# A "First Nations" Unit Merged Thread.



## The Bread Guy (11 Apr 2007)

_- edit -_ I thought I also heard a CBC Radio story this morning alluding to formation of a unit as well as a base.

 Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*Coderre urges military base for natives*
Canadian Press, via Globe & Mail, 11 Apr 07
Article link

Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre is calling on the federal government to build a Canadian Forces base for native soldiers.

"I think that we have to show sensitivity since Canada is also composed of first nations," Mr. Coderre said yesterday.

"The Canadian Forces have always reflected what Canada is," he said.

The base, which would be a first in Canada, would be built in the Restigouche area of northern New Brunswick.

The idea was first floated by Serge Noel, a local resident who noticed that many natives from the area were crossing the border to join the armed forces in the United States.

"The Canadian Forces have taken steps in the past to attract more aboriginals to their ranks and have achieved a certain level of success, but not as much as they would have hoped for," Mr. Noel said.

Mr. Noel added that Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor has already rejected his idea.

However, Mr. Coderre said the issue could resurface during the next election campaign.

"I promise to speak about this project with our leader, Stéphane Dion, and I hope that it can become a campaign promise," Mr. Coderre said.

Mr. Coderre also said he plans to meet aboriginal leaders to gauge their support for the native base.


----------



## Journeyman (11 Apr 2007)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> *Mr. Coderre also said he plans to meet aboriginal leaders to gauge their support for the native base.*


"I have a solution....now I have to find a problem it fits"  :


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Apr 2007)

Government "problem solving" sometimes involves asking, "what's the problem?", and "what's the solution going to be?" without asking, "will the solution SOLVE the problem?"   :


----------



## GAP (11 Apr 2007)

So now we need a race based segment to the CF? Liberal thinking at its' best.....why, I'm sure if we put up the effort we could have separate Muslim segments sorta along the lines of the Sunni and Shite militia's in Iraq........


----------



## Journeyman (11 Apr 2007)

Can you imagine the uproar if someone said "we need a regiment and base for only white people."

Yet Coderre's statement is OK.  :


----------



## Patrolman (11 Apr 2007)

Sounds kind of like what me might call a reserve! Look how well segregation(reserves) has worked so far. We need to integrate not segregate. Liberals and their new ideas!


----------



## niner domestic (11 Apr 2007)

I think these guys (and the thousands like them) might have something to say to Coderre...
and it won't be sure.. we agree...


----------



## gaspasser (11 Apr 2007)

I can't believe that a Parliamentarian actually said that!!!  Is this Canada?  I thought we were a more intergrated poplulace? 
I work side by side with an Aboriginal person, I've never seen a difference.
I also work side by side with some french people, some from Quebec and some from all over, and I've never seen a difference.
Except in language, which I try to learn.  :-[
To re-segregate the military...where is Goderre's head?  Next he'll want African-Canadian units only.
 :rage:
I wonder how his constituants feel?
Aaargh, time for a coffee!
edited to add:
Many of The First Nations peoples shed blood on foreign soils for him to able to say that.


----------



## 3rd Herd (11 Apr 2007)

Not the first time just prior and in the early stages of WW1, complete aboridginal bns were formed. But the were broken up prior to overseas deployment. There are several references to this in The History of the County of Brant, Reville, Douglas F, Brantford:1920, Hurley Publishing Company.


As to the African Canadian issue. At what level could Canada put together an "african-canadian" contingent for service in the Sudan etc.


----------



## kas (11 Apr 2007)

> The idea was first floated by Serge Noel, a local resident who noticed that many natives from the area were crossing the border to join the armed forces in the United States.



Which is clearly due to the United States' sensitivity towards its First Nations population. Does the US still have racially segregated units? Oh wait, when you phrase it that way it suddenly sounds rather negative...

I can't find any references at the moment, but it was my impression that natives from Canada tend to be drawn towards the American military because they perceive it to be more warrior-like. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But if that is in fact the reason, then creating a racially segregated unit / base is doing nothing to address the root of the problem when it comes to recruiting natives to the Canadian Forces.

kas.


----------



## Etienne (11 Apr 2007)

I demand that all English-Canadian be boot out of Valcatraz and Baggotville. Also in all the other base across Canada all non english speaking and aboriginal soldiers should be kicked out of their base and ship. After that, all soldiers should be placed in base or ship were they will all be the same skin color, religion, sex, sex oriented, same hair color and same lenght of toenail. I will immediatly past this to my ridding representative and will also send an email to Mr. Coderre looking for is support. Should have an answer soon enought from him...is he not always looking for a cause to fight ? Good or wrong as long as he fight ?

Good day 

RIP to our fallen today    

Etienne


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Apr 2007)

I guess he didn’t notice the Ranger units that have a high proportion of Aboriginals as do many of the Northern bases that support them.


----------



## Big Foot (11 Apr 2007)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> "The Canadian Forces have always reflected what Canada is," he said.


Geeze, so you mean back in the day, Canada was comprised almost exclusively of white men with some visible minorities thrown in there? What a clown, first suggesting we simply by trucks INSTEAD of C-17s when we clearly need both, now this... God help the CF if he ever becomes the MND. Oh, and I want a strictly Irish-Canadian artillery regiment established so I only have to fight alongside other first generation Irish-Canadians. I should ask Mr. Coderre to support me. He probably would, too. It should be an election issue, lets rebuild all the walls that Canadian society has spent so long breaking down! Blah...


----------



## Bart Nikodem (11 Apr 2007)

Do they still do "Bold Eagle"? That was pretty cool.
Bart


----------



## Signalman150 (11 Apr 2007)

I have always looked to the Liberal Party of Canada for forward looking--and forward thinking--ideas like this.  It's wonderful...someone should have thought of this years ago. I gotta tell you, this man Coderre is friggin' brilliant.

Now, right after we finish creating this new base, (and one would assume new regiments and formations that will be lodger units for the base) we will need to raise several other units and open more new bases. This will be in keeping with the concept of recruiting from various ethnic and special-interest groups, and "reflecting what Canada is", to use Mr. Coderre's erudite words.

I foresee a whole new way of organizing Canada's Army:

a)  A formation comprised of Eastern European immigrants, who specialize in mountain warfare. We'll call them The* Lithuanian Infantry Commando - Mountain Equipped*, (the* LIC-ME* regiment).

b)  The large Francophone community in Winnipeg has been unfairly overlooked, and I think should be permitted to raise it's own proud unit in defence of Canada. We'll call them the *Manitoba's Own French Ordinance Corps,* (the *MO-FOs*, natch).

c)  I don't think it would be fair to leave those following alternate life styles out of this. How about an arty battery made up of gay soldiers?  Well call them the *GAGGLE* - *The Gay Artillery Gunners Gleefully Launching Explosives*.

d) Being an Albertan, I'm very aware of the Ukrainian roots of many around the Edmonton area, hence it would behoove us to form The *Free Ukrainian Companies of Killers* (hmmmm; not even gonna go there).

e) Of course, then I'll be expecting a unit for *white Anglo-Saxon protestants with bummed up cardiovascular systems, and killer Alzheimer's related oh-ohs*; that will be the one for me.  Lemme see, it will be the *WASP-BUCKAROOS* Regiment.

Uh--Mr Coderre--the only reason to do this kind of thing is so that one could then take Canada as a country, and break it into dozens of little ethnically aligned states, divided by colour, race, religion, language....(each with their own army no less! Gee whiz!). 

The idea of a united country, with a common good and common interest is not part of your party's agenda, is it? You and your feeble attempts at garnering votes by pandering to minorities, (like those good friends of Canada's Liberal Party, the Tamil Tigers) is pathetic and destructive to my country. Please get off my planet, and for heaven's sake, stop breathing my air.


----------



## cplcaldwell (11 Apr 2007)

Signalman-150

LMAO


On a serious note though, sometime ago the 'Native Protestors' thread got mangled into a 'How to empower Aboriginals thread.'

I noted that urban reserves would be a good idea. (IMHO)

Several Aboriginal members of the board indicated to me that that would not be a good idea as it would be unworkable. There was, they said, no way that all the different native cultures would come together on one urban reserve as it would be to difficult to maintain the linguistic, tribal and other cultural differences that were so important to the many cultures in the Aborginal community.

Okay so I thought that was a bit hokey: but it's not up to me to tell my neighbour how to arrange the furniture on his patio either. I took the comments at face value and dropped the issue.

I wonder then, how this would work. Suppose we have the "Canadian Aboriginal Regiment". To be correct then, should we have Mic Mac Coy, Mohawk Coy? Cree Coy? Haida Coy? 1....

What uniting affect will this have?

_*My 0.02.*_ 

A half baked idea. I'd rather work or fight next to any Canadian based on our citizenry, rather than be segregated (voluntarily or not) based on race, or colour or religion.




