# Does being part of military make you 'right wing'?



## mellian (22 Jul 2009)

Since making the decision to join, I occasionally joked that I may end up ostracizing myself from a lot of the activist groups that I have been involved with over the years as most do not have the positive views of the military. Then now after reading some comments about the 'left wing' dim views of the military, made me wonder if it is some kind of social requirement to have some kind of 'right wing' view to be in the military?

I mean, a lot of my political views are left leaning. I am anti-war and helped organize and coordinate protests in the past on that basis, a long with against Bush when he came to Ottawa couple of times, against security certificates, pro-choice, etc. Guaranteed to have appeared in many of the photos and videos the police has taken in all the those protests too. 

Yet, I turn around and later applied for the military...so what does that make me? 

Of course, I always been known to destroy stereotypes while enforcing some others.....


----------



## George Wallace (22 Jul 2009)

Perhaps, rather than going through life listening only to sound bites from the Left, you have begun to look at things for yourself and in more detail, using a little bit of reason and analytical skills?  Perhaps, you have taken the blinders off and decided to research/read a little more on national and international topics?  Perhaps you are realizing that Socialism and Communism are great works of fiction, that are not practical at all in reality?  Perhaps you are now in a position where you have to work for a living and manage your own financial affairs?  There are a lot of "perhaps" that you have probably just recently gone through, changing your life.


----------



## the 48th regulator (22 Jul 2009)

Oh Ya,

Totally right wing, no question about it.....







     
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	










    
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	










   
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





Hang up yer hat now, the left never used any form of militaristic means of imposing their views....


dileas

tess


----------



## Newt (22 Jul 2009)

Being in the CF does not make one right wing, left wing, libertarian, or totalitarian. If anything, being in the CF will probably bring your views closer to the center of the political spectrum.

You should be asking yourself, maybe you already have, what aspects of service appeal to you? What is it inside of you that drives you towards being in the CF?

When you get in treat the CF like you would any other workplace or family gathering, keep conversations about politics, sex, religion, and money out of it.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Jul 2009)

What commie pinko, tree huggin', seal lovin', birkenstock wearing, global warming enviromentalist, peace activist freak stopped his flower covered VW microbus, rolled down the windows, letting all the wacky tabacky smoke out, long enough to try plant that tinfoil wacko idea in your head?

Nuke the gay whales for Jesus!

Nope. Nothing to worry about, you'll be fine. ;D


----------



## SeaKingTacco (22 Jul 2009)

mellian-

I think that you will find people in the military have a wide range of political and social beliefs.  They also have excellent senses of humour- but the type of humour takes getting used to.

You may find that the Military as an institution is conservative- with emphasis on the small "c" and not related to a similarly named Canadian Political party.  The military tends to change incrementally and is very big on preserving tradition and heritage.

Good Luck.


----------



## dustinm (22 Jul 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Perhaps you are realizing that Socialism and Communism are great works of fiction, that are not practical at all in reality?



Is that not a false dichotomy? Genuine Communist and Socialist governments have lasted in various forms for and over many years; while they may not have been practical and certainly not stable in the long term, they were very real. 

They didn't call it the Iron Curtain because velvet was in short supply, you know


----------



## Larkvall (22 Jul 2009)

My advice is to spend less time worrying about labels and more time following your principles.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Jul 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> Is that not a false dichotomy? Genuine Communist and Socialist governments have lasted in various forms for and over many years; while they may not have been practical and certainly not stable in the long term, they were very real.
> 
> They didn't call it the Iron Curtain because velvet was in short supply, you know



Are you trying to tell me that "Genuine Communist and Socialist governments" actually existed, other than in name only?  I look at most, if not all, as being nothing more than Dictatorships.


----------



## mellian (22 Jul 2009)

I figured as much, mainly ask to spur discussion to that question. In a sense, with the military's incremental changes in policies and general overall views can help provide a good idea of the overall view of society. Yet, a lot people do not notice or realize this, continue to resort to stereotypes and dated views & examples.  





			
				SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> mellian-
> 
> I think that you will find people in the military have a wide range of political and social beliefs.  They also have excellent senses of humour- but the type of humour takes getting used to.
> 
> ...


----------



## dustinm (22 Jul 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Are you trying to tell me that "Genuine Communist and Socialist governments" actually existed, other than in name only?  I look at most, if not all, as being nothing more than Dictatorships.



Unfortunately I can't claim to know enough about Communism and Socialism to dispute that; As far as the society controlling the means of production, I believe several governments have achieved that. As for the "egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership" that Wikipedia speaks of, I think you're right in that nobody has ever achieved that.

And Socialism's "public or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" sounds a lot like North Korea or Mao's China; of course, those societies were also prone to widespread corruption and eventual collapse, but that's another story altogether...


----------



## GAP (22 Jul 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Are you trying to tell me that "Genuine Communist and Socialist governments" actually existed, other than in name only?  I look at most, if not all, as being nothing more than Dictatorships.



Ahhhh....but they are dictatorships FOR the people!!! Really!! 

Just ask Mugabe, Joseph something or other that on trial now in La Haig, Raul Castro, that wingnut in Venezuela......just some references.....


----------



## George Wallace (22 Jul 2009)

For the most part, of all the people I have met over many years of Service, it is a very very tiny number who have narrow inflexible views on the world, environment, religion, politics, etc.  The vast majority of the people I have met and know in the CF are very open minded and prefer to look at as many facets and angles to any 'problem' or project that they face.  From the very beginning, although we have to have discipline, we also encourage initiative.  This produces a very skilled soldier allowing for a lot of creativity and a broad variety of "thinking".  There are many occupations in the military that require "war gaming" to come up with/imagine every possibility and "Courses of Action".  I don't think that one can categorically "Label" very many members of the CF as being "Left Wing", "Right Wing" or any other variation of these themes.


----------



## Otis (22 Jul 2009)

IMO, the military in general is perceived as right wing for one simple reason: as members of the military, we do not publically express our opinions on political matters. 

We are taught to do this so as to not cause embarrassment to the CF or to present ourselves as representing the opinion of the CF.

As, for the most part, left-wing politicos tend to be vocal in both their opinions and criticisms (this is NOT a criticism, just an observation), our silence is usually perceived as agreement or complacence and therefore we are labelled right-wing.

Again, just my opinion though ... 

I also agree however that for the most part, military personnel tend to lean towards the small 'c' conservative side of center.

Otis


----------



## mellian (22 Jul 2009)

Perhaps always been devil advocate type left leaning Centrist who differ with any political views and groups, probably because I started living on my own and take care of financial affairs since I was 16 and that along with reading, actually spoke and hung in variety of people? Perhaps despite everything that happened in life and that I have done, idea of being in the military has always been there, hence part of why I always preferring helping to organize and coordinate small to large demonstration and marches than just standing there and holding signs? That and always thrive working in a team to get things done, no matter what it is, paid or volunteer or sport.    

