# Responses to "Co-op program called death sentence"



## Mike Bobbitt (13 Apr 2006)

Please post all replies to the "Co-op program called death sentence" Editorial here.


----------



## parkie (13 Apr 2006)

Amen!! brother.Amen!! Most never bother to honestly ask a soldier anything,about what kind of person he is,or what his ideals are. probably for the most part because they are ashamed of their own integrity or lack of.I think they would like to see the soldier has a direct contradiction to their own will,Example would be.I don't have the courage or honor to be a soldier,so therefore the path to becoming one is demeaning to me

                                             A.C.(parkie)


----------



## 2 Cdo (13 Apr 2006)

Nothing more to say except :cheers:


----------



## Wookilar (13 Apr 2006)

I had to go looking for the article when I read this first. I am at loss for words at the thoughtlessness that the _Star_ has shown. It is not even a well written attack on what I, and I think it safe to say that most here, believe in.

Mike, when things like this come up, are efforts made to contact the offending parties and educate them a little more? Posting here is excellent, but it's kind of like preaching to the choir (if you know what I mean).

Thanks for fighting the good fight.


----------



## Korus (13 Apr 2006)

I did a search on Army.ca and couldn't find the origional article.

Luckily, google happens to be a good friend of mine  

http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/story.html?id=17b0353d-28bd-43d6-9df5-6019e5a8a447&k=79802

It's actually kind of painful to read...


----------



## toughenough (13 Apr 2006)

> Fleming said she doesn't know what kind of response the program had at her high school, but she's sure there are students who will be drawn to it. "People who want basic things like money and health care will end up going for it. And I'm worried that it will happen to my friends."



And what are people's motivations for becoming accountants, business analysts, telemarketers, etc? Oh, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.


----------



## bLUE fOX (13 Apr 2006)

Wow. that is one of the single most infuriating things i have ever read. What's wrong with using the military to get work experience? As a CIC type, I don't have too much interaction PRes or Reg Force guys, But i would think that the in the support trades the qualifications would be just as high, if not higher then there civilian counterparts. " And I'mworried that it willhappen to my friends." What the hell? that they'll come out with a better appreciation for living in Canada? or may be have a worthwhile job? Every one i know who has joined a military (CF and USMC) has gotten at least that much out of it. People give your heads a shake.


----------



## Love793 (13 Apr 2006)

Not that I am a great supporter of the left winged media in Canada, however I must defend the Windsor Star with this.  What wasn't placed in the post, was the fact that the very next day (with out being pushed for it) the Windsor Star ran a long rebuttal article, and a Opinion column calling the protesters immature morons (I'm para phrasing).  There has been very few letters in the Star since then supporting these protesters.  However as ironic as it is, these protesters have their right to make their opinion known, as we afford them that right to do so.

As the unit recruiter. and having my partner in crime over at CFRC being the one mostly in contact with the public regarding the coop course, I've been following this very closely, and I would have say the Star has been giving  rather decent coverage of this, and casting the CF in a very positive manner.  In fact interest in the coop course has shot through the roof because of this.  I must thank the Star for it's free advertisement, and the protesters for proving the venue for it.

Just my $.02.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (13 Apr 2006)

Welcome to my world.  The Windsor Star is one of the most discreditable rags that I have ever read.  To date, I have cancelled my subscription seven times in protest, but my wife wants a local news paper (they have a monopoly here) so all of a sudden it starts showing up again.  Forget about the misinformation, I have a hard time getting past the spelling and grammar mistakes.  
Remember how things are in this area,  NDP support everywhere.  Many a Jack Layton bobble head doll adorns the center piece of dinner tables here.  
They also like to pummel on police, and if it's negative, it will make it to print, guaranteed.  In a nut shell, the Star will print what sells, and they don't get all hung up on trivialities like accuracy or confirming sources.  Think of them as the Weekly World News, minus the cool pictures.  



			
				Love793 said:
			
		

> However as ironic as it is, these protesters have their right to make their opinion known, as we afford them that right to do so.



I don't agree completely, brother.  Anyone can opine, but when they are printing lies about sending high school kids into live theatres, that crap is bordering on negligent slander.  That article was a blatant attempt to frighten parents who might consider letting their kids do the co-op.  
And why print this uninformed tripe:

*Grade 11 Sandwich Secondary student Brittany Fleming said she decided to attend the meeting because of how strongly she disagrees with the program.
"It's too disciplined, too scary," said Fleming about the military. "They beat it into you so you don't know what you think anymore. You're not a person anymore. You're just a machine."
Fleming said she doesn't know what kind of response the program had at her high school, but she's sure there are students who will be drawn to it. "People who want basic things like money and health care will end up going for it. And I'm worried that it will happen to my friends."*

God forbid that our precious children learn that they can actually get a job and make their own money, rather than having mommy and daddy shell it out.   Pretty scary stuff for some folks.


----------



## chrisf (13 Apr 2006)

Not going to bother to refute some of the more ridiculous points of the article, but just had to respond to the "machines" comment by stating that I'm certain I am now *more* of an individual because of the military.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (13 Apr 2006)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Not going to bother to refute some of the more ridiculous points of the article, but just had to respond to the "machines" comment by stating that I'm certain I am now *more* of an individual because of the military.



You only think that because they told you.


----------



## Love793 (13 Apr 2006)

Zipperhead_cop-  I agree with your view on the Star, as I said I don't have high regards for a lot of our media types.  I'm saying the article(s) weren't really that bad (from the CF view point).  Yes there was a lot of misinformation regarding the program, but that came from the tree huggers protesting the whole thing.  Yes their opinions where slanderous, and I personally feel that they don't realise that  we as as Canadians have the right to openly express our selves, however with that comes responsibility.  Unfortunately, very few people in society today realise that (take the whole Mohammed cartoons as example).  These people are ignorant.  Very similar to racist beliefs, it's beaten into them.  As the a recruiter, I deal with it on a daily basis, just as you do on the street every day, and have learned to just let them say what they want, and eventually they'll make themselves look like asses, which they generally do.

I'm just saying that the facts in post where not exactly true.  The Star did file a rebuttal article, and rebuttal opinion column the next day, that was a very hard on these protesters.  

I did however laugh my tail off at the Gr 11 kid, saying that we are mindless machines, who can't think for ourselves.  I wander what Left Wing Communist Sympathiser beat that into head?


----------



## Korus (13 Apr 2006)

Kent Brockman: Just miles from your doorstep, hundreds of men are given weapons and trained to kill. The government calls it the Army, but a more alarmist name would be... The Killbot Factory.


----------



## Thompson_JM (13 Apr 2006)

My head now hurts from reading that trash..... why oh why did I click that link..... 

Speaking from the perspective of a graduate of the Co-op Program, (QL2 Co-op 9901 Hamilton), it just blows my mind... Our school totally encouraged the program. especially for students like myself who weren't really motivated at school. hrm, I guess 7 years later I'm just a Killbot, another baby killing Cog in the war machine eh? sigh...   

that entire article is just fallacy after another...


----------



## HItorMiss (13 Apr 2006)

Piper while I agree whole heartily with your sentiment, I am sure and educated man like yourself could come up with a much more eloquent way of stating your point then "frig you" LOL

Come now, why debase ourselves to their level when we are given such a golden opportunities to raise above them and show just how un-"killbot" like we really are.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (14 Apr 2006)

I at least know one lad who will not be on basic this summer because of that article.  One of our sons friends approached me about joining the Res this summer a couple of months ago, and we talked for about two hours.  At that point he was good to go.  Next time I saw him, post article, he had switched off of the military.  I found out his dad had blown the idea out after seeing the article and thinking his kid could get deployed just because he had been trained.  I tried to broach the subject and explain how that is not the case, but it appeared that the window of opportunity is now closed.  



