# Re: They also serve who ...



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *Ian Edwards <iedwards@home.com>* on *Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:14:10 -0800*
I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose Jaw
Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
made up name.
The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several battalions
on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of them.
The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
"unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title, thank
you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town, some
might. A few. I dunno.
The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps a
few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment, the
1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting as
it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *Patrick Cain <patrickcain@snappingturtle.net>* on *Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:26:52 -0500*
At 20:14 30/03/2000 -0800, Ian Edwards wrote:
> About all Ottawa can do is
>reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
>Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
>Regiment. 
This raises one of my eternal Canadian Army questions - What is the
‘Supplementary Order of Battle‘, which 1 IRRegofC and The Perth Regiment
and The Brant Dragoons and all the rest of them supposedly belong to? Is it
written down somewhere? Does it imply a commitment to raise the regiments
to a war strength at some future mobilization? Does the concept differ from
disbandment?
Confused in Toronto,
Patrick Cain
voice: 416 539-0939
fax:    416 515-3698
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"Lawson" <kplawson@csolve.net>* on *Fri, 31 Mar 2000 09:45:02 -0500*
Good point are you aware that at least one of the old Corps Associations
RCASC in fact had legal copy right of its insignia assigned to its self in
early 80s.
Keith Lawson
Nil Sine Labore.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ian Edwards 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
> euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose Jaw
> Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> made up name.
>
> The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
> raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several battalions
> on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
> one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
> in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
> had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
> back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
>
> Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
> the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
> in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
> own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of them.
> The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
> 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
> "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
> Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
> Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title, thank
> you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
> Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town, some
> might. A few. I dunno.
>
> The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
> is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps a
> few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
> Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
> month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
>
> The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment, the
> 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting as
> it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *Gordan Dundas <dundas@prairie.ca>* on *Fri, 17 Mar 2000 10:18:29 -0600*
Am I missing something ?
 I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is  probably quite stupid but
here goes .Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t we
just expand the the current ones?
 Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more useful
to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists have
toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source of
warm bodies.
 To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg force
that is need of restructuring  it ‘s the one that is in desperate need of
service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So let‘s
fob this off on the Militia.
 The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND it our
political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the Armed
Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a very
large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and the ice
storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg flood way
had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
In either event  they would have been followed by the collapse of the
Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to send
troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect that
the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be Belgium?"
 If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
Cheers !Gordon
Ian Edwards wrote:
> I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
> euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose Jaw
> Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> made up name.
>
> The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
> raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several battalions
> on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
> one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
> in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
> had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
> back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
>
> Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
> the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
> in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
> own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of them.
> The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
> 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
> "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
> Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
> Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title, thank
> you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
> Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town, some
> might. A few. I dunno.
>
> The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
> is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps a
> few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
> Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
> month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
>
> The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment, the
> 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting as
> it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"Bradley Sallows" <Bradley_Sallows@ismbc.com>* on *Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:01:19 -0800*
>Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t we just expand
the the current ones?
I would go one step further, and as a precondition to adding any service units
or reroling any other units to service units, first prove that we can expand the
existing ones.
>a transport plt. is probably more useful to the reg. force then a militia rifle
coy.
Riflemen and engineers seem to be the most useful augmentees to date.
>all reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source
of warm bodies.
We are not viewed this disrespectfully by most who have served alongside
reservists.  If there is a counterproductive impression, it is the belief held
by some that the reserves should focus primarily on producing Pte/Cpl and the
occasional Lt and not bother with training any higher ranks beyond the minimum
necessary to run the units.  This ignores the requirements of Stage 3 and 4
mobilization, not to mention the number of Class A bodies required to
administrate a reserve unit.
>However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.
This isn‘t the reason for the regular focus on combat arms and desire to
increase reserve CSS.  Combat arms are difficult to learn and master and there
are few if any civilian equivalents.  Service support trades also take time to
learn and master, but there are many civilian equivalents that in time of war
could be mobilized into CSS positions.  Hence it makes sense to weight the
regular force heavy on combat and combat support arms.
Brad Sallows
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"dave newcombe" <davebo@seaside.net>* on *Fri, 31 Mar 2000 19:29:05 -0800*
What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka.  Lets pray
that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
around time for units deploying on U.N. missions.  We barely had enough
combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis.  We still had plenty of staff
at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and forth.
We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.  If
we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we spend
that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.  I
for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who are
not in uniform.
How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this carries
down to other ranks as well
We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
ranks at command H.Q.s
I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordan Dundas" 
To: 
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> Am I missing something ?
>  I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is  probably quite stupid but
> here goes .Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t
we
> just expand the the current ones?
>  Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
useful
> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
have
> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source
of
> warm bodies.
>  To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg force
> that is need of restructuring  it ‘s the one that is in desperate need of
> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So let‘s
> fob this off on the Militia.
>  The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND it
our
> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the Armed
> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a very
> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and the
ice
> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg flood
way
> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
> In either event  they would have been followed by the collapse of the
> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
send
> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
that
> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
Belgium?"
>  If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
> Cheers !Gordon
>
> Ian Edwards wrote:
>
> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose Jaw
> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> > made up name.
> >
> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several battalions
> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> > Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
> >
> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of them.
> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title, thank
> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town, some
> > might. A few. I dunno.
> >
> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps a
> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
> >
> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment, the
> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting as
> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> > message body.
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"John Gilmour" <jgilmour@atsrecruitment.com>* on *Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:18 -0500*
I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
-----Original Message-----
From: dave newcombe 
To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca 
Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka.  Lets pray
>that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
>around time for units deploying on U.N. missions.  We barely had enough
>combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis.  We still had plenty of
staff
>at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and forth.
>We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
If
>we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we spend
>that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
I
>for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
are
>not in uniform.
>How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
>administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this carries
>down to other ranks as well
>We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
>We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
>ranks at command H.Q.s
>
>I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gordan Dundas" 
>To: 
>Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
>Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>
>
>> Am I missing something ?
