# Blank holes in Ottawa-NDHQ Mad About Sunshine "Soldiers"



## Art Johnson (21 Aug 2004)

Sat, August 21, 2004 
Sun swimsuit troops march over the line
Mike Strobel looks for a foxhole as military issues a cease-and-desist 

By MIKE STROBEL

SOME DAYS, you just want to crawl into a foxhole and cover your head ... We get a letter from National Defence in Ottawa.   "IMMEDIATELY CEASE." The command is underlined in boldface. 

What? What? What have we done? Has Peter Worthington let slip a military secret? Did we misspell Ypres?   No, says the letter. Much worse. The Sun, it says, has violated paragraph 291(1)(c) of the National Defence Act, section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada, and subparagraph 9(1)(i) of the Trade-Marks Act.   Oh, my. We're cooked. It's the brig for us.   Say, does the brig get copies of Sun swimsuit issues?   Not in this man's army. Not anymore. 

That's what the letter this week is about. DND is ticked that we used bits of uniforms, including caps and badges, in our 2004 Winter Swimsuit Edition. Six months later, three (3) soldiers have complained and, voila, cease-and-desist.   The order was given by Maj. Jim McKillip. He is DND's Deputy Inspector of Badges and Insignia.   "I'm the guy who makes sure the use of badges, flags, uniforms and ceremonies corresponds with appropriate regulations," he tells me down the line from Ottawa. 

That swimsuit edition, apparently, did not correspond.   To wit: On the cover, Julie dangled a naval officer's cap from a shapely foot. In the centre spread, seen here, she wore the cap on her head, while saluting with Lynne (airman's cap) and Jessie (army beret).   Julie reappears 13 pages later in bewitching fishnet and a 48th Highlanders cap. The 48th Highlanders complained?!?   "No," says Maj. McKillip. So, who did, then?   "The three complaints were from men and women here in Ottawa ... with concerns about the nature of some of the images."   But there's nothing you can't see on any beach. You don't think this is over-reaction?   "Well, no, or I wouldn't have pursued it in the first place. "Suggesting an association between pin-up girls and the Canadian Forces is just not something we're willing to do." 

Funny thing, the only slightly raunchy image is Julie, again, draped in a strap or two of combat webbing, a canteen and a helmet. But that's okay, says McKillip, because you can't tell it's Canadian Forces. Same for Jessie in a pillbox cap that might be a cadet's -- or a Park Plaza doorman's. "You can get this stuff at any army surplus," says our photographer, Silvia Pecota. Her makeup guy, Gig, found a sailor's cap at a dollar store before heading to St. Vincent and the Grenadines for the swimsuit photo session. 

Silvia is dumbfounded by DND's reaction. The military is a specialty. Her Web site includes a tribute to our fallen in Afghanistan.   "I used parts of uniforms in the swimsuit issue because I wanted a 1940s look and because I wanted to bring attention to our soldiers. "All my friends in the army loved it. I mean, I got the 48th Highlanders cap from a retired captain. Whoever complained should take a valium." 

Our lawyer, Li'l Al Shanoff, smiles and tells me he hasn't seen the likes since Bill Clinton's people complained when we ran a Bad Boy ad with a Slick Willie lookalike.   "DND says it's bad for morale. If I was a soldier, I don't think this would have my morale flagging." Al says the letter's legal claims are too broad, if you will pardon the expression, to stand up in court. But who wants to joust with DND?   We've always been fans of our armed forces. So, after today, we'll try not to use specific Canadian badges and such.   I don't think our troubles end there, though.   On Page 15 of that swimsuit edition, Jessie was stunning in a two-piece and a pirate's hat.   Uh-oh.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (22 Aug 2004)

"Pirates hat"....Che's on his way down the St. Lawrence right now to plunder those Sun offices as we speak. 

