PDA

View Full Version : Dual Citizenship....and dying for your country??


Fox3snapshot
28th Jul 2006, 03:19
Big news in Australia that the first 'Australian' dies in the conflict between Israel and Lebanon.

The gentleman concerned had returned to serve/fight for Israel finishing his return of service and as it turns out died for the country he chose to be 'loyal' to.

Now my first question is why? and all the following questions are why?

In the first press release it notes that he wanted to 'know what it would be like in the Army'.

Well son, why not have joined the RAR and have found out!!!???

:hmm:

SASless
28th Jul 2006, 03:34
He lived in Israel until 12 years old...and returned there knowing he would have to serve in the military and in all probability fight for his country.

Such a tragedy to lose such a fine young man in this way.

Reach
28th Jul 2006, 03:37
RIP

A sad loss.

Fox3snapshot
28th Jul 2006, 04:12
From your post '...fight for his country..' now my concern, his country of 'citizenship' is now Australia if I am not mistaken. Why should he go back to do National Service in a now foreign land and ultimately die for it??

Would he have done the same for Australia????

These questions need to be asked if we are to fully understand immigration and multiculturalism in the modern Austalian Culture.

:suspect:

Swingwing
28th Jul 2006, 05:21
I guess it all depends on your point of view, snapshot.

After all, we were constantly told last week that there were up to 25 000 "Lebanese Australians" in Lebanon at the start of the crisis. A percentage were tourists, and some were visiting family, but there were plenty who had returned "home" to live permanently - although whilst retaining their Aussie citizenship and passport of course.

As soon as there was trouble, plenty of these people started screaming for the Australian Government to come and evacuate them, and complained loudly when it wasn't fast enough for their liking. Anyone who dared to question whether it should be the Australian taxpayer's responsibility to pony up for the evacuation of permanent residents of another country was branded with the usual "racist" and "anti-multicultural" tags.

For what it's worth, I find dual citizenship of any sort (except perhaps New Zealander / Australian) to be impossibly conflicted. In my opinion, once you take Australian citizenship, you should have to renounce the citizenship of any other country. I don't care where you or your parents were born, if you want to be Australian, that's where your allegiance must lie henceforth. I've got no truck with Australians who want to go overseas to fight for anyone else - whether we're talking about Serbian Australians going "home" to fight the Bosnians, Israeli Australians going off to fight the Arabs or anything else. And don't even start me on traitors like David Hicks who have no other citizenship (at least at that stage) but who head off and sign up for non-state terrorist groups like Lashkar e-Toiba and Al-Qaeda.

All of this is in no way to suggest that migrants have to forget where they came from. The multicultural element in this country (and that's truly what it is, not a plurality of monocultures like in many European countries) is what makes it such a fantastic place. Preservation of those cultures is hugely important - and I don't even really mind if those of Italian descent feel they have to support the Azzurri against the Socceroos.:rolleyes:

But once you take out the papers of citizenship, this country (and no other) has claim on your formal allegiance - and you have the right to expect that allegiance to be returned in the form of help when you need it. But that mutual obligation removes your right to go and fight for someone else. If you feel strongly enough, then go for it - but take out their citizenship instead of mine when you do it.

Doors Off
28th Jul 2006, 05:51
Some of you gentlemen would do well to read up on some of the history of your current/former service, the RAAF. Many Commonwealth servicemen, some of whom were pilots, and some of which were Australian, fought for a country other than their birth and citizenship. Many served in the RAF, were loyal warriors and later in the war transferred to the RAAF. In your little world, these fine aviators would have been prevented from serving in the defence of a country they were citizens of.
To suggest that a young Australian/Israeli lad who lost his life in defence of a country and culture he believed in, by the way he did not contravene any Australian laws, would not have helped out Australia and should be banned from returning to live by removing his citizenship, is very myopic. Do not forget that his mother (I assume you gentlemen don't deny having one of those) and sister are law abiding Australian citizens and have to deal with enough pain without your input.
By your definitions there are many 'Mercenaries' serving in the ADF. There are many that hold dual citizenship of many different countries and serve our country so well, you now question their loyalty by suggesting that they should turn in their citizenships of other countries they love, yet some of them have faced bigger risks in serving Australia and have bigger nads than you do. So what do we do?
Here is a suggestion. If you do not like the laws of this wonderful country Australia, leave!:ugh:

Runaway Gun
28th Jul 2006, 10:12
Maybe the RAR didn't accept him.

Maybe he wanted to fight in real combat, as opposed to digging pits on the Outback during exercises.

Maybe he felt strongly about defending Israel.

I say good on him.

Skunkerama
28th Jul 2006, 10:39
Reminds me of a Blackadder sketch but slightly modified.

Former Isreali Aussie that returns to fight for the Jexish cause.....brave, fine, upstanding, young man RIP!!!!