I was always against extremes and propaganda of any sort, preferring to actual facts and letting people in general to figure out for themselves. Even when going up against the police during protests, I see them as human beings like the rest who are only doing their job, and tend to bump heads with some folks in protest movements in regards to that. Communism is possible, just all those who tried implementing it frakked it up due power and greed, and socialism is more prominent among 'first world' nations than many think. 



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> Perhaps, rather than going through life listening only to sound bites from the Left, you have begun to look at things for yourself and in more detail, using a little bit of reason and analytical skills?  Perhaps, you have taken the blinders off and decided to research/read a little more on national and international topics?  Perhaps you are realizing that Socialism and Communism are great works of fiction, that are not practical at all in reality?  Perhaps you are now in a position where you have to work for a living and manage your own financial affairs?  There are a lot of "perhaps" that you have probably just recently gone through, changing your life.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Perhaps always been devil advocate type left leaning Centrist who differ with any political views and groups, probably because I started living on my own and take care of financial affairs since I was 16 and that along with reading, actually spoke and hung in variety of people? Perhaps despite everything that happened in life and that I have done, idea of being in the military has always been there, hence part of why I always preferring helping to organize and coordinate small to large demonstration and marches than just standing there and holding signs? That and always thrive working in a team to get things done, no matter what it is, paid or volunteer or sport.
> 
> I was always against extremes and propaganda of any sort, preferring to actual facts and letting people in general to figure out for themselves. Even when going up against the police during protests, I see them as human beings like the rest who are only doing their job, and tend to bump heads with some folks in protest movements in regards to that. Communism is possible, just all those who tried implementing it frakked it up due power and greed, and socialism is more prominent among 'first world' nations than many think.



Many of us, having gone through those phases ourselves, having been there/done that, tend to react with a  : when we see these people in the streets.  

Otis

You can't forget that as "instruments" of the Government, we must also not appear to be too far to the Right either.  We must appear to be "impartial", as do Law Enforcement Officers, in the conduct of our duties at the orders of the Government.

In the end, one may generalize and call the military Right Wing, if they think the Government is Right Wing or Left Wing depending on the flavour of Government we have in power.  The CF reflects the Government which gives it direction.


----------



## the 48th regulator (22 Jul 2009)

Otis said:
			
		

> IMO, the military in general is perceived as right wing for one simple reason: as members of the military, we do not publically express our opinions on political matters.
> 
> We are taught to do this so as to not cause embarrassment to the CF or to present ourselves as representing the opinion of the CF.
> 
> ...




Cough Cough....since when did soldiers of the right not express their political views when serving???

You heard of the little war that was fought, against a bunch of fellas that were right wing, eh?  Happened in the forties, look it up.

I would say that most people in the military are a-political.  They do not have the time to go out and actively support a political party, and are happy with whatever party supports them, at the time they serve.

That not make more sense?

dileas

tess


----------



## Otis (22 Jul 2009)

That's what I was (inadequately apparently) trying to say ... that we are publically apolitical because we are supposed to be.

And I wasn't trying to say that right-wingers WEREN'T vocal, it just seems they are less so ... IMO we hear a lot more complaining about the "right-wing" government "screwing the people" than we do about the "left-wing" government "screwing the country" ... or maybe I'm just more sensitive to hearing one set of complaints than the other ...


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Jul 2009)

Erm, marching, screaming, waving signs and disruption pretty much are extremism and propaganda, no?


----------



## Roy Harding (22 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Perhaps always been devil advocate type left leaning Centrist who differ with any political views and groups, probably because I started living on my own and take care of financial affairs since I was 16 and that along with reading, actually spoke and hung in variety of people? Perhaps despite everything that happened in life and that I have done, idea of being in the military has always been there, hence part of why I always preferring helping to organize and coordinate small to large demonstration and marches than just standing there and holding signs? That and always thrive working in a team to get things done, no matter what it is, paid or volunteer or sport.
> 
> I was always against extremes and propaganda of any sort, preferring to actual facts and letting people in general to figure out for themselves. Even when going up against the police during protests, I see them as human beings like the rest who are only doing their job, and tend to bump heads with some folks in protest movements in regards to that. Communism is possible, just all those who tried implementing it frakked it up due power and greed, and socialism is more prominent among 'first world' nations than many think.



I don't remember who said it (Winston Churchill, perhaps?) - and I'm too damned lazy to look it up right now - but this quote kind of encapsulates what you are driving at:



> If you are not a socialist when young, you have no heart. If you are still a socialist when old, you have no head.


----------



## PMedMoe (22 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> I don't remember who said it (Winston Churchill, perhaps?) - and I'm too damned lazy to look it up right now - but this quote kind of encapsulates what you are driving at:



The quote has been attributed to many (and in many forms):

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=374518

http://www.geocities.com/unmark/unquote.html


----------



## Roy Harding (22 Jul 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> The quote has been attributed to many (and in many forms):
> 
> http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=374518
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/unmark/unquote.html



Thank you.  I knew that if I was lazy someone else would do my research for me. 

Regardless who said it - it remains apropos to some of the posts in this thread.

Roy


----------



## tango22a (22 Jul 2009)

One of the first things that I learned on promotion.... Things NOT to be discussed in the Mess: Women, Religion, or Politics.

tango22a

Though this Rule sometimes falls by the wayside!


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Jul 2009)

mellian



> I was always against extremes and propaganda of any sort, preferring to actual facts and letting people in general to figure out for themselves. Even when going up against the police during protests, I see them as human beings like the rest who are only doing their job, and tend to bump heads with some folks in protest movements in regards to that.



It's also possible that as you learn more, you're seeing the world in shades of grey instead of black and white, which is a good thing, too.


----------



## Bass ackwards (22 Jul 2009)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Cough Cough....since when did soldiers of the right not express their political views when serving???
> 
> You heard of the little war that was fought, against a bunch of fellas that were right wing, eh?  Happened in the forties, look it up.



You mean the National _Socialists _ ???


----------



## the 48th regulator (22 Jul 2009)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> You mean the National _Socialists _ ???



Yes  National _Socialists _,


The cute name that was used to hide the _Fascist_ (Far right of the spectrum) ideology, to a population that was witnessing an ever growing concept called _Communism_, which was supposed to be the epitome of  _Socialism_ which both lie to the left of the political spectrum, just before _Anarchism_...

I see your Google is kinda working....click on a few more of the Wikipedia links.  


dileas

tess


----------



## mellian (22 Jul 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Erm, marching, screaming, waving signs and disruption pretty much are extremism and propaganda, no?