_That's what the letter this week is about. DND is ticked that we used bits of uniforms, including caps and badges, in our 2004 Winter Swimsuit Edition. Six months later, three (3) soldiers have complained and, voila, cease-and-desist.  The order was given by Maj. Jim McKillip. He is DND's Deputy Inspector of Badges and Insignia._  "I'm the guy who makes sure the use of corresponds with appropriate regulations," he tells me down the line from Ottawa.badges, flags, uniforms and ceremonies  

And damn, its so much easier than actually leading troops!


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2004)

As someone who's invested a fair amount of time and energy (and money) writing about, researching and studying Canadian military uniforms, I've never thought much of the use of uniform items to dress up a "pin up", in fact, I think it looks damn stupid.  I'll note that our own Klassy Kay doesn't resort to that; her photos seem uniformly well done with the need to mix in items of kit (I've not seen her entire portfolio, mind, so I may be mistaken).

Worse are the ones that mix firearms with scantily clad women - if you want to pose in a swimsuit, pose - I love swimsuit pictures.  A woman in a swimsuit with an AK-47 in her hands just seems - dumb.  Sort of a way for monosyllabic gun nuts to get all their fantasies in one place, I guess.  

I'm with DND on this one, though I suppose I am in the minority.  I've seen some of the calendars the Lord Strathcona's cooked up years ago, with professional talent wearing bits and pieces of officer's mess dress or uniforms from the Mounted Troop.  Didn't see the point of that, either.  

Maybe the Sun, like Maxim Magazine, is simply pandering to people too frightened to buy *real* pornography?  **shrugs**

Swimsuit bimbos wearing parts of our uniforms kind of suggests that either attractive women don't join the CF, or if they do, wearing a uniform properly is "unattractive" somehow.  What kind of statement is it supposed to make, anyway?  Support for the troops?  Desire to sign up?  Suitability for enlistment?  Seems as moronic as beer commercials who insinuate that drinking a particular brand will have buxom snow-bunnies falling all over themselves to spend time with you...

Whatever...


----------



## patt (22 Aug 2004)

tells ya how much time our friends at NDHQ have on their hands...


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2004)

patty said:
			
		

> tells ya how much time our friends at NDHQ have on their hands...



Speaking as someone with no management experience, right?  

Try running a company and having to enforce dress requirements.  I have, and I can tell you, your perspective tends to shift once you're actually in a position of responsibility.

Why blame the officer in the article for doing his job?  My question to the people who bitch about long hairs walking around the mall in garrison dress jacket with rank stripes and medal ribbons on their chest is: how is this any different from that?


----------



## George Wallace (22 Aug 2004)

patty said:
			
		

> tells ya how much time our friends at NDHQ have on their hands...



I suppose that was the PC way of putting it.

GW


----------



## George Wallace (22 Aug 2004)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Try running a company and having to enforce dress requirements. I have, and I can tell you, your perspective tends to shift once you're actually in a position of responsibility.
> 
> .......... My question to the people who ***** about long hairs walking around the mall in garrison dress jacket with rank stripes and medal ribbons on their chest is: how is this any different from that?



The new Army Dress Discipline as seen at CTC this summer has drastically changed.  Ear rings, studs, Taliban beards, Aboriginals with Pony Tails, 'mixed dress' in the messhall, poor haircuts; why even a whole course of OCdts arrived in PT gear and the Comd and RSM of CTC sat down an had lunch with them.  Try enforcing a Dress Code after that.  Officers in my Unit are pretty close to those long hairs you talk about walking around in malls wearing military uniforms; desperately in need of haircuts.  I have seen civies, some of them homeless, wearing military gear, some with more pride than actual serving members of the CF in the Byward Market in Ottawa.  Do I like all this?  No!  However, that is not what this article is about.

The Photographer here wanted a 1940's War Time Pin Up calendar look for this calendar and some PC members of the CF who are unnamed are incensed.  What about the morale of the other 99% of the CF?

Your examples are not in line with what happened to be the Photographers design and are leading off topic IMHO.

