It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLL - Should the UK monarchy now be abolished ? Y/N - all ATS members please contribute

page: 6
26
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
Yes, absolutely.

We need a new constitution, one that's designed by the people for the people.
Concur!!!




posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: ScepticScot

And why would anyone care about the Palaces, the pageantry (such as Changing the Guard) etc when there are no Royals to give it any meaning?

After all, look at Greece - got rid of their King some years back, but still have soldiers poncing about and they just look daft






Well, color me ignorant. I had no idea those guys even existed.

Good thing it is Greece with all the ruins and they have good weather because that guard is just silly.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
No.

How else are we going to teach the savages about peace and democracy if we cannot send a prince to shoot at them from a helicopter?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
As of this post approx. 55% are in favour of abolishing the monarchy!!
Based on the current count the monarchy are in trouble.
I suspect that if it was put to the UK electorate the in favour % would be higher than this.


It's not good going for the poll if you ask me, considering this is a "conspiracy website" you'd think it would be more one sided.

Either way, it's not very scientific



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   
No. They are always good for a Laugh.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

Nothing helps spread democracy more than a smug, ginger playboy behind a 30mm cannon


Edit - Here's Grandma:

edit on 26/1/15 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
As of this post approx. 55% are in favour of abolishing the monarchy!!
Based on the current count the monarchy are in trouble.
I suspect that if it was put to the UK electorate the in favour % would be higher than this.
Good luck with that, I've never seen any poll come remotely close to 50% in the 'real' world, the republican sentiments hover less than 20% and has not increased in many years.
Telegraph Poll 2013



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I know, when I first heard about them years back, I had to double check they were real. Then again, it takes real balls to parade around in that outfit in front of all those people....



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Destroy the royal family! Oliver Cromwell will have his revenge for what they did to his corpse!


But that was nothing compared to what Ollie did to Charlie's Dad. King Charles 1 was still alive when they beheaded him. At least Ollie was long since gone on a permanent trip across the Styx when they put his loaf on a spike.

OMG! It sounds like just like the antics IS get up to these days.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

It is around the 1600's in the Islamic Calender, so they're on track...



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
As of this post approx. 55% are in favour of abolishing the monarchy!!
Based on the current count the monarchy are in trouble.
I suspect that if it was put to the UK electorate the in favour % would be higher than this.


It's not good going for the poll if you ask me, considering this is a "conspiracy website" you'd think it would be more one sided.

Either way, it's not very scientific


I have mixed in many different circles for decades and across say 50 people the in favour crowd is approx. 60%!! So this poll is inline with that!



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
Yes, absolutely.

We need a new constitution, one that's designed by the people for the people.
Concur!!!
Careful now, that's starting to smell like 'Murrica over there!

And we all know how ATS feels about American democracy.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

We tend to mix in circles of like minded people - regardless of what we think - so it isn't surprising. Actual, scientific polls of a cross section of society have the desire for abolishing the Monarchy very low - 20% apparently.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: abe froman
Didn't Andrews role involve flying decoy missions for anti ship missiles?
Harry did see combat but was removed when it became public knowledge so creating additional risk to him and his unit. He then flew as an apache weapons operator.
I am anti royal but lets not denigrate the experiences of them as individuals.



No Andrew never flew decoy missions, he was involved in radar "spoofing",producing false radar signals to confuse an enemies radar operators. (From far away)

Harry did not see any actual combat, he likes to say that he "fired on the Taliban" but shooting at people on the ground as you fly past overhead is not combat it was just wrong place wrong time for the schmucks he took pot shots at.

The Taliban did threaten his life, at about the same level as any dignitary or high ranking military official, meh.

His ENTIRE service in Afghanistan consisted of training and training exercises. His military career is punctuated by undeserved promotions given at a rate that beggars belief.

Of course other officers did state that he "was given no special treatment AS AN OFFICER", what else are they going to say?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite
One tends to mix with likeminded folk, I don't imagine you hang around with many rabid royalists so your anecdotal evidence doesn't carry much weight for the opinion of 60 million people.
Lets face it, most folk in the UK are happy with a constitutional monarchy, and a big percentage don't really give a #...I'm one of them as the royal family have zero relevance to my life, and the costs of not maintaining them will make zero difference to our maxed-out overdraft economy.
Moral/just arguments? Of course there is no defence for a head of state being decided by accident of birth, but until/unless most folk in the country don't want it nothing is going to change.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
No Andrew never flew decoy missions, he was involved in radar "spoofing",producing false radar signals to confuse an enemies radar operators. (From far away)


Er, same thing.


originally posted by: abe froman
Harry did not see any actual combat, he likes to say that he "fired on the Taliban" but shooting at people on the ground as you fly past overhead is not combat it was just wrong place wrong time for the schmucks he took pot shots at.


Ok, fair point. I just challenge you to mention that to any Helo or aircraft pilot who has flown "combat" missions and see what their response would be... Or does it only apply to Harry because he is a Prince? Hmmm.....


originally posted by: abe froman
His ENTIRE service in Afghanistan consisted of training and training exercises.


Really? And you can prove this, can you? Or is this you saying something over and over, hoping it to be true? Because there are plenty of people who say otherwise, who were actually there.


originally posted by: abe froman
His military career is punctuated by undeserved promotions given at a rate that beggars belief.


Actually, it was about the rate as to be expected of a competent officer - over 6 years:



Military ranks
United Kingdom 13 April 2006 – 13 April 2008: Cornet (Second Lieutenant), The Blues and Royals
United Kingdom 13 April 2008 – 16 April 2011: Lieutenant, The Blues and Royals
United Kingdom 16 April 2011 – Present: Captain, The Blues and Royals




Officer Cadet
This is the rank held during initial officer training at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

Second Lieutenant
The first rank held on commissioning. It is normally held for up to 2 years, during which time they complete special to arms training relevant to their Corps. Afterwards they are responsible for leading up to 30 soldiers in a platoon or troop, both in training and on operations.

Lieutenant
Lieutenant is a rank typically held for up to 3 years. They normally command of a platoon or troop of around 30 soldiers, but with experience comes increased responsibilities. They also have the opportunity to gain specialised skills outside their unit.

Captain
Captains are normally made second-in-command of a sub-unit of up to 120 soldiers. They are key players in the planning and decision-making process, with tactical responsibility for operations on the ground as well as equipment maintenance, logistic support and manpower.

Major
Promotion to Major follows between 8-10 years service. Typically a Major will be given command of a sub-unit of up to 120 officers and soldiers with responsibility for their training, welfare and administration both in camp and on operations, as well as the management of their equipment


Ranks - British Army

edit on 26/1/15 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Abolish these creeps along with the rest of the peerage.....



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

NO, but i think they should be scaled down , plus we should gag that idiot charles .



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
If the queen of England isn't around, then who is my firearms going to be to keep of my property?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
Here comes there German part again:-/

Poor old lizzy,we have flown her out to every corner of the globe for our country



Correction. It's we, the poor colonies who pay ALL extravagant travel expenses, clothing, food, accommodation and security for their flits to visit this place and that in our countries. They never cease to impose their various family members on us either.

YES, it's time their roles and exclusivity were greatly diminished.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join