In comparison to the idiots that run around destroying windows and spray painting anarchy signs everywhere, and throw rocks and shit at the police? Not so much. 

Yet, I usually avoided doing the screaming and waving signs, always preferring to be at the front and help coordinate, while making sure everyone is safe.


----------



## mellian (22 Jul 2009)

Anarchism tends to be on a separate spectrum.  Left and Right on one line, Community/Collective/Dictatorship/Centralization and Libertarian/Decentralization/Anarchy on another.  



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> The cute name that was used to hide the _Fascist_ (Far right of the spectrum) ideology, to a population that was witnessing an ever growing concept called _Communism_, which was supposed to be the epitome of  _Socialism_ which both lie to the left of the political spectrum, just before _Anarchism_...
> 
> I see your Google is kinda working....click on a few more of the Wikipedia links.
> 
> ...


----------



## OpieRWestmrR (22 Jul 2009)

I think many civilians have trouble understanding how military folk can hold strong and divergent political views but be perfectly happy functioning within a (necessarily) authoritarian system that gets the job done.

There's lots of proof soldiers are politically eclectic. The example that springs to mind is the 'Khaki Election' of July 1945 in the UK. Winston C's Conservatives lost to Clement Attlee's Labour Party in a landslide - Labour got a 145-seat majority, 49.7% of the popular vote, most of the swing coming from the serving military. That's in an election two months after VE-Day. 

The result panicked the Conservatives but eventually the pundits realised soldiers could think for themselves and preferred Labour's national reconstruction program for Britain. The preference wasn't permanent: Winnie was PM again later.


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (22 Jul 2009)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Yes  National _Socialists _,
> 
> The cute name that was used to hide the _Fascist_ (Far right of the spectrum) ideology, to a population that was witnessing an ever growing concept called _Communism_, which was supposed to be the epitome of  _Socialism_ which both lie to the left of the political spectrum, just before _Anarchism_...



I am not sure about that.  If we are talking the left or right of economics, the Nazi's were on the left,  While industry was left in the hands of capitalists, it was tighly controlled by the government.  Nazi Germany was kind of like Sweden with death camps.

Anarchists are left but Libertarians are right?  I don't get it.

Does radical right wing mean ethnocentrical nationalism?  The Soviets killed as many as 20 million non-Russians in their egalitarian state.

I don't know that the terms left and right wing are particularly helpful in making any generalizations.


----------



## the 48th regulator (22 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Anarchism tends to be on a separate spectrum.  Left and Right on one line, Community/Collective/Dictatorship/Centralization and Libertarian/Decentralization/Anarchy on another.




Very good point, which many have argued that the spectrum is actually a circle, with Anarchism being the link closing the circle from the extreme of both ends.

dileas

tess


----------



## Roy Harding (22 Jul 2009)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Very good point, which many have argued that the spectrum is actually a circle, with Anarchism being the link closing the circle from the extreme of both ends.
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



I dimly recall the circle diagram from some course or other I needed to take when taking university courses through distance learning.  It made sense to me, and SEEMs to be applicable when attempting to understand political labels.

As someone else has said in this thread (Denis Ruhl, I think) labels are slippery concepts - and generally inaccurate.

If one were to apply a label to me they'd have a hard time.  In the case of individual rights and freedoms - I can get along with a "Libertarian".  In the case of government interference with the market place - I'm happy to be called a "Red Tory".  When it comes to socialized medical care - you'll find me happily camped amongst the "socialists".

Labels are dangerous - they are black and white concepts in a world of grey.


----------



## Kat Stevens (23 Jul 2009)

As my dad used to say about his political leaning; "If I'm in a room with 100 people, and I have more money than any of them, I'm a hard capitalist.  If I've got less than any of them, I'm a devout communist."


----------



## chris_log (23 Jul 2009)

I find most people I've run into keep their political views to themselves, if for no other reason then they are too busy to sit around and pontificate on politics. A bit of a change of pace for me (I love to argue and talking politics is like a heroin injection for me). 

I wouldn't go around and advertise that you were an anti-war protest leader, however. I commend you for taking your views to the streets (if you were at the Bush protests...5 years ago or so in Ottawa I was in the group of people following the protest with pro-Bush signs and a police escort after we got death threats from the 'pacifist' protesters) but the anti-war slant would best be kept to yourself (although as I've found out there are some pretty staunch anti-Afghanistan views in the CF).


----------



## Roy Harding (23 Jul 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> I find most people I've run into keep their political views to themselves, if for no other reason then they are too busy to sit around and pontificate on politics. A bit of a change of pace for me (I love to argue and talking politics is like a heroin injection for me).
> 
> I wouldn't go around and advertise that you were an anti-war protest leader, however. I commend you for taking your views to the streets (if you were at the Bush protests...5 years ago or so in Ottawa I was in the group of people following the protest with pro-Bush signs and a police escort after we got death threats from the 'pacifist' protesters) but the anti-war slant would best be kept to yourself (although as I've found out there are some pretty staunch anti-Afghanistan views in the CF).



Why?  

If you check my posting history, you'll see that I was a Vietnam war protester - back in the day.

People - ALL people are welcome to express their views here, in a reasonable and non-inflammatory way.  It's called freedom of expression.

Isn't that kinda what the CF is all about?


----------



## dustinm (23 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Why?
> 
> If you check my posting history, you'll see that I was a Vietnam war protester - back in the day.
> 
> ...



I think the issue here is that a CF member (in uniform, or at least identifying himself as a CF member) who may happen to hold radical views and gets himself into the mainstream media may "colour" the 
media's opinion of the CF as a whole.

While it is entirely appropriate (and I would assume encouraged) for CF members to hold and express opinions, I believe there is a time, and a place for it.


----------



## chris_log (23 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Why?
> 
> If you check my posting history, you'll see that I was a Vietnam war protester - back in the day.
> 
> ...



By 'here' do you mean this website or the CF (I assume you meant the CF). 

I understand fully that our great country allows for its citizens to freely and without prejudice express themselves, the CF to a lesser extent. 

What I meant was, hitting a unit then regalling people with tales of your anti-war protests (who knows, some of them may have deployed) may rub some the wrong way (regardless if thats how you meant it). What I'm trying to say is that some of the OP's political views may not jiive with the 'culture' of the CF (despite most people keeping their views to themselves, I doubt many would appreciate working with someone who for years actively worked against what they do for a living) and would be best kept to herself. There are some views I hold that aren't appropriate to be expressed at work...so I don't do it even though, technically, I'm allowed to. 

Just because you can doesn't mean you should is what I'm getting at.


----------



## rod_barolo (23 Jul 2009)

I sure hope that being in the CF does not make you right wing.  I am in the process of applying.

