There should be little in the way of surprise or concern at the announcement that Prince Harry is to serve in Iraq.
Troop Commander Wales, as he is known to colleagues, will join others from the Blues and Royals regiment in a six-month tour of duty as part of the latest deployments.
Quite right to, after all what is the point in embarking on a career in the Army if you get to pick and choose exactly what you do and avoid venturing anywhere near the front-line of an on-going conflict?
It would make a mockery of all the time, resources and money invested in his training, let alone destroy the morale of those who have trained alongside him and who have embarked on similar careers.
Obviously there will be security concerns, but aren’t those the same ones that every single member of the UK’s armed forces – and their family and friends – have faced?
Equally, one assumes such concerns will have been raised, discussed and accepted in private long before Prince Harry’s career choice was made public. His fledgling military career can be traced back to his time at Eton and his deployment to Iraq is yet another staging post on a fairly clear career path.
We saw a similar response when his uncle, Prince Andrew, served in the Falklands War.
Why should we still be so surprised that a member of the Royal Family is exposed to such situations?
The cynic in me wonders whether the Government is delighted by the move.
After all, isn’t this another way of deflecting from the more pressing concern about what has and is still happening in Iraq and our continued and increasingly uncomfortable close alliance with US policy?
On the same day as a former Government minister launched a campaign to become leader of the Labour Party by criticising our involvement in Iraq and “special relationship” with President George W Bush, the headlines are grabbed by another story.
Would it be stretching it a little too far to suggest this is another incident of burying bad news under some good news?