			
				HitorMiss said:
			
		

> Piper while I agree whole heartily with your sentiment, I am sure and educated man like yourself could come up with a much more eloquent way of stating your point then "frig you" LOL
> 
> Come now, why debase ourselves to their level when we are given such a golden opportunities to raise above them and show just how un-"killbot" like we really are.



Hey, for your next photo shoot, try to get some Oakleys with "Kill" on one lens and "Bot" on the other.   And any NCO's or Officers running basic courses this summer, I think course t-shirts that read "Another quality killing machine from the CF Killbot Factory" would be awesome.  Hell, I'd wear one, and if they come in kids sizes, I'll buy 'em for them too.


----------



## Gayson (14 Apr 2006)

~RoKo~ said:
			
		

> Kent Brockman: Just miles from your doorstep, hundreds of men are given weapons and trained to kill. The government calls it the Army, but a more alarmist name would be... The Killbot Factory.



 :rofl:


----------



## Korus (14 Apr 2006)

I tried to find a sound clip of it, but to no avail (Plus I didn't spend too much time searching).
It truly is one of the best simpsons quotes ever.


----------



## NL_engineer (14 Apr 2006)

I was quite surprised that they didn't mention "baby killers" in there article.  For these supposedly educated people they should know were to look before they make statements like they have.  As for the grade 11 girl's statement, she should get her head out of her behind; and realize that the only reason that she has a right to say stuff like that, is because of those men and woman who gave there lives for our freedom  .  


Just my two cents


----------



## blacktriangle (14 Apr 2006)

My coop teacher has had to explain to many parent's that their son's and daughters won't be going to Afghanistan for coop next year....many still won't let their kids do it. 

 :


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (14 Apr 2006)

Interesting quote from the Prime Minister today:

"I believe that military service is the highest calling of citizenship," Harper told the young soldiers at a military graduation in Wainwright, Alta. (source)

It would seem he doesn't agree with the "death sentence" crowd. I can't recall being this impressed - or maybe even just "impressed" - with a PM in previous history.


----------



## DG-41 (14 Apr 2006)

I actually think the response is way too hard on the Windsor Star itself. All they did was report what was said - and then every day since, there has been a slew of published editorials, letters to the editor, etc all SUPPORTING the military and the local regiments, which they have happily published.

They've also sent out embedded reporters with us on exercise, done some great pieces on us, and generally been very military-friendly.

I actually think they've done us a HUGE favour by running that piece; they've gotten the debate way out in the open - now people in Windsor are getting to know about their own home-grown units. It's been overwhelmingly positive for us.

I think Army.ca shot the messenger here, and I'd like to see the anti-Star rhetoric scaled down or even retracted.

DG


----------



## GGboy (14 Apr 2006)

I'd urge people not to overreact to this article or others like it, tempting though it might be.
What happened here was that a reporter (whose only knowledge of the military probably comes from Hollywood) dutifully regurgitated the drivel spouted at a public meeting by a group of anti-war protesters without taking the trouble to check whether or not what they were saying bore any resemblance to reality.
Rather than blasting the Star and the reporter (however justifiably) a better response would be to point out the more glaring errors and omissions in a reasoned and logical fashion and get the paper to print a rebuttal story, which in this case they did. With the added bonus that members of the military come off sounding like the reasonable folks that they (mostly) are and the peaceniks sound like the monster raving loonies that they are. Hopefully, the end result will be a slightly better informed journalist and public ... not to mention a better image for the CF.
I agree with RecceDG: the peace now crowd may have done us an entirely unintentional favour.


----------



## GAP (14 Apr 2006)

IMHO, we are always, well anyway I am, complaining about the media not "reporting" the news rather than creating the news by putting a slant on it. I would rather see as many sides to argument as are available, and make up my own mind, rather than what is in vogue now, where a "reporter" imposes his/her slant as though that was the only logical conclusion. 

I haven't made up my mind on this particular article, but from the sound of it, the local populace and the paper, correctly, has corrected the "slant".


----------



## ArmyRick (14 Apr 2006)

This such clownish crap in that article... When will all the hippies of the 60s hurry up and die? Lets be rid of their free loading, mind numbing and drug induced thinking already!


----------



## Danjanou (14 Apr 2006)

Love793 said:
			
		

> Not that I am a great supporter of the left winged media in Canada, however I must defend the Windsor Star with this.  What wasn't placed in the post, was the fact that the very next day (with out being pushed for it) the Windsor Star ran a long rebuttal article, and a Opinion column calling the protesters immature morons (I'm para phrasing).  There has been very few letters in the Star since then supporting these protesters.  However as ironic as it is, these protesters have their right to make their opinion known, as we afford them that right to do so.
> 
> As the unit recruiter. and having my partner in crime over at CFRC being the one mostly in contact with the public regarding the coop course, I've been following this very closely, and I would have say the Star has been giving  rather decent coverage of this, and casting the CF in a very positive manner.  In fact interest in the coop course has shot through the roof because of this.  I must thank the Star for it's free advertisement, and the protesters for proving the venue for it.
> 
> Just my $.02.



Here's the op-ed piece. Not too bad of a rebuttal, but they could learn from us in how to write and present a rebuttal.

http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/editorial/story.html?id=ff18714c-ad30-4d53-9973-b8df85792c98


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Apr 2006)

GGboy said:
			
		

> ....
> What happened here was that a reporter (whose only knowledge of the military probably comes from Hollywood) dutifully regurgitated the drivel spouted at a public meeting by a group of anti-war protesters without taking the trouble to check whether or not what they were saying bore any resemblance to reality.
> ...



Which makes that _"reporter"_, like the vast majority of his (her?) confreres, nothing more than a bloody _*stenographer*_: a lazy, insufferable twit who then has the gall to ramble on, mindlessly, about _freedom of the press_ as if he (she) has suddenly gone into the *informing the public* business.

The original Windsor Star article was *not* _reporting_, it was, maybe, second rate propagandizing.  The Star should be ashamed of itself.


----------



## Love793 (14 Apr 2006)

RecceDG- Thanks, that was what I was trying to say earlier.

Danjanou- I was trying to find that yesterday, unfortunately there was problems with the DWAN server in Windsor.


----------



## The_Falcon (14 Apr 2006)

I am not going to make  a comment about the article as a whole, because basically I would be a mindless robot repeating what everyone else said  .  However this particular comment which I bolded 



> Grade 11 Sandwich Secondary student Brittany Fleming said she decided to attend the meeting because of how strongly she disagrees with the program.
> *"It's too disciplined, too scary,"* said Fleming about the military



Grabbed my attention, and I am suprised no one else has jumped on it.  Not that the comment it self is surprising, it's just one more example of how lazy and unmotivated people of my generation are.  To think that it's scary that the military is "too disciplined"?  Showing up on time for work, probably requires more discipline than this girl is capable of.  One more example of wasted youth and the "me, me, me" society we have bred.


----------



## DG-41 (14 Apr 2006)

> Which makes that "reporter", like the vast majority of his (her?) confreres, nothing more than a bloody stenographer: a lazy, insufferable twit who then has the gall to ramble on, mindlessly, about freedom of the press as if he (she) has suddenly gone into the informing the public business.



I don't agree; in fact, I disagree rather strongly.

The story here is NOT "Army Program is a Death Sentence" but rather "Army Program CALLED Death Sentence [by local peace group]" 

The Star didn't opine one way or the other on the program itself; instead, it concentrated on statements made by the leader of this group, and then amplified that the message had been taken at face value by quoting a local girl who drank the kool-aid. It also gave equal time to educators who liked the program, or who were at worst neutral.

In other words "Hey, look at this nutcase and what she is saying - and you kids are buying it!" It's not approval of the message, it is a call to arms. The community responded appropriately, and have been flooding the Star with letters of support ever since.

I'll say it again - THE STAR DID US A HUGE FAVOUR. I *live* in Windsor, this isn't an abstract issue for me. The rug has been pulled right out from underneath these "Women in Black" folks and the community is now more aware of us (and in a positive light) than ever before.

