21 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Yes, as Head of State.

PM is Head of Government.

The Thai military owes its allegiance to the Head of State versus other well-known constitutional monarchies where the military owes its allegiance to the Government.

Which constitutional monarchies would that be? When I enlisted in the Oz Army the oath was to the monarch, and it still is. I would suggest that that is the common practice.

" I, (name), swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her Heirs and Successors according to law, as a member of the (insert Australian Navy , Australian Army , or Australian Air Force ) ... and that I will resist her enemies and faithfully discharge my duty according to law. "   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_(Australia)

Edited October 1, 20169 yr by halloween

5 minutes ago, halloween said:

Which constitutional monarchies would that be? When I enlisted in the Oz Army the oath was to the monarch, and it still is. I would suggest that that is the common pracrice.

" I, (name), swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her Heirs and Successors according to law, as a member of the (insert Australian Navy , Australian Army , or Australian Air Force ) ... and that I will resist her enemies and faithfully discharge my duty according to law. "   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_(Australia)

Would that also include a law passed by parliament declaring Australia a Republic? 

Just now, baboon said:

Would that also include a law passed by parliament declaring Australia a Republic? 

I have spent most of my life awaiting the day. It would have arrived almost 17 years ago except for a royalist sycophant PM who proposed a model known to be unacceptable.

Just now, halloween said:

I have spent most of my life awaiting the day. It would have arrived almost 17 years ago except for a royalist sycophant PM who proposed a model known to be unacceptable.

And I think it is wonderful you can voice such sentiments in public such as on here without the threat of imprisonment, but that is a side issue. Are you going to answer my question, however?

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

And I think it is wonderful you can voice such sentiments in public such as on here without the threat of imprisonment, but that is a side issue. Are you going to answer my question, however?

I thought it was rhetorical. And an affirmative answer was obvious from the reply.

Clearly Srikcir was correct, then. The swearing of allegiance to the British monarch is window dressing only.