Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming

[Tez3]

What having a constitutional monarchy means is that it stops any government taking over and becoming a dictatorship. The Armed Forces, the police and the Civil Service all swear allegiance to the Queen not the government so cannot be forced to obey any orders from a government intent on becoming the only governing body. She defends democracy in this country and probably all around the world. As I said she wields great influence behind the scenes and there well have been more wars and skirmishes than there has been without her diplomacy.

Who says no one is upset about Norway not being invited, you don't know how I or others feel about it!

The Canadians are free to decide they don't want the Queen to be head of state or their queen anymore. I think though being their queen does actually make her a citizen lol!

In some of those countries she literally has the power of life and death, some of the countries she is queen of, still have the death penalty and appealing to her is the last place a condemned person can go.

Why do you insist on saying England, you will upset all the other citizens of the UK if you carry on.

 

[yorkshirelad]

What having a constitutional monarchy means is that it stops any government taking over and becoming a dictatorship. The Armed Forces, the police and the Civil Service all swear allegiance to the Queen not the government so cannot be forced to obey any orders from a government intent on becoming the only governing body. She defends democracy in this country and probably all around the world. As I said she wields great influence behind the scenes and there well have been more wars and skirmishes than there has been without her diplomacy.
quote]

Damn! You beat me to it Tez. Although I don't think I could have posted it more eloquently.

It amazes me that Cuong has so much "hatred" for a system he knows nothing about. At least do a simple 'Google' search before you come to the opinion that you hate something. I have no problem with hatred as long as it comes from an informed perspective.

I have my opinions about the UK, some of them negative, but the negatives include such things as, the weather, chavs and no refill of pop in fast food restaurants. I do, however see the genius in the political system. It is designed to maintain democracy, not undermine it. The Monarchy is an essential componant of that system.

Cuong, being Monarch is not a choice, it is a duty. There have been Monarchs in the past who have put their own personal lives ahead of the welfare of their people and abdicated. This in turn has hurt the UK and Commonwealth as a whole. The Queen accepted the responsibilty as Monarch well over fifty years ago and has served with dedication and honour. She should be praised, not lambasted.

You may feel that the PM should be head of state, but that's not what the people of the Commonwealth feel. There have been referendums in the past in various Commonwealth countries about the Monarchy and still her Majesty reigns and thank goodness.

By the way, not inviting the Queen is a slap in the face to any Commonwealth WW2 vet in attendance. Remember they swore their oath to the Queen, not the government, therefore the Queen represents them.

 

[Tez3]

What having a constitutional monarchy means is that it stops any government taking over and becoming a dictatorship. The Armed Forces, the police and the Civil Service all swear allegiance to the Queen not the government so cannot be forced to obey any orders from a government intent on becoming the only governing body. She defends democracy in this country and probably all around the world. As I said she wields great influence behind the scenes and there well have been more wars and skirmishes than there has been without her diplomacy.
quote]

Damn! You beat me to it Tez. Although I don't think I could have posted it more eloquently.

It amazes me that Cuong has so much "hatred" for a system he knows nothing about. At least do a simple 'Google' search before you come to the opinion that you hate something. I have no problem with hatred as long as it comes from an informed perspective.

I have my opinions about the UK, some of them negative, but the negatives include such things as, the weather, chavs and no refill of pop in fast food restaurants. I do, however see the genius in the political system. It is designed to maintain democracy, not undermine it. The Monarchy is an essential componant of that system.

Cuong, being Monarch is not a choice, it is a duty. There have been Monarchs in the past who have put their own personal lives ahead of the welfare of their people and abdicated. This in turn has hurt the UK and Commonwealth as a whole. The Queen accepted the responsibilty as Monarch well over fifty years ago and has served with dedication and honour. She should be praised, not lambasted.

You may feel that the PM should be head of state, but that's not what the people of the Commonwealth feel. There have been referendums in the past in various Commonwealth countries about the Monarchy and still her Majesty reigns and thank goodness.

By the way, not inviting the Queen is a slap in the face to any Commonwealth WW2 vet in attendance. Remember they swore their oath to the Queen, not the government, therefore the Queen represents them.

Why, thank you, kind sir! One thing...the weather here today in the North Riding has been absolutely glorious!

British history is a long one and over that time right from the Stone Age through the Romans, the Normans, the Wars of the Roses, the English Civil War and turbulant times inbetween govenment in this country has been evolving into what we have now, it's not perfect of course but it works. It gives people more rights than you imagine and maybe more than Americans have, certainly more than most in the world. Our democracy is safeguarded while we have a monarch on the throne. I don't agree with all the relatives admittedly though but certainly the Queen as head of state is certainly one of the best things about this country.

It may be hard for people living in a republic to imagine what living in a country where the head of state is a king or queen (or prince and archduke) but it also works exceedingly well in Scandanavia, the Netherlands, Belgium, luxembourg, Monaco, Liechtenstein and Spain.

Here the judges also swear an oath of allegience to the Queen which makes them independent of the government and enables them to rules against it if necessary.

