PDA

View Full Version : Allegiance


Stendec5
20th Jun 2014, 20:14
Shouldn't the Armed Forces swear allegiance to The Flag/The Nation rather than
to the person of an individual who is no different to the rest of us?
The present "Queen" has presided over the most spectacular decline of any great power to the humble insignificance of the present, whilst simultaneously maintaining her own vast wealth and privilege.
Isn't it time we grew up?

Willard Whyte
20th Jun 2014, 20:19
Why would any intelligent person swear allegience to the idiots who run this country? Hardly Betty's fault that we've been shafted by parliament.

500N
20th Jun 2014, 20:33
Willard

Agree on all counts.

I am glad both my Aussie Citizenship papers, commission both refer to the Queen than some piss ant politician.


Stendec5
She is better than the rest of us, I don't know anyone who could have maintained composure at the same time as dealing with a bunch of dickheads for 50 years.

air pig
20th Jun 2014, 20:37
I agree with WW, looking at politicians of various strip in this country and around the world, I'm glad I swore allegiance as a former member of Aunty Betty's flying circus. I look forward to the day she asks nicely to see the prime minister who refuses and she sends for the palace guard commander to fetch the political wretch. Hopefully his only reply would be 'dead or alive Ma'am'

smujsmith
20th Jun 2014, 20:47
Well, great question, but I suspect for many a no brainer. The oath of allegiance we all swear when we enter our Armed Forces is to our Nation, and not to a political party, or government of that particular time. The embodiment of our nation is HM the Queen, or whoever serves the country as Monarch, and yes, I use the term "Serves as Monarch" deliberately, because, despite wealth and entitlement our royal family have given Great Britain stable rule and a unifying influence for many years, and all serve, as do our servicemen. It's been a long time since I was sworn in, I can guarantee that an insistence on swearing allegiance to a politician would have radically foreshortened my career. HM and her family might not sit well with the EU brigade, I'm afraid that old fashioned people like myself still keep our trust in what we know and are comfortable with.

Smudge

500N
20th Jun 2014, 20:55
"HM and her family might not sit well with the EU brigade, I'm afraid that old fashioned people like myself still keep our trust in what we know and are comfortable with."

And younger people it would seem as well going by the polls, at least here in Aus.

OK, the wording on sign up and other things might have changed in the last few years but I think people prefer having someone stable who doesn't bend in the wind everytime things get hard.

taxydual
20th Jun 2014, 21:05
HM Forces

or

Government (ie political) Forces

Don't write off HM when it comes to Alligance. I wonder if 'push came to shove' how many of current (and ex) serving members would ally themselves to a politician.

And as for

The present "Queen" has presided over the most spectacular decline of any great power to the humble insignificance of the present, whilst simultaneously maintaining her own vast wealth and privilege.

Thankfully, for HM Forces actions (past and present) you are allowed to post that opinion.

Replace "present Queen" with "Hitler", "Stalin", "Mao" etc and wait to see how long it takes for the knock on the door at night from the nasty guys.

bill2b
20th Jun 2014, 21:06
I imagine recruitment would drop somewhat if you were asked to lay down your life for Cameroon, Millyband, Clegg "and Country".
Country OK but the rest ?
I would have chosen a different career.

PeregrineW
20th Jun 2014, 21:50
The Queen (or more correctly, the Monarchy) represents stability and continuity. Looking back to 1952 (not that I was there) there's precious little else that has remained the same since then. It would be a sad day for this country should we ever replace HM with a president.

And 500N...a bunch of dickheads? Innumerable bunches of dickheads, surely?

jayteeto
20th Jun 2014, 21:51
I swore to serve the queen, not politicians. Totally disagree with the opening comments

500N
20th Jun 2014, 21:56
My grand mother said that the Monarchy staying in London during WWII and the Blitz, like most other people did one hell of a lot for the people of London. (Even if the children did get sent away for a while).

I somehow doubt the Pollies or a President would do the same today.

PeregrineW
20th Jun 2014, 21:58
HM staying in London, coupled with Churchill refusing to countenance beer rationing - two enormous boosts to morale!