I had a fairly active political past and certainly not on the right.  I would regard Stephen Lewis as our country's finest living politician. 

Mellian, next time ask your leftie friends if they think it is ok to chop off a women's head for teaching little girls how to read?  Sometimes, if you think that sh#t like that is wrong then you have to do more than watch a Michael Moore film.  To paraphrase one of my favorite lines that I got from Army.ca "It is not possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."  Were it not for all the liberals and socialist that joined the military, Hilter would never have been defeated.


----------



## Roy Harding (23 Jul 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> By 'here' do you mean this website or the CF (I assume you meant the CF).
> 
> I understand fully that our great country allows for its citizens to freely and without prejudice express themselves, the CF to a lesser extent.
> 
> ...



By "here", I actually meant on Army.ca - but the thought is equally applicable to the CF in general.

I believe the rest of your clarification boils down to common dog, not to mention common courtesy - whether in the CF or not.

For instance:  I'm not a religious man - but I don't throw that fact in the face of people who are.  And I CERTAINLY don't argue theology with Padre's.

I agree that many topics need to be left alone until one knows one's audience fairly well - and for that reason one should refrain from "hitting a unit then regalling people with tales of your anti-war protests ".


Roy


----------



## Jungle (23 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Anarchism tends to be on a separate spectrum.  Left and Right on one line, Community/Collective/Dictatorship/Centralization and Libertarian/Decentralization/Anarchy on another.


Check out this site:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
You can hit "take the test" while you're there.


----------



## Roy Harding (23 Jul 2009)

I took the test.

Economic Left/Right: -1.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.69 

Seems to me we did this a year or two ago - I'll see if I can find the thread.



Roy

Edited to add:  I found TWO threads on this Political Compass.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32697.0.html

and

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/3814.0.html


It's too early in the morning here on the West Coast for my brain to be in gear (I'm still on my first coffee) - I'll see what I can do about a merge or something along that line tonight.

RHH


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Jul 2009)

I took the test too:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.74 


Apparently I'm very slightly Libertarian/Left.....


----------



## PuckChaser (23 Jul 2009)

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.87 

Kinda wierd, since I consider myself a Conservative.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> ...I doubt many would appreciate working with someone who for years actively worked against what they do for a living) and would be best kept to herself.



Being anti-war is not necessarily not the same thing as being anti-military. May not be the case for many, but there is a distinction. I call it 'militarist pacifist'.



			
				rod_barolo said:
			
		

> Mellian, next time ask your leftie friends if they think it is ok to chop off a women's head for teaching little girls how to read?  Sometimes, if you think that sh#t like that is wrong then you have to do more than watch a Michael Moore film.



That is not exactly the kind of question one can use to determine political leanings, and I know many who identify more on the left who do not like Michael Moore and his films (apart from its entertainment value).


----------



## aesop081 (23 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> I call it 'militarist pacifist'.



Call it whatever you want. A soldier's job is to wage war. Anything else is just a sideshow until there is another war. Beleiving otherwise is beleiving its possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Your political compass
> Economic Left/Right: -2.50
> Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.87
> 
> Kinda wierd, since I consider myself a Conservative.



Not exactly the most accurate, considering some of the questions. 



Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -4.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Call it whatever you want. A soldier's job is to wage war. Anything else is just a sideshow until there is another war. Beleiving otherwise is beleiving its possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.



Of course, but does not mean we cannot discourage war from happening as much possible thought. Carrot first, and then the big stick if that fails.


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Of course, but does not mean we cannot discourage war from happening as much possible thought. Carrot first, and then the big stick if that fails.


True, but the discouragement of war is for the politicians and diplomats, not the military.
We ARE the big stick. We are the ones who must follow through when the diplomats and politicians run out of options.


----------



## 2 Cdo (23 Jul 2009)

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: +3.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: +2.67

Just about where I thought it would be!


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Jul 2009)

mellian-

make no mistake that, if you embark on a career in the Military, being a pacifist is not an option.  As both Cdn Aviator and Old Soldier have pointed out, that not fighting is the choice of the politician, not us in uniform. Once you put on the uniform, not matter what job you do, you will contribute to putting ordnance on to a target and probably killing people.  You will not necessarily be asked your opinion about the "rightness" or "wrongness" of the the whole thing. That said, you can rest assured that you will not have to do anything that would be considered manifestly unlawful.

Make sure that you can square up with your conscience, before you join, that you will be part of the Canadian Government's "monopoly on violence".


----------



## Loachman (23 Jul 2009)

OldSoldier said:
			
		

> True, but the discouragement of war is for the politicians and diplomats, not the military.
> We ARE the big stick.



The military is definitely part of the "discouragement" function.

The "big stick" can deter (preferably) attack, and deal with it should deterrence fail.

Politicians and diplomats who lack a "big stick" (as many do, figuratively) cannot discourage anything, war included.


----------



## Loachman (23 Jul 2009)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> ... if you embark on a career in the Military, being a pacifist is not an option.



I disagree. I'm a pacifist.

I only differ from most who use that term in the methods of creating and maintaining peace, and I recognize that sometimes a little violence is necessary to do that.

Damned labels again...


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Jul 2009)

I define myself as a _classic *liberal*_; I believe John Stuart Mill said most of what needed to be said on the topic; I was, I think, a fairly typical soldier, too, in my attitudes.

Here is my score on the "test:"

Economic Left/Right: 5.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.13

Now, part of my economic attitude may have _evolved_ over the years, as my savings and investments helped me migrate from "worker" to "capitalist" and I suspect I am less libertarian than I was 25 or 50 years ago.

But there are a few things in which I have always (at least as far as I can remember) believed: the absolute equality of all people - as individuals and at and under the law; the absolute *right* of each individual to life, liberty, freedom of conscience and property; and the need to protect the individual's rights from the constant depredations of "collectives" like governments and churches.

As someone else said, "left" and 'right' are not very useful points for discussing the personal, political spectrum.

Some of us have discussed this whole thing before, here on Army.ca, and I supported a diagram of a _gravity well_ as an appropriate model - with classical liberals and conservatives orbiting, safely, at the top while the *illiberals* fall, steadily and surely, towards the bottom.


----------



## chris_log (23 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> By "here", I actually meant on Army.ca - but the thought is equally applicable to the CF in general.
> 
> *I believe the rest of your clarification boils down to common dog, not to mention common courtesy - whether in the CF or not.*
> For instance:  I'm not a religious man - but I don't throw that fact in the face of people who are.  And I CERTAINLY don't argue theology with Padre's.
> ...



