Irish soldiers and saluting the queen

Reg'stoy

I was just wondering if Irish soldiers will, if she comes here, have to salute the queen. Nothing against her personally, there will be enough people with grudges to bear when she's get here, but as a hereditary monarch what right does she have to expect to recieve salutes.

Also as a member of the army of a democratic nation would you be within your rights in refusing to salute a 'born into' hereditary monarch as oppossed to saluting an elected or appointed (by a democratically elected goverment) head of state such as our own President.

Hopefully this won't start a she shouldn't be allowed here arguement, there wil be enough of them on after hours. But I had googled my question in an attempt to get some information and although there was nothing directly related to the Irish army I did find the following link

http://neilmckenty.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/should-a-canadian-soldier-toast-the-queen/

and was just interested in what ye thought here. It seems that this guy was unsuccessful but only for the fact that Canada as a member of the commonwealth has to accept her as their head of state.

Just on a side note I remember the Australian prime minister getting grief from the british press because he dared to place his hand on the royal waist, god only knows what they would say if an Irish soldier refused to salute her. Could they, to avoid such press simply be allowed to not take part in any parades involving her.

jimmycrackcorm

Would Irish soldiers have to salute other heads of state? Either they should do it for all or not at all.

PatsytheNazi

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I was just wondering if Irish soldiers will, if she comes here, have to salute the queen. Nothing against her personally, there will be enough people with grudges to bear when she's get here, but as a hereditary monarch what right does she have to expect to recieve salutes.

Also as a member of the army of a democratic nation would you be within your rights in refusing to salute a 'born into' hereditary monarch as oppossed to saluting an elected or appointed (by a democratically elected goverment) head of state such as our own President.

Hopefully this won't start a she shouldn't be allowed here arguement, there wil be enough of them on after hours. But I had googled my question in an attempt to get some information and although there was nothing directly related to the Irish army I did find the following link

http://neilmckenty.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/should-a-canadian-soldier-toast-the-queen/

and was just interested in what ye thought here. It seems that this guy was unsuccessful but only for the fact that Canada as a member of the commonwealth has to accept her as their head of state.

Just on a side note I remember the Australian prime minister getting grief from the british press because he dared to place his hand on the royal waist, god only knows what they would say if an Irish soldier refused to salute her. Could they, to avoid such press simply be allowed to not take part in any parades involving her.

Don't worry, the Gombeen republic will bend over backwards to please her, a sign of our maturity as a nation, the dawn of a new era in Anglo Irish relations etc And no soldier will consider to refuse to salute her and throw away his cushy state job and pension etc, etc

concussion

Protocol is protocol. Soldiers do what they are ordered to do, not what they feel like doing. Gombeen Republic bending over backwards? Christ above.

Reg'stoy

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Thats the least of her worries, maybe some man will put a few rounds into her !!

Sorry Mods had hoped it wouldn't degenerate into comments like the above

PatsytheNazi

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Sorry Mods had hoped it wouldn't degenerate into comments like the above

T'was only a bit of a joke, line removed.

gizmo555

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I was just wondering if Irish soldiers will, if she comes here, have to salute the queen. Nothing against her personally, there will be enough people with grudges to bear when she's get here, but as a hereditary monarch what right does she have to expect to recieve salutes.

Also as a member of the army of a democratic nation would you be within your rights in refusing to salute a 'born into' hereditary monarch as oppossed to saluting an elected or appointed (by a democratically elected goverment) head of state such as our own President.

We are in the EU with many states apart from the UK that have hereditary heads of state, e.g., Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain.

Should they all be denied the usual courtesy and respect due to a visiting head of state, or is this a question of a display of bad manners to the people of the UK and their monarch specifically, should she visit?

Are you really suggesting the army do an O'Gara?