>>  I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is  probably quite stupid but
>> here goes .Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t
>we
>> just expand the the current ones?
>>  Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
>> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
>> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
>useful
>> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
>> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
>have
>> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
>> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source
>of
>> warm bodies.
>>  To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg
force
>> that is need of restructuring  it ‘s the one that is in desperate need of
>> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So let‘s
>> fob this off on the Militia.
>>  The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND it
>our
>> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the
Armed
>> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a
very
>> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
>> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and the
>ice
>> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg flood
>way
>> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
>> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
>> In either event  they would have been followed by the collapse of the
>> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
>send
>> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
>that
>> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
>Belgium?"
>>  If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
>> Cheers !Gordon
>>
>> Ian Edwards wrote:
>>
>> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
>> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose
Jaw
>> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
>> > made up name.
>> >
>> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
>> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
>> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several
battalions
>> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
>> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
>> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
>> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
>> > Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
>> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
>> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
>> >
>> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
>> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
>> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
>> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
>> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
>> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of
them.
>> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
>> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
>> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
>> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
>> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
>> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
>> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
>> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
>> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title,
thank
>> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
>> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town,
some
>> > might. A few. I dunno.
>> >
>> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
>> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps
a
>> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
>> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
>> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
>> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
>> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
>> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
>> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
>> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
>> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
>> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
>> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
>> >
>> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment,
the
>> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting
as
>> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
>> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
>> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
>> > --------------------------------------------------------
>> > NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>> > to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>> > message body.
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>> message body.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"Don Pearson" <djpearson@HOTMAIL.COM>* on *Sat, 01 Apr 2000 09:58:38 PST*
This recent string of contributions about Reserve restructure has been 
interesting, but occasionally disappointing. Much of the Reserve opinion has 
shown that no one really understands the nature of modern operations, the 
geo-strategic context in which Canada will participate, how it will evolve 
in the future and what we need to do to perform effectively within it. I‘m 
afraid my impression of what I have read here is nothing more than a 
continuation of 1950‘s thinking by part-time soldiers who, although having 
the best of intentions, cannot see past the armoury door.
The world is much more complicated. There are no more frontal attacks. 
Headquarters will remain big and need to be. Starting with Somalia and 
Bosnia in 1992 again, it became and remains obvious that MOCs other than 
combat arms have important work to do in operations and are winning their 
fair share of medals for it. Among the senior officers of today are people 
who earned their spurs dodging bullets in Croatia, patrolling in Bosnia, 
sweating it out in Somalia yes it was really a SUCCESSFUL missionand doing 
good work in a variety of other active peace support missions...although I 
do admit that hardly any of them are among our senior commanders who have 
done not much in the way of real ops.
Modern, real operations need medics, engineers, intelligence specialists, 
computer geeks,psyop folks, CIMIC experts, diplomats, lots of strategic and 
tactical loggies along with mechanics to keep everything running, flying and 
shooting. The combat arms continue to do the initial dirty work. Everyone 
works hard.
Mobilization is mentioned a few times, but here too I get the feeling that 
people still see it as an event that will happen as it did in the past. It 
won‘t. Further, if we really do need a lot of soldiers quickly, the influx 
will be all the "new guys and gals" who will see you serving folks - regular 
or reserve - as "them", the people who were already there...nothing more. 
All of you will have something bigger to worry about.
Hopefully, we‘ll here some more of the rare examples of well thought out 
ideas on the future of the Reserves. For the young folks out there, don‘t 
let the old veterans lead you around with the ole,"why when I was serving we 
only had one officer in the whole damn company!" routine. He‘s right. They 
did. But that was then. This is now.
I think we need more awareness of what "now" requires. Then we need to get 
our heads on straight and determine what is really important. I‘m not sure 
that the existence of any particular Regiment is high on the list. I know 
effective Canadian military capability is.
By the way, this isn‘t entirely aimed only at Reserve opinion...it‘s just 
that I havent‘ seen any attempt at a dialogue by Regular Force officers, 
although I suspect it goes on in other professional forae.
Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. Don P.
>From: "John Gilmour" 
>Reply-To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca
>To: 
>Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:18 -0500
>
>I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
>PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
We still had plenty of
>staff
> >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and 
>forth.
> >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
>If
> >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we 
>spend
> >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
>I
> >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
>are
> >not in uniform.
> >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
> >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this 
>carries
> >down to other ranks as well
> >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
> >ranks at command H.Q.s
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at  http://www.hotmail.com 
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"S. Brent Warne" <sbw@netidea.com>* on *Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:50:10 -0800*
This recent string of contributions about Reserve restructure has been
interesting, but occasionally disappointing. Much of the Reserve opinion 
has
shown that no one really understands the nature of modern operations, 
the
geo-strategic context in which Canada will participate, how it will 
evolve
in the future and what we need to do to perform effectively within it. 
I‘m
afraid my impression of what I have read here is nothing more than a
continuation of 1950‘s thinking by part-time soldiers who, although 
having
the best of intentions, cannot see past the armoury door.
I disagree.  Reservists can see the geo-strategic/political context and 
have been suggesting that with the pace of current operations, 
reservists are the key to success.  What the reserves have shown in the 
past 10 years is that we can fill up the back of APC‘s and service 
components for op‘s with young soldiers.  We have a great deal of 
difficulty deploying older highly trained pers.
Consider this.  The reserves have shown that they can produce soldiers 
on demand to fill the lower level positions on deployments.  We can 
produce the 20 year old with a reasonable level of training who can 
perform on operations in many capacities.  What has become abundantly 
apparent is that the reserves cannot retain soldiers who are highly 
trained in the more complex trades such as FCS tech‘s, maintainers, and 
the host of other training/experience intense trades that are part of a 
modern military.  It takes years to train a good CSS type.  The suite of 
new equipment that is finally coming to the forces requires highly 
trained and experienced support pers.  This not only includes the 
maintainers/supply/engineers, but also the drivers/operators of this 
equipment. The reserves have a problem retaining people when they reach 
their "career and family age" and have an even greater difficulty 
deploying people when they reach this age.  It stands to reason that a 
reservist is committed to his family first, his job second and the 
reserves third.  A reservist who has a family and a job is going to be 
very hesitant to even consider leaving them for a tour.