And I'll say this again too: the Army.ca editorial is WAY too reactionary and lumps the messanger in with the problem children. I really REALLY want to see the anti-Star language toned down or removed. They didn't deserve it, we're building a good relationship with the media here, and I REALLY don't want to see that go sour.

DG


----------



## NL_engineer (14 Apr 2006)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Grabbed my attention, and I am suprised no one else has jumped on it.  Not that the comment it self is surprising, it's just one more example of how lazy and unmotivated people of my generation are.  To think that it's scary that the military is "too disciplined"?  Showing up on time for work, probably requires more discipline than this girl is capable of.  One more example of wasted youth and the "me, me, me" society we have bred.



She is just to uneducated to realize what she is saying.  As for your comment on her not being able to make it to work on time: I would venture even farther and say that she is not looking for nor wants a job.  What there needs to be is a class in all grade that teaches students what is going on in the world, and about the CF.  IMO if we can educate the population on what we do, and how we play a important role in society; it will prevent stupid comments like the below.


> Grade 11 Sandwich Secondary student Brittany Fleming said she decided to attend the meeting because of how strongly she disagrees with the program. "It's too disciplined, too scary," said Fleming about the military



Just my two cents


----------



## HDE (14 Apr 2006)

Typical.

   The so-called "Women In Black" made absolutely no effort to determine if the claims being made are even correct.  We seem to be living increasingly in a world where simply being loud and pushy trumps the ability to make a thoughful argument.  Hopefully the fact that the WIB don't seem to have much of a grasp of the issue will be widely reported.  The good news is that they've had their 15 minutes of fame.   I can't say I'm impressed that parents of potential co-op students are so easily spun :


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Apr 2006)

RecceDG said:
			
		

> I don't agree; in fact, I disagree rather strongly.
> 
> The story here is NOT "Army Program is a Death Sentence" but rather "Army Program CALLED Death Sentence [by local peace group]"
> 
> ...



I don’t agree.

The article, reproduced in accordance with the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act, is below.

Just a few days ago journalists in the _big leagues_ were trading comments in the _Globe and Mail_: national affairs writer Don Martin (I think) took front page feature writer Christie Blatchford to task for the fact (and it was a fact) that her reporting from Afghanistan, where she was _embedded_, was unbalanced.  Not good journalism, said Martin – propaganda fed to the public through an unwitting journalist/dupe.  Some, many said the _balance_ Martin (I think) requires is the _right thing_ when covering most stories but sometimes, and Afghanistan is one of those times the _other side_ is not available – not if you want the journalist back alive.

It looks to me like _Windsor Star_ reporter Dalson Chen is going to claim that he was _embedded_ with the peaceniks (Women in Black) and it would have been too dangerous to do things like _reporting_ on *facts*, easily obtained and verifiable *facts*.



> Co-op program called death sentence
> *Dalson Chen, Windsor Star*
> 
> Published: Thursday, April 06, 2006
> ...



It should have been Chen’s job to refute the entirely baseless suggestions by Eves that students in a short co-op programme would soon be headed overseas, into the jaws of death and _yada, yada, yada._

Sure it gave some people in Windsor an opportunity to set the _record straight_ but the damage was already done – see: zipperhead_cop’s #16, from yesterday.

I stick with my position that the _Windsor Star_ has ignored whatever shreds of journalistic _ethics_ might still be preached, if not often practiced, in Canada.


----------



## blacktriangle (14 Apr 2006)

"People who want basic things like money and health care will end up going for it. And I'm worried that it will happen to my friends."


Somone doesn't want her friends to have basic things such as money and health care...  :crybaby:


----------



## kerfuffled (14 Apr 2006)

I live in the Windsor area(LaSalle Represent!!!) and let me tell you, that story did way more harm to the WIB than to the co-op program. On the contrary, there have been many letters to the paper from people (especially relatives of military folks) who strongly disagree with their views and the way they are getting their message out. Also at least one opinion column by Gord Henderson that blasts the WIB. As for that kid shooting her mouth off, who would want that suck-ass brat in our military anyways? Too disciplined? Too scary? Sounds like a weakling anyway.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (14 Apr 2006)

DG, I don't think it is reasonable to take an "end justifies the means" tact here.  I am also glad that there is some positive dialogue being generated, but the damaging silence is there.  It was an irresponsible article.  Lines like this one:

*But Eves, a retired teacher, warned the partnership will leave the board with blood on its hands. "What is the future for these kids?" she said. "They're going overseas to fight and some of them are going to die."*

If Eves had made the "blood on its hands" comment, it would have been in the quote.  That is the reporter creating that and ramping up impact of the half assed comments.  The whole lay out of the article is set up so that the idea comes out, a thin section of counter point is presented then about half of the article is shooting down the part in the middle.  It ends with the slacker child's useless comments. That is pure and simple bias.  
I would also be interested to see where the rebuttal article was placed.  Typically for the Windsor Star, the big smear makes front page headlines, and the eventual rebuttal is on B6.  How about if they decided to splash on the headline in two inch bold 
"*WINDSOR REGIMENT TRAIN FOR BABY RAPING ALLEDGED"*, 
then go on to write an allegation from some half baked clown with no informed opinion, and took no steps at all to find out the truth, despite our fabulous "inroads" with them.  Despite being misinformed, let them go off for half an article, then wait a day to put in a rebuttal from the Colonel.  You know that would be damaging, and the stigma would linger, despite the slanderous inaccuracy of it.  Don't think for a heart beat that if it will sell one extra rag, they will print it.  
And don't even get me started on Gord Henderson. :rage:


----------



## Love793 (15 Apr 2006)

Zipperhead_cop-  The rebuttal article was printed on A3 in the very next issue.  The article was as least long as the initial article, and as I posted already reflected well on the CF.  As for the editorial, it also reflected highly on the CF as have 90% of the letters to the editor following the initial article.  A hard copy of both can be found posted on the back of the WR RQMS door.

As for recruiting, the story has done wonders for interest in coop crse, and CFRC (Det) Windsor has been flooded with inquiries by both parents and students wanting to take part in the course.

 Also unless your friends kid is planning on joining Hunter this summer, the chance of being coursed on BMQ is slim to nil.  Only one serial is being run for 31 CBG (as it stands now)  for unit earmarked for growth under LFRR Ph 2, and it hasn't yet been confirmed due to lack of avail instructors.  

Everyone else-

 To reiterate RecceDGs request.  We in the Windsor Garrison, have developed a rather good relationship with the media in Windsor.  They are a integral part of the Rctg plans for all 4 Army units and probably HMCS Hunters as well.  By everyone here jumping to conclusions about this article, you're hindering everything.  As the Recruiter for the Windsors I must say that we have a hard enough time recruiting without p*ssing off the media.  

Every one is entitled to their opinions, and I support that, but it's a responsibility of everyone to ensure of the facts before forming a opinion.

So ends my frustrated tirade.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Apr 2006)

You and DG have done a good enough job defending the Star that you shouldn't be worrying. Even if they read this forum, they have a thick hide. They're used to critisism, they get it a lot. Everyone here is entitltled to their opinion, and as such, we'll censor no posts to make your relationship with the local rag more comfortable.


----------



## Wookilar (15 Apr 2006)

I have a question regarding all these rebuttals and support being printed by the _Star_. 

Is any of it "official"? It seems to me, that whenever something like this comes out, it is our friends and families that jump to the front and support the CF. I'm sure that the Windsor Garrison has someone in a Public Affairs position. 

Where is the official correction on this artticle (and others like it)?


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (15 Apr 2006)

Did anyone with that newspaper and I am using the term "newspaper" in a  general term and very loosely, even check to see what the co-op  students learn. 
1) I did co-op way back when ( late 80s ) 88-89 school year, i worked in the highschool in the art department as the in house photograhy guy. I helped out in the photography class, does that make me  a highschool teacher now?
2) friends did co-op with the OPP and the local fire department does that make them police officers and firemen now?
3) one guy did a co-op term working on a farm, yes he is a farmer now but he has a degree in farm science
4) i taught on a co-op course, i always taught the same part of every recruit course, my trade side of the house pay and benefits, they were not ready  to jump on to aircraft and fly  to UN Mission after that term. 