Local-womanizer

I thought the whole O'Gara thing was laughed off,even by herself?

prinz

As someone else said there are a few monarchies about, should they refuse to salute them all? On what grounds? Do we demand other countries copy our political system? Perhaps they should refuse to salute the German President? Perhaps they should refuse to salute the US president?

oglaigh

When there was the royal fleet review a few years back LE Eithne went as Irelands representative and its sailors saluted the Queen.
If there is something similar on this trip and a soldier refuses to salute he should be thrown in jail for refusing an order.

PeterIanStaker

They will behave with the same consummate professionalism they have always behaved with, when rendering diplomatic honours to a foreign dignitary.

Remember, we have had important people, JFK, John Paul II, Kofi Annan, Ban Ki Moon to name a few, visiting these shores. This visit should it go ahead, will not be any different.

iceage

Local-womanizer wrote: »

I thought the whole O'Gara thing was laughed off,even by herself?

Not by everbody. The guy acted like a total knob. In all fairness if he had stood with his hands by his sides or even behind his back it wouldn't have looked too bad, but he had his hands in his pockets. The height of ignorance and if you ask me he looked and acted like a scruffy git. I'm sure someone had a severe word in his ear after that.

I wonder would all here expect the Irish President to receive such behaviour on overseas State visits? I think not.

If the Queen visits Ireland, I have no doubt that the Irish DF will show her, as any visiting head of State nothing but the respect and protocol that the event deserves. I'm sure they are to professional to do otherwise.

Fratton Fred

Reg'stoy wrote: »

and was just interested in what ye thought here. It seems that this guy was unsuccessful but only for the fact that Canada as a member of the commonwealth has to accept her as their head of state.

The two are not connected. The Queen is head of state in Canada, that has nothing to do with them being in the Commonwealth. The worlds largest republic is in the Commonwealth.

If the Queen comes to Ireland then she should be given the same level of respect as any other head of state. If a soldie refuses to salute her on political grounds then they have no business being in the army tbh.

oncevotedff

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I was just wondering if Irish soldiers will, if she comes here, have to salute the queen. Nothing against her personally, there will be enough people with grudges to bear when she's get here, but as a hereditary monarch what right does she have to expect to recieve salutes.

Also as a member of the army of a democratic nation would you be within your rights in refusing to salute a 'born into' hereditary monarch as oppossed to saluting an elected or appointed (by a democratically elected goverment) head of state such as our own President..

When Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (to distinguish "the" Queen from any other Queen ) visits here she will be given a Guard of Honour on arrival and on departure as every head of state is. Nobody had any problem saluting the King of Spain or the Queen of the Netherlands.

Steyr

iceage wrote: »

Not by everbody. The guy acted like a total knob. In all fairness if he had stood with his hands by his sides or even behind his back it wouldn't have looked too bad, but he had his hands in his pockets. The height of ignorance and if you ask me he looked and acted like a scruffy git. I'm sure someone had a severe word in his ear after that.

AFAIK i believe that picture was just snapped at that time and that ROG did indeed follow protocol, just a well edited/timed shot to make him look like he didnt care.

Wicklowrider

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Also as a member of the army of a democratic nation would you be within your rights in refusing to salute a 'born into' hereditary monarch as oppossed to saluting an elected or appointed (by a democratically elected goverment) head of state such as our own President.

Soldiers should follow any lawful order, if not they face disiplinary measures. They take an oath to serve and therefore their personal politics/beliefs take a back seat to the states interests. In theory a soldier could absent themselve or simply refuse an order or be "sick" on the day.
In practise, our soldiers have always been professional about their duties and checked their personal views. You don't have to like an order - Just obey it. The rights or wrongs of a royal visit is someone else's decision.

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Don't worry, the Gombeen republic will bend over backwards to please her, a sign of our maturity as a nation, the dawn of a new era in Anglo Irish relations etc And no soldier will consider to refuse to salute her and throw away his cushy state job and pension etc, etc

Think you may have wrong use of gombeen here? Also - I've known plenty of soldiers retire before pension because they cannot reconcile their personal views with their duties.