Muslim Aussie that goes to fight in Afganistan amongst people of the same religon.....dirty, underhand, scum, Rot in Hell!!!!

Don't get me wrong, it was only a tongue in cheek comment. I think they are both very stupid acts.

rugmuncher
28th Jul 2006, 10:39
Perhaps people shouldn't be given alternative citizenship until after they have fullfilled their obligations to their native lands!

Then it may alleiviate some of the issues relating to foreigners dying whilst fighting in another countries conflicts,,,,oooops,, quite a broad statement given the current global activity of various countries militaries!!

Fox3snapshot
28th Jul 2006, 11:24
A good analogy, pretty well sums it up really.

Green Meat
28th Jul 2006, 14:03
In some cases, dual-nationality does not remove the obligation for national service in one or other of the countries, particularly where the country of origin requires a mandatory period of national service. Presumably not both at the same time, though. I can think of Israel, Greece (Cypriot) and Germany for starters as examples of people I have known where this has happened. I suspect that legally only having asylum status would prevent this? I am thinking particularly of the Iraqis who fled the Ba'ath regime between GW1 and GW2.

One question though, if you were coming to the end of mandatory enagement and your unit was deploying, would you volunteer to return to fight alongside your mates or disappear back to a safer country? It's a thorny one. Moreover, I suspect the statement by Fox3 may have been a media oversimplification:

In the first press release it notes that he wanted to 'know what it would be like in the Army'.

It may well be the case that the right to hold an Israeli passport (and of the Israelis I have known outside of that country, none were willing to give it up the entitlement) may well be dependent on certain criteria being fulfilled including National Service.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
28th Jul 2006, 14:31
Dual citizenry is ok I suppose and you could argue that living in country (A) and fighting for country (I) erm, I mean (B) is ok, but what happens when countries (A) and (B) fight each other?

I remember seeing an interview on the TV during the Falklands with some English bloke wot had emigrated to Argentina.

These smileys might be appropriate:


:uhoh:

:confused:

:ugh:

:{

:=

:*

:(

:O

:rolleyes:

:mad:

:bored:

:eek:

:ouch:

:sad:

and who knows, maybe even this one: :suspect:

Runaway Gun
28th Jul 2006, 15:04
I'm sure that you wouldn't be trusted in such a position.

Monty77
28th Jul 2006, 19:51
I think swingwing's point is valid. Dual nationality passport holders slagging off the Aus govt for not moving quick enough for their liking is stretching it a bit.

Why aren't they slagging off the Lebanese govt/army for not stopping Hezbollah launching rockets at Israel? That's what started the totally over the top Israeli reaction.

Samuel
28th Jul 2006, 23:11
I like Swingwing's post. We are fortunate to always have a choice in what we do and where we do it, but in my mind if you adopt a country and it adopts you, then the least you can do is stand up and be counted in your new country by taking its citizenship. I believe there was a bit of a fuss in Australia a few years ago over the thousands of Brits who have lived in Australia for ten, twenty, thirty years or so, and still clung to their British Passports.Absolute cads!:=

GreenKnight121
29th Jul 2006, 01:43
When I was a USMC Sgt in charge of the FLIR/Laser intermediate level Avionics repair shop in MCAS El Toro, CA in 1985-1989, one of my best men was one of those despised "Mercenaries"!

CPL Bray (known as "Blackie", of course) was not a US citizen (although his older brother was). This was made clear in Dec. 1986, when he tried to go visit his parents for Christmas leave and his request was denied.

His statement to the CO of Headquarters & Maintenance Squadron 13 was:
"I don't care if Éire (Republic of Ireland) IS on the DOD's "Restricted Travel" List, if you won't let me go home to see my parents, then I'll have to have MY Ambassador talk to YOUR President on the subject! Now, can we solve this here, like fellow Marines should?"

He got to go home, but had to "recieve" a "security briefing" from G-2 (Intelligence) first. The spook Major said "I learned more about the current situation in Ireland from that CPL than in my last official update"!

He served with honor, and went where he was sent, so we all had nothing but respect for him!

Fox3snapshot
29th Jul 2006, 01:52
Yep, with you all the way. The whole thing needs to be tidyied up and people have to decide where, how and who they want to swear their allegances too.

This pussyfooting around and trying to get the best of both worlds has to stop.

:suspect:

Brian Abraham
29th Jul 2006, 06:58
Permit citizenship of only one country. Should you wish to get into some one elses punch up then you are a mercenary, and nothing wrong with that. Just hope you pick the winning side. Seemed to work OK in Spain in the 30's and plenty of US boys went across the border into Canada and ended up in the RAF prior to the US getting into the war.

Wiley
29th Jul 2006, 20:45
I find myself firmly on the side of those who are uneasy about dual citizenship, but I fear it is far too hot a potato for either of the main political parties to grasp - unless (very highly unlikely, verging on the impossible) it was done in a bi-partisan manner, with both parties supporting it.

