AIG            Prince Harry in Afghanistan    01 March 2008

Two points come to my mind.  Neither point is a criticism of the Prince, he's just lumbered with where he was born.  I assume he's not a lot different to most lads of his age, the only differences are that money is no object and he is always in public view.

Firstly his name.  Some behind-the-scenes official will be the one to have chosen the name to make the royal family look like the rest of the population.  A totally stupid concept, as all the while we have a Royal House, they will be looked on as 'the top of the tree'.

A good royal name is 'Harold' and that is what Harry should have been called.  I understand that there is an Arabic forename "Hari", but our language is English. Let his pals use the diminutive by all means, but for formal address, use the proper name.  Should he eventually become king, imagine "King Harry".  My only comment is "what a ghastly thought".

Now as to anonymously  letting him go to a war zone is an equal bit of nuttery.  His CO will be under immense pressure not to put him into any danger without appearing to be giving the lad special treatment.  Poor man!  Just think what the outcome would be if the lad actually stopped a bullet; the CO's military career would be over.   Of course, none of what I have just mooted will ever be printed by the press (except perhaps by Private Eye).