Burnt

iceage wrote: »

I wonder would all here expect the Irish President to receive such behaviour on overseas State visits? I think not.

No, but the English rugby team didn't follow protocol in Landsdowne Rd a few years back, she had to step of the red carpet to meet the Irish team.

Not that this is in anyway revelant to the question at hand.

cushtac

Burnt wrote: »

No, but the English rugby team didn't follow protocol in Landsdowne Rd a few years back, she had to step of the red carpet to meet the Irish team.

And look how much ire was expressed about that incident at the time. The fact that Martin Johnson was a tit during that incident doesn't excuse O'Gara's behaviour during the other one.

Fuinseog

gizmo555 wrote: »

We are in the EU with many states apart from the UK that have hereditary heads of state, e.g., Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain.

Should they all be denied the usual courtesy and respect due to a visiting head of state, or is this a question of a display of bad manners to the people of the UK and their monarch specifically, should she visit?

Are you really suggesting the army do an O'Gara?

ROG is a brilliant example of the Irish who got the money but not the class. he looks like he is palying with himself.

Fuinseog

Burnt wrote: »

No, but the English rugby team didn't follow protocol in Landsdowne Rd a few years back, she had to step of the red carpet to meet the Irish team.

Not that this is in anyway revelant to the question at hand.

let them look like a bunch of ignorant fookers, not us.

paky

gizmo555 wrote: »

We are in the EU with many states apart from the UK that have hereditary heads of state, e.g., Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain.

Should they all be denied the usual courtesy and respect due to a visiting head of state, or is this a question of a display of bad manners to the people of the UK and their monarch specifically, should she visit?

Are you really suggesting the army do an O'Gara?

As I recall, didnt Martin Johnson and the whole english team stand on the red carpet and insult our head of state?

By the way when was this picture taken??? Brilliant lmao

Burnt

cushtac wrote: »

And look how much ire was expressed about that incident at the time. The fact that Martin Johnson was a tit during that incident doesn't excuse O'Gara's behaviour during the other one.

Fuinseog wrote:

let them look like a bunch of ignorant fookers, not us.

I agree gents; I was merely point out the incident.

Manic Moran

Given that an Irish soldier would presumably salute a comissioned officer of greater rank regardless of nationality (certainly such is the policy of any military I'm aware of), and for the British Army, it is the Queen's Commission, it seems odd to me to contemplate that the person who grants the commissions would not be rendered a salute.

NTM

Reg'stoy

The reason I asked my original question was because I personally find it strange that a society would allow an individual within it to inherit power by virtue of their birth. I had imagined that as a member of the military where advancement is only achieved through training and therefore a recognition of these skills that you have learned, that this 'queue skipping' would be viewed negatively.

I was interested to see a lot of posts using the Nuremberg Defence, in that they must follow orders irrespective of their personal feelings. I understand that within a democracy the military must be apolitical, which in itself is strange considering most if not all senior military appointments are political, but surely individual members should be allowed some latitude in their personal views.

As for expecting the army to do an O'Gara I didn't in posting my query, expect any member of the military to simply show two fingers to her. Rather I was wondering if they might ask to be excused for want of a better word.

Chimichangas

Reg'stoy wrote: »

The reason I asked my original question was because I personally find it strange that a society would allow an individual within it to inherit power by virtue of their birth. I had imagined that as a member of the military where advancement is only achieved through training and therefore a recognition of these skills that you have learned, that this 'queue skipping' would be viewed negatively.

I was interested to see a lot of posts using the Nuremberg Defence, in that they must follow orders irrespective of their personal feelings. I understand that within a democracy the military must be apolitical, which in itself is strange considering most if not all senior military appointments are political, but surely individual members should be allowed some latitude in their personal views.

As for expecting the army to do an O'Gara I didn't in posting my query, expect any member of the military to simply show two fingers to her. Rather I was wondering if they might ask to be excused for want of a better word.