Laarbruch72
20th Jun 2014, 22:33
There are so many inaccuracies and fallacies in the OP itself that I'm surprised you're all giving the author this much of your collective attention. Most successful bait casting post I've seen in a while, designed only to stir up the military forum regulars.

PeregrineW
20th Jun 2014, 22:35
Quite right, shouldn't feed the trolls. Throwing bricks at them is fun, though.

bill2b
20th Jun 2014, 22:47
Looking at some of his other posts I think he may be a grumpy fisherman from Grimsby, remember he probably married his cousin so he is entitled to be a bit grumpy sometimes.
I am not a great "royalty" fan although I like Harry and Her majesty and her batty husband, bless him but at least they have lead our country for quite a while .

taxydual
20th Jun 2014, 22:51
Laarbruch72

Thank you. A deserved kick.

Appreciated.

Rgds

T

thunderbird7
20th Jun 2014, 23:20
At the end of the day one serves the elected government of ones country, regardless of monarchy or other quirks. Herein lies the problem with all foreign policy: ultimately, the ethics - right/wrong/just necessary - or otherwise, are subordinate to the electoral process. "If we bomb/invade S***a and servicemen are harmed will we be re-elected?" "If we bomb/invade S***a and foreign civilians are killed, will our electorate care and will we be re=elected?"

Hence the dilemma over use of "drone=strikes." Not placing servicemen in harms way to achieve a tactical/strategic end is a no-brainer for military minded folk but acquires a new significance for a politician, intent on a long term career.

But its all ok cos Tony said it wasn't our fault......

Auda abu Tayi was an honourable man...

ExAscoteer
20th Jun 2014, 23:24
I received my Commission from the Queen, not some self seeking pillock of a politician.

That is as it should be.

'To our well beloved and trusted servant xxxx. We reposing especial trust in you...'

obnoxio f*ckwit
21st Jun 2014, 07:04
500N, it was certainly appreciated by the Londoners, although I do have a chuckle at this

We should remember the tremendous contribution of the Queen Mother to the war effort:
As the BBC pointed out, she 'bravely remained in London beside her husband' during the war.
This contrasts sharply with the actions of my grandfather who, on the declaration of war immediately left his wife and children and pissed off, first to France, then North Africa, Italy, France (again) and finally Germany.
The shame will always be with us.

:)

big v
21st Jun 2014, 07:35
IIRC I have never sworn allegiance to anyone or anything. However I received the Queen's Commission which, as Ex Ascoteer pointed out, was a direct command from Her Majesty to one of her subjects. Did it for me.

Roland Pulfrew
21st Jun 2014, 07:57
Isn't it time we grew up?


Ha ha ha ha ha ha! We are grown up. I would never swear allegiance to a pollie. My allegiance is to HMQ and the Nation.

Hempy
21st Jun 2014, 08:44
Isn't it time we grew up?


Ha ha ha ha ha ha! We are grown up. I would never swear allegiance to a pollie. My allegiance is to HMQ and the Nation.

It was a silly statement to start with tbh. The Monarchy and the Military have been intertwined since the days the Regent would lead his troops into battle ON FOOT. I suppose going down that line you'd have to advocate removing ROYAL from every prefix, and take Regimental Colours away as well..

dctyke
21st Jun 2014, 10:05
Yet I received my royal warrant from an MP (Sec State of Defence)

ShotOne
21st Jun 2014, 10:37
Our system of government is the very worst one possible....apart from every other system that's so far been devised!

OilCan
21st Jun 2014, 10:42
Yet I received my royal warrant from an MP (Sec State of Defence)

..granted he signed it, but only by virtue of the authority given him by HMQ. :=

Phil_R
21st Jun 2014, 12:44
At risk of being seen as a bit of an interloper, I can't resist saying this:

The problems highlighted in this thread are among the difficulties many people have with the idea of joining the military, me included. The public face of it appears to push the queen-and-country thing quite hard, with fairly simplistic appeals to patriotism commonplace. I'm not sure how seriously most of this is really taken by the sort of people who actually join, since most of them claim that in the heat of the moment, camaraderie and esprit de corps are more important.

