Quote:
The monarchy are a symbol with no actual power. If you seriously believe the above (and I have a feeling that you don't, given that you've admitted to trolling in other threads) then your nuttier then a Dairy Milk nutbar shat out by a squirrel.
The Armed Forces are controlled by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, they answer to the Cabinet. The Cabinet is not accountable or controlled by the Monarchy. In fact, given that the Cabinet writes the Queen's Speech, I would say they have more influence over the Royal Family then the Monarch has over anyone.
|
You are entirely wrong. The monarch is the head of the armed forces and every soldier that joins the armed forces pledges alleigence to the monarch. Not to the government, not to the people or Great Britain, but to the monarch. The fact that the monarch does not direct battles and take an active role is because they are not stupid enough to believe they know best. And infact if you knew anything about British constitutional history you would know that the monarch chooses to be a figurehead rather than an active combatant in their role in the armed forces.
There are still powers the monarch may use in relation to the armed forces as set out by the charter on the Royal Perogative, however they must show that in order to use that perogative no subsequent legislation has been enacted which prevents them using it. The government may advise the monarch that war should exist and seek to put the armed forces on alert and send them to battle under the royal perogative without regard to parliament