Thats exactly what I was getting at; not everyone may share your views and it is common courtesy to keep any but the most mainstream views out of the workplace. I got put in a very awkward situation in my first few weeks at my new unit due to a (very frank) 'discussion' about the mission in Afghanistan and someone's views on it. 

So for the OP, while your past history of anti-war protesting and anti-Bushy-ness won't cause your career to come grinding to a halt I suggest that you keep that part of your past to yourself out of common courtesy to everyone else (as you may have noticed, you may legitimize your actions as 'militant pacifism' but some others serving don't quite see it that way). I've found that sex, politics and religion are topics best left to yourself in the workplace. There's a time and place for outward displays of the aforementioned, and thats called university.


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Jul 2009)

Better to keep quiet and be thought a fool....


than to speak up and REMOVE all doubt.

 :blotto:


----------



## Roy Harding (23 Jul 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> Thats exactly what I was getting at; not everyone may share your views and it is common courtesy to keep any but the most mainstream views out of the workplace. I got put in a very awkward situation in my first few weeks at my new unit due to a (very frank) 'discussion' about the mission in Afghanistan and someone's views on it.
> 
> So for the OP, while your past history of anti-war protesting and anti-Bushy-ness won't cause your career to come grinding to a halt I suggest that you keep that part of your past to yourself out of common courtesy to everyone else (as you may have noticed, you may legitimize your actions as 'militant pacifism' but some others serving don't quite see it that way). I've found that sex, politics and religion are topics best left to yourself in the workplace. There's a time and place for outward displays of the aforementioned, and thats called university.



I understand the intent of your post - and it's veracity when you're the FNG at a new unit.  But you'd be surprised at the depth and breadth of discussions held in the unit canteen - or in a ten man tent in the arctic - or on an OP at zero dark thirty.  I wouldn't be surprised to hear about the same thing occurring amongst aircrew on a long mission, or sailors on a boring watch somewhere.

Military folk (especially when deployed) quickly bond, and subsequently are able to discuss a wide diversity subjects between themselves - USUALLY intelligently and thoughtfully.  Milnet.ca , I think, illustrates this tendency.

That being said - the FNG at a unit, as you pointed out - needs to test the waters VERY gently at first.  (Milnet.ca, I think, illustrates THIS tendency as well)  


Roy


Roy


----------



## chris_log (23 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> I understand the intent of your post - and it's veracity when you're the FNG at a new unit.  But you'd be surprised at the depth and breadth of discussions held in the unit canteen - or in a ten man tent in the arctic - or on an OP at zero dark thirty.  I wouldn't be surprised to hear about the same thing occurring amongst aircrew on a long mission, or sailors on a boring watch somewhere.



I completely agree, among a group of close friends or a tightly knit group of peers those types of discussions are good to go in the types of situations you mentioned. I myself have had said discussins while trying to stay awake in a badly dug trench, etc. 

It's all about time and place and who you're with. 

Although (again to the OP) I'd still be leery about telling people about your participation in anti-war protests (which, being in Canada I assume, would have had a strong anti-Afghanistan bias). People won't apprecite knowing you were working against what they sacrificed for. Thats just my view, of course. Feel free to express yourself openly about your past, but be aware there are some things that won't earn you popularity points (being an FNG or not). Politics, religion, sex etc are, as Roy mentioned, topics best left among friends, close peers etc. However, I still think that SOME things are best kept to yourself; like your anti-military past (yes, I understand how you justified it as being 'militant pacisfism' (kind of an oxymoron I think), but others will not be as understanding or willing to accept that view...myself included). 

Just ut of curiosity, why did you switch over to the dark side (the CF)?


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

OldSoldier said:
			
		

> True, but the discouragement of war is for the politicians and diplomats, not the military.
> We ARE the big stick. We are the ones who must follow through when the diplomats and politicians run out of options.



Yes, which I would like to be part of. 'Militarist Pacifist', will not start the fight/war, but will finish it. 



			
				Loachman said:
			
		

> I disagree. I'm a pacifist.
> 
> I only differ from most who use that term in the methods of creating and maintaining peace, and I recognize that sometimes a little violence is necessary to do that.
> 
> Damned labels again...



That is why I came up with the term 'Militarist Pacifist', but again just another silly label...


----------



## aesop081 (23 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> 'Militarist Pacifist', will not start the fight/war, but will finish it.



Again, that will not be your decision. If the Government decides to start a war, they will not seek your opinion.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> Just ut of curiosity, why did you switch over to the dark side (the CF)?



Because I am goth and already hang out with those of the dark side? (joking)

Like I pointed out earlier, just because I am anti-war does not mean I am anti-military. I never was anti-military, and always held the view that we, as a country/nation, should always have and maintain a strong and highly trained military as a deterrent, defense, and emergencies. Anti-war aspect only kicks mainly on the point of view that we should not get involve in wars with anyone that does not threaten our security and safety of our nation, and only fight wars if every diplomatic as been tried or/and 'they' started it. The anti-war Protests I was part of was mainly against the Iraq War anyway.

Apart from that, I always had an interest in joining the Canadian Forces since I have been in the Air Cadets at least over a decade ago, and would have probably tried soon after high school if it was not for other aspects of my life. Since those aspects are not obstacles anymore and even have half of university Bachelor complete, seems like a good time as any to apply now. Especially considering I cannot think of anything I would like to do as a career.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Again, that will not be your decision. If the Government decides to start a war, they will not seek your opinion.



...where did I suggest it was?


----------



## aesop081 (23 Jul 2009)

You call yourself a military pacifist......which you defined as :



			
				mellian said:
			
		

> 'Militarist Pacifist', will not start the fight/war, but will finish it.



We do whatever the government wants. We finish the fight as well as start them if that what the politicians want. You better be able to deal with that. If i were you i would take a long hard look at your career choice and personal values.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Jul 2009)

Kinda like being against fossil fuels and working as a pump jockey at a PetroCan.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You call yourself a military pacifist......which you defined as :



Trying to help provide a clarification to what I meant by it. 



> We do whatever the government wants. We finish the fight as well as start them if that what the politicians want. You better be able to deal with that. If i were you i would take a long hard look at your career choice and personal values.



From what I can tell after eight months of thought since made the decision to want to joining the CF, they are compatible. Besides, Canada has never started a war it thought in, our nation just joins the ones already begun by other countries.


----------



## aesop081 (23 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Besides, Canada has never started a war it thought in, our nation just joins the ones already begun by other countries.



In addition to being a walking oxymoron, you have a crystal ball.....wow.


----------



## mellian (23 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> In addition to being a walking oxymoron, you have a crystal ball.....wow.



