Interesting article. I can understand the pride he has serving his country and Queen. I’m not sure it’s a good idea acknowledging that he fired weapons at the enemy. The royal family is already a pretty visible target. A fatāwā like the Clerics issued on Salman Rushdie could really complicate the royals lives. It would require drastically increasing security much like the President has.
It sounds like the Prince fit in well and jolly well gave it a go, as the Brits say. 
I guess I look at it the other way: the royal family is already a pretty visible target. This has not made them any more visible. They already have lots of security, and I don’t think this will make them need any more.
Harry has been walking around with a target on his back since the day he was born. He was in far more danger in Afghanistan than he will be at home; it’s not like people didn’t already know what he was doing over there. He’s a soldier, after all.
aceplace, I concur with appleciders. This will make no meaningful difference. It’s not as if radical islamic terrorists were friends with the Royal family before. The security given to the US president would be considered humerously excessive if it were to be given over here - there’s less need due to lack of firearms. Note that when then Cameron became PM he asked for about half the secruity Brown was given. Note I do not say our security is magically better than yours, it’s obviously far worse - for example my dad once ended up in the middle of a royal convoy by accident and apparently no one noticed for a bit. Security in Afghanistan is a different thing but that applies to every serviceman.
Don’t forget in not very religious countries there are surprisingly few nuts who have the capability to do very much. Cause even “angry muslims” and so on are basically reasonable people 99% of the time.
(also relevant is that basically all the guns in teh UK are held by civilised people, not urban hot head 19 year old jihadists)
Well, they didn’t have much luck getting Salman Rushdie. 
He’s still out there. I’m not sure how much security he actually has.
Prince Harry may make it back to Vegas and the girls soon. Hopefully his bodyguards will be more careful checking for phone cameras.
The angle the article takes that by switching his role to AH64 gunner, as opposed to AFV commander or FAC officer on the ground (his prior postings), his battlefield role becomes less risky to other troops around him, acknowledges that he is a prime target already (the original concern in his first deployments was that the unit would become too tied up in protecting him, to detriment of the mission). The part about the killing is a necessary recognition that while as a track commander or FAC he could always have the impersonality of just having ordered someone else to lay down fire downrange, as a gunship gunner he would have fired directly at targets.
We pay good money for the helicopter and his training, He’d damn well better be killing someone.
I actually think he came out of it pretty well. Seems a fairly normal member of the forces and must be good at his job or they wouldn’t let him near an Apache.
We may have an archaic way of choosing the head of state but at least they put themselves in harms way, medieval-style,
I get the impression that Harry likes being a soldier and feels more comfortable hanging out with his fellow boys (and girls) in uniform than in the more formal roles his birthright normally requires. I am aware that most of the rest of the royal family have done or are doing military service of one sort or another (including William), but Harry seems to wear it naturally.