1 - I know these are not the correct names, they are names attached by whites and often do not even come close to the proper (aboriginal) name. I do not mean to offend and I apologize if I do, 
I guess I'm just 'culturally bound' on this, these are the words I know I will use them.


----------



## Dale Denton (11 Apr 2007)

cplcaldwell said:
			
		

> Signalman-150
> 
> LMAO



[Sarcasim on] Why doesn't he bring up the "need" for an all African- Canadian unit? [Sarcasim off] 
I'm surprised that nobody has written in a newspaper or gone on TV blasting the Grits for wanting racial segregation in the CF.


----------



## JesseWZ (12 Apr 2007)

I am shocked and appalled that this person is elected as a representative of his constituency. I should hope his constituents send some angry letters demanding he apologize to the country for representing them as bigots.
On another note have the Tories jumped all over this one yet?
If they haven't, they really should.


----------



## RangerRay (12 Apr 2007)

The more I hear from Coderre, the more I'm shocked that this clown was once a cabinet minister.  He really scares the crap out of me!  This idea is as assinine as it is ridiculous.

Slightly off topic, but I've always admired how the New Zealand Army has integrated it's British colonial heritage with its' Maori heritage.  A large proportion of Kiwi soldiers are Maori, and Maori warrior traditions, such as the _haka_ have found their way into common practice in the New Zealand Army.  Below, is the logo of the New Zealand Army, which at first looks like the British Army emblem.  However, on closer inspection, it replaced one sword with a _taiaha_, a traditional Maori weapon.  As well, a scroll which reads _Ngati Tumatauenga_, a Maori phrase, was added to it.  I like how it's a uniquely Kiwi design that retains it's British past.


----------



## Armymedic (12 Apr 2007)

I find this whole concept *racist*

This is a purely political ploy. It does not surprise me that a Liberal MP would stoop so low to gain votes.


----------



## mjohnston39 (12 Apr 2007)

I don't think this is an attempt to get votes from the Natives but a ham fist-ed attempt to embarrass the Tories. Let's say the Libs bring this up in an election, the Tories respond that this is a ridiculous idea, the Liberals then can cry that the Tories are racist and bigoted against the Natives. This of course assumes that the electorate believes this is a good idea or even cares...


----------



## Navy_Blue (12 Apr 2007)

K to start I'm not anything close to being Native Canadian.

I have on occasion thought of this.  We all make this out to be a form of Segregation.  You don't need to send only Natives to a unit like this but allow it to be prodominantly Native.  Are there no English people in the 22nd or on the HMCS Ville de Quebec??  It could be a Unit based on Native traditions and Native Warrior traditions (not unlike a highland regiment).  It could instill allot of pride in a people who are plagued with many many social issues.  

I can think of one unit of this type in the commonwealth.  Anyone think of the Gurkhas??  They were/are considered one of the Elite units in the UK.  It would take allot of work to build a unit like the Gurkhas but it could be done.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Apr 2007)

Navy_Blue

That is an Apples and Oranges argument.   Gurkhas are not native to the UK.


----------



## niner domestic (12 Apr 2007)

Well, this whole idea does not surprise me at all. Over the last 3 decades, there has been an emerging attempt from politicians to "add Indian and mix" to various institutions throughout our country.  This one is just one of many by our elected representatives. Some others have been:

Barry Stuart J of the Yukon Bench, idea to bring a concept of a sentencing circle to northern communities that as part of their culture, never use the motifs of circles in government.  As a result an idea that was originally meant to address sentencing disparity amongst First Nations *in the north* for crimes of a *non-violent* nature has been quickly co-opted by other jurisdictions as the mechanisms to address disproportionate representation of First Nation in federal pens.  We all know how that's gone over in the courts.  

Then there was the bright idea to institute all First Nation rolls of jurors following the Donald Marshall Inquiry.  I recall one FN inmate vehemently opposed to the idea and putting it simply, that he'd rather take his chances with 12 white people than 12 Indian grandmothers.  Knowing full well the gradmothers of his FN would in all likelihood leave him out for wolf fodder.  

Then there was the Kingston business man who wanted to reenact the whole Mohawk/Loyalists/1812 thing down by the waterfront at Fort Henry by starting it off with Mohawk "warriors" shooting flaming arrows over the ramparts of the fort.

Then there was the Birkenstock brigade that wanted to introduce an eagle feather to the Supreme Court of Canada as an alternative to using a bible or using an affirmation.  This idea actually got far enough that a committee had been formed.  It was shot down when they couldn't answer the questions of, which First Nation are you going to use for the acquisition of the said feather? (in some FN one does not simply bend over and pick up a feather off the ground, there is a whole ceremony for that other FN believe that only certain people should have possession of a feather while others believe it is very important to know exactly which bird and how the feather was obtained.  What will you do when a witness (now please note here that in the SCC there is very little direct testimony from a witness - if at all) that isn't from the particular FN and wants a feather from their own FN? And lastly, who will be the keeper of the said feather? Who and why someone has a feather is quite important to FNs, so using a generic "feather" would not necessarily bind someone to an oath by using it.  So that idea got shelved. 

Then there was the whole CSC thing about section 81 of the CCRA.  Some talk was shuttled back and forth about what it actually meant for fed prisoners and their communities.  It got as far as a symposium in Prince Albert in 1994.  

Then there is the total mess of the Indian Land Claim commission that for all it's necessity has only guaranteed jobs for the staff for the next 30 years as they plow through the current land claims. But the chair is an Indian so it must be a good thing.  

We'll skip over the Healing Foundation and the mess there.  

Then there was the bright idea to turn DIAND into a super ministry and staff it with 50% FN persons.  The problem at the time was there weren't enough FN public servants in the mix to apply for the *internal* postings. So there was an emergence of my great-great-great-great grandmother was a Cherokee princess type of public servant that managed to keep their job.  

Then there was the National Film Board's attempt to "Indian" up the place.  It started the Aboriginal Film Section.  Filmmakers like Bruce MacDonald seemed to have managed to tap into that  pot of money quite nicely as the criteria is limited to having one or two FN technical crew and one or two FN actors to constitute an Aboriginal film.  

Then there is Health Canada's blueprint for a sunsetting organization.  Medical Services Branch was supposed to shut up shop and have completed health transfer over to all FN by.....1999.  They are a little behind in the schedule. Seems the bean counters forgot to add into the envelope of funding the *ongoing and sustainable amounts* so FN are saying no thanks to that proverbial white elephant.  

Back in early 1993, the then Commissioner of CSC, John Edwards ordered up a study on whether there should be racial segregation(especially black and  First Nation inmates) in the pens.  His orginal thought was to prevent the issues of gangs and racial tensions.  Those at CSC quickly pointed out to Edwards that this study coming from any other commissioner might be able to be got away with but with Edwards requesting it was going to be a hot potato and potential media nightmare.  Edwards, was a former civil servant in Nigeria and South Africa - pre-Mandela.   That study is sitting on some shelf somewhere in the bowels of NHQ collecting dust.  

Still with CSC, back in the early 90s, some bright spark decided that all FN inmates needed to be rehabilitated was to get in touch with their inner Indianess.  So self appointed elders were put on contract to deliver "programs".  It was quite lucrative to get one of those contracts because all you had to do was photocopy some pages from the WhiteBearcrappinginthewood's new age touchy feely book on real-honest-to-goodness-Indian ceremonies and hand them out to the inmates and tell them to walk the red road.  Six weeks later, hand them all a fancy-schmancy certificate and tell them they are all warriors.  

Then there was the brilliant government idea to re-initiate aboriginal language training after spending a century trying to quash anyone from speaking it.  But, someone decided that by 2050, there would be only three linguistic groups surviving (this is just a remake of the 1920 museum period's prediction that by 1960 all FN would be gone or assimilated) so oodles of money got thrown into Cree, Inuit and Haudausonee.  Then in a innocuous little survey done by a school board in Kingston Ontario, it came to light that what was originally thought to have a number of maybe 30 FN kids in the area interested in learning a language, turned out to have over 1600 kids and their parents who were First Nation. This started a reexamination of off reserve stats. The feds in true form, handed that language envelope to the province's boards of education to sort out.  

Are you starting to see a pattern? 

Coderre's idea will last as long as the NAVA has to shoot him down.  This is not about votes, or attempts to embarrass the current government - this is just another case of an attempt to add Indian and mix...


----------



## a_majoor (12 Apr 2007)

For another fine example of how ethincly segragated units operate, Mr Coderre should look to the example of Former Yugoslavia in the 1990's.......


----------



## jimb (12 Apr 2007)

IN fact ,The Gurkhas are "mercenary soldiers " who fight for pay. They sign for a 21 year contract, and only recently have they been granted any pension rights by the UK Government, so a poor compariosn to this idiotic idea spawned by this Liberal MP.