The sentence is in past tense, as in that has historically been the trend thus far.   :


----------



## dustinm (23 Jul 2009)

[quote author=mellian]
Besides, Canada has never started a war it thought in, our nation just joins the ones already begun by other countries.
[/quote]

Well, of course. Canada is a stable country, and has managed to avoid being the belligerent in most contexts. However, during the War of 1812, it _was_ "Canadians" versus Americans, and we/they didn't wait for reinforcements to show up before repelling the invaders.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (23 Jul 2009)

Slight correction, the War of 1812 was between the United States of America and the British Empire (particularly Great Britain and British North America).


----------



## dustinm (23 Jul 2009)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Slight correction, the War of 1812 was between the United States of America and the British Empire (particularly Great Britain and British North America).



Yes, thus the quotes around "Canadian."  You probably know this better than I do, but as I understood it there were British troops permanently stationed inside what is now Canada, which would have made them Canadian, had the country existed at that point.


----------



## the 48th regulator (23 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> We do whatever the government wants. We finish the fight as well as start them if that what the politicians want. You better be able to deal with that. If i were you i would take a long hard look at your career choice and personal values.



We are not Terminators, that are built for destruction, and are woken up to go out and destroy the enemy at all costs.  We are a military, who follow the direction of our leaders.  We are a voluntary Military, that we can serve (if we meet the standards...) ou nation military if and when we choose.   We are not a Mercenary force, who takes pay to wage war.  We are not automatons that are used as tools to be "pawns" of the governments Chess board.  We are citizens who have decided to take the cause to defend, and fight for our nation, to support our Canadian Morale views.  If we choose to Serve our Nation, there is nothing, not on Iota of doctrine that states we are not allowed to be a pacifist, and still be able to serve.

Now I will stop the pedestal rant, as long we stop the locker room talk....._hehehe we kill the enemy full stop.  It's what we are trained, paid and told to do.  get witht he program hehehehe..._





			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> Kinda like being against fossil fuels and working as a pump jockey at a PetroCan.



Oh stop with the oxymoron....yes yes Military-Pacifist....Military-Intelligence...etc etc.

As much as I wanted to try my skills at what I trained to do, hell ya there was part of me that wished no war ever existed.


There are only two types of people that pray for war Generals that want a name in history, and Psychopaths that don't know the difference....


dileas

tess


----------



## chris_log (23 Jul 2009)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> We are not Terminators, that are built for destruction, and are woken up to go out and destroy the enemy at all costs.  We are a military, who follow the direction of our leaders.  We are a voluntary Military, that we can serve (if we meet the standards...) ou nation military if and when we choose.   We are not a Mercenary force, who takes pay to wage war.  We are not automatons that are used as tools to be "pawns" of the governments Chess board.  We are citizens who have decided to take the cause to defend, and fight for our nation, to support our Canadian Morale views.  If we choose to Serve our Nation, there is nothing, not on Iota of doctrine that states we are not allowed to be a pacifist, and still be able to serve.



In not as many words, being a CF member doesn't remove your right/ability to think for yourself and make personal judgements on what is going in the world around you. 

That being said, it is an absolute imperative that your personal views not affect your ability to serve. So, to the OP, you may be a pacifist and left-leaning politically and at the end of the day, that's your choice and as long as you (like everyone else) keep the political rants to yourself at work then you'll never have a problem. But come the day when you are called to deploy, then you must go regardless of your personal feelings about said deployment AND, most importantly, if you find yourself in a situation where you have to use your weaon, you MUST be able to use it without hesitation. 

If you feel you can do that, then you can be an animal worshipping anarachist druid for all I (or anyone else) cares.


----------



## Antoine (23 Jul 2009)

48th regulator has resumed exactly the reasons why I am in the process of joining the military as a reservist.

But I agree with CDN Aviator: by joining the military, I might be sent with weapons in my hands and use it against another nation.
If I don't like it, then other options are possible such as working for a Non-governmental organization (NGO), the UN or go back to school and get a degree that allows me to work as a Canadian diplomat that also works to preserve the interset of our country.

By the way, I was wondering the same about right versus left wing in the military.


----------



## 1feral1 (24 Jul 2009)

I would have been RW regardless of my time in two armies.

Soldiers are just people with different political views like anyone else.

OWDU


----------



## aesop081 (24 Jul 2009)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> We are not Terminators, that are built for destruction, and are woken up to go out and destroy the enemy at all costs.  We are a military, who follow the direction of our leaders.  We are a voluntary Military, that we can serve (if we meet the standards...) ou nation military if and when we choose.   We are not a Mercenary force, who takes pay to wage war.  We are not automatons that are used as tools to be "pawns" of the governments Chess board.  We are citizens who have decided to take the cause to defend, and fight for our nation, to support our Canadian Morale views.  If we choose to Serve our Nation, there is nothing, not on Iota of doctrine that states we are not allowed to be a pacifist, and still be able to serve.



Wow, thanks, i didnt know what i was doing here until you said that.   :



> as long we stop the locker room talk....._hehehe we kill the enemy full stop.  It's what we are trained, paid and told to do.  get witht he program hehehehe..._



Locker room talk ? Do you even understand what i do for a living ? Those are not 10 foot peacekeeping cylinders i train to drop........



> hell ya there was part of me that wished no war ever existed.



Same here. But then again, i know what i was hired and trained for.



> There are only two types of people that pray for war Generals that want a name in history, and Psychopaths that don't know the difference....



You are right, i must not know the difference. I didnt see it every day while i was crawling through minefields......you know where.

Lets not kid ourselves. A war starts and you dont like it, thats fine. You have 2 choices : fight anyway or get lost. I dont have an issue with you either way.


----------



## the 48th regulator (24 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Wow, thanks, i didnt know what i was doing here until you said that.   :



Then stop with the knuckle dragging , camouflaged with the Flag of our nation talk.  She Admitted to having a pacifist view, did things to support it, and now wants to serve our nation.  How do the the two conflict?  Tell me where, absolutely where, there is a doctrine that states someone who serves their nation, can not have a view or one that is against war?  What I would agree with you, is if she allowed her political views, to interfere with her duty.  Then I buy your argument.  Until that time, I see nothing wrong in what she admits.



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Locker room talk ? Do you even understand what i do for a living ? Those are not 10 foot peacekeeping cylinders i train to drop........



Oh golly miss molly, I sure hope that was sarcasm, cuz if it wasn't, the echo in this cinder blocked room with the benches and lockers drowned out what you were saying....



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Same here. But then again, i know what i was hired and trained for.



_Hired and trained for._  

Do you not see what you are playing into??

So basically you are admitting it was only as a job, and you see your training to be used as one thing and one thing only, in the gain of a pay cheque, which you were hired for.

Gimme a break, brother, you did not join for that reason, and as I said cut the macho bravado talk, it ain't you nor anyone esle who serves our military.