*****

Doors open, your argument re Commonwealth servicemen serving in the RAF and other British services in WW2 might appear to be a valid one in the current debate to someone with no knowledge of history, but in fact it is spurious. Until 1949, anyone born in Australia was an "Australian citizen and British subject". Even if Australia was no longer officially a colony of "the Old Country" in the 1940's, the attitude of many if not most Australians (and New Zealanders, Rhodesians and the citizens of many other ex-colonies of Britain) was still firmly rooted in "the Old Country", (or "Home" as my Grandparents and all my Great Aunts and Uncles referred to a country they had never once visited)

Sztoggy
29th Jul 2006, 21:23
I'm a french military pilot, holding a dual citizenship: I' also lebanese.
I choose to serve in France, wich is the country where I spent the biggest part of my life. France would need me right now, I'd be here.
But today, it's y other country that is under attack, members of my familly lost their houses, shops, and are forced to hide in the mountains. They never acted the wrong way, and my grannie is a saint to me.
Question: what should I feel regarding this, and where is my place ?
This country also need me, more than France by now. This is the kind of feeling that guy (wich was virtually my enemy) must have felt.
For swinging, keep in mind that Lebanese are not crying for a personal help from Australia. Some of them, married some australian girls, and had some australian kids. That's why, even if they returned to Lebanon, they are asking for help, to protect their wifes and kids... but maybe you can't get it.

SASless
30th Jul 2006, 02:47
SZT,

As a Lebanese in the French military....if you find yourself deployed in an International Force under the UN to Lebanon with the mission to protect the Israeli Border....where would your loyalty lie? To your family, to Lebanon, to France?

It is a most difficult position you would be in no doubt. Situations like your family are in must remind us of the true cost of war. I pray they remain safe from harm and a rapid resolution of the fighting can be achieved so they can live in peace again.

Sztoggy
30th Jul 2006, 09:26
I don't know if it would be so difficult, as long as I agree with the french position. First of all, this force should be deployed after a cease fire, wich is my very first expectation for the time. Then, France is asking for the return of the prisoners (all of them, Israelis ans Lebanese), and the return of the stolen land. The next stage would be to replace the armed Hezbollah with a well trained Lebanese army. My mission shouldn't be to protect the Israeli border, as you can see, it's already well protected...

Swingwing
30th Jul 2006, 09:44
I don't know if it would be so difficult, as long as I agree with the french position. (my bolding).
Don't you see, Sztoggy? You've just made my point perfectly.
You have just made your support for the nation and air force you serve conditional on your agreement with their political position! As a military man you do not have that right or choice. You are obliged to carry out the orders you are given (excepting of course the case of unlawful orders to violate Geneva conventions etc). That is what being in the military is about. If you want to make the political decisions about the position France will adopt, run for office as a politician. Do not do it from the cockpit of a French aircraft.

I can understand why you might feel the way you do - you can't just put aside all feelings for the land of your birth or heritage, and to expect you to do so is simply unrealistic. But my exact point was that holding dual citizenship simply makes these kinds of dilemmas worse. What about if the French and Lebanese positions were to differ, or your French commanders gave you orders which you couldn't support from a Lebanese viewpoint? What would you do then?

In my humble opinion, citizenship is about making a choice. Not just a choice as to where you live or which government pays your pension when you retire. It's a choice as to who you would support when your life and liberty are the issues at stake.

Perhaps my perspective is simplistic - my family's been in Australia since the beginning, so I've never had to make these sorts of choices. But I would really question how you could take the oath of citizenship to one country if you still felt that you had to divide your allegiance between that nation and another.

SW

Sztoggy
30th Jul 2006, 10:04
The answer is simple. It's not that I bought a second citizenship. I'm really from both countrys in my flesh.
You said that as a military pilot I do not have the right to decide. My answer is that before being a soldier, I'm a man, and if I have a right to take, I'll take it. Sorry :}

SASless
30th Jul 2006, 13:57
Swing,

The "Robert E. Lee" concept in a way....did he owe his loyalty to the Union or to his home state of Virginia. He chose Virginia and led the Confederate forces against the Union Army.

Loyalty can be a difficult thing to understand.

He saw himself as an American and a Virginian.

MarkD
30th Jul 2006, 20:09
which stolen land Sztoggy?

If you mean Shebaa Farms the UN doesn't reckon it's Lebanon's and therefore has certified Israel as compliant with UNSCR 1559 - so does every map they could find that wasn't forged. See Wikipedia on the subject.