Members of Parliament and indeed the Prime Minister himself have taken oaths of allegience to the Queen. Another safeguard against him and his cronies (or any other politicians) taking over the country. You could say that if he wanted to he could but he would have no back up in law to convince people he was right nor any support from the armed forces who are amazingly loyal to the Queen.
Not to invite the Queen is frankly a foolish thing to do, it will cause a backlash even with the French people who actually like the royal family.

 

[Empty Hands]

One of the downsides of swearing an oath of allegiance to one unaccountable person is that the person in question might decide to do something with it. You've all been spoiled. A person of great character has been your monarch for 50 years now, most of you remember none other. She will be replaced one day however, and by someone you have no control over. Indeed, by an accident of birth. What happens when you someday get someone in there with the character of a Dick Cheney, who might decide to take a crack at abusing their powers? It's not like you can vote them out. Then, they can take advantage of all those personal oaths of allegiance by the police, judiciary, and armed forces, and see if they can do something with them. Where are the checks? How does this system support democracy then? How can any system support democracy when it relies on one single individual, put in place by birth order rather than the will of the people, is unaccountable to them, and to whom the institutions of power swear personal allegiance? The entire thought is absurd.

I wouldn't rely too much on the good feelings of the commonwealth, either. Republicanism (not the American kind) is on a rising tide. The last referendum on forming a Republic in Australia in 1999 was only defeated 55-45. I expect that those numbers will continue to change all over the commonwealth, and at an expanding rate, once someone with the great character of Elizabeth is no longer on the throne.

 

[Archangel M]

Politics aside. While France may not "be Obamas country"..he always has the option of saying "I will not attend" if the Queen is going to be snubbed....

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Politics aside. While France may not "be Obamas country"..he always has the option of saying "I will not attend" if the Queen is going to be snubbed....

Oh come now, His ego would never permit him to deprive the world of himself.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

What having a constitutional monarchy means is that it stops any government taking over and becoming a dictatorship. The Armed Forces, the police and the Civil Service all swear allegiance to the Queen not the government so cannot be forced to obey any orders from a government intent on becoming the only governing body. She defends democracy in this country and probably all around the world. As I said she wields great influence behind the scenes and there well have been more wars and skirmishes than there has been without her diplomacy.

Who says no one is upset about Norway not being invited, you don't know how I or others feel about it!

The Canadians are free to decide they don't want the Queen to be head of state or their queen anymore. I think though being their queen does actually make her a citizen lol!

In some of those countries she literally has the power of life and death, some of the countries she is queen of, still have the death penalty and appealing to her is the last place a condemned person can go.

Why do you insist on saying England, you will upset all the other citizens of the UK if you carry on.

It's the Marine thing, he's forgotten how to quit.

 

[Sukerkin]

I recall that a while back we had a discourse about the nature of the monarchy and the checks and balances that keep the wheel rolling.

Ah, here it is:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=65436

What has gone wrong of late is that the 'chief executives' of the government in power have been doing the same thing that the President in the USA has been doing i.e. sneakily gathering in power to their hands. That needs to be stopped before the whole system goes somewhat more wobbily than we normally like.

Hopefully, if people have any more comments not related to the OP but related to this subject instead, then they can post in that old thread - we don't mind zombies as long as they behave themselves .

 

[yorkshirelad]

How does this system support democracy then?
quote]

How does the US system support democracy? Answer this question and your own question will also be answered.

 

[CuongNhuka]

It's the Marine thing, he's forgotten how to quit.

No, it's a Marine thing: I hate any form of government with inherited roles. I don't care how bloody good she is! If it's not Democracy or Meritocracy, I want nothing to do with it!

 

[Big Don]

No, it's a Marine thing: I hate any form of government with inherited roles. I don't care how bloody good she is! If it's not Democracy or Meritocracy, I want nothing to do with it!

A meritocracy, Peter?

 

[Tez3]

One of the downsides of swearing an oath of allegiance to one unaccountable person is that the person in question might decide to do something with it. You've all been spoiled. A person of great character has been your monarch for 50 years now, most of you remember none other. She will be replaced one day however, and by someone you have no control over. Indeed, by an accident of birth. What happens when you someday get someone in there with the character of a Dick Cheney, who might decide to take a crack at abusing their powers? It's not like you can vote them out. Then, they can take advantage of all those personal oaths of allegiance by the police, judiciary, and armed forces, and see if they can do something with them. Where are the checks? How does this system support democracy then? How can any system support democracy when it relies on one single individual, put in place by birth order rather than the will of the people, is unaccountable to them, and to whom the institutions of power swear personal allegiance? The entire thought is absurd.

I wouldn't rely too much on the good feelings of the commonwealth, either. Republicanism (not the American kind) is on a rising tide. The last referendum on forming a Republic in Australia in 1999 was only defeated 55-45. I expect that those numbers will continue to change all over the commonwealth, and at an expanding rate, once someone with the great character of Elizabeth is no longer on the throne.

The monarch is there to make sure the government doesn't take over, the government is there to make sure the monarch doesn't take over, it's all checks and balances.
As I said it was a few thousand years in the making and I'm not getting at Americans with their couple of hundred years but trust me it works. I think it's maybe one of those things you have to be here to appreciate as it probably looks odd to outsiders not used to the system.

