isolated from harm and evil by a glowing magic window and unwilling to face the harshness of the real world.
Another sensationalist headline from KATU. Way to put yourself in the same boat as the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail. But at least the tabloids have proof readers...
Way to put a bigger target on you head there son.........
 @kramrÂ
Â
I think if he had his choice, his head would be Britonâs ONLY target.
Â
He sounds an awful lot like most military people.
Â
"You come to me, I dare you. I am trained, I have skills and I have tools. Leave my people out of this. You want some, come get it from me." He also has a whole platoon of people to help protect him and he knows it.
Â
It is a bravado that is trained into military staff (and it helps these folks are young). But it serves to allow them the strength to go into combat and expect everything will be fine.
Â
As old dodgers we know that to be untrue, but most know youth is often wasted on the young.
Â
Besides imagine what would happen to the British fighting spirit should he end up harmed because of his service?
Â
Brits are quiet, but don't confuse quiet with weakness.
Â
So, just because he has a pedigree like a dog, he is  more important than an Oregon National Guardsman that has either killed a Taliban scum or has been wounded by one??Â
What, I thought he went over there to have tea and crumpets with the taliban!?
"Lindsey German, leader of the Stop the War Coalition, called Harry's comments "arrogant and insensitive" and raised the prospect that Harry might have targeted Afghan civilians."
Â
It's war you moron. People die. His comments were not arrogant or insensitive. They were realistic and honest.
Â
As far as targeting civilians you are just trying to inflame this issue for your own personal agenda. For that you should be ashamed of yourself and are nothing but a parasite on society for your insensitive, arrogant and unfounded comments.
 @RalphCramdenÂ
Â
The death of civilians is why you avoid war, but the Taliban LIKE to have civilians dead. Both in "peace" and at war. That's why they are badguys.
Â
I LIKE what Harry said. Good for him. Maybe people will wake up and realize WE ARE AT WAR. That killing people (badguys) is the whole purpose.
Â
Do we build bridges? Sure, but we do it sometimes under fire.
Â
And finally he flew as gunner in an Apache Attack helicopter. What did people think he was doing? The whole purpose of such a machine is to kill people and break things.
Â
I have never heard of a Hellfire missile or a .50 browning ever shoot rainbows.
Â
Â
 @RepomanÂ
Can't build bridges with muslims. It's either their way or they plant an IED on the highway and kill you.
@iamtroglodite@yahoo.com --- Like!
 @RalphCramden  You are making a gross generalization. Muslims people live all over the world and are not all extremists as you would suggest. I have some very good friends that are Muslim who are refugees who came from Bosnia. They are some of the kindest most generous people you could ever meet. They are all about family and are exceptional hosts. They work hard, keep a clean house and don't live on welfare. They are also now US Citizens and thankful to be here. They've suffered more than most Americans could ever imagine. They left during a period of "ethnic cleansing". When people throw out generalization such as this it only breeds hate.
@RalphCramden @Repoman   Be hones, christians are the same. Been killing people since the dawn of time. Be honest. Every religeous group believes they are right and everyone else is wrong and deserves to die and spend eternity suffering.
@RalphCramden @Repoman "Can't build bridges with muslims" But, maybe we can fertilise the fields with them.
 @RepomanÂ
If I did try and build a bridge they would just blow it up. muslims have no interest in meeting non muslims half way.
 @RalphCramdenÂ
Â
I will disagree with you on that as a blanket statement of all of Islam, but I am certain you can't build a bridge with the Taliban. Â
Are you kidding me KATU, what would you expect during a war, stop trying to demonize him..........
"Asked if he had killed from the cockpit, the third-in-line for the British throne said that he and a lot of other people had done so while in combat"
Â
"The response was immediate: The Daily Mirror ran a page-one headline "Royal Sensation Harry: I Killed Taliban""
Â
I call this "Rita Skeeter" reporting. Â Taking a quote out of context for no reason other than sensationalism.
Â
Â
@negativerep I agree. I may be wrong, but it sounds to me he was saying While he is hanging onto his machine gun in that chopper he is just another soldier doing his job AND the rest of the guys are doing theirs. He is no better or worse, and I don't think he wants to be. I salute him just as I do ours for fighting the good fight!
Things can get kind of Harry over there !