 Racially segregated CF units ? Crazy. Totally crazy.

Jim B. Toronto.


----------



## geo (12 Apr 2007)

Hmm.... do you think they would form a Battalion of Lesbians ???
I think that would be interesting - really!
(though I would certainly not want to get in their way - on a bad day)


----------



## foresterab (12 Apr 2007)

Regarding the Gurkha units within the British Army,

While most folks consider the word Gurkha to be representative of a Nepalese citizen the fact is historically this has not been true.  Traditionally these troops and units have recruited primarily from the martial minded tribes of central Nepal...Gurung, Magar, Tamang, Khasa and Kiranti tribes.  However this is just a fraction of the groups in Nepal as the link attached shows:
http://nefin.org.np/content/blogcategory/67/40/

So basically what you have is a famed regiment that has traditionally been racially based from only 5 out 55 tribes in the country.  During times of conflict huge numbers of the non-core tribal groups have signed up but recruiting is still very selective.

What does this all mean for Canada?

Well consider if Canada created the Aboriginal Unit as proposed but only recruited from the 6 Nations of Central Canada?  Or the Plains Confederation?   Now we're into a situation that is even worse than before because we now have a selective racial based unit that in turn is racially selecting members for the unit based upon their warrior traditions.

It's a no win situation.


----------



## childs56 (12 Apr 2007)

Imagine this. Oka, The once Famed Native Regiment has now gone into a full on blockade of their traditional land here. They have tanks, AFV's, Anti tank rockets and helicopter support and Fighter Jets. 

Over the past 15 years we have set this group of what once were proud soldiers with this high tech equipment and high end training. This was thought to have brought around the redevelopment of Native rights with in Canada and rejoin what was once a far distant memory of what was wrongfully down to them by our fore fathers over 100 years ago and then 20 years ago.  Only a paper agreement that todays elders say was brought about with trickery and onyl the white mans best interest. 

We have been living in solitude, we have been asked to live by Canadain Laws, but those laws do not allow me to carry on my tradtional rights as a Native. These include bartering for my basic necssitys, hunting for my food, carrying out my tradtional ceremoines. (involves smuggling smokes at discount prices, shooting animal with high powered rifles, hunting wales with jet boats and again very high powered rifles, over fishing areas that have not been touched by anyone but them selves for 5 years.)


I understand the thought behind this politician's idea of forming a Native Regiment. Sounds all good. Except if you are going to do something like this it needs to be for the right reasons. 
As far as I can tell if a exodous of Natives are leaving for the US to Join their military then I have to ask a few questions. Who are they loyal to? What are their traditional rights upon return to Canada? Do they claim special status when they join? Why have they abandoned their proud land that they speak so freely of defending?

To any politicians who wants to break Our country up further then it already is, think twice about it. I will fight to the bitter end to ensure that Canada stays as Canada. Not some political crap shoot you call your job.


----------



## 3rd Herd (12 Apr 2007)

American & Canadian Indians In The Military
US/Canadian Indian Tribes
Serving as of April 1, 2003
Source: Immigration Policy Center and U.S. Defense Department 

Army - 2,985 Eskimo - 98 Aleut - 79 = 3,162
Navy - 7,068 Eskimo - 116 Aleut - 199 = 7,383
USMC - 1,111 Eskimo - 30 Aleut - 31 = 1,172
USAF - 1,696 Eskimo - 30 Aleut - 22 = 1,748
US/Canadian Indians total = 12,860, plus
Eskimo - 274 & Aleut - 291 Total = 13, 425 
Grand Total All Serving = 1,401,128

Interesting related sites:

The People's Path Home: http://www.yvwiiusdinvnohii.net/military.htm

Turtle Island Native Network: http://www.turtleisland.org/news/news-veterans.htm


----------



## niner domestic (12 Apr 2007)

First Nations can join the US military because of the Jay Treaty.  Just as anyone else who has rights to abode in the UK, Aus, NZ or the US can also join that respective country's military.  Can one of you please explain to me what the difference in your thinking is of a FN joining the US mil as opposed to the many threads on Canadians leaving a joining the UK forces, or ANZAC? Why is that not questioned whereas a FN leaving Canada is? 


CTD, your post is confusing, are you setting out an argument to convey a potential scenario that upon training, a FN would turn that training for their own use in some distant future? Are you questioning the loyalty of FN that are serving, have served and are about to serve? Please clarify.


----------



## Seyek (12 Apr 2007)

While Coderre's idea to re-insitute what basically amounts to segregation is undoubtedly wrong, and flat out idiotic, I think Navy Blue's idea is kind of interesting. Why not a regiment (like the highland regiments) based on native traditions, but composed of everyone?


----------



## GAP (12 Apr 2007)

Seyek said:
			
		

> While Coderre's idea to re-insitute what basically amounts to segregation is undoubtedly wrong, and flat out idiotic, I think Navy Blue's idea is kind of interesting. Why not a regiment (like the highland regiments) based on native traditions, but composed of everyone?



Better yet, why not just focus on the individual unit. Let the Unit build its' own History and Tradition, irrespective of where the people came from or what religion/color they were?


----------



## Jacqueline (12 Apr 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> Better yet, why not just focus on the individual unit. Let the Unit build its' own History and Tradition, irrespective of where the people came from or what religion/color they were?



+1 

This segregation thing is a stupid idea.


----------



## childs56 (12 Apr 2007)

Niner Domestic. I come from a Native background, though I use that very loosely. Because my Great Grandma was full blooded. But untill recently I have know very little about it, growing up in the rest of Canada. Making a living for myself and not blaming the failures of where I came from onto others who have no control over the matter.  

I am not advocating that people who are already or may join the CF in the future are going to be disloyal. 
I am just giving out a scenerio that is not that far fetched from what I have seen over the past while from some of these special groups.  

One idea which makes more sense to me would be to stand to a Regiment in the North. Full time infantry soldiers. The primary recruiting group would be the Inuit. Why? they already live there. Those wishing to go there would have a choice. But this unit would be responsible not only for Artic soverinty but also for over seas deployments. 

This would serve a purpose and could be better suited for the idea of a Native style unit in Canada. Which will combine the customs of the different peoples in Canada to join together. 

I am still against a unit soley staffed of one group of people in Canada. 
To each their own. 

One thing I will note is that if the Liberals think they are going to win the next election on promising the Natives their own Military Unit, and promising Eastern Canada more money for Kick backs I think they have another thing comming to them.  

If you like it or not the Goverment in place right now has stood up for Canadians as a whole. For better or worse they have made some very tough decisions. Which the Liberals and other partys have waffled on. 

Cheers.


----------



## M Feetham (12 Apr 2007)

I think that a unit made up of just one group of people is a bad idea. You tend to lose a wealth of experience that you would usually have from the various backgrounds. As far as aboriginals in the CF, there are several Aboriginal recruiting programs already in effect. The PRTC, Op Raven and Op Bold Eagle are three of the better known ones right now. Several years ago, there was a bit of a recruiting drive for up north when HMCS Montreal went up to the Northern native cummunities with some aboriginal recruiters from the navy on board. They had a few sign up and with the other programs we usually average about 11 to 18 candidates who will be sworn in. Last year in Esquimalt for the PRTC we had 11 people who were sworn in in their respective communities.
Feet.


----------



## childs56 (12 Apr 2007)

Those programs work well. Why can't the Liberals leave things well alone.


----------



## RangerRay (12 Apr 2007)

Further to what I said about the New Zealand Army...

Though they combine the British colonial traditions with Maori warrior traditions and have a large proportion of Maori members, Maori and whites are not segregated into seperate units.

Below is a picture of Kiwi troops on parade.  Note that rather than wearing scarlet sashes, the NCOs are wearing sashes that have a distinct Maori pattern to them.  Note that the NCOs pictured in the sashes are white.


----------



## Technetium (12 Apr 2007)

Along the lines of what RangerRay mentioned,  I think it would be cool to have a Native Regiment, similar to how we have Highlander Regiments where the traditions are Scottish, but the unit is comprised of soldiers of any heritage.  This has nothing to do with what Mr Coderre is suggesting, I just thought it would be cool.


----------



## Jacqueline (13 Apr 2007)

Technetium said:
			
		

> Along the lines of what RangerRay mentioned,  I think it would be cool to have a Native Regiment, similar to how we have Highlander Regiments where the traditions are Scottish, but the unit is comprised of soldiers of any heritage.  This has nothing to do with what Mr Coderre is suggesting, I just thought it would be cool.




Maybe this is what they are planning, make different regiments, then people will join "their regiment". Just a thought.


----------



## niner domestic (13 Apr 2007)

So by extension of that proposal there would be 614 regiments stood up for the FN members to join?  Then there is the Metis, Urban and Off Rez (Bill C31s) to consider.  