I guess no one told the paper that reg force soldiers do not jsut hop on the plane and hit the mud running and shooting the poor defenceless    terrorist. before they are sent to any mission they all go for refresher and other training as required. Maybe some one here can tell me I am wrong but i have not heard of any one walking in off the street and being in a combat zone the next day or next week.

that reporter is clearly lacking the understanding of what the Co-Op term offers to a person considering the military as a career or just as interest. Life skills, social skills, the fact that a kid can come back to school and say I did something I never thought i could do or given the chance to do. I never got to kill anyone, or be a mindless robot, maybe i missed that session of my basic training.

I had more fun on my basic training time then I did at any other time in the army,  7 years, i learned more about myself and my limits i thought i had, and learned to forget what my  limits were.  I had to measure up.

I will be the first to admit I was scared during part of my training, geranade training scared me, I never realized i was going to be throwing the real thing,  i had it in my head i was going to be throwing the training ones like everything else was training rounds. I threw the real thing, and they went bang and boom, mud and dirt, bits of metal flew the air and it was great fun looking back but it was scary.

I guess the reporter never thought to do any research like talk to a Co-oP  person on the army side of the house, got the quotes from the peace freaks, they are the experts afterall on things green. everytime I see a peace protest sign i want to throw gernades at them. 

Bomb greenPeace, feed a whale


----------



## Love793 (15 Apr 2006)

Wookilar-  We haven't had to place a rebuttal.  The Star ran their own rebuttal, using the facts about the course as provided by the Bde Recruiter the very next day.  31 CBG of course put out the talking points regarding the issue, but they where the usual points emphasizing everyones right to express themselves, and stressing the strategic corporal.

Recceguy- We're not asking for censorship, we're asking a little bit of fact checking on all sides.


----------



## Marauder (15 Apr 2006)

I disliked the fact that Cpl Olson (da junior) was quoted, only once, in a secondhand sort of fashion. And much more ink was given to the loon-ball lefties than the other side of the story, but to honest that is, too me, the Star's attempt at being balanced. At least the other side (the CF side) was given some lip service. If the journo was actually earning his pay, he would have contacted the unit recruiters in town or the folks at CFRC to determine what a coop semester with the CF ACTUALLY entailed, and could have then put that into the story, but from the outset it looks like buddy just sorta showed up to the meeting, saw the useful idiots foaming at the mouth, and ran with it, rather than, you know researching background and fact-checking, etc. That all happened after the fact when people who knew the real deal wrote in and started correcting stuff. This is where the Star kinda redeemed itself in my eyes, in that they choose to run the rebuttals, and opinion piece, and the *numerous* letters of support for the Forces from quite a few different angles. Unfortunately, that first piece was put out in army.ca's purview in a bit of a vaccuum. It's kinda like seeing Pte Bloggins and Cpl Gustav out at Sassy's getting wasted and with the lampshade on their head, and then the next day watching them do their CQ and RQ jobs with great efficiency and pride. One mis-step can leave a bad taste in the mouth, no matter if that event was completly without context. The Star is full of weirdo commies, though, don't get me wrong. But this time they refrained from continuing to shot themselves in the foot after the inital ND.

I think our collective disgust should be really centred on those WIB freaks and that airhead teeny bopper and all the other highschoolers who open their collective suck hole without having the first clue what they are talking about.


----------



## career_radio-checker (16 Apr 2006)

Is anyone able to post those *numurous* letters of support? I tried to read them on the Star's site but they ask for a membership.


----------



## sober_ruski (17 Apr 2006)

In my old high school there was a coop term with either Vancouver police or local RCMP (not sure which one). Those lucky enough to get selected got to fire some nice weapons (including MP5s  ) and one girl almost had her arm blown off when a shotgun's barrel exploded. So why is police coop accepted and CF coop isnt? Some POs have to... disable suspects and some end up dead. Cant wait for all those speed and weed induced hippies to die off.


----------



## DG-41 (17 Apr 2006)

> This is where the Star kinda redeemed itself in my eyes, in that they choose to run the rebuttals, and opinion piece, and the *numerous* letters of support for the Forces from quite a few different angles.



This is the Star's usual MO when dealing with a contentious subject: publish a story outlining the questionable behaviour of somebody, and then serve as an outlet for community outrage. They don't editorialize anywhere near as much as say, the Toronto Sun or the National Post do - instead, they prefer to turn over rocks and let the community handle the editorializing when things squirm to light.

The best example I can think of happened a couple of years ago. Walker Road has been turning into a big box retail centre for the past dozen years or so, and the development is starting to encroach on the compound of an evangelical Christian "church". One of the establishments to go in near this compound was a Hooters. The pastor of the "church" took offense to the idea of chicken wings being served so near his parish, and got his parishioners to write in to the liquor board to have Hooter's liquor licence rejected - which is what happened. The Star picked up the story as something like "Local church opposes restaurant liquor licence" and then (if memory serves) gave the pastor some space on the editorial page to put his side of the story out.

Well, the pastor didn't have a very good grip on what actually went on inside a Hooters, so his editorial was full of outright inaccuracies. He apparently thought Hooters was a chain of brothels.... Anyway, community outrage was HUGE - almost all of it in support of Hooters. Even those groups not normally a big fan of the concept behind the restaurant (women's groups, etc) came out in favour, over allowing an obscure religious sect to determine who does or does not get a liquor licence.

This particular pot was kept boiling for MONTHS. There wasn't a day that went by without at least one letter to the editor on the Hooters story.

And who won big on that deal? Hooters. Their liquor licence was held up for about a month, but business boomed. I know I went out a couple of times to.. uhh.. show my support of community standards  and the place was always rocking.

It's a different kind of journalism... a kind of "editorial by instigation" but it seems to work for Windsor. We now have a situation where citizens are writing in to defend the co-op program and the military at large en masse, where community awareness of the local units is higher than it has been in a very long while, and the WIB are utterly discredited. 

Call me crazy, but I call that a win.

So AGAIN - I think the anti-Star language in the Army.ca editorial is undeserved and completely over the top, and I would like to see it scaled down or retracted.

DG


----------



## George Wallace (17 Apr 2006)

RecceDG

Perhaps you may want to do another Recce of the revised Editorial and then come back to us ?


----------



## DG-41 (17 Apr 2006)

Ah, it has been revised...

(reads)

Well... that's better than it was...

But I don't agree with the statement re "factfinding". I don't think it is the job of the paper to refute the statements made by groups like WIB - and I note that the paper DID give space to people with opposite views in the original article. 

I won't claim that the original article was perfect; the gold standard of articles of this nature... but I think the outrage is better directed at the WIB than the Windsor Star.

All else being equal though, the revised version is MUCH better. Thank you.

DG


----------



## Edward Campbell (17 Apr 2006)

The _Canadian Association of Journalists_ have a code of ethics which they call _*Ethics Guidelines*_.  It can be read here: http://www.caj.ca/principles/principles-statement-2002.htm 

It appears to me that the _“ We will report all relevant facts in coverage of controversies or disputes."_ guideline was blissfully ignored by the Windsor Star – by its reporter, its editors and its publishers.  I think the proper designation for the Windsor Star _report_ is yellow journalism.


----------



## Centurian1985 (17 Apr 2006)

Is this rag the 'Windsor Star' or the 'Red Star'?

Once again, a group of opinionated and 'educated' people deliberately malign a government department for their own purposes...


----------



## DG-41 (17 Apr 2006)

Oi,

Gentlemen, just because a paper publishes stories that contains information that we don't agree with, don't like, is unfavourable, or generally unpleasant does NOT mean that the paper contains any sort of bias one way or the other.

