UK is a monarchy.

[Sava]

Yep, real safe assignment that one.





Yeah, really hiding away there.

You will buy anything they tell you. Bow down to your Queen and Prince! Kiss the royal ring! Suck the royal cock!

[Dr Strangelove]

Thomas Jefferson was never in the military.
Ronald Reagan was posted to the "First Motion Picture Unit" ferchrisakes. His training consisted of home-study extension courses which entitled him to a commission 26 days after enlisting. While technically assigned to an Officer Reserve Corps Cavalry unit in Iowa from 1937 to 1942 he continued to make movies in California all through those years. When he was called up he went diretcly into the PR division.
If Reagan's cushy PR job coujnts as military service, then FDR's service as Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1913 to 1920 ought to count. He at least played a direct role in the prosecution of WW1.
Actually the majority of our presidents prior to WW2 never served in the military. Military service wasn't that big of a deal back then.

[regexcellent]

Thomas Jefferson was never in the military.
Ronald Reagan was posted to the "First Motion Picture Unit" ferchrisakes. His training consisted of home-study extension courses which entitled him to a commission 26 days after enlisting. While technically assigned to an Officer Reserve Corps Cavalry unit in Iowa from 1937 to 1942 he continued to make movies in California all through those years. When he was called up he went diretcly into the PR division.
If Reagan's cushy PR job coujnts as military service, then FDR's service as Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1913 to 1920 ought to count. He at least played a direct role in the prosecution of WW1.
Actually the majority of our presidents prior to WW2 never served in the military. Military service wasn't that big of a deal back then.

Thomas Jefferson was in the Virginia Militia.

Reagan's service in the military might not have been particularly heroic but the same is true for almost anyone in something like quartermaster or other rear area stuff, which comprised half the army then and more now.

The people breaking the Japanese naval codes were in relatively cushy jobs not getting shot at but what they did was still military service.

[BlackCat]

Be sure to ask your majesty if he needs his cock sucked before you turn in.

Typical american lack of knowledge about other countries

[Alexander's Horse]

I'd rather QEII had the last say than some idiot politician, elected or not.

[Colonâ„¢]

Monarchy would be fine by me, even if the monarch didn't do anything beyond enjoying the pretty walls of his pretty palace, if everyone's given an equal opportunity to be monarch. I say succession should be decided by lottery.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'd rather QEII had the last say than some idiot politician, elected or not.

Why? And why do you suppose her children would be better than some idiot politician?

[BlackCat]

Why? And why do you suppose her children would be better than some idiot politician?

The queen can't press the button launching a nuclear attack - that is a possiblilty that an american president have even though he is elected because he had the most advertising money.

If the american presindent was stripped all his powers except veto rights, the system might work. Could even mean that some good presidents would be elected.

[Hauldren Collider]

The president can't just push a button and get a nuclear attack either, BlackCat, why don't you read up on US nuclear protocol?

[Alexander's Horse]

Why? And why do you suppose her children would be better than some idiot politician?

Not necessarily, and monarchies do rise and fall mainly on the quality of the people. Mad King George III was just the wrong person to have on the throne when the trouble started with the US colonies.

I do know that one reason Australia has not become a republic is people do not trust politicians and see a lot to like in having a disinterested person, even if hereditary, holding ultimate power within a democratic constitutional framework. If "King Charles II" proves an idiot or a meddler, that sentiment may change quickly.

[regexcellent]

Uh...isn't the Governor General of Australia the one who exercises the Queen's powers in her place?

And the Governor General is appointed by the Queen solely on advice of the government. So you're not getting any mileage out of having a queen.

[Hauldren Collider]

I seem to recall at one point Prince Charles wanted to be the Governor General and Australia basically told him to **** off.

[Alexander's Horse]

Uh...isn't the Governor General of Australia the one who exercises the Queen's powers in her place?

And the Governor General is appointed by the Queen solely on advice of the government. So you're not getting any mileage out of having a queen.

Yes the GG is the Queen's representative, so we have the best of both worlds under a constitutional monarchy - ultimate power vested in a Sovereign removed and the powers exercised constitutionally by an Australian on the advice of a democratically elected government.

Prince Charles was never seriously contemplated for GG. We haven't had an English one for decades, and probably won't again.

[Colonâ„¢]

Oh FFS, I live under a monarchy as well and I'm perfectly fine with it as well, considering we've once temporarily unseated the king when he refused to sign a law, but let's not pretend a monarchy is inherently superior to a republic. If the monarch knows his/her place, it's just not worth bothering to change things.

[BlackCat]

Oh FFS, I live under a monarchy as well and I'm perfectly fine with it as well, considering we've once temporarily unseated the king when he refused to sign a law, but let's not pretend a monarchy is inherently superior to a republic. If the monarch knows his/her place, it's just not worth bothering to change things.

Honestly, in the Belgian case a monarc is problably the best solution - that is if the person can be neutral. Electing a president would be quite interesting