Newfoundland 3
Nova Scotia 13
Prince Edward Island 2
New Brunswick 15
Quebec 39
Ontario 126
Manitoba 62
Saskatchewan 70
Alberta 44
British Columbia 198
Yukon 16
Northwest Territories 26
Total 614

source INAC


----------



## orange.paint (13 Apr 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Hmm.... do you think they would form a Battalion of Lesbians ???
> I think that would be interesting - really!
> (though I would certainly not want to get in their way - on a bad day)




Man...what a softball team...


----------



## cplcaldwell (13 Apr 2007)

I fully agree with 9D's hypothesis that this is another manifestation of "just add Indian".

The Gurkha's are magnificient, but they are _mercs_.

I think that RangerRay's point on NZ is well taken. NZ has something to show us on this. 

They (the Kiwis) got _there _ in an entirely different way, but they are in a _good spot _ nonetheless.

I have had the opportunity to spend some time in NZ. 

It is a unique tradition and history. It is not a 'done deal'. Real issues exist between the Maori and Pakeha and will for some time, I wager.

*Upshot. * 
I would rather see a way in which the contribution of FN into our military tradition is recognized, in some institutional manner, or the degree to which an individual is allowed to demonstrate that heritage (not to the detriment of good order and discipline) *than see* some token cap badge attached to the OrBat.

How? 

See a Maori 'Staff', on parade, full facial tattoo, dress and decorum all properly turned out... awesome. 

To see a section or platoon perform a 'haka' is downright scary ( ... you thought the 'All Blacks' were scary ... add Steyr's ... yikes .. )



Broad strokes folks. I'd rather integrate the best of all than segregate and divide. 0.02


----------



## medic_man17 (13 Apr 2007)

I'm Aboriginal, and I think that the idea of a base created solely for aboriginal Soldiers is, for the lack of a better descriptor, stupid.  I have been in the CF for about 4 years and I do not believe my ancestry should be any reason to create a base specifically for a certain nationality.  I have never thought myself any different than any person I have ever had the opportunity to serve beside because at the end of the day, we're all wearing the same uniform, and we're all serving the same country.  That's all I have to say about that. 
The thought of a regiment that would highlight certain attributes of first nations culture is intriguing, and the Canadian Rangers is a great example of this.  If they could branch out into other first nations groups, it just might work... Imagine a tracking course, or an escape and evasion in wooded areas course, taught by those who live it.  that's just a thought or two from my perspective.


----------



## childs56 (13 Apr 2007)

What would stop them from forming a Reg Force Ranger Unit. I know lots of Natives and non Natives that would love to join a unit such as that. 

As stated earlier a Regiment with Native Background similar to a Highland unit would be a step in the right direction. As opposed to standing to a full only Native unit.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Apr 2007)

One thing to remember is that Kiwi society evolved a lot differently than ours.  The native and non-native populations integrated much more than any other colonial society.  So it probably isn't much of a surprise that their army has combined Maori warrior traditions with British colonial martial traditions.  In Canada, we were so worried about appeasing the French that we completely ignored the natives, and left no place for their warrior traditions in our military.  And while the Kiwis have managed to integrate Maori culture while maintaining British martial culture in their army, in Canada, we seem to be irradicating our British martial heritage in order to make it more attractive to those of French descent.  The time for us to incorporate native heritage and symbolism into our military should have been at the time of unification (ptui!) when all our symbols and culture were redefined.  As well, it would probably only work if the native societies were more integrated with the non-native society like they are in New Zealand.

My $0.02...


----------



## geo (13 Apr 2007)

Rangerray?

WTF - "in order to make it more attractive to those of French descent."

I have seen the way some national courses are "made attractive" to french speaking soldiers.... sink or swim - and that ain't all that attractive IMHO!


----------



## medaid (14 Apr 2007)

Okay... how bout making Chinese/Other Asian Regiments? I mean both the Chinese as well as the Japanese Canadians made great sacrifices during the 1st and 2nd WWs. It even came out in a book published by DND. In case those of us have not seen it yet, it's titled 'Fighting for Canada: Chinese and Japanese Canadians in Military Service'. Every unit is supposed to receive two copies. 

So why not a Chinese unit huh? A little _Fuman-Chu_ style beard, and a rice stalk and crossed chopsticks for a capbadge all under the crown? I think it would be beneficial to have distinct unit identities and heritage, but at a time right now, isn't it more important to HAVE troops that will later fill those imaginary regiments, and their cultural heritages? I mean if you look around some of the units here in the Greater Vancouver area, we've got ourselves a fair number of soldiers who are of asian decent. Just my 0.02 yuan.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Apr 2007)

niner domestic said:
			
		

> So by extension of that proposal there would be 614 regiments stood up for the FN members to join?  Then there is the Metis, Urban and Off Rez (Bill C31s) to consider.
> 
> Newfoundland 3
> Nova Scotia 13
> ...



To be fair, based on my own limited understanding, not _EVERY_ FN (or Band) is considered a separate "culture".  You ARE bang-on, though, even when we consider Ojibway, Cree, Swampy Cree, Mohawk, and all the other groups out there (not to mention all the East & West coast Aboriginal cultures!).  

Also, from limited experience, I don't think Aboriginal cultural groups are anywhere NEAR as homogenous as the idealists who come up with these schemes think they are.  On one course I've taken, for example, some Ojibway and Cree (urbanized, public sector workers) visiting a Mohawk reserve, when seeing all the British flags and Union-Jack-Based symbols about, said, "These guys are some assimilated, eh?"  Goes to show you that there ain't just one "Indian" history or world view out there.

Good luck, Mr. Coderre.....


----------



## niner domestic (14 Apr 2007)

The classification of First Nations is a bit of a sore point amongst the actual FNs.  INAC and anthropologists in their infinite wisdom lumped a large number of indigenous people into the same as or similar linguistic groups or some simply because of the present alliances they had.  (remember these are the same people that decided that if an Indian woman married a non-Indian she was no longer considered an Indian).  A fair amount of the present day classification is based on those earlier groupings. Some FNs were lumped together for only the sake of expediency of Indian Agents not wanting to head further up a river or trek through a bush to do head counts so they deemed that those groups were the same.  Now, in the Yukon where I'm from there are 16 First Nations up there and all of them are quite distinct from each other.  To further complicate the theory that there are only so many actual group distinctions, my linguistic and anthropology is also found in the southern states in Navajo, Apache who are part of the classification of Dine - we spell it Dene up here.  (I'd like to see who remains standing when one tries to tell a Tlingit that they are the same as a Tutchone) So in the instance of the YT, yes, there would be 16 supposed regiments.  The number of "bands" that one sees today are a direct result of a census taken by the Indian Agents shortly after the inception of the 1878 Indian Act.  Those number are still being used today to calculate transfer payments and treaty rights.  

The "bands" that were created by INAC and Indian agents, did not account for unique traditions, clan association (again my group was mistakenly divided into a north and southern group based only on a misinformed agent that didn't understand the clan structure.  Then merged another group with the southern group only because they used the same fishing grounds.  That merged group isn't even the same FN.)

But we can play the game of name the FN group to shorten down the list.  In the east we have the Wabenaki - made up of Mi'kmaq, Malicite, Passmaquoddy, Penobscot and Abenaki...  then we have eastern woodlands, six nations - that is actually more like 12 nations - plains, subarctic, arctic, Gitsk'an, coastal...Or we can go for the linguistic base to shorten it down even further - Algonquin, Inuit, Siouan, Haudashaunee, Salish, Athabaskan (there are 16 distinct languages spoken up there so that might get tricky again), Aleut - but remember these are just linguistic groups, the actual languages in most cases aren't even the same - Mohawk is not the same as Tuscarora or Cree is not the same as Anishabe.  

Still want to assume that a regiment could be stood up for each FN that would be able to incorporate all of the traditions of each FN? Coderre needs to have better staffers who can actually do the research before they give him his briefing notes.


----------



## Technetium (14 Apr 2007)

How much FN culture is there in the CF right now?  The day after reading this thread I recalled where CHIMO came from and saw for the first time the two Salish poles guarding the entrance to 1 CER.  Then again, maybe this was just a fluke and they are the only two things in the CF =)


----------



## Pea (14 Apr 2007)

I really can't agree with anything that would create more segregation. I'm Metis, I grew up in small town Northern Alberta surrounded by various different reserves. My Mom grew up on a Metis Settlement and she can remember what that was like very well. Growing up we lived 45 minutes away from said settlement, instead of on it, where we very likely could have had cheap/free housing. Why is that? To get away from the damn segregation. I hate being classified and stereotyped. I hate being told I should be looking into this program, or this scholarship, or this "handout" because of that little ID card in my wallet.

