Yet had royal navys and royal air force.. I need to know why..
2007-10-22 03:23:46 · 2 answers · asked by scott y 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The same reason as the UK doesn't. It is traditional for the army to be made up of regiments - each with it's own Commander and the Queen as Commander in Chief. An example would be the Royal Scots Guards.
2007-10-22 03:51:04 · answer #1 · answered by Mike10613 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The army is "royal" as well. Québec as its "Royal 22nd Regiment" (the "Van Doos") presently serving in Afghanistan. And they have tons of Royal this and that all over Canada. It is of very British tradition like every other branch of the service. The Governor General is the head of state and the representative of Queen Elizabeth II in this country.
More precisely, I think it has to do with that British tradition: gentlemen would have to buy their own commission (therefore no "commoner" would ever be an officer) and raise and equip their own regiment, and go to next step of being approved by the King or the Queen. It was the same In Canada even in WWII I believe. Today the canadian army is "national" in a manner but still heavy in the Regimental tradition.
2007-10-22 10:34:52 · answer #2 · answered by robert43041 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