But it's still fairly obvious that the military ultimately doesn't work for the queen, they don't work for the country, they work for the winner of the four yearly popularity contest. Personally I have no problem whatsoever with the idea that military force, while regrettable, is occasionally necessary and that if it is necessary it should be done as professionally as possible, but the decision to kill someone is not one I'm willing to delegate to a politician. I'm not sure how anyone ever justifies that delegation.

P

Two's in
21st Jun 2014, 12:58
but the decision to kill someone is not one I'm willing to delegate to a politician

Well good, because politicians don't ever make that decision. They vote for broad and grand political objectives that can only be achieved through military action. It is the military who ultimately have to implement those objectives who end up making decisions on life or death. There is not one politician around today who has enough moral fibre or integrity to even understand the consequences of military action in terms of "killing people". From the pilot or ship's captain releasing munitions to the squaddies firing back at the bad guys, it is the military who ultimately have to make and live with those decisions.

That's probably why having allegiance to someone who has demonstrated integrity, duty, commitment and faith over more than 60 years makes the harder decisions a little easier to live with. All politicians are totally devoid of those qualities, that's why we end up fighting the wars we do.

Gnd
21st Jun 2014, 12:58
Dont the RAF swear allegiance at the recruiting office, e.g. take and oath - sure everyone else does? About the same time you take the Queens shilling? Mr V says not. Me it's Q&C, never voted for the pounces myself! (and for way to long me thinks at this time if austerity!)

Willard Whyte
21st Jun 2014, 13:41
Well good, because politicians don't ever make that decision. They vote for broad and grand political objectives that can only be achieved through military action. It is the military who ultimately have to implement those objectives who end up making decisions on life or death. There is not one politician around today who has enough moral fibre or integrity to even understand the consequences of military action in terms of "killing people". From the pilot or ship's captain releasing munitions to the squaddies firing back at the bad guys, it is the military who ultimately have to make and live with those decisions.

It was 'interesting' (read: frustrating and anger-inducing) to hear some frightful labour polly on Question Time a week or two back, when pressed by an even more dreadful woman, say that mistakes were made by the military (re the invasion of Iraq) in not having a plan once the war was won.

Excuse me? A military failing? The dumb little ****sucker couldn't utter the phrase 'we' (as in politicians) made a mistake, he just had to pass the blame.

ExAscoteer
21st Jun 2014, 13:50
Bliar's adviser John McTernan was on 'This Week' on Thursday pontificating about how we should go back into Iraq.

Tell you what you odious little cnut, how about we go back in but YOU pick up a weapon and lead from the front.


No?


Thought not.

Phil_R
21st Jun 2014, 13:53
politicians don't ever make that decision

In every sense worth considering, they certainly do.

That response does unfortunately give every asterisk-sucking politician the perfect absolution from all responsibility for the deaths involved, so I'm not going for it.

P

scarecrow450
21st Jun 2014, 14:06
I joined the ROYAL Air Force and it really hit home at the CIO when they give you a bible and then stand you in front of a large curtain, which when is drawn is a large painting of Her Maj, not some robbing, cheating lying back stabbing politician !

air pig
21st Jun 2014, 15:44
As a SERE course member our attestation was on the first Monday morning at 09:00 in the Rotunda at Cranwell with the portrait of the Queen on one side and if I remember correctly the Duke of Edinburgh on the other, but could have been Lord Trenchard.

MPN11
21st Jun 2014, 16:08
Both I and the OH have our parchments signed by HMQ, God Bless Her, not some transient being (regardless of their political persuasion, propensity to fiddle expenses or intellectual capability). We served HM, and the Nation ... Sadly, the politicians were always the downside, regardless of political colour (And a few VSOs as well).

As an aside, it seems that when I was attested, I mistakenly signed allegiance to the Yang Di Pertuan Agong of Malaya, or something thing like that. However, HM accepted my service anyway, paid me for 30 years, and still permits Her Minister of State to pay me a pension. Sorry, Ma'am. :uhoh:

Tankertrashnav
21st Jun 2014, 17:39
was a direct command from Her Majesty to one of her subjects. Did it for me.