I've now joined the CF and am leaving for BMQ in 3 weeks. I do not want to be part of some "special unit" because of my race. I want to be a "person" like everyone else and go where I am needed throughout the country. I don't need a unit to highlight Native tradition and culture. If people are really interested in that, they should be studying it and practicing it on their own time. Just as every other culture does. I just want to be a soldier in the Canadian Forces, that's it, that's all. No "specialness"


----------



## Technetium (14 Apr 2007)

Pte Pea said:
			
		

> I just want to be a soldier in the Canadian Forces, that's it, that's all. No "specialness"


Cool.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Apr 2007)

niner domestic said:
			
		

> (....) Still want to assume that a regiment could be stood up for each FN that would be able to incorporate all of the traditions of each FN? Coderre needs to have better staffers who can actually do the research before they give him his briefing notes.



Thanks for sharing more details about ethno-cultural history here, 9D - I only know a little bit about northern Ontario (and that's complex enough - let's not even start to talk about religious-spiritual divisions, righ?).

While gov't ministers have big bureaucracies (for better or worse) working on briefing notes, I'd be interested to know what kind of support opposition types get in such issues?  This strikes me as almost reflexive, rather than reflective, policy making - like someone wiser than me said earlier in the thread, "add Indian and mix".


----------



## garb811 (14 Apr 2007)

Technetium said:
			
		

> How much FN culture is there in the CF right now?  The day after reading this thread I recalled where CHIMO came from and saw for the first time the two Salish poles guarding the entrance to 1 CER.  Then again, maybe this was just a fluke and they are the only two things in the CF =)


I presume you may have seen this before?


----------



## childs56 (14 Apr 2007)

Pte Pea good words. That seems to be the general consesis of others in your situation. 

Leave the politics and vote buying out of the CF. Lets soldiers, Sailors and Airmen be eqaul among themsevles.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (14 Apr 2007)

One of the reasons the Libs are not in power any more is that there was no special interest group to small for them to not to try to appease. They had so many priorities and so many special interest groups to please that it just became un managable. That and the majority of ordinary Canadians began to get sick and tired of it all. I think the last year of having a government focused on the main issues and mainstream population has been a breath of fresh air....but the libs still don't get it. They elected yesterdays man's (Chretien) main cheer leader as their boss and keep harping about issues most of us couldn't give a monkey's about........I hope they like the opposition benches....and I hope Denis Coderre is never considered to run anything...ever!


----------



## niner domestic (14 Apr 2007)

Coderre would be eligible for the same services offered to all members of parliament:

Members also have access to Parliamentary facilities and services such as the Public Information Office and its education and visitor services; the Library of Parliament and its research services; and language training in either French or English for the Members, their spouses, and their employees. Food services are available at the Centre Block Restaurant as well as a number of cafeterias, canteens and lounges, and room service; preventive health services. Daycare services for Members and their staff, mini-bus transportation between Parliamentary buildings, and other services, such as a barber shop, beauty salon, tailor, steam room, massage therapist, recreation room and gymnasium are also accessible to Members. Further, each MP receives offices in one of the buildings around Parliament as assigned by the Sergeant-at-Arms in consultation with party officials. Finally, substantial research funds are made available to officially recognized parties (i.e. those with a minimum of 12 elected M.P.s), with Government receiving significantly more than the Official Opposition or 2nd Party Opposition.
Each Member also receives an Office Budget which can be used for Ottawa office staff costs, a constituency office and its staff costs and operating expenses, constituency travel expenses, and certain other authorized expenses. (See attached.) There is also a graduated Elector Supplement for constituencies where the number of electors is 70,000 or more, and a graduated Geographic Supplement for constituencies where the area to be served is 8000 square kilometres or more. (See attached.) Members also receive $3000 per Parliament if re-elected or $5000 if newly elected for the purchase of furniture and equipment for constituency offices. In addition, Members have free mailing privileges to anywhere in Canada and constituents may send mail to a Member free of postage from anywhere in Canada.

Also, Members may hire staff with their office budgets, whose rates of pay are determined by the Member upon appointment, but may not exceed an annual rate of $60,460, and pay increases may be made up to three times each year, not including raises resulting from promotions. Members, as employers, recruit, hire, promote, define job responsibilities, and discharge staff "for cause," although in reality staff can likely be discharged even without cause. However, MP employment practices are subject to human rights legislation if there is discrimination on gender, age, religion, race, etc. Furthermore, an MP is not allowed to hire a spouse or family members--there were even uproars in the past when M.P.s hired each other’s children. http://www.david-kilgour.com/mp/house.htm

We have a monsterous department allocated for all things First Nations, they have staffers there that spend all their days just preparing BNs for members and Ministers.  In this day and age of rapid communication ability there is no excuse for any elected member of government not to be able to research before they open mouth to insert foot.


----------



## orange.paint (15 Apr 2007)

Call me crazy however I'm a big fan of the "Canadian army" as an ideal.
What happens to leadership issues?I'm not saying a Native cannot be a fantastic leader,I have met some great ones myself.However when you segregate you tend to lower the standard.What happens if a francophone commander is the better commander than the Native commander?Obviously the native commander will get the position due to it being a segregated closed unit.

How about a full African American Brigade?While were at it the homosexual brigade.White only brigade.Hell lets segregate meal lines and washrooms while were at it.Where do i sit on the bus going to Petersville every Monday?

STUPID.

...I can see the brigade patches now....rainbows.....

Shudder


----------



## medaid (15 Apr 2007)

All chinese unit! CROSS CHOPSTICKS with RICE STOCK!!! THINK ABOUT IT!!!


*sigh* why do we waste money on stupid ideas and stupid politicians who come up with said stupid ideas?!


----------



## Pea (15 Apr 2007)

CTD said:
			
		

> Pte Pea good words. That seems to be the general consesis of others in your situation.
> 
> Leave the politics and vote buying out of the CF. Lets soldiers, Sailors and Airmen be eqaul among themsevles.



Thanks. I've spoken to a few others "like me" on this topic, and the general consensus from them seems to be what I have said.


----------



## FastEddy (16 Apr 2007)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> K to start I'm not anything close to being Native Canadian.
> 
> I have on occasion thought of this.  We all make this out to be a form of Segregation.  You don't need to send only Natives to a unit like this but allow it to be prodominantly Native.  Are there no English people in the 22nd or on the HMCS Ville de Quebec??  It could be a Unit based on Native traditions and Native Warrior traditions (not unlike a highland regiment).  It could instill allot of pride in a people who are plagued with many many social issues.
> 
> I can think of one unit of this type in the commonwealth.  Anyone think of the Gurkhas??  They were/are considered one of the Elite units in the UK.  It would take allot of work to build a unit like the Gurkhas but it could be done.




"Navy Blue" Just as a point of interest, during the Hayday of that Splendid Regt., weren't all the Officers British ?, along with all the Fine East Indian Regt.s . (of course I stand to be corrected on this).

If such was the case, in your opinion, what should the Officer Corps be made of in these newly formed Native Units ?. And should they have their own GHQ. And on that point, who and where would the General Staff come from ?.

I'm sure you have given this Idea a great deal of thought.

Cheers.


----------



## Boxkicker (18 Apr 2007)

Okay I must ask if there is anyone else out there who is tired of trying to be a liberal social experiment. In  22 years I have heard a lot of dumbs things about us from the liberals, but this takes the cake government imposed racism. 

The only time I think of Coderre or Dion is when I flush. God forbid they ever get elected to high office.


----------



## CougarKing (1 Mar 2015)

Quite an article that talks about the motivations behind creating one...without saying how it can be created or what has to be changed in the Defence Budget to make room for this unit.

Winnipeg Free Press



> *It's time to create a First Nations regiment*
> By: James Wilson
> Posted: 02/26/2015 3:00 AM
> 
> ...


----------



## dangerboy (1 Mar 2015)

If this was to happen (I don't think it would ever happen, we already have more units than we can sustain) I think it would have the opposite effect than what we want it would end up almost segregating people, which is the last thing anyone wants.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Mar 2015)

Sure. We could have HQ in Ontario, and a Coy each in Yukon, Alberta, Northern Quebec and Nova Scotia. That way we can efficiently burn as much money as possible without having any sort of use for the unit.


----------



## cavalryman (1 Mar 2015)

Aren't the Rangers mostly First Nation?  Grant the Rangers regimental status and voila: problem solved.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Mar 2015)

What problem is solved? I don't buy that there's any problem here at all. Its a solution looking for a problem proposed by someone who knows very little of how the CAF operates, or how units are created/placed around the country.


----------



## ballz (1 Mar 2015)

In our more modern, nation-wide army, there's already debate about whether the regimental system is losing its purpose and in some ways detrimental to progress. Loyalty to the tribe instead of the nation and all that, I believe there are already threads about it... I also agree we have more units than we can sustain. Our 3 reg force brigades are currently working at about 1/3rd strength, if that.

