# Todays Army compared to yesteryear...



## CallOfDuty (29 Mar 2004)

Hi there everyone....Im new here.  MY name is Steve and Im from halifax.  Great site!!!!! 
  Im going to be handing in my application for the army next week and Im looking for some thoughts from people already in.  I was talking to a good buddy of mine about joining the army( he is a retired tank mechanic) and he was saying to me...Dont do it...dont join the army....go airforce.  When I asked him why, all he could say was...." the army aint what it used to be.....Its all different these days".  What do you guys think that means?   ITs not going to change my mind about joining.....But I‘m curious on your thoughts.
Later guys
STeve


----------



## Michael Dorosh (30 Mar 2004)

Far be it from me to dispute a tank mechanic (those paragons of higher education and good advice), but in many ways the Army is better than it used to be.  

From what I can judge by talking to members past and present, the discipline is less harsh today, and there seem to be fewer people taking responsibility for things.  There is still plenty of hard work, pride and glory to go around.  It all depends on what you expect to get out of it.


----------



## Infanteer (30 Mar 2004)

> the discipline is less harsh today, and there seem to be fewer people taking responsibility for things.


...and these are good things?


----------



## Engineer Corporal (30 Mar 2004)

Owned...


----------



## Danjanou (30 Mar 2004)

Ah yes this was has been going on since the first enrolled caveman grabbed the second enrolled caveman by the scruff of the neck, tossed him against the wall and screamed "listen newbie let me tell ya how tough it was in the old army!" :warstory:  

It seems it is the perogative of every old fart to bemoan the fact that things just ain‘t as tough/good as when he was in/first joined up, and that his beloved army has gone to **** in a handbasket.

Are things better/worse now then say 10-20 years ago? I guess it depends on what qualifiers you choose to measure it by: equipment, pay and benefits, training, deployments, public perception, government support, Policies (SHARP) and the list goes on and on.

Methinks we have the potential for an interesting debate here. Let‘s try and keep it civil though.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Mar 2004)

What I notice when I go to a mess dinner, is how many people are wearing decorations from overseas, in the late 70‘s to 80‘s there was a slump in oversea‘s postings. So you are far more likely to go overseas in this "new army". The old army was suffering from a lack of combat experienced leaders. As the people who have seen combat take over leadership positions they will help focus the military towards being more combat effective. Maybe not as comfy as the old army but certainly more focused on it's main task, if they actually give them the money and equipment to train! Some of the new age â Å“feel goodâ ? crap is detrimental, but at the same time the military is now (slowly) recognizing that soldiers coming back from overseas often need some sort of support, whether it is peer, group, religious of professional. This is no slur on the soldiers, just acknowledging that many of our soldiers are put into extraordinary positions and have to spend the rest of their lives living with decisions made in a split second.


----------



## Jack Neilson (30 Mar 2004)

Right Danjanou, we old farts do tend to do that.  However, beneath that gruff exterior the great majority of us have the greatest respect, admiration, and pride in today‘s soldiers.  Although I retired in 1982 after 27 years service I have tried to keep current and I don‘t really see that much difference in the core values of individual soldiers.  I recently read a discussion in this forum regarding "discipline" which related entirely to "punishment".  To my mind discipline has little to do with punishment but a great deal to do with self-discipline, a quality with which today‘s soldiers are amply endowed.  Pride in oneself and one‘s unit were paramount in the old days.  I see the same thing today.  Comradeship and loyalty, first to one‘s own comrades and secondly to other service members remains.  Yes, many things have changed but the important things which make a soldier a soldier, bravery, loyalty and honour are still found in abundance.


----------



## CallOfDuty (30 Mar 2004)

Thanks for your feedback guys!  I really like what you had to say Mr. Neilson
  Cheers all
SteVe


----------



## Jason Bourne (2 Apr 2004)

Excellent words Mr. Neilson, thats really encouraging to hear as I‘m heading out in about a week and a half, guess you can‘t do without enough words of wisdom and encouragment.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (2 Apr 2004)

> Originally posted by Infanteer:
> [qb]
> 
> 
> ...


You really have to ask?   

Perhaps "but" would have been more apropo instead of and.


----------



## Art Johnson (2 Apr 2004)

I don‘t know if I should jump in here or not, certainly the punishment in the late 40s was very severe. I recall a Gunner who died during 1st Field Punishment at Pet. On the other hand the DB in Korea was so lax that it was refered to as a Summer Camp and a new crew from 12 DB in Borden was brought over to straighten things out aftr a visit by the Defence Minister. Our CO at the time had a big pit dug near "A" Coy HQ and offenders went into it but were required to come out and fight as required. It is a difficult situation, in my opinion most men are not mentaly or physicaly suitable for the Infantry or possibly the other combat arms.
It has nothing to do with Bravado, I have seen the most seemingly insubnificant person perform extremley well in battle while the supposed tough guy cowered out and had to be driven to do his job. A friend of mine Whitey Ingram threatned to shoot another friend of ours because he was going to bug out and believe me he would have.
On one experience I actually booted a guy in the *** to get him up in his position later that night I helped to carry him out after he was stiched across the gut by machine gun fire.
There were people who just would not go into action they would rather go to detention and there presence in a platoon was demoralizing, they would punch out an NCO just so they wouldn‘t have to fight. One such chap was posted to our company and the Company Commander said he was going to send him home and we bitched like **** and the Company Commander said which one of you wants him, he didn‘t get any takers. Harsh dicipline may be fine in the back lines but it doesn‘t work in the fighting line.


----------



## RCD (9 Apr 2004)

It‘s the senior NCO‘S the backbone of our forces.If they know their stuff & teach it correctly you will be a good.


----------



## Garry (9 Apr 2004)

I think the biggest change I‘ve seen in the last 27 years of service has been in the role of the Forces.

When I joined, the Cold War was in full swing. Many of my leaders had Korean War experience. We (4 CMBG) had a clear mission. Life was very straight forward for me, I knew exactly what I had to do, who to do it with, how to to it, and who to do it to. I had excellent equipment, outstanding training, and the support of the country to do it.

Then we won.

Since then, we really haven‘t had a "bad guy", hence our mission and purpose has been vague. Yes, we still have "Defence of Canada", but with no enemy to focus on... 

Peacekeeping became de-rigour, and God Bless all those poor buggers who went, trained for war, to stand in between two groups of idiots and try to save innocent lives- I respect the Hail out of all of you who went. 

The "War on Terrorism" at least gave us a chance to do what we were trained to do- unfortunateley the clandestine nature of terrorism doesn‘t always give us a chance to operate the way we were trained.

Bottom line, the country gives us our mandate to operate, and our fortunes are governed by the threat. Few want a strong Military during the "good times".

Cheers-Garry


----------