GW


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2004)

Ear rings were being worn by males in uniform?  I rather doubt it....

So what IS the topic here?  Seemed like a lineup to castigate an officer at NDHQ who was doing his job - ie following up on the use of our uniforms - cap badges also double as "corporate symbols".   Yes, a bum downtown or a swimsuit model can wear a uniform with more pride than the CF - is this really what we want to see happening?


----------



## Cloud Cover (22 Aug 2004)

"Ear rings were being worn by males in uniform?  I rather doubt it...."

Gotta say, wouldn't believe it if i didn't see earings  myself at a University recruiting demo ... I was stunned, to say the least.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

whiskey 601 said:
			
		

> "Ear rings were being worn by males in uniform?  I rather doubt it...."
> 
> Gotta say, wouldn't believe it if i didn't see earings  myself at a University recruiting demo ... I was stunned, to say the least.



You've got to be joking - they were reservists, I take it?


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Aug 2004)

Yes they were, they had a tent set up and the whole shebang. I was a little embarrased, as I was not even paying attentio to them when a friend of mine, a York Region copper, came over and asked me if when i was in the CF we were allowed to wear earings:  to which i replied "F*** No!", then he told me to check out the tent. I did, said nothing and went straight to the faculty pub with him. Very sad, as there were officers there as well.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

I've seen the odd reservist forget to take his earring out - as far as I know, it is still not permitted.  

Instead of running for the bar, why not ask the soldier about it?


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Aug 2004)

You are right, it isn't permitted, but it is probably tolerated to a limited extent. I like to think it was a lapse of judgement, i.e forgetting. I was in the Navy, and I know lots of guys who had earings, part of an old [optional] ritual. Some cox'n s and "buffers" tolerated it, most did not. Nobody ever got across the brow wearing one, thats for sure. [except weekends in home port, and in civvies only.]   As far as saying something? The "boys" were set up on the "concrete beach", and   I try not to say anything outside of the lecture room, especially at that location,   at least to people I don't know directly. Bad form at an Ontario University, especially UWO ...   That includes reservists who are also students, and as for the bar ... well, there was pressing and substantial work to be done there in a short amount of time!!


----------



## George Wallace (23 Aug 2004)

As we have digressed from the topic of a "1940's War Time Pin Up calendar look" to Dress and Deportment; what do you think of CF members and Body Piercings?

GW


----------



## Slim (23 Aug 2004)

We've always been fans of our armed forces.

Gasp, Choke...Do they...Do they really mean it...?  Authorsays with dumbfounded look on his face. Begins to dig through back issues of the Sun to find the last time they slagged the military.

He doesn't have to search all that hard... :

Slim


----------



## 291er (23 Aug 2004)

I say the Major was doing his job, but he may have wanted to confer with the PAFFO's first.....
and as for the NDHQ slagging, I say this, every unit/base/formation has its share of thuds, NDHQ just happens to be the HQ and hence there is more publicity.  We also happen to have a lot of people here in the NCR, I think if you looked at it from a statistics point of view, you won't find a huge difference from any military base in Canada.  I don't put much merit into that remark anyhow, as it says "Future member of the CF", another example of a future potential recruit who knows it all, an all too familiar sight  The fact being, there are lots of people who have tedious jobs here, but the fact is, that they have to be done.  Personally, I am of the opinion that I want someone like this Major doing that job, paying attention to detail.
As for the points about Reservists walking around with earrings etc, it really does'nt surprise me nowadays.  It seems that every 5 years or so we get almost a new revolution of people joining....more and more of this "new army" type.....don't get me wrong, I am not completely opposed to this new ethos, just some aspects.  But I seem to see more and more people who try to split away from our traditional military image and care less and less about the image of the CF soldier.  Now when I joined (not so long ago) I was taught that when you go out looking like cr-p in uniform, that it reflects on everyone in the Forces....I still take this very seriously to this day.  
If I may branch out for a moment, another pet peeve of mine is something that happened to me just this week.  I was coming off of a midnight shift (the last of 4) and taking the bus fm NDHQ to my house.  Another person in uniform, a reserve Infantry MCpl who barely looked old enough to drink, decided to make a point of coming from the back of the bus, in order to chew me out for wearing desert boots.  I am not sure what he was thinking, but I understandably got a bit defensive and ticked off at him.  When I informed him that I was Reg Force, and that I had permission to wear these boots as I am deploying to Sudan within the next month, he apologized profusely and did an about face to the back of the bus.  Just a reminder....think before you speak.....and if you see a Cpl wearing desert boots on the bus after a strenuous midnight shift, your best bet is to let him be. :threat:


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Aug 2004)

> When I informed him that I was Reg Force, and that I had permission to wear these boots as I am deploying to Sudan within the next month, he apologized profusely and did an about face to the back of the bus.  Just a reminder....think before you speak.....and if you see a Cpl wearing desert boots on the bus after a strenuous midnight shift, your best bet is to let him be.



Looking back on it now do you think it was professional of him, even though he is a "young reservest", to approach you and attempt to correct what he *thought* was an infraction or whatever?


----------



## 291er (23 Aug 2004)

I have no qualms about that....it was just his attitude about it....he treated me as though I were a young no-hook Pte who did'nt know any better.   Had he been polite about it, I would not have had any problems, it was'nt the fact that he came to me about it, it was just the manner in which he did it.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (23 Aug 2004)

Being diplomatic always gets better results then coming across with an atitude.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (23 Aug 2004)

I say kudos to the MCpl.

Many would not have said anything at all, he saw a dress infraction, and acted upon it.

The fact that he was reservist does not have any bearing on the situation at all.  He was a MCpl, obviously concerned about the image of the Canadian Armed Forces.  I would have undoubtedly approached you as well, in the same situation.  There is a dress code, and it should be enforced by all and sundry.

I wish more would act like the MCpl did, and straighten out dress infractions when they see them, instead of turning a blind eye.......


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Aug 2004)

Ah right on. I hear you then.   I've approached a few reg force soldiers in kingston and tried to be diplomatic ie. hey man not to be a goof but do you really think it looks professional eating a hamburger while walking down the street or spitting in public?   
Or going up to guys in uniform (in the food court at the cat center) telling them to cut out the swearing .   I think 99% of the time the guys didn't even realise what they were doing.

if someone is being a dink with an attitude thats one thing, if a soldier is just correcting a fault thats another.


----------



## 291er (23 Aug 2004)

I have nothing against reservists, I'm an ex-reserve Infanteer myself so that did not matter to me at all.  And although a dress infraction, there are circumstances, I would rather break a dress infraction than hit the ground in theatre with boots that are'nt broken in.  And I made sure to get approval all the way up my chain of command before doing so.  I would not just go off and do this on my own initiative, I made sure I got approval fm people with a lot more stripes and bars on their shoulders than I.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Aug 2004)

Just my take, but I think what the article does do is show exactly how f'd up NDHQ's priorities are.

How many years to replace the Sea King?
How many years to replace Protecteur-class?
How many years spent on CADRE?
How many years to complete F-18 upgrades?
How many years to get desert CADPAT?

But on this, and the guy they promised LTD pay and have now reneg'd, they leap into action.

I love my country but if that doesn't signify the need for a serious culture shift at NDHQ, I don't know what does.




Matthew.     ???

P.S.   The only way I see that culture shift taking place is a new federal government followed by some quick and
painful restructuring and firings on merit.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Just my take, but I think what the article does do is show exactly how f'd up NDHQ's priorities are.
> 
> How many years to replace the Sea King?
> How many years to replace Protecteur-class?
> ...