This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation. I am more than happy with the First Nations soldiers we have in our battalion and they don't seem to mind being part of an organization that has white, black, red, yellow skinned hetero/homo/bisexual Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, etc that speak English, French, German, Spanish, Portugese, Pashtun, Cree, etc. Why would we want to take a step backwards?


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2015)

ballz said:
			
		

> In our more modern, nation-wide army, there's already debate about whether the regimental system is losing its purpose and in some ways detrimental to progress. Loyalty to the tribe instead of the nation and all that, I believe there are already threads about it... I also agree we have more units than we can sustain. Our 3 reg force brigades are currently working at about 1/3rd strength, if that.
> 
> This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation. I am more than happy with the First Nations soldiers we have in our battalion and they don't seem to mind being part of an organization that has white, black, red, yellow skinned hetero/homo/bisexual Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, etc that speak English, French, German, Spanish, Portugese, Pashtun, Cree, etc. Why would we want to take a step backwards?



I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (1 Mar 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.



The U.S. Army did that back in the late 60's/early 70's and from my understanding it was a complete disaster.


----------



## Old Sweat (1 Mar 2015)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> The U.S. Army did that back in the late 60's/early 70's and from my understanding it was a complete disaster.



It is also my recollection that the human resources folks decided that the command sergeant major (CAM aka RSM) position need not be branch specific. Therefore the next available E9 (the highest non-commissioned rank) would be assigned as the CSM of the next battalion of any branch that need one. In other words the RSM slot in a unit would be in our terms ATR. Good luck with that!


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Mar 2015)

My two cents:

1. In Canadian society we have no need for a regiment based on the racial background of the members. It flys in the face of what we believe in. Besides, we have regiments that are barely surviving already.

2. Numbered battalions were tried in the First World War. After that war we went back to named regiments.



			
				Old Sweat said:
			
		

> It is also my recollection that the human resources folks decided that the command sergeant major (CAM aka RSM) position need not be branch specific. Therefore the next available E9 (the highest non-commissioned rank) would be assigned as the CSM of the next battalion of any branch that need one. In other words the RSM slot in a unit would be in our terms ATR. Good luck with that!



I can just see a CWO from the RMS trade attempting to be the RSM of a combat arms unit. Good luck.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Mar 2015)

Let's recall that what we now know as the _"Regimental System"_ began in the British and Indian Armies specifically to deal with and, later, exploit religious, ethnic and cultural differences. Soldiers from one group would not serve with those from another or, later, it was seen to be possible to use ethnic (including religious) differences for a _positive_ (morale) effect. Think of Sikhs and Scots, Rajputs and county regiments, and so on ... the _regimental system_ is a hodge-podge of ideas and practices, some very good, some of marginal utility, at  best, which make virtues of necessities.

Suppose we had nine numbered battalions in the Canadian Infantry Corps ~ does anyone really think that the French speaking 2nd, 5th and 8th battalions would be, in most ways, "the same" as the English speaking 1st, 3rd, 4th and so on battalions?

I think our official bilingual _duality_ points us away from a clear, simple numbered units _system_ and, if that's the case, the British style _regimental system_ with all its "buttons and bows" issues is not all that bad.


----------



## McG (1 Mar 2015)

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> It's time to create a First Nations regiment


I suppose this would be a creation intended for the PRes?



			
				ballz said:
			
		

> This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation.





			
				Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> 1. In Canadian society we have no need for a regiment based on the racial background of the members. It flys in the face of what we believe in. Besides, we have regiments that are barely surviving already.


I gather you both are not supporters of similar suggestions to create a BC lower mainland Sheik Regiment.  What are your thoughts on Scottish and Irish regiments?



			
				Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> 2. Numbered battalions were tried in the First World War. After that war we went back to named regiments.


That seemed to have been a fairly effective force.  I cannot see the CEF as having demonstrated inadequacy of a numbered system.



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.


The current government has been more inclined to increase the number of regiments, having revived several in the PRes.  I don't see your proposal gaining much traction.  On the positive side, the current government has not created any new regiments and so we may not see the suggested native regiment.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Mar 2015)

Some armies can make a mix work.  Apparently at one time "The 3rd battalion of the 14th Punjabi Regiment has a Sikh company. a company of Punjabi Musselmen and two Hindu companies, one of Rajputs and one of Dogras." (From the script of a talk given long ago by a former HCol of 12 Med Coy in its pre-Fd Amb days; I have never researched to verify it.)  Imagine being the battalion cook.


----------



## Kat Stevens (2 Mar 2015)

Our Scottish and Irish regiments are anything but Scottish and Irish.  There are Kowalskis, Schmidts, Singhs, Changs, and Moussas standing beside the MacDonalds and Murphys.  A unit based on ethnic lines wouldn't stand a chance from either side of the spectrum.  Some will see segregation, others will see special treatment.  No thanks.


----------



## ballz (2 Mar 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Suppose we had nine numbered battalions in the Canadian Infantry Corps ~ does anyone really think that the French speaking 2nd, 5th and 8th battalions would be, in most ways, "the same" as the English speaking 1st, 3rd, 4th and so on battalions?
> 
> I think our official bilingual _duality_ points us away from a clear, simple numbered units _system_ and, if that's the case, the British style _regimental system_ with all its "buttons and bows" issues is not all that bad.



Those French-speaking battalions would still fall under the same French-speaking, numbered brigade they do now, just like the western battalions would stay under the same English-speaking, numbered brigade it does now, for geographic purposes.

It makes perfectly good sense to have things done geographically, and using "Quebec" as a region because of its language also makes sense.

2 CMBG is a bit weird with its random units in Gagetown but I'm not sure that would have to change (although its very impractical) if regiments ceased to exist.

What could be gotten rid of is all the hocus pocus behind regimental senates and regimental adjutants and regimental colonels and regimental sergeant majors etc, who push down direction that is not theirs to push down and make career-related decisions based on crystal balls and personal feelings.

Personally, instead of being organized into numbered battalions, I think it would make more sense to be numbered into numbered Battle Groups if possible, although I'm not sure how that would work.


----------



## medicineman (2 Mar 2015)

MCG said:
			
		

> I gather you both are not supporters of similar suggestions to create a BC lower mainland Sheik Regiment.  What are your thoughts on Scottish and Irish regiments?



I seem to recall one sunny day in Calgary I was doing medical support for Her Majesty presenting a new Queen's Colour to the Calgary Highlanders - the subaltern that knelt in from of her was in full highland regalia with his Turban, Rifle Green on his head.

Does that help?


----------



## Infanteer (2 Mar 2015)

Calling for numbers instead of names for units fails to understand what the Regimental system is or how it operates.  Note we do have some numbered Regiments, such as the 12e Regiment Blinde while the R22eR simply added Royal to a numbered Regiment of the CEF.  What is  key is not the name/number - note the British Regimental system operated for the first 2/3 of its life under numbered Regiments of Foot - but how the Regimental system manages the service of its members.  Compare our "named" regiments of the infantry and how they manage manpower compared to, say, the "named" regiments of the Australian infantry that all serve under the same cap badge.


----------



## The_Falcon (2 Mar 2015)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> I can just see a CWO from the RMS trade attempting to be the RSM of a combat arms unit. Good luck.



Actually this happened in the 7th Toronto RCA, 2008-2011? RSM Rosa, was a supply tech, started with the 48th, moved across the parade square, and was basically on full time class B with the guns, and progressed up the ranks (supply tech) to CWO and was appointed the RSM of the regiment.

/tangent


----------



## The_Falcon (2 Mar 2015)

The writer of that article claims to be former military, I guess he never served in one of those Scot or Irish regiments  : If he had then he would know, that some (many) of those regiments formed as a result of local grassroots movement to get that particular regiment. For example the 48th Highlanders, a bunch of wealthy Scots wanted a Highland regiment in Toronto, and used various ways and means to get one (condensed history obviously).


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (2 Mar 2015)

ballz said:
			
		

> Personally, instead of being organized into numbered battalions, I think it would make more sense to be numbered into numbered Battle Groups if possible, although I'm not sure how that would work.



The optimized battle group concept has been tested and found wanting on at least one occasion so I doubt there is any interest in revisiting this. OBGs work ok if you're infantry or armour, not so well if you're anyone else. For example, a bty of guns is not a BG asset, but a bde asset. If the inf and armour want to merge than there might be some logic in that, but I would stop it there.

I suspect if we went to a numbered system we would quickly see all the things that people seem to hate about the regimental system (honour arise, senates, merit boards, etc) would just continue, But with 1,2,3 bn of 2 CMBG being the grouping vs RCR.


