Oath of allegiance

[alisoncc]

Listening to the Queens Christmas message a few minutes ago - we get it earlier downunder, I was reminded that it's close to half a century since I swore an oath of allegiance to the Queen, her successors, etc. etc. on my attestation into the RAF. And I reached a conclusion in my thinking that 'yes' I would still honour that oath if called upon. I don't profess to be a staunch monarchist or republican for that matter, but I did swear an unconditional oath. Do other ex-RAF members of this military aviation forum feel the same way? And would you answer the call if it was made?

[rmac]

I myself have taken the oath.

However, I was watching a documentary the other day about why professional German army officers felt obliged to follow Adolph Hitler and there was a suggestion that it was due to the oath they had sworn and the level of importance attached to it. Once Hitler became aware of this, he cynically changed the oath to swear allegiance to "the Fuhrer".

Thus began the inevitable decline and eventual destruction of the most disciplined and professional army in the world (at the time), but unfortunately for them not the largest, which was of course the Russians, another lot with a strong oath, who threw themselves on German guns in their millions until the Germans ran out of ammunition.

Make up your own minds, but I prefer to subscribe to the concept that loyalty is a two way street, what has been referred to recently as the military covenant............

[alisoncc]

I don't believe that the intent behind swearing the oath was that it should be immaterial of such considerations as the "Law of the land", the Geneva Convention, etc. Thus if required to carry out some illegal act or something I would consider immoral, the I would refuse. It wasn't a "Blind" oath of allegiance. Nor were there any conditions attached, like only for the next twenty years or whatever. But I do consider it to be binding as long as I am able.

[Chugalug2]

alisoncc:
Thus if required to carry out some illegal act or something I would consider immoral, the I would refuse.
Not only are you excused from carrying out illegal orders notwithstanding your Oath of Allegiance, you are specifically required by Military Law to defy and report them. If just some of the people, many of them very high ranking officers, who carried out orders contrary to the UK Military Airworthiness Regulations had complied with Military Law and defied those orders many avoidable accidents would have been avoided and many needless deaths averted. We now wait for UK Military Law to be enforced on such people.
Not a very seasonal note I must admit but very apposite at the moment.

[Tourist]

Chugalug2

Oh my God man!
Stop it!
Please stop hijacking threads for your private quest to justify your existence!
The vast majority of aircrew are perfectly happy with what we fly.
Go away.

[SASless]

We too here in the USA swear an Oath to support and defend the Constitution at the time of appointment to Military and civilian law enforcement employment. (Definitely not to our current Fuhrer)

The question being raised now is along the lines of "Does one commit to that obligation for life, duration of employment, or does it end upon leaving the Military Service, at end of possiblle call-up from Retirement" or does it have a point at which one is no longer bound to the oath.

There is a new organization called "The Oath Keepers" that is posing questions as to what limits an Oath Keeper should use in complying with Orders from on High.

They do espouse some interesting limits.....and declare there is are orders their members refuse to carry out against the American People no matter who issues the order.

A bit of googling might provide some interesting articles and news reports about those questions and limitations.

[sled dog]

In my opinion, when one leaves the military ( as i did many moons ago ) all obligations as regards oath of allegience become null and void. Otherwise ALL ex servicemen are liable to defend the realm regardless of age. For the first time in many years i was able to watch the Queens Speech, and very disapointed i was. Too much emphasis on " The Commonwealth " , which is surely a dying breed ? Does anyone else hold similar views ?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

alisoncc,

Only managed 35 years to date with a couple more to go but if retired and the good lady or one of her off spring asked I quite probably would.

But if the lying bunch of ***** we currently have in office ever asked in the future then there is more chance of me slamming my tackle in the car door than there is of me taking up the challenge :(

Tourist,

IMHO, and I stress IMHO it is Officers like your self that have allowed the 3 arms of the Military to become what they are today and I pray to god that in the 3 years I have left to serve I never have to misfortune to work for the like of you again :=

[Tourist]

:rolleyes:
Dry your eyes princess.....

[off centre]

IMHO, and I stress IMHO it is Officers like your self that have allowed the 3 arms of the Military to become what they are today and I pray to god that in the 3 years I have left to serve I never have to misfortune to work for the like of you again





http://homepages.nyu.edu/~shk268/pictures/ron%20burgundy.JPG


"Stay classy, San Diego."