Therefore, logic says that we should build on this basic attribute and 
expand the area‘s  where the reserves have been successful.  Consider 
the cost of training an specialist who after years of training, cannot 
deploy because of family and job constraint ?  Could the reserves deploy 
a full maintenance company to Bosnia for a tour - doubtful.  Can the 
reserves supply soldiers to augment the deployed battle groups and NSE - 
YES !!
This means that we need to focus on the lower level of trained pers.  I 
include in this category a complete platoon  suitably augmented .  
Achievable - YES.
The world is much more complicated. There are no more frontal attacks.
Headquarters will remain big and need to be. Starting with Somalia and
Bosnia in 1992 again, it became and remains obvious that MOCs other 
than
combat arms have important work to do in operations and are winning 
their
fair share of medals for it. Among the senior officers of today are 
people
who earned their spurs dodging bullets in Croatia, patrolling in Bosnia, 
sweating it out in Somalia yes it was really a SUCCESSFUL missionand 
doing
good work in a variety of other active peace support missions...although 
I
do admit that hardly any of them are among our senior commanders who 
have
done not much in the way of real ops.
Modern, real operations need medics, engineers, intelligence 
specialists,
computer geeks,psyop folks, CIMIC experts, diplomats, lots of strategic 
and
tactical loggies along with mechanics to keep everything running, flying 
and
shooting. The combat arms continue to do the initial dirty work. 
Everyone
works hard.
Mobilization is mentioned a few times, but here too I get the feeling 
that
people still see it as an event that will happen as it did in the past. 
It
won‘t. Further, if we really do need a lot of soldiers quickly, the 
influx
will be all the "new guys and gals" who will see you serving folks - 
regular
or reserve - as "them", the people who were already there...nothing 
more.
All of you will have something bigger to worry about.
Again, the reserves understand this issue very well.  The demographics 
of Canada have changed significantly in the past 25 years.  The reserves 
provide the constituency that now is the Canadian reality.  We are the 
link to getting the new Canadians integrated into our military.  We need 
them !! 
Hopefully, we‘ll here some more of the rare examples of well thought out 
ideas on the future of the Reserves. For the young folks out there, 
don‘t
let the old veterans lead you around with the ole,"why when I was 
serving we
only had one officer in the whole damn company!" routine. He‘s right. 
They
did. But that was then. This is now.
I consider myself a veteran.  Having been on the first operational tour 
that the reserves participated in many moons ago, I think we do 
understand the necessity of getting reserve restructuring right.  Don‘t 
make the reserves something they can‘t be, make them something they CAN 
be.  If that takes restructuring the regulars at the same time, then so 
be it.
I think we need more awareness of what "now" requires. Then we need to 
get
our heads on straight and determine what is really important. I‘m not 
sure
that the existence of any particular Regiment is high on the list. I 
know
effective Canadian military capability is.
What are you saying here ?
By the way, this isn‘t entirely aimed only at Reserve opinion...it‘s 
just
that I havent‘ seen any attempt at a dialogue by Regular Force officers, 
although I suspect it goes on in other professional forae.
Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. Don P.
We all need to discuss this issue.  The ramifications are huge if we 
don‘t get it right.
>From: "John Gilmour" 
>Reply-To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca
>To: 
>Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:18 -0500
>
>I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
>PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
We still had plenty of
>staff
> >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and
>forth.
> >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper 
trails.
>If
> >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we
>spend
> >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream 
lined.
>I
> >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people 
who
>are
> >not in uniform.
> >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there 
in
> >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this
>carries
> >down to other ranks as well
> >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for 
higher
> >ranks at command H.Q.s
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at  http://www.hotmail.com 
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.
eJ8 IgwSAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy
b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAtAEAAAEAAAAQAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL
AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAASwAAAAAAAACBKx kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAGFybXlAY2lwaGVybG9n
aWMub24uY2EAU01UUABhcm15QGNpcGhlcmxvZ2ljLm9uLmNhAAAeAAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAA
AB4AAzABAAAAFwAAAGFybXlAY2lwaGVybG9naWMub24uY2EAAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD DwYAAAAeAAEw
AQAAABkAAAAnYXJteUBjaXBoZXJsb2dpYy5vbi5jYScAAAAAAgELMAEAAAAcAAAAU01UUDpBUk1Z
QENJUEhFUkxPR0lDLk9OLkNBAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAAeAPZfAQAAABcAAABhcm15QGNpcGhl
cmxvZ2ljLm9uLmNhAAACAfdfAQAAAEsAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDdAQ9UAgAAAABhcm15QGNp
cGhlcmxvZ2ljLm9uLmNhAFNNVFAAYXJteUBjaXBoZXJsb2dpYy5vbi5jYQAAAwD9XwEAAAADAP9f
AAAAAAIB9g8BAAAABAAAAAAAAAIJXgEEgAEAHAAAAFJFOiBUaGV5IGFsc28gc2VydmUgd2hvIC4u
LgC3CAEFgAMADgAAANAHBAABAAoAMgAKAAYAKAEBIIADAA4AAADQBwQAAQAKAA0ABwAGAAABAQmA
AQAhAAAANEEyN0ZFOUFBNjA3RDQxMTgwRDU0NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAA3gYBA5AGALQUAAAhAAAACwAC
AAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AACkcxsLnL8B
HgBwAAEAAAAcAAAAUkU6IFRoZXkgYWxzbyBzZXJ2ZSB3aG8gLi4uAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG/nAsb
B5r J0sHphHUgNVERVNUAAAAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAQAAAAc2J3QG5l
dGlkZWEuY29tAAMABhCn4PMXAwAHEJkWAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABUSElTUkVDRU5UU1RSSU5HT0ZD
T05UUklCVVRJT05TQUJPVVRSRVNFUlZFUkVTVFJVQ1RVUkVIQVNCRUVOSU5URVJFU1RJTkcsQlVU
T0NDQVNJT05BTExZRElTQVBQT0lOVElOAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAmhEAAJYRAAC1HwAATFpGdXkYI213
AAoBAwH3IAKkA MCAGOCaArAc2V0MCAHE00CgH0KgAjIIDsJbzLMNTUCgAqBdWMAUAsDMGxpMzYB
QAtgbmewNDEwNQqgA2B0BZBOdAunCrEKgFRoBAAgzQlwYwnwBUBzdAUQFABwIG9mIAWgAjAFEGL4
dXRpAiAEIAGgCGAFQOZSB5AEkHZlFgEWgRLw3nQIcBjAD4AEIGIJ4Qrj3wqAC4AUoBjiFrEsGdAY
MThvY2MZsBexB0BseYQgZAQAYXBwbxqRLRaxLgXQEvBoFuJ0aPMYwBhmb3ALgBexGZMVZLBzaG93
A6Ad4GEFQDRubxbgbhjCHCN1bvcEgRaAAHBkBCAd4hwQGVP/FvEEZR6gBJAgQBeyG0Ad4mEVZGdl
by0WgSBAZchnaWMXE2V4BUALgCwgdxXQHYFDAHBhZL5hJkADEAMgCrEXoGMFID8lMRtAH9EmEAVA
JyNldu8G8BixGjYd02YXkBliIcG7JkEgQXciMQngKtB0IICeZCCAK8EjcQIQcm0o8PsBIBSxaRiw
HEED8B3gJiGzKIAdQEknLLAVZGEDUPsLcCrQbRxQB3AUcAeQG L7FuIq80kZkRizJuAZkBrB/yYQ
BCAgcC2yFtAEYBlxICHfA6AnABVkFyILgHUjoxbiYDE5NTAnIfILgGvtFrJiHFAnci0XoAeAFnDv
BvAccCGBJkFvG0AHQB3g/QhgZx2QMNEWshVkHeIZ4L8WgBbiGpIc8SPTG8BuMfH/FnAJ4CdhOQEd
4grABGAIcPUcUW8FsC4I0ABBFHUVVX8VZDCwHHIJwh1AGFUEAHTfBCA6ITqDHeIkyy8cwBOAvyeh
B0AllyqyMNMZ43M3kP8kwBrzIBQtkh3TCrAWMBbj/whwCXAWUSNqGOE xgrAP6T8a2UcUCvBQuAb
sC/BPmH VyAyHeJGNAeRMNMfxCnV8zrTFDAgeSDwNsEV4UOUSxjAP0JmJzJ1cB3TYsUA0GsW4kFQ
QzTRKrL/PrNEkQWgL5AgoQIwBCAsgfcekTTRQ N5CGAWwTZmSEL/GYIYsScACcEgQQEAQVEW8bcc
cAEgJXB1N1AcUWULULxveRazNoAEkBmQaTeg/xxBJRELgCuRI3FIMD0KCFD/AIFUci2xSDIVwEjv
H9gd4fccUD9CFHFkEvA2SR7xAQB/A4Ero0yDHeIJACtABcBs9ykALVAnYG8AkBekWyNT0v8HgE9R
UVRZ2h3iAdBLI1RC/0PUJwAg4TZgHBACYFxhXPP/HbJVMhayNvFZxCxlMAIjd/8mEgOBWbJEcUER
B5BIRhmk307hKpEXgCFgAHB0HEEcof9G4RZRS5ZIyzolCXABkCYhfzZqRtNUvSnVMnNO4lzgeD9V
EgEABCBH0WERBCBGQ/sF8BShaDTQG0AAwBqRVUL/D6A3IVuSHfEf0DkEMgFXEt1ipS8l4CNxCJBu
RJE5Y/8PsG32ICNG4idyFuInAARlrm0DECiACsB5PmFJOwH YUdgBCBLNCvBVSNR8jvw9yrQbwBv
EXkjcFeFQuAogKcioyCwB BlcXlQcF5y/yAUFeFMgBwUTuFDUywBKhL/BbBIARYBeiEY4VSuKrJy
eP9OQUzQHMB0wVWjV5IxxCCRexxBC4BjCkBz1G0Rb8gv/3 CHEByYBQAVVFwMxtiB0D7NmAd02QF
EBiwgrEjZAWw/1sBHcIV4XoXHUBXvzMBFHH/YcEssGpUFrIjcB6gYdEmUD8aAVmDIOEdgR3hfUAg
Is8bwAnRBcAqsmZhdbFn4f0kwCJB AORXPEDoFIjVIH/Uw JT4paFeGMgXY0IaYggP9hVHQFRigx
sk7hdbACQCuUvxXSjBVMgCGRKCEV4WqIgH86gRchfmRIyy2xCyA YUH/k3ljIhmiJwCMFpcClnMV
4fd4AHvlGeAghQEcUB3wXWH/Z6Erso2TFyFW5FzgN Qd4f8ssE SJwArwAhwVeuHIQlw3yyBKBEJ
ACViHJB5S6gfwf9TYCrQF4ADECrQkuMV4U1A/wCQJYAgQBdUKpRycXCGRuH YTTRkBJG9Vf8QpVH
8ypA/mw YVa5TsI5BGKXP1IjcP8nwAdAmUYu4I4iSzRiaToH81O0ZtJhdXNxFvGaKZaC952CVSMF
QD ocqJiplutlf aAVNgAyBvswnwAHBOtWVCPSvBQl1QAwCaAZ73IC35K F1YgAwqEQDkaZbguT3
Nlgrwa4wZ3plhLFTwyuRX01AAkBh0QnACGBwTgROJFNFtRFZRQXwISH/n5wV4QeABiJLxit2AhBE
8P9bA1xOYmZVdnZBgUZKNJQi/yUyBbCyAm2EeXELUSvAHvG KHkzYbFn4bhEK5EpmJL7D3AIkHZh
s7rjVeUDMDxA/xVRFIWgBiZABbBgsbxCHXL/bThBMZSxhwMqghlxIHEyc38DUW/hAyCj4U1RSDEV
ZEj/MTF6ICeBNrMnMglwb7IZ0N9UwCqjK3YZ4B1AU3XxQ0P9Q NTA3ETgCcAKrIVZLQFcyYhNJA5
MsNQPhALcSl/G0Aoga4CZyIqwc2EWwFixzfwCGBLpU1PQ1sBcZTvMtIzNgbQdDNtSXUvgQkR/5zC
x9FNcCvEJiFkWdIglwL/GXED8DpAnlWLIRVkjBCLIf8fwEbiIsIJgIRBT4MogMSx/kEEYJ5kOoEe
0U xjoJa4/8dwQRwoXB0VI/EFWRjIktB/1ViivSqoAhwsZEEcINxNXG3slEPwGTjQwNgI6FhG0D/
J EDYBwwFrImIbQEG0AfZX8rQCOh5CIbgRgxJiHQFig/SzBLcSiRGbEg5ScAU1WEQ0O7EFNGVUx1
of0v0ykqsivwOAh4A9fzd7P/xUAIgVOBcVcA0C0iLEFEgv9/hukVSDDuYDdHMLAVZCvx7ybglIEg
FA BZJpj6 Oek/9G4owg3VK04t3VlFIhwTay/iiZhClHK/AgsTpSyGMp1W/nkOvjIOIekXPEsD0K
Tf8Ec0YS9pNkdytz3DElcCPx/4NZGpLj8STAcuKqqCPx1efX4ZCOIiTAZcvALLowUHAbTOACEGz9
kSagSU1J/kN tPwyHHBT0c2g/DIJAP8/ERbxJQjQmMuRQSShASVg/weRB0DdUkPjB4APcaog eD/
K7JHYFPAjYI7sDIUGSDaM/0bQGYcQKo00LYfwRSQHRP/hyLWSjOVMqEr1B3xHsHjUb/LUBxwJ5At