----------



## Remius (2 Mar 2015)

What the author fails to factor in is the diversity of First Nations across Canada.  An Inuit from Iqualuit would feel the same way with the 1st Mohawk Light Infantry than he would in 3 RCR.  There are also many cultural factors that make forming a homogenous Regiment in the regular Force impracticle if not impossible.  And that is not even counting the FN types that want nothing to do with a segregated unit.

The only way that it can work would be to open new local reserve units.  Reserve units will take on the local flavour.  Hence why some scottish or irish units have more non Scottish and Irish types in them.  As demographics in certain areas shift so too does a reserve unit's cultural make up.    

But imagine the CAF opening reserve units on FN Reserves...think of the political fall out that would have.  Accusations of occupation, non FN commuting on a native reserve or vice versa.  essentially a shyte storm.

Nice sentiment, well intentioned, poorly thought out.


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Mar 2015)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> I can just see a CWO from the RMS trade attempting to be the RSM of a combat arms unit. Good luck.



Lots of Log branch folks have been Coxswains of various HMC Ships.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (2 Mar 2015)

Well, there have been a few Log CWO/CPO1 that have been Coxns. I would not say "A lot".

However, the Coxn's job on a ship is not like that of an RSM. First, the Coxn's nowadays do mostly administrative and leadership duties. Their job is comprised mostly of supporting the command team's leadership on the disciplinary side, ensuring all routines are run properly and overseeing morale. Those aspects of life at sea don't call on the Coxn to be a "seaman" anymore. especially when you consider that in our modern ships, the helm at specials or in combat is not the responsibility of the Coxn anymore. The Coxn would only assume command if all the Mars officers of the ship were wiped out - an unlikely scenario.

If I understand the Army way correctly, the RSM is both the Battalion's second in command - and takes over from the Battalion commander should anything happen to him - and the Battalion commander's primary advisor on matters of combat and tactics. Anyone from the Army side, feel free to correct me if I am wrong


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Mar 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Well, there have been a few Log CWO/CPO1 that have been Coxns. I would not say "A lot".
> 
> However, the Coxn's job on a ship is not like that of an RSM. First, the Coxn's nowadays do mostly administrative and leadership duties. Their job is comprised mostly of supporting the command team's leadership on the disciplinary side, ensuring all routines are run properly and overseeing morale. Those aspects of life at sea don't call on the Coxn to be a "seaman" anymore. especially when you consider that in our modern ships, the helm at specials or in combat is not the responsibility of the Coxn anymore. The Coxn would only assume command if all the Mars officers of the ship were wiped out - an unlikely scenario.
> 
> If I understand the Army way correctly, the RSM is both the Battalion's second in command - and takes over from the Battalion commander should anything happen to him - and the Battalion commander's primary advisor on matters of combat and tactics. Anyone from the Army side, feel free to correct me if I am wrong



While I am not Army I do have experience in the Land element and you might get push back from the DCO or the Adj over the CWO being 2 I/C of a BN/Regiment.  

As for the lots VS few I guess it depends on what each of views as the value behind those words.  I can personally think of 5 Sup Techs who have been Coxswains, and I know Clerks, Cooks and Med Techs who have been Coxswains as well.  This doesn't include Stewards who are sort of in limbo. 

I digress,  the RSM for 2 RCR, for example, should be an RCR without a doubt.  The shared experiences alone will enable the relation with his/her subordinates, is a must I would imagine.  

Back on topic.  We may see more of these "special interest" BNs become conversation as our British lineage becomes less and less relevant to the current make up of our country.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Mar 2015)

Often First Nations don't feel a lot of love for each other and also have issues as to whom is a "first nation's person" So a Metis in a First nation unit might get harassed or similar for someone that is 1/4 FN


----------



## dangerboy (2 Mar 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> If I understand the Army way correctly, the RSM is both the Battalion's second in command - and takes over from the Battalion commander should anything happen to him - and the Battalion commander's primary advisor on matters of combat and tactics. Anyone from the Army side, feel free to correct me if I am wrong



This is probably worthy if yet another split; the RSM is not the Battalion's Second in Command that job is done by the DCO (Deputy Commanding Officer) an RSM will never take command of a BN unless there is not a single officer left in the unit.  His job is much like the Coxn's job in the Navy (discipline, dress and deportment, manning) but his most important job (in my opinion) is to advise the CO and represent the NCMs in the unit.  He is also in charge of PWs and casualties during BN attacks.  There are a couple of actual RSMs on this site that can expand on what I wrote and probably explain their job better than me.


----------



## ZacheryK (2 Mar 2015)

I'd have to agree that creating Native Regiments like the Highland ones we already have, but not disallowing non-Natives from joining would be the only logical step to take. Segregating an Army has been a historically bad idea, because things like, I dunno, coups happen. Not to mention I can imagine it would inflame existing discrimination. I've encountered unsavory types that assume because you went through the Blackbear http://www.forces.ca/en/page/aboriginalprograms-93 training program that you're a bad troop, and will be treated as such. 

Not to mention that most PRes units I've encountered are understrength. Could the money that would be used raising and staffing an entirely new regiment not be used to bolster the currently existing ones? 

Just my  :2c:


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Mar 2015)

I wouldn't imagine my idea about a numbers system would be very popular.  The pros and cons of a regimental system are over my head I'm sure.  Maybe it's a failing on my part but it just doesn't feel that important anymore.  Almost like mess's and mess functions.

I wouldn't really see a First Nations unit any differently than I would a scotish regiment or irish regimemt.


----------



## ballz (2 Mar 2015)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> This is probably worthy if yet another split; the RSM is not the Battalion's Second in Command that job is done by the DCO (Deputy Commanding Officer) an RSM will never take command of a BN unless there is not a single officer left in the unit.  His job is much like the Coxn's job in the Navy (discipline, dress and deportment, manning) but his most important job (in my opinion) is to advise the CO and represent the NCMs in the unit.  He is also in charge of PWs and casualties during BN attacks.  There are a couple of actual RSMs on this site that can expand on what I wrote and probably explain their job better than me.



Further to that, the RSM is the "expert" on soldiering and the CSMs are the "expert" on soldiering within the companies. A lot of this ties into discipline, but for example in a Bn defensive position it is the RSM and the CSMs that are the most experienced on properly constructing trenches, etc. As a Pl Comd, I plan the platoon position but my WO is the guy who goes around inspecting trenches and making sure all that stuff is up to snuff, properly concealed, SF kit properly installed and targets registered correctly with the C2 site, etc etc. At the company level, the OC plans the company position but the CSM goes around ensuring the WOs are keeping each Platoon's trenches inspected and effective, and at the Battalion level it's the RSM keeping the CSMs on those things. For these reasons, the RSM *has* to be an experienced infanteer. A logistics CWO just can't be expected to know all these intricate details of the infantry trade.

And absolutely, the RSM is not the Second-in-Command, he's not even part of the Chain of Command. The same goes with the CSMs at the company level. And the officers absolutely need him (and the "Charlie" net) to be doing the things mentioned above, not taking over in the absence of the CO.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Mar 2015)

Would a 2LT take command of a battalion before a CWO?


----------



## ballz (2 Mar 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Would a 2LT take command of a battalion before a CWO?



By the book, yes. I suspect by the time a Battalion only has 2Lt's left in its officer corps, it has been combat ineffective for a long-*** time... and would be absolved by other units.

There was a Lt pretty fresh out of Ph IV that ended up taking command of the company during a pretty heated battle in Afghanistan and managed to withdraw the entire company under contact. I don't know the in's and out's of the story, or who it was, but it has been mentioned on this site before in the "So You Wanna Be An Infantry Officer?" thread. Bottom line, it was a Platoon Commander fresh out of Phase IV, not the CSM, that was next in the succession of command.

Also to note, too much attention gets paid to 2Lt, Lt, and Capt. Our current system of promoting people to Lt and Capt based on when they graduated university means that you can have a Capt and a 2Lt who finished Ph IV together commanding a platoon at the same time. The Capt is not miraculously more checked out by virtue of rank. They are still both Pl Comd's that just came out of Ph IV.


----------



## ballz (2 Mar 2015)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> The optimized battle group concept has been tested and found wanting on at least one occasion so I doubt there is any interest in revisiting this. OBGs work ok if you're infantry or armour, not so well if you're anyone else. For example, a bty of guns is not a BG asset, but a bde asset. If the inf and armour want to merge than there might be some logic in that, but I would stop it there.
> 
> I suspect if we went to a numbered system we would quickly see all the things that people seem to hate about the regimental system (honour arise, senates, merit boards, etc) would just continue, But with 1,2,3 bn of 2 CMBG being the grouping vs RCR.