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 20:24
The answer is simple. It's not that I bought a second citizenship. I'm really from both countrys in my flesh.
You said that as a military pilot I do not have the right to decide. My answer is that before being a soldier, I'm a man, and if I have a right to take, I'll take it. Sorry :}


Ah, yes, another fine example of the French military in action....
(I know, the above cheap shot belongs in JetBlast)

Sztoggy, I've been reading with some interest your posts in this thread and the "Soldiers kidnapped" thread. While I can sympathise with the turmoil you are facing with your family in the crossfire, and I am sorry that you are facing it, you are either a loyal member of the French armed services or you are not.

Your private views are one thing, but to intimate that you'd fight for another country while serving France is unprofessional. Whatever your circumstances that brought you to France and to decide to serve her, you made a grown up choice. Are you really stating that should France have a different policy than one you agree with, you'd switch sides?! Nice! :yuk:

Sztoggy
30th Jul 2006, 21:04
Well, I'm a bad boy :\

Sorry guys, but first of all, I'm a man, with a familly, a past and some feelings. I'm not a brainless soldier ready to die in any circonstances.
I think I'm not stupid, and I've been raised the right manner. For these reasons, I'm confindent with my choices, and remember that in the past, some french soldiers also disobeid, for some good reasons. Don't talk to me like if I was a kind of spy or something. I'll never act against any of my countries, and that's why I'll never excecute anything disturbing to me regarding my dual citizenship. Don't forget that the army knew all my details when I was recruited. Sorry to be disturbing by my honnesty on this forum...

Jorge Newberry
30th Jul 2006, 21:28
This is not a new phenomenon nor is it confined to the Middle East:

1.
Anyone fancy a guess as to what percentage of other ranks in the US armed forces either have dual citizenship or donīt have US citizenship at all...?

2.
Ireland left the Commonwealth and declared itself a Republic in 1948 yet HMG has continued to accept Rep. of Ire. citizens into the ranks.

3.
The Spanish armed forces have, in recent years, been making great efforts to recruit from Latin America. Citizenship is offered in due course but as far as I know, itīs not obligatory to take it.

Iīm sure if I racked my brains a bit I could think of more examples... the fact is that having two passports doesnīt necessarily lead to confusion/divided loyalties and having just one doesnīt necessarily mean that you are bursting with love for and loyalty to that state.

GreenKnight121
30th Jul 2006, 22:02
When I entered basic training in 1981, during our first week one of the things we were required to do (if US citizens) was formally and legally renounce any and all foreign citizenships we held! If someone refused to renounce, they were processed back out of the service as "unsuitable".

Those who held foreign citizenships, but not US (like CPL Bray, as I related in an earlier post), were required to sign papers agreeing to follow all lawful orders (subject to normal courtsmartial for disobedience), even if those orders were to take armed action against their nation of citizenship! If someone refused to sign, they were processed back out of the service as "unsuitable". There were many Phillipine citizens (mostly in the USN) who were serving in the US Armed Forces while I was... one of them worked in the same avionics shop as myself & CPL Bray: PO2 Policarpio.


I do not know if the "global communitarians" (as Bill Clinton described himself) in Congress have changed this... but that is how it was 25 years ago.

cazatou
30th Jul 2006, 22:11
Swingwing.

Your point of view, and SASless touched on this, means that every Free French Airman who fought for the Allied cause during WW2 was a Traitor; as were those from Belgium, Denmark, Holland, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia, Italy, Poland, Luxembourg, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Luxembourg et al.

During a visit to Estonia with SACEUR in 1993 our "minder" informed us that he had been conscripted into the Luftwaffe in 1942 and had spent several years in a POW Camp after the war was over. His brother, 2 yrs younger, had been conscripted into the Soviet Air force after Estonia had been "recaptured" and returned home several years before he did.

I would suggest that you have a rather "idealistic" viewpoint which bears little resemblence to the reality that faces those who are caught up in such situations.

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 22:14
GK121,

Still the same basic rules; you enlist/are commissioned, take an oath to serve and defend the {US} Constitution. If you can't/won't, out you go.

I am certainly not an expert, however, I feel fairly confident to say that I would think that most other nations operate in a somewhat similiar fashion. One takes an OATH to serve THAT nation. That's why I find Sztoggy's intimation that he'd switch sides if it weren't convenient so odious.


(High horse mounted.....CHARGE!!!:E )

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 22:22
Swingwing.
Your point of view, and SASless touched on this, means that every Free French Airman who fought for the Allied cause during WW2 was a Traitor; as were those from Belgium, Denmark, Holland, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia, Italy, Poland, Luxembourg, Latvia , Lithuania, Estonia, Luxembourg et al.
During a visit to Estonia with SACEUR in 1993 our "minder" informed us that he had been conscripted into the Luftwaffe in 1942 and had spent several years in a POW Camp after the war was over. His brother, 2 yrs younger, had been conscripted into the Soviet Air force after Estonia had been "recaptured" and returned home several years before he did.
I would suggest that you have a rather "idealistic" viewpoint which bears little resemblence to the reality that faces those who are caught up in such situations.