cdgBHUBFnCL/IKLgFdgBSXKYcfcczfATgP56NAS8QzmjflIqMHnhNhL/g9WmBHgQMKEkwDsELPAt
UP9DV8YEj7Ua8SdBOpIogZnS/410epUnIx8gHLAaARmxKIE/HHBspzrSLiESJsfQbif9LhFGRQBx
ktKRMEEgxyvx/ytz5vAAMQBzNnZ6IU1gGVD3JAR7QAYQdW3g4BUnMpvxyxkxJBMiedJndaGBKrL/
0kCEUIywYyInIzqSUHFOVP9UIf4jtRE MB4QwvDa1rSB11f1tREVsSKekiIblI 3 x8hyfNsMSJH
gTFy7mEx v3L5kHNUUTBH9IU9UmyZxF/MhTN8UAAVyEfIbSAwgJi9 YhPC9WJ0HSQhuUV/dncf82
sZIShhTpIQkhnCO9IBlA71eFW1GhEIWAcFdQBCFEwf 18W4g5vBJkwPSQABOQVTAz6ogjpFnpEpK
MjVLJFeO/8bBN/DA8akkr8Hc4AkgcuD/JRJo4a1QefBok92wMHPm4P/VwOfS3OB2IlGBRubkAdgj
/xDxQ0W9MnnwN2Zk4kCBQGL/bKKdAbTidblRgb1UnqK7QPeYoFX1xo9IhVGyQhuBvSD JxUSphIo
Qm0k8TTNcEbi/23Q0xBtsYXTLsKlIe7S5gR/xgSdwRWxvjWoMDXwQbhS/2llGAG0gaUyUHQglOYi
JTP//2EXwtDFwpGlI2CiWKDM4f 8kp4RYMAf0mBwUIFgxUoU/aDQIqtQCrGQMsCA55IgFv 9ISGV
gRKZwKLieYLeY/WHt1jgxXHcUG2dYrNzIYyw/7oBB2F4wcxgpbGE4EPxhwPv6CDvRZ3AzxBCSHO8
8hWx/aUxbocCLeM2oio/DQfAgH2dh22hgF0QdQJKlZiRSP eNKdzRTaV4mRICkG002jP/3STASD/
kDvFZSR1QGTCjID b60AwIAogtggvSHYcS0b/70yp/I4Ma5yOcYiJjRB48DPp9BFwQVDUwQgREkj
zaD/drC2LShXikMyIUlBp3BvksdlBJ7AZg1DQU7O4xcQ//FCXIJ2o2MsplQhM5nhuJT/oWDTIQ S
G5OnoZvT3OAMxu8 31 J VTIwmHnkIuADvD/qBBDI9SiHcC sFHxfRWHA//VwL0pEPIhlbTxpUA3
kEUT/6/TQ/Lpk0qie9GQAnrU59X711cXASeewK1Sw4DKQQGV/1x2QqD8EftTroFekl2EIUP/RoCh
ILhjNvHFEO7xvjb8Ef8XAQRwNrLGBKCQEXDspDdn/zymrRFdgA2yjuHpIFZPDQd V5MjykEf06Fw
j3KmAz/7bq8NJUIlE/XyG5It40ky/w6ii4DoEg houLoEpNARoW/9rEJ8fkQ7mHc4KWxar4A3xIm
XGPAgCfyFHAnH4LrQfezoaPh8YBwk0GTQjehoQH9CSFi6CB8MSFDRyF6495k/ Tm7pnDgKqilAGT
QOqQQwL/DkHYsdVDxsERcOkzCkG0cf5hUnCfnJzADFG0csKROfP/0yEQ9Dbx3kFYgTEhYzHPEPlk
gSBQbjiBvjiSzVG9Vv3/gHO98byyLeYz1q7BMgL7 PQ4wmju4NcxGMNJFBDyT9KxUvRuT8clPkbL
AG2iOh2wSm9o1cBHosBnL5DhoHJwPGoCsKEzQLv/4SEQYwWA3OC4Yi7WQY4 n VGgLcxLVRvoJB5
CHF5QF3REEGNsQEgLu J4QJAn WkQjykj6WTo2b6U7VgascBoJBGgKCQU2O/3GEJkCJE4HLuYZ/l
RMGx7aCQU1yArQAxxODGwDNABjCsUNHAMDozOTrkMTi1EDA1rFCf5Z/lv1fjvfDZ4wOBqzAoEU4d
4PvWQmdhJpFxT4N6of4BGDQnvZKD4WRwT1e6oElaB7rANVGf5VBBUEVSYC1QVVNIs2C7IEDxupBE
SFG7MbtMmOcTFP9PUiPhFHDr4p/lLWHeUJ/lBCA XIFOLkQuSPguUS4bkWTw2lgzkegR/6BQWEDf
MP9R0JLhkNugYmLfXYDAEc3gy6HQiT7coa8Qv6q2uHA9V8qBZPJ00kEIgP8xgiAiYXGVIXGBKfFg
4thR/wLQDFG7I7vzdbLccKq2abD/uAdzgd/Q1bEOMWThYmJ00v8iJgWQ3OAOcXDSfuFdwRRh921F
1kCOcGRJMk53t6AVcZ5kvadcY/VDcVFyZ16x/8SYdRLMpwhCzVHf4CgQ3HH/xhMAse0QeNDkAdxA
wqe9p//coguCSRRaMObQFEFcV9vR/zbxe0MhUHrijFQIMBNw3JP/I7i9pTjBvaf1AjKRxbHcoX5t
vZg/4B3wXoO/ceggT 3eVSh7AxNBYyFQ6TGcB/4pOLbb0kh2G G4CO/hBbDfALPswk8D49EPwnb/
Udcm7 LTCBTVYpw0LteghvO9pd8CQCmgAsG9p nQd0VBPEHfsUNK0cFyXxAuwim9r3QB/0sh BAJ
RczkGqQGRsBju P/B3Lir0siGuLjtPmCkeMIBf/Fs/9g9QO 8q/AfvHSlHzy//gA5sfhxXYQ8wVS
kLkR4EV95sRf7n/vj/Cf8MDmxEfVEQFZdNJQZAB2AOH/YPugUB hRb7ggCBsMpgTjnCDMNCMwHA6
Ly939SD LiQwotDCYaMinyOOcCsLPi33X/hv X/5wubETk/8VEWgkAewCZAhEC QKBH3H9FgoFjC
ZqBhhuR9sv9g/xNwwbGNYA xbLApEAGVvsL auswSRAvkKbvDzH85Dih/mPHYRRxJ2S7gP63 9RA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--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *Gordan Dundas <dundas@prairie.ca>* on *Sat, 18 Mar 2000 13:51:07 -0600*
--------------1E4E8266D97104892891B598
Ahh... they already did just that if they do again if you think you‘re having
difficulty getting paid ‘clothed .fed. downsize NDHQ.I suspect no one will like
what happens or does‘nt after that.
I suspect that while there‘s some fat there still it‘s unlikely to be cut first
and any cutting will those who efforts affect the troops.
John Gilmour wrote:
> I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
> PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dave newcombe 
> To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca 
> Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:51 PM
> Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>
> >What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka.  Lets pray
> >that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
> >around time for units deploying on U.N. missions.  We barely had enough
> >combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis.  We still had plenty of
> staff
> >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and forth.
> >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
> If
> >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we spend
> >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
> I
> >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
> are
> >not in uniform.
> >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
> >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this carries
> >down to other ranks as well
> >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
> >ranks at command H.Q.s
> >
> >I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Gordan Dundas" 
> >To: 
> >Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
> >Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> >
> >
> >> Am I missing something ?
> >>  I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is  probably quite stupid but
> >> here goes .Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t
> >we