I wasn't around when 2 RCR was organized as a BG. My troops speak pretty fondly of it, but back then they also had money for doing Cbt Tm training and BG training, so it's not really a fair comparison I guess. Your point about the Bty of guns is a good one. What about the Sappers? I could see an Infantry Bn, an Armoured Sqn, and an Eng Sq all housed and working together. At least, in Gagetown, it would be more ideal I think, because we are separated from the rest of the brigade.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Mar 2015)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Back on topic.  We may see more of these "special interest" BNs become conversation as our British lineage becomes less and less relevant to the current make up of our country.



There is no 'special interest' battalions. Our Scottish and Irish Regiments are that in name only, and have been for a very long time. Whole battalions of Sikhs, Samoli, Korean, etc, just won't happen. It flies in the face of everything we try project as a military. It would also be moot. Almost everyone, in them, would be Canadian first and their ethnic background second.


----------



## ModlrMike (2 Mar 2015)

The author clearly does not understand the complexity of First Nations societies. Notice that I used the plural there. Any attempt to raise a First Nations Battalion or Regiment is doomed from the outset if one thinks in terms of an homogenous group. There are any number of other questions:

What happens when the battalion's needs can't be filled by FN soldiers? Does it go without, or do we post in non-FN members? 
Do we have enough experienced FN members who are suitable and willing to lead and command this unit or are we going to mimic the US coloured battalions who were led by white officers? I'm sure we can see where that will lead.
If raised as reserve units do we limit membership to only FN soldiers? The Constitution probably has something to say about that.

What we need to do is make the CF more welcoming to FN applicants. We have already made a good attempt with Bold Eagle and similar programmes. Perhaps mentorship plays a part, but that again raises the question of commonality between the participants.

My  :2c:


----------



## Kat Stevens (2 Mar 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> There is no 'special interest' battalions. Our Scottish and Irish Regiments are that in name only, and have been for a very long time. Whole battalions of Sikhs, Samoli, Korean, etc, just won't happen. It flies in the face of everything we try project as a military. It would also be moot. Almost everyone, in them, would be Canadian first and their ethnic background second.



What a great point.  :goodpost:


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (2 Mar 2015)

ballz said:
			
		

> I wasn't around when 2 RCR was organized as a BG. My troops speak pretty fondly of it, but back then they also had money for doing Cbt Tm training and BG training, so it's not really a fair comparison I guess. Your point about the Bty of guns is a good one. What about the Sappers? I could see an Infantry Bn, an Armoured Sqn, and an Eng Sq all housed and working together. At least, in Gagetown, it would be more ideal I think, because we are separated from the rest of the brigade.



I'm not an engineer, but I assume that their predicament would be the same. Engineers, arty, ad(if we had it), pay ops are all higher level than BG and need to be centralized to allow them to be available to support where needed. If they are in a BG than it limits their flexibility in use and eliminates any ability to achieve concentration of force. 

On an aside, many arty types in 2 RCR liked it also but complained somewhat that they were used as GDs sometimes to run ranges than in their functions. Having a BG ascc for example, was completely useless so they did a lot of "other" tasks


----------



## quadrapiper (2 Mar 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> There is no 'special interest' battalions. Our Scottish and Irish Regiments are that in name only, and have been for a very long time. Whole battalions of Sikhs, Samoli, Korean, etc, just won't happen. It flies in the face of everything we try project as a military. It would also be moot. Almost everyone, in them, would be Canadian first and their ethnic background second.


The only way it might dimly make sense is if we were ever to need to stand up significant, geographically dispersed reserve units in areas where a particular First Nations identity is a useful rallying point, rather than just recruiting the current ones to battalion rather than platoon or company strength and reactivating supplementary units; e.g. in the Queen Charlottes or similar regions.

I think, given a WWI-ish setting, i.e. locally-driven formation of units, you might see some new cultural identifiers in the army, raised or volunteering in the same way as the Irish and Scottish regiments: _Canadian_ in dedication, but formed by the efforts of a particular community in a particular area. Maybe not, as an example, the _1st Canadian Sikhs_, but perhaps a unit with many turbans in the ranks, a strong custom (consider Robbie Burns) of celebrating certain festivals and occasions, and so on.

Can't see how or when this would happen, though.


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Mar 2015)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> This is probably worthy if yet another split; the RSM is not the Battalion's Second in Command that job is done by the DCO (Deputy Commanding Officer) an RSM will never take command of a BN unless there is not a single officer left in the unit.  His job is much like the Coxn's job in the Navy (discipline, dress and deportment, manning) but his most important job (in my opinion) is to advise the CO and represent the NCMs in the unit.  He is also in charge of PWs and casualties during BN attacks.  There are a couple of actual RSMs on this site that can expand on what I wrote and probably explain their job better than me.



Dangerboy has this right. I represent the NCM view to Niner and provide advice on the health and welfare of troops.

My chief responsibilities are the five Ds - Dress, Disicipline, Drill, Duties and Deportment.....

Notice their is no "budget" responsibility.....I don't tread in that area unless some knob on the floor is spouting "budget" problems when he shouldn't be.


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Mar 2015)

>The author clearly does not understand the complexity of First Nations societies. 

To be fair, if the "James Wilson" who wrote the article is identically James Wilson, the Manitoba Treaty Commissioner, he probably has some grasp of the complexity.  But the idea is over-optimistic.


----------



## a_majoor (2 Mar 2015)

The author is also clearly unaware of much more pressing issues affecting the Armed Forces. 

As well, units will probably evolve in much different directions (for example a Stryker Brigade Combat Team has integration of various elements right down to the Company level, to use perhaps the most extreme example, but looking at how the Russians use their _SPETSNAZ_ forces is illustrative of another approach to modern war), so the issue of "who" is being recruited for the unit will hinge on aptitude, adaptability and ability to learn, rather than the person's cultural or ethnic background.

Indeed, I could hardly think of any better way to cripple a unit than to focus on what is essentially an irrelevant criterion to the organization and staffing of a unit. Just get the best possible people; period.


----------



## OldSolduer (2 Mar 2015)

What we should be doing is focussing our efforts in how best to do what we do best....what our prime purpose is....bringing death and destruction to the enemies of our nation.

But....being who we are we focus on things that ultimately cause us to lose focus on what we are supposed to focus on.....

Follow that?


----------



## a_majoor (2 Mar 2015)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> What we should be doing is focussing our efforts in how best to do what we do best....what our prime purpose is....bringing death and destruction to the enemies of our nation.
> 
> But....being who we are we focus on things that ultimately cause us to lose focus on what we are supposed to focus on.....
> 
> Follow that?



Like high visibility rank and name tags, or WWII era rank badges for officers?  ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Mar 2015)

ballz said:
			
		

> Also to note, too much attention gets paid to 2Lt, Lt, and Capt. Our current system of promoting people to Lt and Capt based on when they graduated university means that you can have a Capt and a 2Lt who finished Ph IV together commanding a platoon at the same time. The Capt is not miraculously more checked out by virtue of rank. They are still both Pl Comd's that just came out of Ph IV.



Interesting point thanks.


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Mar 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >The author clearly does not understand the complexity of First Nations societies.
> 
> To be fair, if the "James Wilson" who wrote the article is identically James Wilson, the Manitoba Treaty Commissioner, he probably has some grasp of the complexity.  But the idea is over-optimistic.


That's what it says at the end of the article - one & the same.


----------



## ModlrMike (3 Mar 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >The author clearly does not understand the complexity of First Nations societies.
> 
> To be fair, if the "James Wilson" who wrote the article is identically James Wilson, the Manitoba Treaty Commissioner, he probably has some grasp of the complexity.  But the idea is over-optimistic.



Wouldn't be the first time somebody was responsible for something they didn't understand.


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Mar 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Wouldn't be the first time somebody was responsible for something they didn't understand.


Here's a bit of his military experience according to his LinkedIn profile ....


> .... Infantry Officer 23A
> Canadian Armed Forces
> 1999 – 2006 (7 years) Loyal Edmonton Regiment (4PPCLI)
> 
> ...


.... so one while his military knowledge about the CF isn't zero, one can't tell how much exposure he's had to the potential intricacies (and pitfalls) of forming a new regiment.

To me, the best line so far in this thread is this:


			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> What problem is solved?


While Commissioner Wilson seems to appreciate what Bold Eagle or similar programs do for some individuals, that doesn't necessarily mean creating First Nation regiments would be good or easy as well.

Also, as others have said, which Aboriginal culture will the Regiment embody?  I'm FAR from expert, but I know of at least three distinct cultures in Ontario alone, each pretty different from each other, much less across Canada.  Easier said than done ....


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Mar 2015)

Besides all this, where would the leadership be found for this unit?


----------



## Rifleman62 (3 Mar 2015)

Hamish Seggie



> Besides all this, where would the leadership be found for this unit?



Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada :nod:

Lots of leaders there.

A First Nations unit is a bad idea. If you thought the CF already had too many Chiefs and not enough Indians, just wait.


----------

