if the royal family had another civil war against the government who would have control of the army?

Question

wolde it be the queen bacause its called the royal army or the goverment bacause they have most of the power

Answer 1

Neither. The Army (and other forces) would probably go their own way and restore order. Bearing in mind the number of very pissed off personnel however, I wouldn't want to be a politician should it happen!

Answer 2

The British Army is not called the Royal Army.



The Queen as head of state of UK and therefore Commander in Chief and Grand Admiral of the Fleet would get massive support in any civil war in UK.



Not just from the military but also the civil population.



It is all too easy for the republicans among us to assume, quite wrongly in my view, that most people in UK do not support the Monarchy.



Wrong. We do support the monarchy, it's just that we don't keep banging on about it.



When push comes to shove, I know who's side I'm on and it is not the government at Westminster.



God save the Queen.

Answer 3

The armed forces swear allegiance to the Queen. I believe if there was a civil war, the leaders of the three branches would do a coup d'etat and impose martial law and try and restore a sensible government, if there is such a thing. The military don't really trust the government [and who can blame them when they are treated so badly] and in this day and age most members would want some form of democracy than an absolute monarchy.

Answer 4

It would be the government, because they hold ALL the power. The Royal Family holds no military power minus the Princes who are in the military. The Government directs funds to the military and ultimately is the only one who can declare war. This point is pretty much moot anyways since there is no reason for Royalty vs. Government since Royalty is just a decoration. The fact that's it's the "Royal Army" means nothing since the government is the major funder.

Answer 5

While I can't speak specifically of Great Britain, in general when a civil war breaks out (ones where both sides have near equal support among the populace) the military also tends to break based on their own beliefs.



Legally speaking given that your queen is more figurhead than anything else, I would have to say that teh VAST majority of your military would side with the government. Also, where would the queen get money to pay the military?

Answer 6

Queen Elizabeth the second. I would gladly fight for this often derided public servant who tirelessly presents our nation at it's best. Appoint the Princess Royal as C.O of the Calvary, aided by her daughter. Give Fergie the infantry and allow Harry the Artillery (along with some real ale ).

Stand back and watch parliament crumble.

Answer 7

She doesn't have a lot of luck nowadays but she is still technically Head of the armed forces that is why they all take the queen's "shilling". The Government only have control of the armed forces by "permission" of the Queen.



Even though now out to pasture I took the oath, I took my "shilling" and even at my age I still feel honour bound to protect Her Majesty. Ask any who have served and I think most will give you the same answer.



Finally I will simply say. "Gentlemen - The Queen. God Bless her!"

Answer 8

The military swear an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen NOT to the government.

I would suspect though that the military would defend the Queen.

To bear arms against the Queen would be treason of the highest order..and for that, anyone found guilty of treason should be hanged, drawn and quartered...a TRAITORS death.



GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.

Answer 9

I think it would be the Queen- as in our last civil war the Roundheads had to muster. But the forces did split. So- I imagine it would happen again.



And most of her regiments have a loyal affinity- such as Her Majesty's insert regiment here, Prince of Wale's Own, King's Own, etc.



AS an ex-servicemen- I just want to point out most soldiers would rather fight for their Monarch and conservatism than some tosser politician- pay or not. We'll get it in the end or die trying.

Answer 10

Major Lee Hypo-Theticle

Answer 11

Technically, the "Royal" military units are bound to the monarchy, but that institution (the crown) has evolved into a human zoo for people to point at as they are on parade. The military would take orders from the civilian leaders.

Answer 12

the army is not called the royal army, we are part of her majesty armed forces along side the Navy and RAF, my oath of allegiance was firstly to the Queen and that's who i would fight for if this totally stupid scenario happened

Answer 13

SThe oath of allegiance says it all:

I [name] swear by almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors and that I will, as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, in person, crown and dignity against all enemies, and will observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors and of the generals/air officers [depending on Service] and other officers set over me."





Those who do not believe in God,



"solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm . . . "



That's the oath I swore and I take that oath as totally binding.

Answer 14

there would have to be 2 separate armies to have a war wouldn't there...so 1 for each side

Answer 15

the queen hopefully then they could send all of labour 2 be stoned 2 death by the british public 4 ruining the country or maybe tomatoed 2 death.

Answer 16

i guess it would be an individualistic decision. i'd say there would be alot of discourse over serving one or the other. obviously, the government has direct control over armed forces. the Queen is more or less a figurehead.

Answer 17

it would be the government. the royal family has no power. they are just figure heads of something represented from the past.

Answer 18

No one it would be like kosovo, till the scots took over!

Answer 19

GOD bless the Queen