Looking at your age I guess this was before 1983, so your statement is correct. However since then, all of us who were previously British subjects are now British citizens. The term "British subject" now only applies to a very small number of people in various categories, including, for reasons I can't fathom, British citizens who were born in the Republic of Ireland before 1949 :confused:

No doubt the OP will be pleased to learn that he is no longer a British subject!

SVK
21st Jun 2014, 17:43
My allegiance is to Her Majesty and her heirs and successors. End of story.

Basil
21st Jun 2014, 17:54
The OP who was, perhaps, hoping for more fun, must be astonished by the measured responses.
Anyway, I'm off out to become slightly inebriated at another ex RAF guy's abode and Mrs B has volunteered to drive - bliss. Must remember "Ladies and gentlemen, The Queen!" :ok:

gzornenplatz
21st Jun 2014, 18:51
Hic! Sorry ten characters, Hic!

1.3VStall
21st Jun 2014, 19:26
Can anyone tell me what is the point of this thread? Thought not!

'Bye.........

thing
21st Jun 2014, 19:42
'To our well beloved and trusted servant xxxx.

Is your first name Castlemaine?

I always thought that the oath to the Queen was due to the monarch's non political affiliation. And in case anyone imagines that the Queen is some kind of proto Tory her favourite PM was Harold Wilson.

She has been a magnificent stateswoman for this country and it saddens me that she inevitably is coming to the end of what has been one of the finest reigns that this country has seen in modern times. Her sense of duty has been unsurpassable and of course she will always have a place in my heart after replying to the question posed to her at some diplomatic shindig of what she would like to have been if she were not the Queen. She replied quite simply 'A Yorkshirewoman.' Obviously a woman of great taste and elan. God bless you ma'am.

Stendec5
21st Jun 2014, 20:22
Gosh. That was some blue touchpaper.
Sorry if I have offended any sensibilities it was just a question tossed into the ring for a bit of (light?) debate.
One thing that comes across from these remarkably homogeneous replies however, is the failure to differentiate between "politicians" and the Monarch. You assume a huge gulf between the poor old Queen (Gawd Bless 'er etc) as she valiantly carries on working her fingers to the bone in line of duty (and you thought the nurses had it tough) and the assortment of weasel low-life in ****ehall and Westminster.
There is NO difference. That's my point.
The oath is a smokescreen that gives the impression of allegiance to the person of the Monarch, but that same Monarch is but a rubber stamp that will happily sign into law every bit of Lib-Lab-Con insanity that passes across her desk without a moments thought for the consequences.
By making such a solemn act as an Oath Of Allegiance more relevant, for example to a Written Constitution that would protect our freedoms rather than hand them over to the EU or allow a criminal rodent like Blair to take us to war in Iraq on a pack of lies, surely that would be a force for good.
The oath would be sworn to defend that Constitution and prevent examples like the above from happening again. What's wrong with that?

500N
21st Jun 2014, 20:27
Because as has been shown, the Constitution can be walked all over
as per what Obama is doing.

thing
21st Jun 2014, 20:49
but that same Monarch is but a rubber stamp that will happily sign into law every bit of Lib-Lab-Con insanity that passes across her desk without a moments thought for the consequences.

I doubt it. If you want to really look back to when British monarchs had absolute say you would have to look back to King John before he signed the Magna Carta. The last monarch to rule without parliament was James I. His boy tried it but they lopped his head off.

The Old Fat One
22nd Jun 2014, 08:54
To Phil R (if you are still around)

A great many military folk couldn't really give a monkeys. It is a procedure that you go through as part of your job. The individual servicemen and women, know who they work for, why they do it and when they would stop. By and large they do a magnificent and professional job, without overthinking the trivia and inconsequential.

If they discuss this sort of stuff it's probably when they have had one too many in the bar. Generally, if single, they are more interested in where the next shag is coming from. And if married, where the kids will go to school.

Spraffing about this stuff is generally the preserve of anally retentive old timers, such as me, with too much time on their hands.