The paper's job is to report the news, no matter who or where it comes from.

The last paper that I can recall that only published stories favourable to the state was _Pravda_ - is that what you want? 

DG


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Apr 2006)

RecceDG said:
			
		

> Gentlemen, just because a paper publishes stories that contains information that we don't agree with, don't like, is unfavourable, or generally unpleasant does NOT mean that the paper contains any sort of bias one way or the other.
> The last paper that I can recall that only published stories favourable to the state was _Pravda_ - is that what you want?



Yeah, who needs facts and sources when there is "news" to print.  DG, as for your statement "It seems to work for us in Windsor" it would be more accurate to state "we have no choice, it is the only local paper in Windsor".  The fact that so many people have reacted should suggest that the original article should have had a more balanced tone to it.  



			
				RecceDG said:
			
		

> The paper's job is to report the news, no matter who or where it comes from.



That's why we have...


----------



## Love793 (17 Apr 2006)

RecceDG-  Is 9D aware your Recce, or is that another Michigan Jail issue? ;D

42E


----------



## DG-41 (17 Apr 2006)

> The fact that so many people have reacted should suggest that the original article should have had a more balanced tone to it.



From what I have seen, the lion's share of the outrage has been directed at the originators of the quote, not at the paper itself.

And I stand by the statement that the paper did present a balanced tone to the article. They could have gone to better sources, but the ones they cited are in my opinion, adequate. Perhaps not "ideal", but adequate.

The comparison with the Weekly World News etc is pure hyperbole. The statements made by the WIB spokeswoman and the equally ill-informed 11th grader were fact, not invention. They actually said what was reported.

Sometimes people are going to say things we don't like. If these quotes happened in a public forum in which a reporter is in attendance, it is quite likely that they will hit the paper. This is normal and natural in a society that has a free press. Save the outrage for the people generating the quote, not the paper that reported it.

Nixon said "I am not a crook". Clinton said "I did not have sex with that woman." Both statements were manifestly false - should they have not been reported?

DG


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (17 Apr 2006)

No, but I bet they were investigated at least.....otherwise Nixon wasn't a crook and Clinton didn't have sex.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Apr 2006)

RecceDG said:
			
		

> Sometimes people are going to say things we don't like.



Lieutenant Ironic.


----------



## DG-41 (17 Apr 2006)

I can see the mess is going to get more exciting. 

DG


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Apr 2006)

You are assuming I will talk to you in the mess?

 ;D ;D


----------



## GGboy (17 Apr 2006)

I think you guys are missing RecceDG's point here, which given the importance of "info ops" these days is a vital one.
By going after a reporter who's just doing his/her job (albeit not exceedingly well) with both guns blazing, you're just putting yourself in the category of nut-bar, zealot, or even kill-bot. When this sort of thing happens, the best thing to do is point out what the reporter missed, make your case logically and reasonably and suggest he/she do another story with the CF's point of view included. Ranting about them being commies or peaceniks just puts you in the same filing cabinet as the WIB fruitcakes and pisses off the reporter. And as Sam Clements noted, you shouldn't pick fights with people who buy ink by the barrel.
Not only will the immediate outcome be more positive for the CF, with a little luck you'll end up with a reporter who's better educated about the military and (most importantly) has a phone number for the local PAffO so the next time the WIB or their ilk do something like this he/she can call them for comment BEFORE running the story.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (17 Apr 2006)

_Ranting about them being commies or peaceniks_ 

Huh? Must have missed that line in the editorial....


----------



## Centurian1985 (17 Apr 2006)

Being highly aware of how news stories get from the reporter to the newstand, I can tell you that this isnt a case of a reporter putting out their personal angle.  Only top-rank reporters get to call their own shots.  These stories are tasked by editors who want specific angles that are in accordance with the political leanings of the OWNER of the paper.


----------



## LAH (17 Apr 2006)

It does not surprise me that a comment like this comes from a teacher. For the most part, teachers are a good group of people. But there are also the ones that have no idea what goes on in the real world because they live their whole life in a bubble. They are born and stay with mommy until they start school. They stay there until they graduate high school, university and teachers college. Then they return to the world from whence they came until they retire at age 55+. School. A sheltered institution where they are not allowed to think outside the box and hide from the evils of the world and get summers off and can't understand why everybody else doesn't. (this is a true statement as I had it out many times with teachers)

I have served with many teachers and only a few were worth their salt. Fortunately the rest all quit when General Vernon as CMA Commander changed the rules so many years ago.

So let these idiots say what they want. We know the truth and I am willing to debate any political correct teacher any time.


----------



## medicineman (17 Apr 2006)

Well, by virtue of what these crackheads say, I should be a gorked out pot head with serious munchies for granola and an ecoterrorist; after all,  I was an environmental studies major when I was at UVic.  I mean, isn`t that what all save the whales types are like?

MM


----------



## wdewitt (17 Apr 2006)

It is obvious this individual did not do there homework.
The only time was in 1944 when troop level require to finish the 2WW that subscription was  done.
Canadian Forces is totally volinter and the best trade soldier because 
we are jack of all trades for a small force.
In both 1st and 2nd WW we proof that we could get the job done.
The lack of information on our CF is very poor to the average citzen.
Canadians  saw our troops in Manitoba and Quebec Provence during the Flood of the Century. Also the freezing rain storm down east.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Apr 2006)

desertfox115 said:
			
		

> It is obvious *this* individual did not do *there* homework.
> The only time was in 1944 when troop level* require * to finish the 2WW that *subscription* was  done.
> Canadian Forces is totally *volinter* and the best *trade* *soldie*r because
> *we are jack * of all trades for a small force.
> ...



i'm going to guess english is not your first language....


----------



## Michael OLeary (17 Apr 2006)

desertfox115 said:
			
		

> It is obvious this individual did not do there homework.
> The only time was in 1944 when troop level require to finish the 2WW that subscription was  done.



Speaking of doing one's homework:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Service_Act



> Canadian Military Service Act
> 
> *The Military Service Act was a Canadian statute that introduced conscription during World War I.*
> 
> On May 18th, 1917, Canada's Prime Minister Robert Borden made an announcement in the House of Commons that aggravated the already tense relationship between the French and English people of Canada and would cost the lives of many Canadians. Borden explained that *Canada would begin registering and conscripting men for the Great War*. In the House every French-Canadian MP voted against conscription and virtually every English-Canadian voted for it. The majority won and the *Military Service Act became law on August 29th, 1917*.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Apr 2006)

> Grade 11 Sandwich Secondary student Brittany Fleming said she decided to attend the meeting because of how strongly she disagrees with the program.
> 
> "It's too disciplined, too scary," said Fleming about the military. "They beat it into you so you don't know what you think anymore. You're not a person anymore. You're just a machine."
> 
> Fleming said she doesn't know what kind of response the program had at her high school, but she's sure there are students who will be drawn to it. "People who want basic things like money and health care will end up going for it. And I'm worried that it will happen to my friends."



It's too disciplined, too scary! 

I'm a machine, Roar!
Ex-ter-min-ate, Ex-ter-min-ate

Teachers who try and push their views on students are assholes.
My feminist English teacher [don't say manhole cover its sewer cover, dont say rifleman its rifle person, dont say history it sounds too much like his-story]  refused to let me take my exams Early because she didn't agree with the idea of students being allowed in the reserves. She believed their is no longer any need for "grunts".  I had to wait an extra year to do my QL3, point for her.  That said I've personally interested more than a dozen students and teenagers in the CF and got them into uniform. I win.

Still a very stupid article IMHO. God forbid young students make their own decisions and earn their own living and not ride on mommy and daddies coat tails.