Cdn Blackshirt, if you haven't actually served, or indeed, set foot inside NDHQ, maybe you need to talk a lot less about things you couldn't possibly know about.  I get the feeling that list includes just about every thread on this board.  Not that I claim to have served at NDHQ - I did visit there this summer FWIW - but I am not jumping up and down like an unwashed cretin, either.

Do you really think that some guy whose duties include the use of our corporate imagery would have any connection whatsoever to major equipment procurement?  Get a grip on reality.  The government controls the purse strings, in case you've forgotten.  I would argue also that Arid pattern CADPAT hasn't been necessary with some minor exceptions, certainly less necessary than much of the other good stuff we have been getting over the last 15 years or so.

Until you've got some actual managerial experience under your belt, I don't think you're in a position to comment in sweeping generalities.

If it really bothers you so much, why not write to the officer mentioned in the article - his email is available through the CF email system - and demand that he stop his current activities and hop right on the new equipment procurement.  See what he tells you, I'd love to hear about it.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Aug 2004)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Cdn Blackshirt, if you haven't actually served, or indeed, set foot inside NDHQ, maybe you need to talk a lot less about things you couldn't possibly know about.   I get the feeling that list includes just about every thread on this board.   Not that I claim to have served at NDHQ - I did visit there this summer FWIW - but I am not jumping up and down like an unwashed cretin, either.
> 
> Do you really think that some guy whose duties include the use of our corporate imagery would have any connection whatsoever to major equipment procurement?   Get a grip on reality.   The government controls the purse strings, in case you've forgotten.   I would argue also that Arid pattern CADPAT hasn't been necessary with some minor exceptions, certainly less necessary than much of the other good stuff we have been getting over the last 15 years or so.
> 
> ...



Dear Michael,

I currently run two mid-sized businesses that gross about $1.5 million per year and count companies like Suncor, Syncrude and Magna
as some of my clients, so you can take the "actual managerial experience under my belt" comment and decide how you'd like to 
rephrase it as it is grossly inaccurate.

The one thing I have learned from my experience is that the ability to set priorities and allocate assets is absolutely essential to the
long term success or failure of your corporation and I can walk into any corporation and look at its historical decision-making pattern
to determine if they get it, or they don't.

In this case the decisionmakers at NDHQ as well as the Liberal Government who control the pursestrings obviously do not.   

Have a look at the last Australian Annual Review in comparison.   

Link:   *http://www.defence.gov.au/budget/02-03/dar/pdf/dar0203full.pdf*

....and if you can't see the difference, you're not looking.

Lastly, in regards to emailing the specific officer, what's the point?   He is doing his job.   

The whole point of my post is that it is the underlying structure and culture from top-down that are failing both the
men and women in uniform, and the citizens of our country.

Bottom Line:   Get off your high horse Michael.   Your last post only made you look like an ass....



Matthew.      

P.S.   I read your last published article (Calgary Sun I believe) and you're much better than your last post.   I hope
after reading what I attempted to keep as a civil and thoughtful response that you reconsider your use of the
term "unwashed cretin".


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Aug 2004)

> I currently run two mid-sized businesses that gross about $1.5 million per year


I think we found a possible solution to our bandwidth problem...


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

Well, I need to revise my statement then.   Instead of "unless you have managerial experience under your belt you are in no position to generalize", change to "even with your managerial experience, you are in no position to generalize."

Not sure what the link was supposed to prove.   Your arguments do not follow.   You posted a litany of major equipment purchases and then used the one officer (whom you admit "was only doing his job") as evidence that DND as a whole doesn't have its priorities in order.

What you fail to realize is that DND doesn't control the money.   You could fire the good major tomorrow and still wouldn't save enough money to refit a single jet fighter or purchase a single new helicopter.

Frankly, the gnashing of teeth about Ottawa and its "culture" - which you seem to know so much about - is getting tiresome and old.

I'd much prefer that DND move too far in one direction (suggesting that the use of uniforms in calendars is inappropriate) rather than the other (perhaps a fuzzy DND mascot to show up at all major league baseball, hockey and football events, Dead Peacekeeper trading cards, CADPAT uniforms for prison chain gangs working on major highways....the mind boggles).