If you are thinking of joining you can pretty much ignore everything your read on pprune...it does not represent modern military culture one iota.

Phil_R
22nd Jun 2014, 12:05
Well, I got that impression, yes.

What that does imply is that a lot of people aren't really giving the rights and wrongs of it it a lot of thought. Which is surprising.

P

smujsmith
23rd Jun 2014, 21:39
Phil,

I probably fall in to the same category as TOFO, and am equally well divorced from my days as a serving airman. What I would say is that he makes a point, as a singly, my time off to see the girlfriend, and afterwards raising the kids certainly made demands on my thoughts. But, when sent to the Gulf, I went, when sent to Bosnia, I went. I went to Kigale, straight from my daughters 18th Birthday party, with no qualms. Perhaps some have conflicts about allegiance, loyalty etc. I had none, I'd signed a contract that said, you do what we tell you to do, and we will pay you enough to afford a decent life for your wife and kids. I have been fortunate to meet our monarch twice during my career, both times bringing home to me the seriousness of the oath of allegiance we all took. I'm just an honest bloke from north of Brum, and if I say I will do something, I like to stay true to that. 30 years of service made me a better person than the one that joined in 1969, it allowed me to give my wife and children a good life, and despite my age, if anything "kicked off" again, I would definitely offer whatever service I can. I hope that helps with your interest in Allegiance. I would say that it's probably us "old geezers" who still allude to it.

Smudge

Heathrow Harry
24th Jun 2014, 21:26
TBH it's nicer to think you are working for the dear lady in Buck House rather than the shysters in Downing Street

But it's all the same in the end as it's the shysters who give the orders and pay the bills

Tankertrashnav
25th Jun 2014, 11:58
No - we pay the bills - don't forget there is no such thing as government money - it's all ours!

ACW418
25th Jun 2014, 17:06
I gave no consideration to whom I swore allegiance when I joined the RAF. I guess I would have sworn it to anyone if it meant I got in and trained as a pilot - obviously there are some who would not be included in that list. You must remember that when I joined the National Anthem was played at the end of the night in a cinema and most would stand still for that so it was natural to swear allegiance to the Queen on joining the services.

Having said all that as an older chap I am happy that it was to HM. Really your allegiance then, as now was to your colleagues, and probably senior officers if the truth be told.

ACW.

Heathrow Harry
26th Jun 2014, 10:01
HMQ "embodies" the UK for the purpose of swearing allegiance

Legally this is slightly different from Elizabeth Windsor the person

Charles I, the person, was executed pretty much for making war on Charles I the embodiment of the State..............

(I Know, I know..... :confused::confused::confused:)

Tankertrashnav
26th Jun 2014, 15:38
The latest estimate of the cost of the royal family is £35m. Some republican bunch has come along and said it's more like £300m (but I haven't seen either set of figures in detail)

The republican bloke came out with usual guff - would pay for umpty ump nurses or teachers etc (have you noticed, its always nurses or teachers, never Typhoons or warships?) Someone came back with the fact that even the higher figure is only half the cost of Channel 4's Welsh service (do we all have to pay for that?)

Anyway whether it's 50p a year or £5 a year a head, I'm quite happy to chip in. And while we're at it, I wonder what the annual budget for POTUS is? Somewhat more, I'm guessing!

ian16th
26th Jun 2014, 19:47
Looking back to 1952 (not that I was there) Doing a Max Boyce, 'I was there!'

The 16th Entry of Boy Entrants, on May 22nd 1952, was the 1st entry to take the oath after the death of HM George VI.
The cards that we read the oath from, had hand written amendments changing His to Her, etc.
We were also the entry selected to do route lining at the Coronation in 53. One of my biggest regrets is that I was one of the select, then I caught flu and went into SSQ at Yatesbury, when I came out everyone had gone to Cardington and I missed the event.

Yes we served Queen and Country. But 62 years ago, we never called her Auntie Betty.

Tankertrashnav
27th Jun 2014, 08:59
I think we have Private Eye to thank for that one, Ian. But usually said affectionately, I think.