[Samuel]

From the outside looking in...rather than attacking the man Tourist, perhaps you could have given more consideration to what Chug actually said, which is absolutely correct, although that is only my humble opinion.

You on the other hand, make vast generalisations, about even vaster generalisations, that " the majority of us a perfectly happy with what we fly". You can't possibly know that with any degree of certainty, and my guess is that there a actually quite a few people out there who have reservations, but being the people they are keep them largely to themselves, which sort of negates your generalisation.

Oaths aside, the two gentlemen, and I use that word in a limited sense, have well and truly failed their responsibilities, not only to themselves, but to everyone else really. Loyalty, and more importantly perhaps, accountability, is a two-way street.

Happy Boxing Day...anyone want a ham sandwich?

[Sven Sixtoo]

I swore an Oath to the Crown

It takes precedence in my life over everything

Except the one that goes

I, Sven take you, *** to be my lawful wedded wife, to have and to hold, ...

[Chugalug2]

Tourist:
Oh my God man!
Stop it!
Please stop hijacking threads for your private quest to justify your existence!
The vast majority of aircrew are perfectly happy with what we fly.
Go away.
Full of Christmas Cheer aren't we Tourist? Well, full of Christmas something or other it would seem. Hijacking a thread is more along the lines of your complete non-sequitur. My post on the other hand developed the point that the OP himself made. To hijack it I would have had to chunter on about something entirely unrelated, like for instance naming the Southern Railway Battle of Britain Class Bullied Light Pacific Locos numbered 21C149-170, such as 153 Sir Keith Park, 159 Sir Archibald Sinclair, 163 299 Squadron etc. Now that's a "Thread Hijack" and the mods would be justified in coming down on me like a ton of bricks! Oh! OK Pop, it's a fair cop! I dunnit, I dunnit, I dunnit, Doh! :)

[glad rag]

Tourist, have a full on James May!

"Not only are you excused from carrying out illegal orders notwithstanding your Oath of Allegiance, you are specifically required by Military Law to defy and report them."

And that IS the point.

[GreenKnight121]

For the USA:

In the Armed Forces EXCEPT the National Guard (Army or Air)

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.


In the National Guard (Army or Air)

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (STATE NAME) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.



Note the little "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice" clause... orders, from whatever source (even the President), which violate regulations, etc, are exempted from obedience.


The UCMJ makes this clear in article 92:

892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION

Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or

(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


Uniform Code of Military Justice - UCMJ (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm)

[El_Presidente]

Alison, 'tis an interesting question you pose...We should first all understand that President Brown asks (tells) Queenie how he wishes us to exploit his cabinets' foreign policy, and Queenie rubber stamps said request (even though it's merely a formality)...The question of allegiance...When I joined aged 20, you could cut me and I'd bleed blue; after 6 months in Bosnia, the blue idealism was still there; likewise after Sierra Leone; and generally shaken but still in good quantities after walking foot patrols in Basra for an eternity.Then, we had the needless loss of XV179. And the rose tint was peeled from my Oakleys and I really saw just how disposable we are; how disjointed we had become; how slap-dash our leaders led us; how the allegiance we gave, was poorly repaid . Things went south from there for reasons I'll not discuss here. None of us really know how we will react to a tight situation until we are in it; and I think this is the sum of my answer - I'd have to judge the merits of the request based on the circumstances. If the country was seriously in the dwang, probably; if the situation was something I was morally against, I doubt it.

[SASless]

Are we really talking "morale problems" or actual loss of committment?

[BEagle]

The pins came out of my personal B&Y in 2002 when it was obvious that the gurning idiot wasn't going to be stopped from licking Dubya's backside no matter what he was told - and would soon be involving everyone in foolhardy military adventurism.

Serve HM? Of course. Serve the interests of some lying lap dog politician hanging on the coat tails of a Texan half-wit....YGBSM! So I pulled the handle.

[SASless]

BEagle....did not HM approve the things you mention? Or did I miss her telling the PM to wind his neck in and keep you folks in barracks?

It would appear to this Yank....the PM runs the country at the behest/approval of the Senior Royal...or that too simple an interpetation?

If HM had spoken out....would you have joined the coalition with the other thirty plus countries?

Remember for some of us it has been well over two hundred years since we have had the same form of government you guys do....thus the actual situation of having Royalty and a government is quite foreign to us.