As for pissing and moaning about life in the CF, I'll confine my complaints to areas I've actually served in, and send them properly up the chain of command.   The rest I'll leave in the hands of those who know better.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (23 Aug 2004)

Michael, um, I don't want to get into an argument or anything, but I find your defense of the inhabitants of NDHQ somewhat puzzling.

No, DND does not control the money, but it does set priorities, based on need, one would presume.  To set these priorities, one would have to have goals, even short term goals, one would think.

And yet, in just the last few years, we have spent gazillions of dollars on projects that have gone, to be blunt, in to the garbage can.  Examples?  The Leopard Thermal Sight Upgrade project, completed just a few years ago,  Another?  The M113 upgrade project.  And there are more, as I know you are well aware.  Very shortly after these projects were announced, and funded, the decision was made to go to an all-wheeled army.

Does this make you feel confident that our leaders know what they are doing?  It makes me wonder about the leadership in the army, and I know that I am not alone in my head scratching.

And yet, you say that the gnashing of teeth about Ottawa is getting tiresome and old.  How so?  Are the problems in Ottawa corrected?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

Problems corrected?  I wasn't aware that pissing and moaning on an open forum would correct anything, if you see my point.

It's all a matter of presentation - you just named two good examples (I presume, don't know much about them).  Compare to the other argument in this thread - "We haven't had the Sea Kings replaced in years therefore no one at NDHQ should be doing anything else."  It's a dumb argument.  And why drag it into a thread about corporate imagery.  It's intellectual bankruptcy.  If you want to complain about procurement issues, start a new thread.  And we can all go around and around in circles and solve all the Army's problems and then complain because no in NDHQ pisses standing up or are half as smart as we are.

I can only go by personal experience; I too was in management for about a year.  I was lucky enough to have started in the company at the lowest levels. I was openly critical of management, and promised myself if I ever got the chance, things would change.  Guess what - a week after my promotion, nothing changed, and my eyes opened, and I did things very much like my predecessors had.  Not because I had to, but because they were the right way to do things that my former co-workers, now employees, wouldn't understand.

I would love for some NDHQ types come onto the board and actually discuss openly and honestly some of the policy decisions, though we all know for security reasons that won't happen.  But you know, as long as everyone here acts like a dickhead, flings faeces at the Ivory Tower in Ottawa and generally insults every policy decision made, I wouldn't blame the decisions makers for throwing their hands in the air.  I certainly went through that as a manager (of a very small company) - give the staff one thing and it isn't good enough because they want ten more.

Now, if anyone has an intelligent and reasoned explanation as to why an officer at NDHQ charged with protecting our corporate image should in any way be connected to a discussion of procurement policies, please present it now.
Otherwise, lay off the whining and crying, it isnt' doing anyone a damn bit of good.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Aug 2004)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Well, I need to revise my statement then.   Instead of "unless you have managerial experience under your belt you are in no position to generalize", change to "even with your managerial experience, you are in no position to generalize."
> 
> Not sure what the link was supposed to prove.   Your arguments do not follow.   You posted a litany of major equipment purchases and then used the one officer (whom you admit "was only doing his job") as evidence that DND as a whole doesn't have its priorities in order.
> 
> ...




So your contention is that unless you're CF or CF veteran, regardless of management or business education or experience, you have no right to make critical 
observations, assessments, etc.?

Let me blunt and say that is totally absurd.

Do you complain about your computer?   Have you ever built one?   How about your car?   Your house?   

In regards my listing major equipment programs as evidence NDHQ doesn't have its priorities straight, I stand by that contention.

In all those programs NDHQ spent a small fortune on teams of individuals to research the project prior to budget funding was ever allocated.

Look at CADRE specifically.   How much was spent?   If it gets cancelled what's our ROI?   

