PDA

View Full Version : World Heads of State


Trossie
26th Dec 2017, 00:24
Beat this:

Queen's message pays tribute to London and Manchester - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42475052)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AS-dCdYZbo

Which other pompous, po-faced gits as Head of State anywhere else could match up to any of that?

Pinky the pilot
26th Dec 2017, 06:48
I think that the lack of replies to your post Trossie, more than adequately answers the question.:=:D

Wonderworld
26th Dec 2017, 11:31
I think it was the best Christmas message by HM in years. Very pleased she is Queen of Australia!

Tankertrashnav
26th Dec 2017, 11:34
The only trouble with Her Majesty is she is going to be a hard, if not impossible act to follow.

Great speech!

funfly
26th Dec 2017, 13:46
TT, when you think of the nutter who will follow her
FF

Pitchpoller
26th Dec 2017, 16:09
A rather more finely crafted speech than yer average Trump Tweet, methinks.

A bit of culture there, clearly.

Hussar 54
26th Dec 2017, 23:47
Would swap your current Head of State for ours in a heartbeat.

CloudHound
27th Dec 2017, 00:47
The looming constitutional crisis following Her Majesty's death will make the Edward Vlll affair seem almost trivial to today's subjects.

Prince Charles does not have the moral authority to take the Crown let alone become head of the English Church.

The facts as I understand them are:

Had a relationship with Camilla Parker-Bowles before, during and after their respective marriages,
Married Diana Spencer,
Started up with Mrs Parker Bowles whilst still married with her husbands acquiescence, and
Married Mrs Parker-Bowles after his estranged wife was killed.

Not donning tin hat, not ducking.

lomapaseo
27th Dec 2017, 01:16
The looming constitutional crisis following Her Majesty's death will make the Edward Vlll affair seem almost trivial to today's subjects.

Prince Charles does not have the moral authority to take the Crown let alone become head of the English Church.

What's the down side of just stepping aside on either appointment?

CloudHound
27th Dec 2017, 01:23
The problem is he canít do that. Abdication or death are the only options once crowned King.

This all could come to a head around the time Jeremy Corbyn becomes PM.

As a republican heíll relish the dilemma.

WingNut60
27th Dec 2017, 04:02
The problem is he canít do that. Abdication or death are the only options once crowned King.

This all could come to a head around the time Jeremy Corbyn becomes PM.

As a republican heíll relish the dilemma.

I think the question may have actually been "What's the down side of just stepping aside BEFORE either appointment?"

If it wasn't, it is now.
Or even "Is it constitutionally possible for him to just step aside BEFORE either appointment?"

VP959
27th Dec 2017, 10:03
The looming constitutional crisis following Her Majesty's death will make the Edward Vlll affair seem almost trivial to today's subjects.

Prince Charles does not have the moral authority to take the Crown let alone become head of the English Church.

The facts as I understand them are:

Had a relationship with Camilla Parker-Bowles before, during and after their respective marriages,
Married Diana Spencer,
Started up with Mrs Parker Bowles whilst still married with her husbands acquiescence, and
Married Mrs Parker-Bowles after his estranged wife was killed.

Not donning tin hat, not ducking.

I couldn't agree more. I cannot imagine Charles as King, he is morally and temperamentally unsuited to the job and would turn the monarchy into a laughing stock. He may well even turn the tide of public opinion towards those who want to see the end of the monarchy.

I have no idea as to the authority the Queen has in constitutional matters, but my personal view is that if a way could be found to skip a generation, such that William succeeded to the throne, then that would be a far better outcome.

I should add that I have nothing personal against Prince Charles. I met him once, informally at Culdrose Gliding Club, and he seemed a nice enough chap. It's simply the combination of his moral behaviour (accepting that he was under a set of constraints at the time that may not apply today) and character, in particular his seeming inability to maintain the required degree of separation between the role of the monarchy and the role of government, that I believe make him unsuited to be King.

WingNut60
27th Dec 2017, 12:18
Would changing his religion not work?