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You are right, i must not know the difference. I didnt see it every day while i was crawling through minefields......you know where.



Ya, that is why I am telling you to knock of the Mr. T Jibber Jabber about _taking out the bad guys, cuz dats what I was paid and trained to do_ act.




			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Lets not kid ourselves. A war starts and you dont like it, thats fine. You have 2 choices : fight anyway or get lost. I dont have an issue with you either way.




Fight or get lost.  Fight or get lost....yep, because it is only those that "Fight" deserve our respect.  God forbid we have a view, and decide to serve our nation, yet feel that war is wrong.  One can serve, and not abide by the political view of the Masters, you do know that, eh? Or, lemme guess, do you buy the defence _"I was only doing what I was ordered to do?"_


Gimme a break CA, you are only jumping on her because she said she hated war, and protested it.  Until she crosses the line, and is using the military in a mission as her own personal "Fifth Column" agenda to spread peace within the military, so that war ends, then you have no point.

If she serves, and does her duty to a tee, I will stand by her view.  But if she gets out of order...._Well, I pity the fool._

dileas

tess


----------



## helpup (24 Jul 2009)

Nice topic Mel, good luck in your choice of profession ( what ever it may be) This ground pounder will keep his politics to himself on here.  My point of view on having organized protests and the like in the past.  Fair enough, as a Civi that is your right and a right the CF has an obligation to protect. You are not comming across as jumping on the edge of any bandwagon but going on your beliefs with out the rock throwing extremist. So all the power to you.  As for joining the CF. The reasons are in the end yours to justify. It will either be something you like, love, dislike, or loath.  Just as long as however long you decide to serve you learn from any experience.  I think the best advice given so far though is when your new somewhere keep the protest organizer info on the downlow.  Also with out knowing who you associated during that time there is a chance you may not get a high level secret clearance.  

Just my thoughts.


----------



## mellian (24 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> I think the best advice given so far though is when your new somewhere keep the protest organizer info on the downlow.



It is not something I advertise in general anyway, and only brought it here to spur the discussion. 



> Also with out knowing who you associated during that time there is a chance you may not get a high level secret clearance.



Yes, that has crossed my mine, and even then in terms of clearances. I just hope whoever that processes it is not to picky in regards to the term 'associated'.


----------



## helpup (24 Jul 2009)

That would be up to the investigators.  What might bite you on the A$$ is computer searches ( if done, out of my lane here on the specifics) that may have you linked to people or organizations who would rate a red flag from cursorary searches.  Your refferances may or may not help or hurt you. I dont know your specifics.  But I do know there are many with various backgrounds in fairly high security clearances. Just be forthright with any questions posed and dont try to hide things ( mind you dont volunteer it either)

Good job on spurring the discussion

Note my spell check is still not working. ( yah yah a lazy man relies on spell checker )


----------



## George Wallace (24 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> Note my spell check is still not working. ( yah yah a lazy man relies on spell checker )



It's the M1 Spell Checker from MS... It's 'Merican boy!.....Thems 'Merican spellin words.  It's a MS conspiracy to reeducamate the world to use "'Merican English".


----------



## PuckChaser (24 Jul 2009)

On the "military pacifist" point of view.... I certainly would not want a pacifist covering my flank or in my fireteam in a TIC.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> On the "military pacifist" point of view.... I certainly would not want a pacifist covering my flank or in my fireteam in a TIC.



Just a thought:

Even a pacifist can  get pissed off and strike back.  

Even a pacifist may fight to sustain his life.


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Jul 2009)

> Pacifism is a wonderful conviction in theory, but only in theory. Real life has a way of eventually rubbing even the most altruistic nose in a steaming pile of "F**k that".



Anthony Beal


----------



## ltmaverick25 (25 Jul 2009)

I am in the military and I am right wing.  I know for a fact that not everyone in the military shares right leaning views.  This is made obvious by all those arguments I find myself in with those damned lefties 

On a more serious note though, this has been said by others, but I will say it again here.  You really need to think about the consequences of your decision.  You have the right to whatever beleif you may wish to hold, however you absolutely will not have the right to forgo your duty, or disregard orders because you have an ideological objection to them.  There are real consequences here that could get your teamates killed if you failed to act for example.  I dont want this to come across like a lecture or anything of the sort, but, based solely on what you have written in this thread, I am not conviced you have come to terms with ALL the potential realities of this job.

Defending Canadian territory against hostile acts is certainly part of our job description, but its not the only part.  Ultimately, the CF is employed to defend Canadian interests.  And there is nothing moral, fair or balanced about a nations interests.  Granted we do not have a history of starting wars, but we do have a history of intervening in other peoples wars and participating in offensive battles.  Not because it was the nice friendly Canadian thing to do, but rather, because political leaders at the time deamed such acts to be in Canada's interests.


----------



## chris_log (25 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> On the "military pacifist" point of view.... I certainly would not want a pacifist covering my flank or in my fireteam in a TIC.



As opposed to a trigger happy militarist?

The danger with labels is that you start to lump people into categories that makes it easier to dismiss them. I'll work with anyone who passes their training, shows a reasonable level of competence and whom has earned my trust....political views be dammed. 

To state that you'd never serve with a person who holds 'pacifist' beliefs show only ignorance. 

Heck, you could label me a pacifist. I tend to avoid violent confrontations (even in my old civvie job, where fighting WAS the job) and prefer to take down a potential threat via my words, not fists. Now that being said, I hold a capacity for violence like everyone else does (regardless of political beliefs). 

If the OP has a desire to serve her country and has no qualms about using force if necessary, then give 'er. 

Jesus, the way some people talk here you'd think we spent our time shooting every thing that moved (we don't, regardless of trade, there's infanteers who have deployed and not shot a single person...I know some personally). 

A military is an organisation that uses violence to accomplish the nation's goals...but we are not a violent organisation (I think that makes sense). Violence is a tool, not a lifestyle.  

(And despite all the aforementioned....for the record our modern interpretation of politically driven pacifism is a naive joke. Just as modern liberalism goes against the basic tenets of what liberalism really was....modern pacifism, in a political sense, bears little resemblence to what the word really means, in my view).


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Jul 2009)

Start :warstory: involving a LW believer

I'll share something here......

On my tour we had a young Pte (Para), who one hot fall day in Baghdad, failed to fire his MAG 58 at clear and present danger to personnel and property, all IAW our ROEs. He should have though, as many lives were in danger. He froze! He should have shot!!

Why he did not, only he knows, but his PL began to outright HATE him. There was a few incidents to fuel this fury before hand.

He was very passive and I would call him ultra left. How he ended up in the RAInf I'll never know.

Him failing his PL mates in a very serious situation effected his Inf PL so much, through the chain of comd, from Seco to PL SGT to PL Comd, he was farmed out, outcast from his own PL as he could not be trusted in a pinch. 

