What a complete and utter waste of time and money! I have no problem per se with Prince Harry not going off to battle, but why train him to be a tank commander if he won't be allowed to go into battle...that is where tank commanders go! He should be a supply or intelligence officer, or something else that puts him behind a desk.

Haywood, St. Johns Wood,

This is shockingly short-sighted polictical decision.

This decision undermines morale in the Allied forces and - surely - telegraphs the West's impending surrender in Iraq.

A Dodd, Seattle, USA

Do It is terribly unfair. But, as we achieve middleage, we come to realise that much of life is, unfortunatly, unfair. As we age, cool logic begins to cloud the inner warmth of chivalry until finally we are left with only icy formalities. Prince Harry deserves better -- as does England. Once Kings weilded sword in battle, oft times dying, yet a young nation survived.

I dare say that Prince Harry's mates fear not the increased risk to themselves. Its a shame that the nation does.

Don Donner, Fayetteville, Ark/USA

Just suppose that "Prince Harry" disappears into an anonymous Headquarters post and his place in charge of his men is taken by a brown haired Lt 'Hal' Smith, with a passport and all the authentic identity documents and family background an officer needs. There are historical precedents - they did it for Lt . Albert RN, didn't they?

Nigel MacNicol, Oakham, Rutland

Why the hell didn't they just send him and tell everyone he'd been after he was home safely. He'd have done his duty and he wouldn't have put anyone in danger. The Army have made themselves look pretty stupid.

bob, London, UK

This entire business is a farce.If you join the bloody army you serve in all conditions and circumstances.This sends entirely the wrong message to other young men in our armed forces;you are good enough to be shot at and possibly killed,Harry is too indispensable.We should end this disastrous adventure NOW.

Edwina Rigby, Blackburn, England

Harry and his brother should immediately resign from the Army as it is all too clear that they are unable to carry out the role for which they are trained i.e. fight a war! This is an insult to all the men and women who have died serving this country in Iraq, painfully exposes the continuing shambles at the MOD and the obselence of the Royal Family in the twenty first century.

Trevor, Nottingham,

In the past England and Britain were led by lions. Henry V at Agincourt, Churchill in WW11. There is a long list. Ancient Kings and Princes of England led their troops into battle knowing well they were the first enemy target. Their standard and colours were held high in order to inspire their troops to incredible efforts for their countries honour. King GeorgeVI and Queen Elizabeth remained in Buckingham Palace throughout the blitz knowing the Nazi bombers were using them as a target. They were brave hearts everyone. Now we in the 21st century have a royal solider prince called Harry. The Ministry of Defence think it too dangerous for him to go to Iraq but acceptable for everyone else. He would be a target. Every British soldier in Iraq is a target. He would not be any different from my son or yours. He would inspire every fighting man to serve his country with distinction. If he were to be captured he would be brave and suffer like any other soldier. The country would be proud. Now we are ashamed. Ashamed of the apparent discrimination between the figures of the establishment and the rest of us who send our sons and daughters to war. In not allowing Harry to fight in Iraq it is a decision wrought from insecurity and weakness. A missed opportunity for the monarchy to rise above the ordinary and set an example for the country to which we all could aspire. The man himself must feel very demoralised and his future now is bleak indeed.

M.J. Frizell, Payzac, France

commonsense has prevailed in not sending HRH maybe equal commoinsense should be applied by not sending anyone else to this pointless cause

t e kates, lincoln,

Thr reality of the current world is that information travels much faster. It is not Harry's safety that is at issue, it is the massively increased danger to those that serve with him. It is bad enough to know as a member of an Army that you are a Target. It is terrifying to know that because of the man next to you, or in the same room or even barracks, that you have been singled out to be killed, maimed or captured.
In the unlikely event one of our politicians' sons served his country, say for instance Euan Blair. would you not give the same consideration to those serving with him?

Dave Edwards, Burnham on Sea,

Thus is absolutely the right decision. The risks are great enough anyway without increasing them further. Can you imagine the fall-out if we had seen Prince Harry on TV/internet, captured, tortured (I am sure these evil men would do it) and even beheaded by Al-Qaeda.

Prince Harry must hold his head up high and will, no doubt, do us proud, no matter what his CO orders him to do.

Neil, Wirral, UK

Common sense prevails. The whole affair has been mishandled. As a result, Prince Harry has become a much higher value target and will be at greater risk than before - whereever he serves. The Blues and Royals will no doubt suffer more than they would have in Iraq. The services need to be very careful about the information they release to the media. Careless talk does indeed cost lives.

Alan R., Newton Abbot,

Totally the wrong call. If Harry wants to go, target or not he should be there leading his men. To many times the rich and powerful get a pass because of their station. As David Halberstam has noted about Bush and Cheney. It's not that they didn't go to Viet Nam that has been the issue, it is by not going they have never learned the lessons of war. Send the Prince. These are real world lessons. As one who has served his country I know wherof I speak
Ex R.C.N.

Bill Leaman , Cranbrook BC, Canada

It's a sad decision and I hazard one that was taken with a view to the dangers his presence would cause all around him, rather than personal danger to Prince Harry. However, if the Prince cannot lead his men in combat what future is there for him in the Army ? His character does not seem to lend itself to purely ceremonial duties.

Anthony J Harrison, Charlotte, NC, USA

What a total joke and a PR distaster for the British Army and the UK.
When Harry joined the Army they KNEW it would amost certain
that he would be deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. Why did they not
plan ahead for it?
I can understand that the main concern is that he would be a
target and that would put everyone around him in an
increased danger.
When I was an 18 year old trooper in the sixties in the same type
of armoured regiment as Harry, I know he would not be in command
of more than a squadron of four vehicles and 13 soldiers.
Surely it would have been possible to find 13 SAS troopers
to be in his squadron. They could have looked out for him and
maybe saved the reputation of the British Army and the Monarchy.

G.J.Edwards, Gerrards Cross,

"....feel that he has let down his men." Much to the contrary, Prince Harry is doing more to support and protect his men by not going, than if he had gone. Had he done so, it would've been much the same as walking about a golf course hilltop holding a golf club over his head during a lightning storm. He woud've been a lightning rod and his mere presence would've undermined the security of his unit. There is no dishonor in protecting your men and guaranteeing the success of the misssion.

SGT Carvalho, R. V. (USAR), Waverly, Tenn., USA

The murderous thugs have won another round, thanks to the shadow of a man that 'serves' as 'head' of our once proud Army.

The decision not to allow Harry to serve in Iraq is just the short of cowardly decision to expect from the cowardly armed forces of 21st century cowardly Britain.

For pete's sake let Harry serve. It's time our enemies were impressed for once with our courage instead of being continually encouraged by our squeamishness.

Jim Good, Hatfield, Herts

As a veteran, myself, I can understand how the young prince would want to be with his men. He is a credit to his family and to his nation. I do believe it is a mistake to cave in to the terrorists and not allow the young prince to go. Yes, he will be facing greater risks, but that comes with the territory of being a soldier.

HJ Shiau, San Francisco, California