Ancient Observer
27th Dec 2017, 12:35
I am no monarchist, and I wish that all the hangers-one would be fired and relieved of their stupid "titles". The dotty "Princess" tile, duke and so on.
However, the present incumbent does seem to have earnt some admiration.
All that Charlie the Greek has is a reputation for shagging posh birds.

Blacksheep
27th Dec 2017, 13:31
He may not become King - the future crisis revolves around a role for Camilla. Given the background, crowning her as Queen isn't morally acceptable, on the other hand, Charles doesn't seem inclined to settle for anything less.

funfly
27th Dec 2017, 15:03
over the last few years they seem to have made a major effort to stop all the inbreeding but could it be too late?

VP959
27th Dec 2017, 15:37
Prince Phillip was never King, neither was Prince Albert for that matter. Any talk of Camilla being an issue is really a side show, IMHO.

Prince Charles just isn't fit to be King, in any way, shape or form. The modern monarchy has managed to create a clearly defined separation between government and its associated politics, and the role of the monarchy as a politically neutral Head of State.

Charles could undo that in seconds, as he is far to addicted to poking his nose into government internal affairs. I doubt that there is any government department that hasn't received a few dozen letters from him, demanding this or that, or making very strong suggestions as to how the policy of that department should be shaped. Within government he was very well known as a complete PITA, who took every opportunity going to try and get policies changed in order to align better with his personal whims.

By contrast, AFAIK the Queen has not once done something similar, even when the subject has been something very dear to her heart, like selling off HMY Britannia.

Fareastdriver
27th Dec 2017, 15:49
Big Ears should have married Carmilla in the first place. In those days the Crown Prince was expected to marry a virgin and IIRC a tabloid published a story about her time with a previous boy friend. That is why Diana was pulled off the social railway track at an early age.

Living overseas during the reign of the Princess of Hearts I read the blow by blow reports of her extra-marital social life so I am a bit cynical about those who think that Carmilla was a wrecker.

I agree that he is a bit of a numbskull but we have had worse in our history and he could well cut the mustard when he is crowned.

G-CPTN
27th Dec 2017, 15:49
selling off HMY Britannia.

Who bought it? - and for how much?

VP959
27th Dec 2017, 15:59
OK, she was donated to a trust, but the principle was to remove the high cost of owning, operating and maintaining her from the public purse.

ethicalconundrum
27th Dec 2017, 16:17
Here's tuppence worth from a colonialist - which means it's worth maybe even less. I have always considered that the monarch was a steady hand on the tiller of state, while not ever dabbling in the grittiness of statecraft(at least internally). Thus keeping large swings in govt from getting out of hand. I have no idea about Chas, except he does seem to have taken most of his life rather lightly.

The way he treated Diana was irritating to a colonialist. Stiff upper lip, and all that, he seems to be sorely lacking.

Anyway, no disrespect intended to our forebearers over there. Hope it works out well, but that skipping a gen idea seems to be most suitable. Won't happen though.

G-CPTN
27th Dec 2017, 16:26
When HMY Britannia was withdrawn, I was in favour of it being 'upgraded' - until I visited and saw the ancient equipment that would have taken a major rebuild to update.

Gertrude the Wombat
27th Dec 2017, 17:53
Big Ears should have married Carmilla in the first place. In those days the Crown Prince was expected to marry a virgin and IIRC a tabloid published a story about her time with a previous boy friend. That is why Diana was pulled off the social railway track at an early age.
Correct. Charles' only failing was not being strong enough at a young enough age to tell his father and the ranks of courtiers "sod that for a game of soldiers, I'm marrying whom I like".

ethicalconundrum
28th Dec 2017, 00:54
Only downside to the Charles and Camilla union would be if they were fruitful and multiplied. Rather than the current rakishly handsome pair you have now, there would be a couple lads ready for the saddle, and shod with iron on their hooves.

But again - no disrespect intended from the colonies. :}

Ascend Charlie
29th Dec 2017, 00:00
He still wears a military uniform, but he should have been drummed out of the corps for having an affair with the wife of a fellow officer. Conduct VERY unbecoming, Section 40 of the Code. Cut off his buttons, break his sword, yellow stripe down his back, marched out the gate to linger with Chuck Connors waiting to be forgiven. Branded.