I dont think any army is a democracy. Thought it was based on rules, routine, discipline, respect and following orders etc.

I would expect people within the army to be allowed to have personal views, but jumping from having those views to openly expressing them..??

so no, I dont think being the army is an appropriate place to try and express opinions that go against the interests of the institutions that the army represents/protects. That would be disrespectful IMO.

cushtac

Reg'stoy wrote: »

The reason I asked my original question was because I personally find it strange that a society would allow an individual within it to inherit power by virtue of their birth. I had imagined that as a member of the military where advancement is only achieved through training and therefore a recognition of these skills that you have learned, that this 'queue skipping' would be viewed negatively.

Saying the Queen inherits power is debatable, she's the figurehead of a country that's as much as a democracy as Ireland is. I dare say there's plenty of soldiers who view our own government negatively, that doesn't mean they don't pay proper complements towards members of the government when required.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I was interested to see a lot of posts using the Nuremberg Defence, in that they must follow orders irrespective of their personal feelings. I understand that within a democracy the military must be apolitical, which in itself is strange considering most if not all senior military appointments are political, but surely individual members should be allowed some latitude in their personal views.

What level of latitude do you think is appropriate? Do you think any soldiers who may have a prejudice against a particular nationality or ethnic group should be excused from saluting heads of state they don't like?

Personal views are just that, personal. Professional soldiers should not allow their personal views interfere with the execution of any lawful orders they're given. It's not a Nuremberg Defence either, as no one here is advocating blind obedience on the part of the Defence Forces.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

As for expecting the army to do an O'Gara I didn't in posting my query, expect any member of the military to simply show two fingers to her. Rather I was wondering if they might ask to be excused for want of a better word.

Why should they? How would the Defence Forces function if soldiers were allowed to be excused from duties they didn't like?

Anyone joining the Defence Forces is made aware very quickly that they have to follow lawful orders, if they're not into that they don't belong in uniform.

Local-womanizer

Steyr wrote: »

AFAIK i believe that picture was just snapped at that time and that ROG did indeed follow protocol, just a well edited/timed shot to make him look like he didnt care.

Thats it I think Steyr,I remember after the Brits saying it was blown out of proportion and in fact he was civil towards her.

I think as you said the pic was taken after the official stuff,and he was just kinda nervous. I mean ROG isent the most outgoing Irish player tbf.

Manic Moran

Reg'stoy wrote: »

The reason I asked my original question was because I personally find it strange that a society would allow an individual within it to inherit power by virtue of their birth. I had imagined that as a member of the military where advancement is only achieved through training and therefore a recognition of these skills that you have learned, that this 'queue skipping' would be viewed negatively.

The whole 'Royalty' business seems to be working quite well for a number of countries. Who are we to say they're wrong? I personally kindof like the idea of a head of State who doesn't have to play election politics.

I was interested to see a lot of posts using the Nuremberg Defence, in that they must follow orders irrespective of their personal feelings.

That's not anything to do with Nuremberg. There's a difference between following orders that you know to be unlawful, and following orders that you just don't like. Disobeying the latter is not advisable for long-term career prospects.

NTM

Wicklowrider

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I was interested to see a lot of posts using the Nuremberg Defence, in that they must follow orders irrespective of their personal feelings. I understand that within a democracy the military must be apolitical, which in itself is strange considering most if not all senior military appointments are political, but surely individual members should be allowed some latitude in their personal views.

The "Nuremberg Defense" as you put it has nothing whatsoever to do with this, you've missed the point. It has been explained to you that soldiers should follow lawful orders - Nuremberg was all about unlawful orders and acts. Really, I don't see this whole thing mattering a whole lot to soldiers, they'll just get on with the job. As I have stressed in previous post, the decision to allow a royal visit isn't their responsibility but carrying out lawful duties is. As a soldier I took part in one or two guards of honour where my personal views were at odds with the visitor - so what? My government was elected by my country people and they saw fit to invite the visitor.