> >> just expand the the current ones?
> >>  Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
> >> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
> >> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
> >useful
> >> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
> >> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
> >have
> >> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
> >> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source
> >of
> >> warm bodies.
> >>  To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg
> force
> >> that is need of restructuring  it ‘s the one that is in desperate need of
> >> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So let‘s
> >> fob this off on the Militia.
> >>  The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND it
> >our
> >> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the
> Armed
> >> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a
> very
> >> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
> >> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and the
> >ice
> >> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg flood
> >way
> >> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
> >> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
> >> In either event  they would have been followed by the collapse of the
> >> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
> >send
> >> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
> >that
> >> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
> >Belgium?"
> >>  If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
> >> Cheers !Gordon
> >>
> >> Ian Edwards wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
> >> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose
> Jaw
> >> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
> >> > made up name.
> >> >
> >> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
> >> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
> >> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several
> battalions
> >> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
> >> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
> >> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
> >> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
> >> > Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
> >> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
> >> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
> >> >
> >> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
> >> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
> >> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
> >> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
> >> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
> >> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of
> them.
> >> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
> >> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
> >> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
> >> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
> >> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
> >> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
> >> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
> >> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
> >> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title,
> thank
> >> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
> >> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town,
> some
> >> > might. A few. I dunno.
> >> >
> >> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
> >> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps
> a
> >> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
> >> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
> >> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
> >> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
> >> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
> >> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
> >> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
> >> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
> >> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
> >> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
> >> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
> >> >
> >> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment,
> the
> >> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting
> as
> >> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
> >> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
> >> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------
> >> > NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> > to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> >> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> > message body.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> >> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >> message body.