Sorry, I don't follow your logic. For the sake of brevity, I'll use the Free French in your example. If a guy volunteered to serve the Vichy following the German invasion, then I'd say yes, he was a traitor to his oath if he left and flew for the RAF. If he didn't take an oath to Vichy France, then no worries. Subsequently, once Adolf and Co. occupied the whole of France, then that oath was invalidated.
The other occupied countries in your example would be the same. If the country one had taken an oath to defend no longer exists or is occupied to the degree in WWII, then one would be released from said oath.

Sorry about your 'minder' and his brother, rotten luck, but not germaine to the point at hand. Sztoggy apparently is a voluntarily serving member of the French military. Until yet another country plays through France, he should be bound by his VOLUNTARY oath to serve even if he doesn't agree with the French government's policy, should it come to that.

cazatou
30th Jul 2006, 22:30
brickhistory

See post above yours.

It depends on how the oath is extracted. If it is freely given then fine. But if it is extracted on pain of death, or of injury to ones Family, then is that a binding contract?

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 22:33
cazatou,

Absolutely not.

I'm on my tall pony over a voluntary oath.

cazatou
30th Jul 2006, 22:45
brickhistory,

Sorry we crossed.

You miss the point. Ther "Vichy Government" that negotiated the surrender WAS the "legitimate" Government of France recognised by the German Government ; but one that had renaged on its obligations to its Allies.

General De Gaulle had proclaimed a "Government in Exile" which was recognised by all the Allied Combatant Nations - including the USA and USSR when then became embroiled.

Free French forces fought valiantly for the Allied cause in North Africa, Europe and the Far East.

By your reckoning they were all "Traitors"

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 23:23
brickhistory,
Sorry we crossed.
You miss the point. Ther "Vichy Government" that negotiated the surrender WAS the "legitimate" Government of France recognised by the German Government ; but one that had renaged on its obligations to its Allies.
General De Gaulle had proclaimed a "Government in Exile" which was recognised by all the Allied Combatant Nations - including the USA and USSR when then became embroiled.
Free French forces fought valiantly for the Allied cause in North Africa, Europe and the Far East.
By your reckoning they were all "Traitors"


caz,

We are writing past each other; the Vichy government was not the same one that made the Allied arrangements pre-1940. Most of the Free French that came to Britain and served so well did not take an oath to Vichy as far as I am aware, so therefore they weren't traitors. Once all of France was occupied, then even those bound to Vichy were released from their obligations in my mind. Comes back to your "serving at the point of a gun or under threat of torture" scenario.

I in no way disparage those that fought against the Nazis. My issue on this thread was the 'picking and choosing' of which policy a serving member of France's military appears to espouse.

Jorge Newberry
30th Jul 2006, 23:36
GK121,
One takes an OATH to serve THAT nation. That's why I find Sztoggy's intimation that he'd switch sides if it weren't convenient so odious.
(High horse mounted.....CHARGE!!!:E )

quite so, but at least to enlist, I am not sure about to be commissioned, one is not required to to hold a US passport...

brickhistory
30th Jul 2006, 23:49
Jorge,

To be commissioned in the US Armed Forces, one must be a legal US citizen. To enlist, one does not. But one DOES sign a binding contract. See GK121's post above.

Roadster280
31st Jul 2006, 00:50
Bindingly and legally enforceably renouncing one's citizenship to the receiving country is all well and good. The fly in the ointment here is that the UK does not recognise such renunciation. Other countries, such as Germany, do.

It's a very vexed situation. I find my ideals more rooted in the US than the UK. So I'm happy here. I did serve in the UK military for most of my adult life, and I would have fought and died for the Queen. The concept of dual citizenship suits me, but if it ever came to a third "war of independence", I would obviously have to take sides, and which side that would be would be decided by where my feet were at the time, as I would have clearly voted with them.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
31st Jul 2006, 00:53
That's why I find Sztoggy's intimation that he'd switch sides if it weren't convenient so odious.what if...something like you were Russian, but living in Germany in 1940 ish and you jioined the German army, but then later they invaded Russia. Would that make a difference?


or to make it even cloudier, suppose you were a German and you thought you were part of a master race so you fought for them, but then after a while the scales fell from your eyes as you began to see what was really going on. Would some sort of re-alignment of your priorities be equally odius?

brickhistory
31st Jul 2006, 01:18
what if...something like you were Russian, but living in Germany in 1940 ish and you jioined the German army, but then later they invaded Russia. Would that make a difference?


or to make it even cloudier, suppose you were a German and you thought you were part of a master race so you fought for them, but then after a while the scales fell from your eyes as you began to see what was really going on. Would some sort of re-alignment of your priorities be equally odius?