Fratton Fred

Reg'stoy wrote: »

The reason I asked my original question was because I personally find it strange that a society would allow an individual within it to inherit power by virtue of their birth. I had imagined that as a member of the military where advancement is only achieved through training and therefore a recognition of these skills that you have learned, that this 'queue skipping' would be viewed negatively.

That probably applies to half the Dail to be honest.

I think you seriously over estimate the power that the Queen actually has. The Queen is the Head of the Army, as the President is in Ireland, but like the President, she has no real ability to actually send them to war, only elected representatives can do that.

You made a sizeable, but common, mistake regarding her role within the commonwealth, I suggest you take a look at www.royal.gov.uk for more info.

Taken from the above site...

The Queen is Head of State in the United Kingdom. As a constitutional monarch, Her Majesty does not 'rule' the country, but fulfils important ceremonial and formal roles with respect to Government. She is also Fount of Justice, Head of the Armed Forces and has important relationships with the established Churches of England and Scotland.

The Queen is the only person to declare war and peace. This dates back from when the Monarch was responsible for raising, maintaining and equipping the Army and Navy.

Today, this power can only be exercised on the advice of Ministers.

Fratton Fred

Steyr wrote: »

AFAIK i believe that picture was just snapped at that time and that ROG did indeed follow protocol, just a well edited/timed shot to make him look like he didnt care.

Local-womanizer wrote: »

Thats it I think Steyr,I remember after the Brits saying it was blown out of proportion and in fact he was civil towards her.

I think as you said the pic was taken after the official stuff,and he was just kinda nervous. I mean ROG isent the most outgoing Irish player tbf.

If you think of the number of people the Queen meets in a year, from vastly different backgrounds, what ROG did is pretty much a non event. It was an unfortunate photo that got blown out of all proportions and I think it was actually only Boards.ie that even mentioned it.

Donny5

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you think of the number of people the Queen meets in a year, from vastly different backgrounds, what ROG did is pretty much a non event. It was an unfortunate photo that got blown out of all proportions and I think it was actually only Boards.ie that even mentioned it.

Whilst I think it was probably just an unfortunate photo and he wasn't trying to be offensive, it's not true to say boards.ie was the only place it surfaced.

Fratton Fred

Donny5 wrote: »

Whilst I think it was probably just an unfortunate photo and he wasn't trying to be offensive, it's not true to say boards.ie was the only place it surfaced.

Fair enough, maybe i should read the Herald more :pac:

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the Queen comes to Ireland then she should be given the same level of respect as any other head of state. If a soldie refuses to salute her on political grounds then they have no business being in the army tbh.

What other heads of state have awarded their citizens with an honour for killing Irish civilians? Tell me exactly what makes her on par with other heads of state.

What has she done to earn our respect out of curiosity?

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

What other heads of state have awarded their citizens with an honour for killing Irish civilians? Tell me exactly what makes her on par with other heads of state.

What has she done to earn our respect out of curiosity?

and what honour did she award for killing Irish citizens then?

And why does she need to earn your respect, she is the head of state of a neighbouring country, that should warrant enough respect.

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

What has she done to earn our respect out of curiosity?

No one has to earn our respect before the come here and are treated accordingly in their official capacities.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

and what honour did she award for killing Irish citizens then?

Derek Wilford, OBE.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

And why does she need to earn your respect, she is the head of state of a neighbouring country, that should warrant enough respect.

Unfortunately it doesn't. Would you extend that same respect to Adolf Hitler? I mean, if being a near-by country is purely the only basis for meriting respect.

She has not earned our respect. Being the head of state of a neighbouring country isn't enough I'm afraid.

dlofnep

prinz wrote: »

No one has to earn our respect before the come here and are treated accordingly in their official capacities.