SARF
29th Dec 2017, 00:09
Wills is doing zero as far as I can see..
bang another five years of search and rescue out.. or air ambulance if you don’t fancy the weather offshore..
Harry needs to shut the **** up. Crack on with the brilliant invictus games..
Stop interviewing politicians.. that’s no go zone..
And don’t marry the next fergie ffs

funfly
29th Dec 2017, 11:29
I’m impressed by how brave our Charlie has been in his life. Have you seen all those medals he has won over his time serving in the RAF, the Marines, and the Military. He must be so proud to wear them.
Respect

Tankertrashnav
30th Dec 2017, 10:34
Found this comment from a serving soldier back in 2006. It doesn't look like Prince Charles takes his medals too seriously, and after all if you look at royals and heads of state the world over they are all similarly adorned.

I met Prince Charles in 2004 during the 60th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy. I was part of a parade when he was opening a garden of remembrance. At this time I didn't have any medals and when he spoke to me he asked me why, I told him I hadn't been in the army that long and asked jokingly if I could have one of his. He was wearing a blue suit, not military, and he had lots of medals on it. He roared with laughter and said I could have one of his "chocolate" ones. He was really down to earth and it seemed he understood that his medals weren't of any real value. I'll be getting my Iraq medal when I return to UK in Jan 2007.
Tosh, Baghdad

Tankertrashnav
30th Dec 2017, 10:37
He still wears a military uniform, but he should have been drummed out of the corps for having an affair with the wife of a fellow officer.

Blimey, if that had happened when I was serving the RAF list would have been a very thin document!

Fareastdriver
30th Dec 2017, 11:29
Blimey, if that had happened when I was serving the RAF list would have been a very thin document!

As an Acting Pilot Officer I would have never got on it.

1DC
30th Dec 2017, 16:03
I think if the choice is Charlie as King or Jeremy as President i think i will settle for Charlie..

West Coast
31st Dec 2017, 02:14
I'm sure it was a lovely speech, but what other ceremonial duties did she need to attend to that day? I'd much rather see the PM's greetings, for that matter even the most junior member of the house of commons.

Trossie
1st Jan 2018, 17:36
I think that the lack of replies to your post Trossie, more than adequately answers the question.:=:D

"Last call, say again?"!!

(A week, two full pages and still on the 'front page' of JB.) ;):ok:


Some of the to-be-expected anti-monarchy 'rants', but generally some good and well argued 'pro' and 'anti' posts.

Pinky the pilot
2nd Jan 2018, 10:20
"Last call, say again?"!!

Yers..well:hmm:... it did take a while to get some reaction.:O:E

Some of the to-be-expected anti-monarchy 'rants', but generally some good and well argued 'pro' and 'anti' posts.

Perhaps there first needed to be a bit of provocation maybe yes??:confused:


Anyway; A good thread!:ok:

Ancient Mariner
2nd Jan 2018, 13:07
If all else fails, do what us real Vikings did when no suitable candidate was found in Vikingland. We hired a head hunting company to trace one down in Denmark. Old Haakon turned out pretty good, as did his son and the next.
Now, however, I think it is time to call those headhunters again.
Per

KenV
2nd Jan 2018, 17:07
I cannot imagine Charles as King, he is morally and temperamentally unsuited to the job and would turn the monarchy into a laughing stock. He may well even turn the tide of public opinion towards those who want to see the end of the monarchy.....the end of the monarchy. Why would that be bad? (....asked by an American who does not begin to understand the whole archaic monarchy thing.)

Tankertrashnav
3rd Jan 2018, 00:33
Suits us - and we don't have to go through the whole tedious rigmarole of electing a new head of state every four years like you do.

G-CPTN
3rd Jan 2018, 00:38
Suits us - and we don't have to go through the whole tedious rigmarole of electing a new head of state every four years like you do.

Didn't Zimbabwe have that arrangement?