First example: Did the Russian voluntarily join the German Army? In 1940, if so, then yes, he's a big boy, made a decision and enlisted in the German Army.

Second example: Assuming being a line Army, Air Force or Naval member, then yes, you have a duty which most of them performed. Doesn't make them evil or wrong, they were trying to perform their duty. Fortunately, they lost. Please don't throw in the SS/Gestapo and whomever else was in the mass-murder business to my point because then one enters into the "illegal order" game and the Hamster Wheel starts spinning!

parabellum
31st Jul 2006, 01:30
But that is not what is happening here A....gh. Sztoggy is saying that he will only honour his oath and obligations to the French flag if it suits him and he agrees with the French policy, he is stating his intentions before he has to make any decision, no Damascene conversion here then, is there?

Dual nationals fighting for Israel are actually fighting for the survival of the Jewish faith in it's homeland more so than a particular country, I think, for what it is worth.

Again, a personal view, but I can't help thinking that the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers, by cross border raiding parties into Israel, from Gaza and south Lebanon is all part of a bigger plan by Syria and Iran to have an all out war against Israel. Syria seem to be doing as much as they can to provoke an 'incident' that they will claim is an attack from Israel and then Iran will enter the fray too.

Possible outcome, Iran enters the war, Israel carry out a limited nuclear attack on Iran and threaten Syria with the same, all sides withdraw behind their borders, claiming victory, to lick their wounds and work out another plan aimed at removing Israel from the map.

Fox3snapshot
31st Jul 2006, 01:48
Sorry mate, to politically motivated response and there are plenty of other areas in these forums that you can explain your opinion on the Israeli or Palestinian tactics.

I have been very intersted in the responses so far and the diversity of backgrounds making them. Whilst I have not changed my opinion on the Dual Citizenship issue, I certainly now have a better understanding of the motives behind other peoples devotion and commitment to multiple country obligations.

:cool:

SASless
31st Jul 2006, 01:52
Cowboy rules are simple...."You ride for the brand.....you ride for the brand!"

Simply put....you are in or out....no gray to it. You raise your hand and take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the USA....you are an American.

You may have British roots....but you are an American....either accept that concept or pack yer bags. There's no feet to it Roady....the saying "These colors do not run!" mean something. Enjoy your freedom here and prosperity here....someday it might be your turn to defend it. Either be willing to do so or renounce your new citizenship and revert to being British or whatever you were.

Being "American" is more than holding a passport with USA stamped on it.

brickhistory
31st Jul 2006, 01:57
Being "American" is more than holding a passport with USA stamped on it.

But most of us don't have passports!!! :}

SASless
31st Jul 2006, 02:08
My Uncles never needed one to tour Europe.....of course they went ashore at Normandy and spent Christmas in Bastogne. They suggested the summer in Germany was really keen.

Sztoggy
31st Jul 2006, 07:28
To be more clear, I never said that I would choose the orders to wich I would obei or not. I just admitted that IF France, the country for wich I'm serving, had to take position AGAINST my other country, (Lebanon), it's more than probable that I won't be able to obei...wich is quite different.
During conflicts you have to feel a kind of patriotism. Today, it's my second nation that is in pain, and I feel a need to serve it in a way.
As I belong to the French army, wich is probably gonna be engaged in Lebanon, I'd be pleased to be a part of it, especially since I agree with the french policy regarding this situation. I never said anything else than this...
Otherwise, for those who still feel disturbed by my attitude, they might try to call my boss to give him the details...

brickhistory
31st Jul 2006, 09:48
To be more clear, I never said that I would choose the orders to wich I would obei or not. I just admitted that IF France, the country for wich I'm serving, had to take position AGAINST my other country, (Lebanon), it's more than probable that I won't be able to obei...wich is quite different.



The highlighted words are what really troubles me about your posts. What if France does have to take a different position? What will you do? As you voluntarily joined France's military and gave whatever oath, signed whatever agreement, joined of your own free will, doesn't France have the right to depend on your loyalty in action?

Swingwing
31st Jul 2006, 11:05
Thread's probably reached it's use by date - but thanks Brick. Haven't felt the need to jump in again, because you've said it all for me, and probably better than I could have too...

cheers

SW

chornedsnorkack
31st Jul 2006, 11:14
Didnīt French Foreign Legion have a clear principle that the soldiers can be excused from serving against their native country - that they are only sworn to fight for France against every third country?

Sztoggy
31st Jul 2006, 11:24
The highlighted words are what really troubles me about your posts. What if France does have to take a different position? What will you do? As you voluntarily joined France's military and gave whatever oath, signed whatever agreement, joined of your own free will, doesn't France have the right to depend on your loyalty in action?