----------



## the 48th regulator (17 Apr 2006)

> Grade 11 Sandwich Secondary student Brittany Fleming said she decided to attend the meeting because of how strongly she disagrees with the program.
> 
> "It's too disciplined, too scary," said Fleming about the military. "They beat it into you so you don't know what you think anymore. You're not a person anymore. You're just a machine."
> 
> Fleming said she doesn't know what kind of response the program had at her high school, but she's sure there are students who will be drawn to it. "People who want basic things like money and health care will end up going for it. And I'm worried that it will happen to my friends."



Nice,

Hope she has the gonads to show up this November 11th to the local parade or legion, and spout off those words.

_Too disciplined, too scary, not a person anymore, just a machine...._

Well it was the to disciplined, scary, non-human machines, that served, fought, and died for these people to spout such nonesense..

dileas

tess


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Apr 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Ex-ter-min-ate, Ex-ter-min-ate



You have to admit, in the early 80's Daleks had a creepy, killer disco garbage can aura about them.   

I would not be piling on the Windsor Star if this was an isolated incident.  But this stuff happens all the time.  And in this day and age of people having no spine and being so horribly terrified to be viewed as anything but pastel and PC, this kind of thing can do harm, rebuttal or no.  The tale of the tape will be when it is time for this to come up again next year, and lets see if the schools are so open to having an army recruiter come by because they are worried "about any trouble".  That is where the harm lays.  Those little hits to the middle level bureaucrats who are so terrified of getting a "complaint".  OH, GOD, NOT A COMPLAINT!!!
You guys who are worried about taking on the big bad paper because it can harm the CF's relationship with them; don't be fooled.  They print good things because that is what they feel like on a given day.  The rag I looked at in the Pioneer gas station today was about as thick as a Pennysaver (which, conversely, is chock full 'o' bargins!).  If an incident occurs involving a member, even if it was not even remotely linked to the CF, don't think that they won't smear "SOLDIER INVOLVED IN X, Y, AND Z" first chance they get because of any great "cultivated" relationship.


----------



## Franko (18 Apr 2006)

A scene earlier today in Winsor.....







Their commander (pictured here) had little comment...






 ;D

Regards


----------



## Haggis (18 Apr 2006)

C&P Crusader said:
			
		

> A scene earlier today in Winsor.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



E&K Scots?

Cool kilts!  ;D


----------



## zipperhead_cop (18 Apr 2006)

As the recruiter left the school, it was noted that a blue telephone booth shortly therafter disappeared...

http://www.dwwa.net/dr2/Highlanders/Hightard.wav

In all fairness to the WIB, this is an excerpt from the recruiting speech:

http://www.dwwa.net/dr4/Genesis/rant.wav

So you can see their dilemma ;D


----------



## coachron (30 May 2006)

My,  but there is a lot of defensive reaction to any suggestion that the military solution is rarely a solution to anything with the possible exception of contributing to the death and injury of mainly young and impressionistic people.  It may or may not come as a surprise to members of army.ca that not all Canadians are quite so keenly supportive of the war making project, particularly as far as it concerns the Middle East and South Asia.   Nearly 2500 American lives have been sacrificed, not to mention 17,000 wounded, by an administration that had no cause whatsoever to invade Iraq.  Historical attempts by, for example, England in the 19th century and the Soviet Union in the 20th to invade and occupy Afghanistan suggest that there is more than a little reason to worry about Canadian Forces deployment in that country by a government that appears not to have thought much about the mission. 

Yes, there is a place in the world for the warrior.  There also is a place for those who question whether high school is the place to indoctrinate people in the science and attitudes of war fighting without balancing that indoctrination with information that war is an outmoded method of solving problems.


----------



## Edward Campbell (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> ...  there is more than a little reason to worry about Canadian Forces deployment in that country by a government that appears not to have thought much about the mission.
> 
> Yes, there is a place in the world for the warrior ...



You're right on both points, coachron:

1.	The Liberal Party of Canada and successive Liberal governments since 1957 have rarely given any thought about any military missions.  The Party’s goal has been to starve the military in order to shove social pabulum down the insatiable maw of the Canadian public; and

2.	Warriors in the 21st century, as in the 1st, are, by and large, young men and women – very young, still boys and girls when I see them though these tired old eyes – usually still in their teens when they _take up arms_, sadly many are still in their teens (or not far past) when they pay the ultimate price.

As to the utility of the military solution and Canadians' reaction thereto: I believe you are correct.  I suspect that a substantial majority of Canadians are completely ignorant about the state of the world beyond North America – that’s why they want us to invade Sudan and kill a bunch of brown-shirt wannabees called the _janjaweed_.

I, at least, am not at all _defensive_ about the Canadian military and what it can and should do in the world.  Quite the contrary, in fact; I am an aggressive advocate for more and better military capabilities to give the government of the day options when the big, bad world intrudes, again and again, upon our _peaceable kingdom’s_ interests.  I am equally an advocate for a sound elementary education in Canada – which would address the problem of most Canadians being pacifistic dupes.

Edit: sentence structure and punctuation - these "tired old eyes" are really old and tired this morning!


----------



## Infanteer (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> war is an outmoded method of solving problems.



 :rofl:

I love that false idol of progress....


----------



## pbi (30 May 2006)

> If an incident occurs involving a member, even if it was not even remotely linked to the CF, don't think that they won't smear "SOLDIER INVOLVED IN X, Y, AND Z" first chance they get because of any great "cultivated" relationship.



This, sadly, is always true. While it is definitely possible (and, I think, a good policy) to treat the media fairly and honestly, the apparently understanding and sympathetic reporter whose name and face we get to know on operation is, in the end, subject to the daily whims of the editors who will decide the required "spin".

Cheers


----------



## pbi (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> My,  but there is a lot of defensive reaction to any suggestion that the military solution is rarely a solution to anything with the possible exception of contributing to the death and injury of mainly young and impressionistic people.  It may or may not come as a surprise to members of army.ca that not all Canadians are quite so keenly supportive of the war making project, particularly as far as it concerns the Middle East and South Asia.   Nearly 2500 American lives have been sacrificed, not to mention 17,000 wounded, by an administration that had no cause whatsoever to invade Iraq.  Historical attempts by, for example, England in the 19th century and the Soviet Union in the 20th to invade and occupy Afghanistan suggest that there is more than a little reason to worry about Canadian Forces deployment in that country by a government that appears not to have thought much about the mission.
> 
> Yes, there is a place in the world for the warrior.  There also is a place for those who question whether high school is the place to indoctrinate people in the science and attitudes of war fighting without balancing that indoctrination with information that war is an outmoded method of solving problems.



Coachron:

Like any profession, we reserve the right to defend ourselves against scurrilous, ill-informed, or distorted commentary. Further to that, in our particular case we learned, decades ago, that we must shoulder much of the burden of telling our own story, and trying to keep the public we serve informed with facts as opposed to half-truths, and mindlessly repeated chants that sound good at the Student Union but don't cut much ice in the real world.

The Co-op program exists across Canada (I was involved with it in NW Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan) and has been in existence since at least the late 90's: long before most Canadians could even find Afghanistan on a map. Its acceptance by such a diverse range of school boards suggests to me that it is seen as a valuable program.

If you accept that a state has a right to secure its own defence externally and to have a monopoly on the use of armed force internally, then you more or less accept the premise that the military should exist as a part of the nation, just as the police service or the fire service. It seems to me that you also accept that violence and lethal force can be applied in legitimate service of the aim of society and the state. (If not, you negate the first premise...)

So, if we are a legitimate part of this country, then we have the same rights as any organization to make ourselves known to Canadians. Since Canada relies on a volunteer professional force, we must recruit to survive and be that legitimate agency the country needs. It also follows that we should fill our ranks with the best people we can obtain. In a society such as Canada, with its alarming ignorance of things military, and the prominence (not to say dominance) of certain vocal anti-military groups, we start out from a disadvantage. Therefore, we need to be creative in our methods. Co-op is one of these creative methods.