Queen Elizabeth the second is not the only monarch you know that we've had lol! We've had a very very long line of them, some bad some very good. there's still a good many people who remember her father and of course the Queen Mother. A good many still remember the queen's uncle and her grandfather. The system has worked since the Restoration in 1660 so it's a bit longer than fifty years.

 

[Tez3]

No, it's a Marine thing: I hate any form of government with inherited roles. I don't care how bloody good she is! If it's not Democracy or Meritocracy, I want nothing to do with it!

But the thing is....you do have nothing to do with it lol!
It's not your government or monarchy, we don't criticise the way you run your country (oh and we could, trust me!) so why get so upset about the way we run ours?

 

[mook jong man]

I wouldn't rely too much on the good feelings of the commonwealth, either. Republicanism (not the American kind) is on a rising tide. The last referendum on forming a Republic in Australia in 1999 was only defeated 55-45. I expect that those numbers will continue to change all over the commonwealth, and at an expanding rate, once someone with the great character of Elizabeth is no longer on the throne.

Yeah , when was that ?
10 years ago and we haven't had another one since , which umm sort of tells you that we like it the way it is .

Most people here love the Queen , and they absolutely adored the Queen Mum . We even like Prince Charles because he went to school here which makes him part Aussie in our book even if he does look like a Volkswagen with its doors open .

The Queen sends birthday cards here to old people , gives out Knighthoods . You grow up feeling like you know her , her pictures are up on the wall in school , scout halls , government buildings , she's everywhere.

At Christmas time you watch the Queens Christmas message on telly , when they come out here for a visit its a big deal , thousands and thousands of people line the streets to see her .

When anything bad happens here she is the first one on the phone to ring the Prime Minister and offer her condolences . Australians trust that woman , more than what we trust our own politicians.

Well if someone gets in there that we don't like , then we will have to cross that bridge when we come to it. But don't hold your breath waiting for Australia to become a republic because most people like it the way it is.
Besides we've got other stuff to worry about like a drought , unemployment and all the rest of it .

God save the Queen.

 

[Tez3]

Countries who have the monachy as their head of state are free at any time to become republics and either stay in the Commonwealth or not, entirely up to the people. It's a choice they make not Britain.
Personally I would be happier and again I'm not getting at America, if we held to the Commonwealth ties and strengthened them rather than become America's poodle as Blair wanted with Bush. I think a lot of people feel this way here. We have far more in common with Oz, NZ, Canada etc than we do with America tbh much as we like Americans as cousins we should stick with our brothers first.

 

[Sukerkin]

Good points all round ladies and gentlemen but we are drifting far off the beam of the OP at this juncture.

I just wanted to say, as I don't think I have in this thread yet (to avoid a gratuitous outburst of Frog bashing on my part) that I personally feel slighted by this 'slip' of the French. It seems they're still spitting on us all these decades after Dunkirk.

They dishonour our Queen, by direct inference all the troops that served on D-Day, my grandfather and, by inheritance, me.

I wont hold my breath for an apology.

 

[Big Don]

They dishonour our Queen, by direct inference all the troops that served on D-Day, my grandfather and, by inheritance, me.

I wont hold my breath for an apology.

I wholeheartedly encourage you to ask for one. The address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue...

 

[Tez3]

I wholeheartedly encourage you to ask for one. The address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue...

Do they answer letters? I know Buck House does, the Queen's letter are answered by her Ladies in Waiting and she reads as many as she can.

 

[elder999]

Do they answer letters? I know Buck House does, the Queen's letter are answered by her Ladies in Waiting and she reads as many as she can.

Yes, they (White House staff, rarely the Pres. himself) answer some letters, and, since Obama's big on the using the INternet, they'll answer some emails sent to (surprise!) [email protected].

I wholeheartedly encourage you to ask for one. The address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue...

Of course, while the White House might be seen as some as displaying a lack of tact or diplomacy in accepting the invitation from France, he'd certainly have been seen as lacking tact or diplomacy for refusing it. In additions, the British PM has been invited, and he's the head of state, or, at least, the state's elected representative.

I mean, what exactly should the White House apologize for? Accepting the invitation? The French deciding to snub the Queen?

Honestly.

 

[Tez3]

Yes, they (White House staff, rarely the Pres. himself) answer some letters, and, since Obama's big on the using the INternet, they'll answer some emails sent to (surprise!) [email protected].



Of course, while the White House might be seen as some as displaying a lack of tact or diplomacy in accepting the invitation from France, he'd certainly have been seen as lacking tact or diplomacy for refusing it. In additions, the British PM has been invited, and he's the head of state, or, at least, the state's elected representative.

I mean, what exactly should the White House apologize for? Accepting the invitation? The French deciding to snub the Queen?

Honestly.

Thats what we said, it's the French and for all we know Obama may have said something to the French and got rebuffed for his trouble, we don't know a lot of what goes on when it comes to diplomacy. Not everything is overt.
It's only reported the Queen is annoyed she hasn't actually said anything in public.