Yes France has the right, but what if I preffer to take the left ?
I volunteered for some reasons. Considering that these reasons are not existing anymore (for instance, France no more representating my values), I'll definitly unvolunteer, with all the consequences.
But let's give it up, we are quite far from such a situation. That was just to say that as I see my face in the mirror every morning, I preffer not to act as a prositute for my country, but as a minded being, even if it's far from the definition of soldier...:}

TWOTBAGS
31st Jul 2006, 11:50
to Quote SAS;

Being "American" is more than holding a passport with USA stamped on it.


If only some of the other nations that have (have had) their "citizens" in Lebanon this past few weeks did not pander to nancy wancy nimbys and do-gooders that want to pander to "multiculturism" and "intergration" then the whole place would be better.

If you want to live in another country other than the one you were born/raised in then you accecpt their way of life.

Full STOP

If your personal cultural perspectives differ then I believe you have picked the wrong country, and if your culture or home land is so good....why leave?

If you want long lunches and funny food...... Go to France
If you want a relaxed lifestyle and sunshine.... Go to Australia
If you want a consumer fed hussle and bussle... Go to America
If you want a muslim society......Go to Saudi Arabia

Sztoggy
31st Jul 2006, 12:36
Well, tell me how do you decide were to be born and were to be raised, unless you're delivererd from a sperm bank to the place you expected to be ??
You can't decide anything about your origins and the culture you'll receive.
And it's possible to be attached to 2 different countries, whatever you may think.
I hold a dual citizenship, and I would die for both of my countries.
A war between them should happen, I'd be forced to choose a camp according to my values, trying to protect the right one against the one that sees to be wrong to me. It already happened many times during WWII.
Stop talking like binary droids from star wars for god sake ! Life is not black or white.

pr00ne
31st Jul 2006, 13:23
"Patriotism, the last refuge of the scoundrel"

Dr Samuel Johnson.

The sooner the thing is consigned to the history books the better. How can you be proud of something that is not an achievment and that you have absolutely no choice over whatsoever?

Pr00ne

Maple 01
31st Jul 2006, 15:25
Go on pr00ne, give the rest of the quote......

brickhistory
31st Jul 2006, 15:31
Yes France has the right, but what if I preffer to take the left ?
I volunteered for some reasons. Considering that these reasons are not existing anymore (for instance, France no more representating my values), I'll definitly unvolunteer, with all the consequences.
But let's give it up, we are quite far from such a situation. That was just to say that as I see my face in the mirror every morning, I preffer not to act as a prositute for my country, but as a minded being, even if it's far from the definition of soldier...:}


Sztoggy,

I'm exiting this particular Hamster Wheel after this post. I truly hope you aren't faced with having to choose between France, the country you agreed to serve and Lebanon, your place of birth. If you do have to make such a decision, and you say you will accept the consequences, then so be it.

Umm, regarding the "prostitution" thing....are you not being being paid by France to do the duties she has called upon you to perform thus far? If the answer is yes, then, sir, all we are discussing is the price, not the job description!:E

SASless
31st Jul 2006, 15:34
Boswell tells us that Samuel Johnson made this famous pronouncement that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel on the evening of April 7, 1775. He doesn't provide any context for how the remark arose, so we don't really know for sure what was on Johnson's mind at the time.

However, Boswell assures us that Johnson was not indicting patriotism in general, only false patriotism.

Sztoggy
31st Jul 2006, 15:46
Umm, regarding the "prostitution" thing....are you not being being paid by France to do the duties she has called upon you to perform thus far? If the answer is yes, then, sir, all we are discussing is the price, not the job description!:E

Well, I mentionned this profession (that I really respect a lot :8), in order to mean that it's not because I'm paid and that I volunteered, that the nation has all the right regarding my acts...It means that, even if I'm not supposed to think about the orders, I'm a human being, and I can't help thinking (I know, it might be surprising...)

Roadster280
1st Aug 2006, 00:06
Cowboy rules are simple...."You ride for the brand.....you ride for the brand!"
Simply put....you are in or out....no gray to it. You raise your hand and take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the USA....you are an American.
You may have British roots....but you are an American....either accept that concept or pack yer bags. There's no feet to it Roady....the saying "These colors do not run!" mean something. Enjoy your freedom here and prosperity here....someday it might be your turn to defend it. Either be willing to do so or renounce your new citizenship and revert to being British or whatever you were.
Being "American" is more than holding a passport with USA stamped on it.

I quite agree, my point was just that the UK does not recognise renunciation. FYI - I dont have US citizenship, I was saying that the concept of dual nationality does suit me, and when the time comes, I will almost certainly apply for it, and with honour. I'll even spell that last word differently. However, it would not excuse me from my reserve liability to the UK, and that's where the feet come into it. Hell, I'd join the Guard today if they would have a fat old knacker.

sagy34
1st Aug 2006, 13:06
SZTOGGY,

you take the money, you do the job.

If you have doubts about your ability to do the job, then get out.