Under normal circumstances, they do not. But when they honour their soldiers for the state murder of Irish civilians, then yes - yes they do. She could begin earning our respect by removing Derek Wilford of his OBE.

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

Unfortunately it doesn't. Would you extend that same respect to Adolf Hitler? I mean, if being a near-by country is purely the only basis for meriting respect..

Something about DeV and the German Embassy and a book of condolences to the German people.....I'm thinking....

dlofnep

prinz wrote: »

Something about DeV and the German Embassy and a book of condolences to the German people.....I'm thinking....

So no, you can't answer the question?

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

So no, you can't answer the question?

You brought Hitler into this, and Hitler was afforded the respect of official Ireland.

He never visited Ireland so dealing in hypotheticals is irrelevant. What we do know is that Hitler was treated like any other head of state. So if hypothetically had he visited Ireland, I am fairly certain he would have been afforded an official welcome and all that entails.

Now have you any better comparisons?

getz

irelands largest ethnic population are british,but i am not sure that has anything to do with these threads,

troubleshooter

dlofnep wrote: »

Under normal circumstances, they do not. But when they honour their soldiers for the state murder of Irish civilians, then yes - yes they do. She could begin earning our respect by removing Derek Wilford of his OBE.

What and allow Irish republicans another petty little victory. How about bringing republicans to justice for their murders?

dlofnep

prinz wrote: »

You brought Hitler into this, and Hitler was afforded the respect of official Ireland.

I didn't ask if he was, or wasn't. I asked should he have on the mere basis of him being a head of state.

prinz wrote: »

Now have you any better comparisons?

The comparison was fine. Hitler himself isn't even important in the context of my point - which was that heads of state should only be afforded our respect if they have not disrespected our state. The Queen disrespected the Irish people when she awarded Derek Wilford with an OBE.

troubleshooter

dlofnep wrote: »

Derek Wilford, OBE.



Unfortunately it doesn't. Would you extend that same respect to Adolf Hitler? I mean, if being a near-by country is purely the only basis for meriting respect.

She has not earned our respect. Being the head of state of a neighbouring country isn't enough I'm afraid.

Why do republicans who are a tiny minority, yet vocally infest the internet always claim to speak for the Irish people.

troubleshooter

dlofnep wrote: »

I didn't ask if he was, or wasn't. I asked should he have on the mere basis of him being a head of state.



The comparison was fine. Hitler himself isn't even important in the context of my point - which was that heads of state should only be afforded our respect if they have not disrespected our state. The Queen disrespected the Irish people when she awarded Derek Wilford with an OBE.

She did not award him the OBE, the Prime Minster did, she simply bestowed the honour, which is her duty.


Wilford was cleared of wrong-doing by the now-discredited 1972 Widgery Tribunal and, months later, was awarded an OBE in Edward Heath's New Year's list.

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

The comparison was fine. Hitler himself isn't even important in the context of my point - which was that heads of state should only be afforded our respect if they have not disrespected our state. The Queen disrespected the Irish people when she awarded Derek Wilford with an OBE.

You seem to be mixing up our state and your idea of the "Irish people".

dlofnep

troubleshooter wrote: »

Why do republicans who are a tiny minority, yet vocally infest the internet always claim to speak for the Irish people.

What exactly would you call Derek Wilford's OBE? A mark of respect towards the Irish people?

dlofnep

troubleshooter wrote: »

She did not award him the OBE, the Prime Minster did, she simply bestowed the honour, which is her duty.

So she is in a position to simply unbestow the honour.

troubleshooter wrote: »

Wilford was cleared of wrong-doing by the now-discredited 1972 Widgery Tribunal and, months later, was awarded an OBE in Edward Heath's New Year's list.

And now that this has been found to be false, there would be no problem with removing the OBE, correct?

dlofnep

prinz wrote: »

You seem to be mixing up our state and your idea of the "Irish people".

Not really.

getz

has not any irishmen received honours for killing british people ?even one nazi criminal who the irish goverment honoured after the war