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------
> >NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> >to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> >to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> >message body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------1E4E8266D97104892891B598
Received: from cpu2212.adsl.bellglobal.com cpu2212.adsl.bellglobal.com [207.236.3.189]
by pol1.prairie.ca 8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU with ESMTP id JAA19997
for  Sat, 1 Apr 2000 09:41:31 -0600
Received: from majordomo@localhost
          by cpu2212.adsl.bellglobal.com 8.8.4/8.8.4
  id MAA32464 for army-outgoing Sat, 1 Apr 2000 12:06:38 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: cpu2212.adsl.bellglobal.com: majordomo set sender to owner-army@cipherlogic.on.ca using -f
Received: from atsrecruitment.com [209.171.89.35]
          by cpu2212.adsl.bellglobal.com 8.8.4/8.8.4 with ESMTP
  id MAA32461 for  Sat, 1 Apr 2000 12:06:29 -0500
Received: from johng [10.1.1.165] by gateway.atsrecruitment.com with SMTP id  Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:22 -0500
Message-ID: 
From: "John Gilmour" 
To: 
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3612.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3612.1700
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:18 -0500
Sender: owner-army@cipherlogic.on.ca
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca
I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
-----Original Message-----
From: dave newcombe 
To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca 
Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>What happens if we have another domestic crisis, such as Oka.  Lets pray
>that it doesn‘t happen during the annual flood season, or during the turn
>around time for units deploying on U.N. missions.  We barely had enough
>combat troops to deploy during the Oka crisis.  We still had plenty of
staff
>at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and forth.
>We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper trails.
If
>we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we spend
>that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream lined.
I
>for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people who
are
>not in uniform.
>How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
>administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this carries
>down to other ranks as well
>We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
>We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
>ranks at command H.Q.s
>
>I think I‘ll switch to de-caf this week.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Gordan Dundas" 
>To: 
>Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:18 AM
>Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
>
>
>> Am I missing something ?
>>  I say this because I ‘ve got an idea that is  probably quite stupid but
>> here goes .Instead of  adding more service units to the roster why don‘t
>we
>> just expand the the current ones?
>>  Now I know the reason for this restructuring is an attempt by NDHQ to
>> basically get something for nothing.ie: a transport unit shouldn‘t cost
>> anymore to run then a rifle coy.and a transport plt. is probably more
>useful
>> to the reg. force then a militia rifle coy.
>> This is I‘m afraid going to further erode what good feeling reservists
>have
>> toward their reg force brethren and reinforce the feeling that all
>> reservists are viewed as expendable cannon fodder.Or at least as a source
>of
>> warm bodies.
>>  To be be honest from this lowly civvies point of view it is the reg
force
>> that is need of restructuring  it ‘s the one that is in desperate need of
>> service units.However combat arms is "sexy" combat support is‘nt.So let‘s
>> fob this off on the Militia.
>>  The real problem isn‘t the the reserves or the reg force or even DND it
>our
>> political leadership who have for years ignored the sad state of the
Armed
>> Forces.The armed force have been extremely lucky that we‘ve had had a
very
>> large deployment that has lasted more then 90 days.
>> By this I mean 5-8000 troops deployed during the Red river flood and the
>ice
>> storms the following year.what would have happened if the Winnipeg flood
>way
>> had collapsed or the Brunkild Dike given way?Or if the ice storms and
>> exterme cold weather conditions had gone on?
>> In either event  they would have been followed by the collapse of the
>> Canadian Forces.This is not helped by our current leaderships desire to
>send
>> troops just about everywhere on a moments notice.One begins to suspect
>that
>> the Motto of the Armed Forces is "if this is tuesday,this must be
>Belgium?"
>>  If I‘ve been rambling it‘s the cold medication.....Honest!
>> Cheers !Gordon
>>
>> Ian Edwards wrote:
>>
>> > I think a strong legal argument could be made against restructuring a
>> > euphemism certain units. Let‘s consider the case of The Royal Moose
Jaw
>> > Fusiliers to keep it neutral. For the younger readers - YES it‘s a
>> > made up name.
>> >
>> > The RMJR has a fine history dating back to before Christ was a Cpl. It
>> > raised battalions for blah, blah, blah wars. Today the "unit" IS THE
>> > REGIMENT. Or perhaps not. During WW2 the Regiment had several
battalions
>> > on Active Service Overseas, a battalion in the Reserve Army at home and
>> > one in July 1945 at Shilo preparing to join the Canadian Army Pacific
>> > Force before the Bomb was dropped. Times got tough over in Paga Pogo
>> > in 1944 and the 1st Battalion was converted from Infantry to a Postal
>> > Battlion, scaring the ****  out of Hitler. it was a dirty job but some
>> > had to do it. When the emergency passed they reverted to Infy and went
>> > back to the front lines as part of the 9th Canadian Infantry Division.
>> >
>> > Change them now in the year 2000 to a Mobile Bath and Laundry Unit?
>> > Well, depends on who the "them" is. It can be argued, somewhat
>> > successfully, that DND does not "own" the name RMJF. Ottawa doesn‘t own
>> > the Regimental customs and traditions, doesn‘t "own" the cap badge was
>> > in existence before approval by a General Order, and certainly doesn‘t
>> > own their dress uniforms, etc, etc. or the right to wear a copy of
them.
>> > The Regiment is much more than just its unit, which is in essence their
>> > 1st Battalion only bn numbers being dropped when there is only the one
>> > "unit". Legally, the RMJR Senate has the right to refuse to be
>> > converted to "The 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battlion Royal Moose
>> > Jaw Fusiliers". The Senate has a choice. About all Ottawa can do is
>> > reduce the "unit" to nil strength and transfer the unit to the
>> > Supplementary Order of Battle in reality, completing the death of the
>> > Regiment. The same day Ottawa can cut a piece of paper creating The
>> > 43rd Mobile Bath and Sanitation Battalion no supplementary title,
thank
>> > you and transfer all ranks to this new abomination for as long as the
>> > Old Fus‘ FORMER MEMBERS will stay. If that‘s the only game in town,
some
>> > might. A few. I dunno.