You can't have it both ways.:=

GreenKnight121
1st Aug 2006, 22:09
The statement cited by prOOne comes from the following work:
The Life of Samuel Johnson (http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/b#a659) (1791) by James Boswell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Boswell)
Boswell's full mention of this statement reads:
Patriotism having become one of our topicks, Johnson suddenly uttered, in a strong determined tone, an apophthegm, at which many will start: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered, that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self-interest.

The event was specifically a fairly heated discussion of Edmund Burke, his colleagues, and their tactics; of all of which Johnson disapproved. Much reference is made to the "rabble-rousing" tendencies of the men in question, who would appeal to patriotic sensibilities in a last-ditch effort to salvage otherwise defeated causes.


Dr Samuel Johnson's full beliefs on Patriotism can be found in his statement as follows:
The Patriot (1774) [/URL]

ADDRESSED TO THE ELECTORS OF GREAT BRITAIN.
[excerpts from the text] Full text: [URL="http://www.samueljohnson.com/thepatriot.html"]The Patriot (http://www.samueljohnson.com/thepatriot.html)


It ought to be deeply impressed on the minds of all who have voices in this national deliberation, that no man can deserve a seat in parliament, who is not a patriot. No other man will protect our rights: no other man can merit our confidence.
A patriot is he whose publick conduct is regulated by one single motive, the love of his country; who, as an agent in parliament, has, for himself, neither hope nor fear, neither kindness nor resentment, but refers every thing to the common interest.
Let us take a patriot, where we can meet him; and, that we may not flatter ourselves by false appearances, distinguish those marks which are certain, from those which may deceive; for a man may have the external appearance of a patriot, without the constituent qualities; as false coins have often lustre, though they want weight.
Some claim a place in the list of patriots, by an acrimonious and unremitting opposition to the court. This mark is by no means infallible. Patriotism is not necessarily included in rebellion. A man may hate his king, yet not love his country.
The greater, far the greater number of those who rave and rail, and inquire and accuse, neither suspect nor fear, nor care for the publick; but hope to force their way to riches, by virulence and invective, and are vehement and clamorous, only that they may be sooner hired to be silent.
A man sometimes starts up a patriot, only by disseminating discontent, and propagating reports of secret influence, of dangerous counsels, of violated rights, and encroaching usurpation. This practice is no certain note of patriotism. To instigate the populace with rage beyond the provocation, is to suspend publick happiness, if not to destroy it. He is no lover of his country, that unnecessarily disturbs its peace. Few errours and few faults of government, can justify an appeal to the rabble; who ought not to judge of what they cannot understand, and whose opinions are not propagated by reason, but caught by contagion. The fallaciousness of this note of patriotism is particularly apparent, when the clamour continues after the evil is past.
He that wishes to see his country robbed of its rights cannot be a patriot.
It is appropriate here to insert another quote from Dr Johnson:
"It is more from carelessness about truth than from intentional lying, that there is so much falsehood in the world." The Life of Samuel Johnson (1791) by James Boswell March 31, 1778, p. 372

N Arslow
1st Aug 2006, 23:01
I hope to become a citizen of a second country in the very near future. That was my choice (and obviously the choice of the government of that country if they accept my application).
I see no confliction now or in the future. I have served in my country of origin's armed forces and have considered my new country's (but decided against for domestic reasons). If there were ever to be a conflict of obligation I would make another choice.
I feel I was given a brain to make those choices when necessary.
The brain also allows me to see the strengths and weaknesses both have to offer. I will never feel compelled to be led by blind patriotism in either case nor to believe that I have to agree with everything one government decides to do or not. Obviously I have chosen to live in democracies where that is a right.
What is the problem?

L J R
2nd Aug 2006, 06:03
.....and where do those who are employed by the Brits under BWoS in the Deserts of King Saud, with Oz, NZ, Canuk etc passports fit in with this situation. They do not actually 'fight' for the current Prince, but those whom they train may.

Wiley
2nd Aug 2006, 06:31
LJR, I think most of us in that siuation quite happily (if somewhat flippantly) refer to ourselves as mercanaries, (although I accept that this might upset real mercenaries, as we don't actually fight to earn our keep).

I also think your point has nothing to do with the subject of this thread, as there is no question of such contract workers taking up citizenship of the countries they work in.

Sztoggy
3rd Aug 2006, 19:34
SZTOGGY,

you take the money, you do the job.

If you have doubts about your ability to do the job, then get out.

You can't have it both ways.:=

i'm not doing it for the money, but for my country, according to my convictions. How can you do the job if you're not patriot ? And then, if you're patriot for your country, you should be patriot for two in case you have a dual citizenship as I do. And my patriotism will never push me to act again my second country. Sorry if you can get it, and as I said, you still can try to call may president to advise him of my presence in his army.:}