KEY POINT:   *"How could that money have been better spent if NDHQ was structured to only research funded projects?"*

CASR did a great analysis of this specific problem in November of 2003.

I'll post it as per the Australian Report:   http://www.sfu.ca/casr/ft-advisory1-1.htm

And in regards to the Australian Report which you ignored, it's focus is on measuring ROI for the taxpayer in context of
a deliverable effective fighting force.   Have you looked at Defence Department Financials lately?   They are a mess and
provide zero clarity on what is actually being accomplished with the budget provided.

So you can continue to take personal shots at me (note the lack of an apology for the unwashed cretin comment) if it really
makes you feel better, but in doing so you merely demonstrate a complete lack of class, decorum and more importantly objectivity 
which I was expecting.

I hope for a less vitriolic response next time around....





Matthew.


----------



## muskrat89 (23 Aug 2004)

> Now, if anyone has an intelligent and reasoned explanation as to why an officer at NDHQ charged with protecting our corporate image should in any way be connected to a discussion of procurement policies, please present it now.



For some of us, it is exasparating that the process to chastise a centrefold and publication for wearing an Army hat is far more decisive and efficient than that of properly equipping our Forces. You may argue that it is due to complexity, while we are arguing that it is due to culture.



> I wasn't aware that pissing and moaning on an open forum would correct anything, if you see my point.



And what does you "pissing and moaning" about their "pissing and moaning" accomplish? Do you suppose that you will change our opinions with your condascension?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (23 Aug 2004)

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> For some of us, it is exasparating that the process to chastise a centrefold and publication for wearing an Army hat is far more decisive and efficient than that of properly equipping our Forces.



Tough.   I should hope it is easier to write to a newspaper about a photo than to decide on which helicopters to buy.   Wouldn't you be suspicious if it was the other way around?   They've done quite well by us as far as uniforms and small arms, that certainly didn't happen overnight.   I wish I could get paid every week instead of every two weeks.   I don't see that ranting and raving on the internet will change that.   

"God give me the strength to change the things I can, the courage to accept the things I can't, and the wisdom to know the difference..."



> You may argue that it is due to complexity, while we are arguing that it is due to culture.



And you're an expert on the culture within NDHQ because......................what exactly.   You've worked there?   You're procured equipment for the Army?   My problem isn't that people have opinions on this, it is that they trot them out without provocation in the most unlikely of places.   "Oh my God, some staff johnny at NDHQ has time enough to complain about calendars, NO WONDER our Sea Kings are killing people left, right and centre!!!!!"

Please.

Most importantly, it's a public forum.  How do you want the Army viewed by those not in the know?  As a can-do force limited by their equipment but making do professionally, or a bunch of whiny babies who sit on the computer all day and cry to high heaven about how poorly they are led - despite really having no clue about why or how higher policies are decided or implemented.

Maybe we ought to stick to our own bailiwicks - I am sure you can post some more good info on how to set up a hoochie.


----------



## muskrat89 (23 Aug 2004)

> Wouldn't you be suspicious if it was the other way around?




According to you, we're not qualified to form that opinion......



> And you're an expert on the culture within NDHQ because......................what exactly.  You've worked there?  You're procured equipment for the Army?



But you're qualified to say that small arms and uniforms went well?  To quote the Great One - "Please..."



> "Oh my God, some staff johnny at NDHQ has time enough to complain about calendars, NO WONDER our Sea Kings are killing people left, right and centre!!!!!"



My point tried to demonstrate (agree with you) that although, there is a literal disconnect, we see this as  the disease, as opposed to a symptom..

I see that you're not actually opposed to crying on the internet... it's the content that you have a problem with . Maybe when we're misguided it's crying.. when you're offering your opinion to us, though.. it's not   

Anyway, you asked how they were connected, and I tried to show how I thought the others were making a connection. You're not seeing our point, we're not seeing yours.. I'm "out" on this one


----------