If a school board, on its own free will (which is how it works, by the way...) decides to admit the Co-op program, we will make use of that opportunity. To do otherwise would make no sense.
To assume that the students (or, for that matter, the school board) do not know what they are doing, or are somehow "dupes" of the military is too fantastic to credit. Although, I guess it is consistent with the viewpoint that the military is filled with mentally deficient high-school drop outs. I mean, why would "real people" ever join the military when unemployment is so low, right?

Finally, I doubt you will find too many people serving in the military today who are so myopic as to view the military as a "solution" to much of anything, any more than we might view the police as a "solution" for crime, or welfare as a "solution" for poverty. All complex situations (like Afghanistan) require multi-pronged solutions, combining all of a nation's powers and abilities.(Just as Canada is involved on several fronts in developing Afghanistan to be a successful state) In some situations (like stopping the more obvoius activties of the Taleban and friends), the use of deadly force against those who are violently opposed to the shape of  the solution is an important component. It is not the only component, and all by itself it may not be productive, but it is an important tool. And, by the way, the endless repetition of  the cautionary tales of the British Empire and the Soviets in trying to conquer Afghanistan is largely misplaced, since neither NATO nor the US Coalition is trying to "conquer" Afghanistan. (There are not near enough troops there, for a start...) And, in most of the country,(at least when I was there in 04/05) ISAF and the Coalition are not viewed as enemies as they are in the Pashtun south.

Where we in the military (specifically, in our case, the Army) come in is as the national component responsible for the controlled and reasoned application of deadly force, or at least the believable show of the ability to use that force. In order to do that, we have (at the mos basic level) to train people to kill and survive attempts to kill them. If we don't do that, we're not effective. If we're not effective, then we have failed Canada and we are not meeting the first two premises. Since what we do is physically and mentally demanding on several levels, it makes sense to start entry-level training at an age when people are likely to have the stamina, fitness and enthusiasm to be good professional soldiers. That means recruiting younger people, most of whom in Canada are in some form of school.

So, if we are to exist and be effective, we need to recruit young Canadians in school. Co-op is one way to do that (and only one way...only a  percentage of Co-op students pursue the military as a career). It lets young people get a taste of the military (with no real committment), while completng an important stage of their education: two useful and important natinal goals. But, if school boards don't want us, we won't be there. We'll do the best we can, somewhere else.

Cheers


----------



## Navy_Blue (30 May 2006)

We need young people with heads on their shoulders.  If we don't get these people our outfit will be heading way down hill.   You can see it now people in your reg, sqn, shop, platoon whatever.  People who you know really were recruited from the bottom of the barrel.  If this bottom of the class recruiting continues we will start seeing more issues on deployments like the yanks.  Soldiers going out for revenge killing civi's and they wont forget Abu Grabe for awhile.  If we want soldiers, sailors and Airmen to make the right choices we need them to be mentally capable too.

I firmly believe that the majority of people in the CF are better citizens because of the training we receive.  This country would be much more socially conscious and see a much lower crimerate if every 18 yo kid was put in conscription out of high school for 6 months.


----------



## pbi (30 May 2006)

Navy: I don't know where you've served, but after 32 years, I can safely say that these useless people are in the minority. "Bottom of the barrel" people usually aren't much good for anything and don't stick around too long. I do admit that we have some, but in the last decade or so I would say that their numbers have greatly declined. Compared to most of his peers around the world, the Canadian soldier stands out for intelligence, intiative and level of education.

Cheers


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 May 2006)

>war is an outmoded method of solving problems.

If that were true, there would be no genocide.  War is in fact perceived by some to be a very expeditious means of solving problems.  Contrarily, alternatives to war have a notably poor record of thwarting or opposing war, otherwise we should have expected matters in the Sudan to have been wrapped up nicely years ago by people employing those alternatives.

On the main topic, the press have been vehement recently as to their role in society and the nature of their profession.  Regardless how one might feel about the particular methods used by the Windsor paper to initiate and conduct debate over community issues, the broader point is inescapable: as long as the press lay claim to professionalism, society has the right to demand the press behave professionally.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (30 May 2006)

coachron said:
			
		

> Yes, there is a place in the world for the warrior.  There also is a place for those who question whether high school is the place to indoctrinate people in the science and attitudes of war fighting without balancing that indoctrination with information that war is an outmoded method of solving problems.



I appreciate that at least your profile indicates that you have no military experience, although your post clearly indicates that.  
Lets suppose someone was going around and telling our youth through the media, particularly at a job fair, that GTA teachers are a bunch of shiftless hippies that have no grasp on life or world events, and if their brand of unfounded pap were to extent to the world, as it has infected the GTA and ruined the concept of common sense there, our planet would be slave to the whims of zealots and dictators everywhere.   I would have to believe that a group of the affected would speak up and try to present a more balanced view of their profession.  
As long as there are pacifist malcontents, there will always be soldiers to defend their delicate, Jergens softened back sides.  
Have fun abusing your freedom.


----------



## Navy_Blue (30 May 2006)

pbi since joining the Navy I have seen way tomany people who should not be in uniform.  I have personally seen people who where untrainable, incompetent and lazy who were on the verges of being kicked out of the forces and yet are still in promoted today.  They played "my wife will leave me" or "I will not be-able to support my kids."  The person in question was charged months earlier for beating the wife while she was pregnant.  He is now AWOL and not expected to return, but we couldn't release him.  An other example of this would be a cook who served chicken fingers and french fries at Christmas and told the old man and his family to serve themselves.  He is still in and promoted this story is much longer as well.  I could list at least 5 to 10 more.   Now with the need to find 23000 recruits they wont fire anyone.   While infantry res I never saw these people last long but in the Navy they flourish.


----------



## pbi (31 May 2006)

NavyBlue: I wasn't suggesting that they don't exist: they certainly do. I have had the pleasure of tryng to fix/fire some of these people, so I know what you are talking about. I just don't believe they are in the majority, or even a significant minority. However, I will agree that "one is too many".

As far as recruiting goes, the Comd of the CFRG was speaking here at CFC yesterday. According to him, we are having no problem at all meeting our recruiting intake goals: the Army (especially the Infantry) is doing very well. (The Navy, unfortunately, is having serious problems...) The real difficulty he sees is not getting folks in, but getting them trained in a reasonable amount of time: i.e. not wasting a year sitting in PAT in Borden.

Cheers


----------



## Centurian1985 (2 Jun 2006)

I figure pbi and others have made some good responses but I just cant resist adding my own two cents, so coachron, here are my comments:



			
				coachron said:
			
		

> My,  but there is a lot of defensive reaction to any suggestion that the military solution is rarely a solution to anything with the possible exception of contributing to the death and injury of mainly young and impressionistic people.


Do you read the papers? Our government does not send our troops willy-nilly around the world.  They are deployed only after a lengthy political review process of investigation and debate that usually results in our forces being one of the last countries to arrive.  This is YOUR government making a decision to deploy troops to fight.  If you don't like it, argue with the representative YOU voted for.  It is amazing how defensive anti-military proponents get when it is suggested that the government THEY voted into power is responsible for sending troops out to die or get injured; they would much rather blame a person in uniform who does not make the decision, but is willing to serve their country.  Oh and by the way, we also support national and international humanitarian and search and rescue roles, are you also opposed to those 'military' actions?  



> It may or may not come as a surprise to members of army.ca that not all Canadians are quite so keenly supportive of the war making project,


How very amusing.  Every Canadian soldier is well aware of the opposition against our existence in society.  Why don't you use that vast education and knowledge you possess and explain to us a viable solution that the government can use that would successfully remove the need for any 'war-making project'?      



> particularly as far as it concerns the Middle East and South Asia.   Nearly 2500 American lives have been sacrificed, not to mention 17,000 wounded, by an administration that had no cause whatsoever to invade Iraq.  Historical attempts by, for example, England in the 19th century and the Soviet Union in the 20th to invade and occupy Afghanistan suggest that there is more than a little reason to worry about Canadian Forces deployment in that country by a government that appears not to have thought much about the mission.