>> >
>> > The Senate has a say. For any kids still reading this far, the Senate
>> > is a body consisting of the former COs of the battalions and perhaps
a
>> > few other VIPs and/or "honoraries". It‘s often incorporated under the
>> > provincial societies‘ act, and is in no way part of DND Take for
>> > example "the crazy eights". In early 1957, the 8th Princess Louise‘s
>> > New Brunswick Hussars changed their name to the 8th Canadian Hussars
>> > Princess Louise‘s. Why? Well, first of all their regimental senate
>> > approved of the change. The change was required in order for the
>> > regiment to gain a Regular Force armoured component and the name
>> > change was deemed necessary by Ottawa to remove the local-only stigma
>> > within their name you can just imagine the fights that would have
>> > broken out in a bar in Saskatoon if those New Brunswickers, ripe from a
>> > month in Dundurn, tried to steal a local gal from the Toon Town boys.
>> >
>> > The 8CH. THEY WERE NOT THE FIRST TO BE ASKED. At least one regiment,
the
>> > 1st Hussars, from London in the bush, turned down the offer, tempting
as
>> > it was. I think "The Plugs" 4PLGD were also asked and declined. The
>> > 4th Princess Louise Dragoon Guards are no longer with us.
>> > Death Before Dishonour, disbanded a few years later.
>> > --------------------------------------------------------
>> > NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>> > to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>> > message body.
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>> message body.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
>to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
>to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
>message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.
--------------1E4E8266D97104892891B598--
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------



## army (21 Sep 2002)

Posted by *"dave newcombe" <davebo@seaside.net>* on *Sat, 1 Apr 2000 20:11:11 -0800*
Does that mean there will be enough people at NDHQ to order a new field
kitchen for a deployed unit, if theirs is stolen in transit.  Does anyone
out there have the numbers of employees and service members at NDHQ and all
the other command out there.  I‘d like to see that compared to numbers we
have at the sharp end.  You know the end that does the work, that everything
else is supposed to support.-----
From: "Don Pearson" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> This recent string of contributions about Reserve restructure has been
> interesting, but occasionally disappointing. Much of the Reserve opinion
has
> shown that no one really understands the nature of modern operations, the
> geo-strategic context in which Canada will participate, how it will evolve
> in the future and what we need to do to perform effectively within it. I‘m
> afraid my impression of what I have read here is nothing more than a
> continuation of 1950‘s thinking by part-time soldiers who, although having
> the best of intentions, cannot see past the armoury door.
>
> The world is much more complicated. There are no more frontal attacks.
> Headquarters will remain big and need to be. Starting with Somalia and
> Bosnia in 1992 again, it became and remains obvious that MOCs other than
> combat arms have important work to do in operations and are winning their
> fair share of medals for it. Among the senior officers of today are
people
> who earned their spurs dodging bullets in Croatia, patrolling in Bosnia,
> sweating it out in Somalia yes it was really a SUCCESSFUL missionand
doing
> good work in a variety of other active peace support missions...although I
> do admit that hardly any of them are among our senior commanders who have
> done not much in the way of real ops.
>
> Modern, real operations need medics, engineers, intelligence specialists,
> computer geeks,psyop folks, CIMIC experts, diplomats, lots of strategic
and
> tactical loggies along with mechanics to keep everything running, flying
and
> shooting. The combat arms continue to do the initial dirty work. Everyone
> works hard.
>
> Mobilization is mentioned a few times, but here too I get the feeling that
> people still see it as an event that will happen as it did in the past. It
> won‘t. Further, if we really do need a lot of soldiers quickly, the influx
> will be all the "new guys and gals" who will see you serving folks -
regular
> or reserve - as "them", the people who were already there...nothing more.
> All of you will have something bigger to worry about.
>
> Hopefully, we‘ll here some more of the rare examples of well thought out
> ideas on the future of the Reserves. For the young folks out there, don‘t
> let the old veterans lead you around with the ole,"why when I was serving
we
> only had one officer in the whole damn company!" routine. He‘s right. They
> did. But that was then. This is now.
>
> I think we need more awareness of what "now" requires. Then we need to get
> our heads on straight and determine what is really important. I‘m not sure
> that the existence of any particular Regiment is high on the list. I know
> effective Canadian military capability is.
>
> By the way, this isn‘t entirely aimed only at Reserve opinion...it‘s just
> that I havent‘ seen any attempt at a dialogue by Regular Force officers,
> although I suspect it goes on in other professional forae.
>
> Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. Don P.
>
> >From: "John Gilmour" 
> >Reply-To: army@cipherlogic.on.ca
> >To: 
> >Subject: Re: They also serve who ...
> >Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 10:39:18 -0500
> >
> >I concure with Dave Newcombe,  go one step further to say DOWNSIZE the
> >PAPER-PUSHERS @ NDHQ !!!!
>
>
> We still had plenty of
> >staff
> > >at N.D.H.Q., taking their early Fridays, and pushing paper back and
> >forth.
> > >We need to make our Armed services less bound to desks and paper
trails.
> >If
> > >we plan on making our reserve units more efficient, then couldn‘t we
> >spend
> > >that much energy making our headquarters at all levels more stream
lined.
> >I
> > >for one don‘t believe that there is any place on any base for people
who
> >are
> > >not in uniform.
> > >How many Army Officers of all classifications are there out there in
> > >administrative only roles, vs, Officers in Combat formations. this
> >carries
> > >down to other ranks as well
> > >We need to learn to do more soldiering and less papering.
> > >We need leaders to lead men in combat units, not make coffee for higher
> > >ranks at command H.Q.s
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at  http://www.hotmail.com 
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.


----------