Quoting empire-building and the sacrifice of US lives is nice for your local anti-war demonstration, but what's your point.  We are not an invading army.  How does your criticism of the military relate to the fact that the government YOU elected 'appears not have thought much about the mission'.   You obviously have a problem with our government's decision, but instead of facing up to YOUR responsibility for electing them, you blame the military.  No serving soldier gets to vote on this issue, we get issued an order.  Every soldier in turn has the choice of obeying that order, not out of blind obedience but out of duty to their country.  Unlike most members of the general population, many members of the military are willing to risk their lives for their country, and obey a decision made by representatives of the people who were elected by the people.     



> Yes, there is a place in the world for the warrior.  There also is a place for those who question whether high school is the place to indoctrinate people in the science and attitudes of war fighting without balancing that indoctrination with information that war is an outmoded method of solving problems.


This is the most ridiculous statement yet.  You state that high school is no place to indoctrinate children in the science and attitudes of war without fighting'.  Wellllll, how interesting, lets follow that thought.  Let's remove all references to war from school programs.  Lets start with history.  No need to talk about how the Greeks formed their nation and founded western civilization, or how the Roman empire was built and founded legal and electoral systems still in use today, they were all founded on warlike activities.  No need to discuss the British empire, which spawned over 20 countries worldwide, that was just war-like expansion and colonization.  No need to inform the kids about how the English fought the French for control of Canada, no need to discuss the war of 1812 with the US, no need to discuss the Riel movement,  and lets get rid of every reference to world war I and 2, or any other warlike event that affected the population and society of our country.  And geography, wouldn't want to clutter up the kids minds and explain the role that international conflict had in shaping the borders that encompass a nation.  Oh don't forget mythology and theology, cant forget all those references to wars and battles that are an integral part of our religious belief systems, or any references to the Charlemagne's unification of Europe through religious expansion.  There's the English and French languages, lets remove every word in the two languages that has any reference to war, war machines, or war effects.  Then there's also law, lets remove any reference to the Geneva convention or to war crimes.  I hope you get the point.  It's not the military that indoctrinates kids with thoughts of war, its the school education system and teachers who teach kids about war.  Whether they perceive it as a noble purpose is up to them.   

Finally, an 'outmoded method of solving problems' - what fantasy world do you live in?  War is recognized in all political textbooks as either the last act of a desperate government or a means of enforcing or supporting political will.  It is used as a tool by every government in existence today.  Unpopular, yes, but outmoded, no.  

In summary - THIS, your so-called informed opinion, is why I react negatively.  You want to dislike the military, be my guest.  But if you are going to present arguments based on poorly thought out concepts and ill-informed ideas of how the world exists and how people interact, or even on how the school system works, and most importantly, ignore YOUR role in the process, then expect a negative response.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (3 Jun 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> In summary - THIS, your so-called informed opinion, is why I react negatively.  You want to dislike the military, be my guest.  But if you are going to present arguments based on poorly thought out concepts and ill-informed ideas of how the world exists and how people interact, or even on how the school system works, and most importantly, ignore YOUR role in the process, then expect a negative response.



Ah, that clown isn't coming back.  Just another BreaktheCommonSense member throwing out a hit and run troll post.  They know their tripe can't survive the light of scrutiny.


----------



## pbi (4 Jun 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Ah, that clown isn't coming back.  Just another BreaktheCommonSense member throwing out a hit and run troll post.  They know their tripe can't survive the light of scrutiny.



Yeah...you're probably right. But we were sure on a roll there, weren't we?

Cheers


----------



## Centurian1985 (7 Jun 2006)

At least he isnt saying 'I can make you understand...if you would only listen...'  Ack!  (Insert smiley of Billy Connelly with middle finger raised)


----------



## wdewitt (19 May 2008)

You are going to get stupid comments no matter ;" What happens".
This happen all the time and it sparks discontent and emotion from both sides.
I left school in 1972 and there was little education on the armed forces or advertisement.
Allot of student parents were still ex-members from WW2 or Korean Conflict.  
Most of the university types join for extra money and free training in the reserves.
I join for extra training and was hoping to get my 404 for driving heavy equipment in REECE.
We work with lots of regular forces staff and enjoy our time. ;D
I hated it when people protest the forces because they usually do not have clue one what they are talking about. : CF personnel are very committed to there job and very passion about how they work. 
The CF has to be more proactive in the media and public to have the country under stand there objectives 
and reason it is there for our well being. ;D
Unfortunatily it part of the challenge being in the business that we love to do.
My relatives had 8individuals in the CF personnel in all branchs.
My wife was army brat and I wish I had gone thru the forces instead of the Public service after 32yrs service. I have work with numerous ex forces personnel and it been a privilege at all times.


----------



## Mike Baker (19 May 2008)

Whoa, nice to bring back a thread from two years.


Baker


----------



## NL_engineer (21 May 2008)

> I join for extra training and was hoping to get my 404 for driving heavy equipment in REECE.



This just caught my eye:

What heavy Equipment did you wanting to drive? backhoe, elevator? or thew good old MLVW  :  If it is the first two you are in the wrong trade. 


Edited to make change for mistake ZC pointed out  :


----------



## Nfld Sapper (21 May 2008)

Think he might be refering to the ARV, ARVL, Wrecker and the HRT.


----------



## NL_engineer (21 May 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Think he might be refer*r*ing to the ARV, ARVL, Wrecker and the HRT.



OK what Reecie PL has a Heavy E det?


----------



## armyvern (21 May 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> This just caught my eye:
> 
> What heavy Equipment did you wanting to drive? backhoe, escalator? or thew good old MLVW  :  If it is the first two you are in the wrong trade.



Guys!!

No dogpiling ... read his whole post ...

He left school in 1972 (were you tykes even around then!!??  >) !!! He's 54. He joined the Public Service. Good on him.


----------



## Captain Coffee (21 May 2008)

Love793 said:
			
		

> Zipperhead_cop-  I agree with your view on the Star, as I said I don't have high regards for a lot of our media types.  I'm saying the article(s) weren't really that bad (from the CF view point).  Yes there was a lot of misinformation regarding the program, but that came from the tree huggers protesting the whole thing.  Yes their opinions where slanderous, and I personally feel that they don't realise that  we as as Canadians have the right to openly express our selves, however with that comes responsibility.  Unfortunately, very few people in society today realise that (take the whole Mohammed cartoons as example).  These people are ignorant.  Very similar to racist beliefs, it's beaten into them.  As the a recruiter, I deal with it on a daily basis, just as you do on the street every day, and have learned to just let them say what they want, and eventually they'll make themselves look like asses, which they generally do.
> 
> I'm just saying that the facts in post where not exactly true.  The Star did file a rebuttal article, and rebuttal opinion column the next day, that was a very hard on these protesters.
> 
> I did however laugh my tail off at the Gr 11 kid, saying that we are mindless machines, who can't think for ourselves.  I wander what Left Wing Communist Sympathiser beat that into head?



Right on my friend!  Thanks for sharing that.  I'm a firm believer that the media CAN do a fine job of balanced reporting even though some of them seem too lazy to do so.

I'd like to read the Star's rebuttal.

One journalist who is pretty balanced about what she writes is Christie Blatchford.  I think she's out of Toronto now.  But she's the author of the book "15 Days" all about troops she met while imbeded in Afghanistan.  She also manages to touch on some other things too, just through what soldiers talked to her about, like Somalia and Bosnia.  Freekin' awesome book.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (21 May 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> What heavy Equipment did you wanting to drive? backhoe, escalator? or thew good old MLVW  :  If it is the first two you are in the wrong trade.



We can get qualified for escalator?  Dammit!  I busted my ass to get on the moving sidewalk course for nothing  :crybaby:


----------



## NL_engineer (21 May 2008)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> We can get qualified for escalator?  Dammit!  I busted my *** to get on the moving sidewalk course for nothing  :crybaby:



Typo 

Dam auto type  :


----------