He ended up being farmed into my PL, and I was the PL SGT. Leaving his PL pretty much broke his spirit, as we had him on suicide watch for a while, and I was very concered for his mental welfare, and I made this known at many O Gps. and I put him in a group room, after informing my PL the situation with him. He was accepted over time by my lads, and we included him with all we did. For some time he was a true admin burden, but he was still useful inside the wire. I showed him emptathy, and offered if he ever had anything on his mind to come and see me at anytime.

It took him about a month or so to come around, and once, I had him accompany me on an ammo run up Route Irish to Camp Victory in a Valir Uparmoured Unimog with LAV escort, I had him riding shot-gun with a para-Minimi, but I did not have much faith in him outside of picquet duties. If the AIF was going to 'arc' up, I hoped it would not be that day. We got back into our FOB without incident.

I was however, fair and positive to him, giving him the reassurance he needed, but I did not want him going outside the wire, as I knew he was in effective, and could not really be trusted.

A nice guy though, soft spoken, almost virgin like in appearance and manner. He ended up assisting our Doc with medical duties in our FOB (Union III Al Tawheed), working at US Army 10 and 28 CSH hospitals with Coalition wounded, coming in right off the LZ. So he had his place, and he was effective there, and quite frankly I had been there a few times myself, and seen the most sickening of injuries, so good on him finding his niche of usefulness. I could not stand it in ther for 2 mins yet alone shift after shift of the at times insane trauma. It takes a special breed to handle that.

He discharged after returning from Iraq.  

Sum up Sarge...

I would want someone who was keen, switched on and aggressive with me. I don't think one has to be a RW'r for that, as look at SGT York of US WWI fame. Look what he accomplished, and look at his religous background. 

End  :warstory:

OWDU

Sorry, had to edit for spelling and grammar.


----------



## mellian (25 Jul 2009)

From my experience alone and of all of the people I met over the years, one's political views is not a good tool to judge whether one is capable of being aggressive or/and violent. That is clear as day with some protests, where some individuals, despite having 'left wing' views, are quite willing to commit property damage and violence to get their message across. 

As for myself, I am no stranger to violence or aggression, upon myself or committing it, but always in defense of myself and friends thus far. I mean, I play roller derby where one cannot be shy at hitting someone else, and something I am not afraid in doing in the context of the sport and to help the team, even if I risk injuring and hurting another person which unfortunately has happened. I do what I have to do, and worry about the consequences or feelings after. 

Despite my political views, I have no qualms to do my duty and help maintain the safety of the team/unit, even in a war I am may not personally approve of. If I end up shooting someone(s) as part of that, so be it. I do what I have to do, and worry about the consequences and feelings after, as I am sure I will not have time to think about it in the times that matters anyways. Most I can do is hope I do not accidentally friendly fire or kill non-combatant civilians. If after the fact I happen to object, then there is the conscientious objector process and VR when the tour is done. 

In the end, I brought the protest stuff to help spur discussion in this thread.


----------



## ltmaverick25 (25 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> From my experience alone and of all of the people I met over the years, one's political views is not a good tool to judge whether one is capable of being aggressive or/and violent. That is clear as day with some protests, where some individuals, despite having 'left wing' views, are quite willing to commit property damage and violence to get their message across.
> 
> As for myself, I am no stranger to violence or aggression, upon myself or committing it, but always in defense of myself and friends thus far. I mean, I play roller derby where one cannot be shy at hitting someone else, and something I am not afraid in doing in the context of the sport and to help the team, even if I risk injuring and hurting another person which unfortunately has happened. I do what I have to do, and worry about the consequences or feelings after.
> 
> ...



Fair enough, when do you swear in?


----------



## mellian (25 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> That would be up to the investigators.  What might bite you on the A$$ is computer searches ( if done, out of my lane here on the specifics) that may have you linked to people or organizations who would rate a red flag from cursorary searches.  Your refferances may or may not help or hurt you. I dont know your specifics.  But I do know there are many with various backgrounds in fairly high security clearances. Just be forthright with any questions posed and dont try to hide things ( mind you dont volunteer it either)



I occasionally 'stalk' myself with google searches, figuring out how much one could possibly find out about me. Allows me to remove any references that really looks bad (none so far), and not get caught off guard if someone I never met or anyone else knows something I did tell them or anyone else about. Beyond google, authourities may or may not still have various footage of me at protests, which I make a point to wave to then, or pose. Big Brother is only an issue to me if they ever pull a The Net or Eagle Eye or Enemy of the State stunt. 

I made a point to avoid anyone I know from activism and protesting for references, mainly because they would refuse anyway if it is for the CF. That and some of those I know who have their own set of clearances. 

I have experience answering questions for clearances, or crossing the border, or by the police, etc. Where a lot of people tend to get nervous and fumble with their answers, or say to much, I actually look forward to it with weird sense of hope they will throw in some trick or hard questions, putting me on the spot somehow. I attribute that as part of my overall 'sucker for punishment' aspect of my character.


----------



## mellian (25 Jul 2009)

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Fair enough, when do you swear in?



Unknown yet as I still have to do medical check scheduled in over a month and the interview which is presently unscheduled. If every goes well and rate it is going, probably be the end of October or November.


----------



## Smity199 (26 Jul 2009)

My  :2c: is that anyone who has even participated or had supportive thoughts about an anti-war protest let alone organized several has no place in the CF especially not in the combat arms.. I just dont understand why you would want to join if those are the beliefs you have.. all politics aside anyone right wing, centre or left wing or anything else inbetween that ever is involved in an organized protest is a moron  regardless of the cause. Go out and be proactive, holding up signs and yelling when a president of another country comes to ours does nothing but embarrass all of the other canadians. When I saw people actly so rudely and ridiculously when George W. Bush came to visit a few years back all i could do was feel shame.. I was ashamed that those fools came from the same country as me, and fear.. fear that all of us normal decent, hard working Canadians would be judged on a few crack-pot's actions.. If ever have the priveledge to defend my country in battle I sure hope to god that no one like you has anything to do with it.. Id prefer if your sort stuck to protesting or hanging out at organic coffee shops/cafes or whatever else it is you do.


----------



## len173 (26 Jul 2009)

I know some people in the military, and combat arms, who you would call 'left wing'. However, I don't know anyone who participated in anti-war protests. 

That is no reason that you shouldn't be allowed in the CF. But I would think long and hard about what the right choice for you is. You don't get to pick the mission when you sign up. The last thing the military needs is more people who feel they can select what duties they prefer, based on social and political feelings.

There is a war on right now, and you could end up  being a part of an incident, or situation that your friends back home are marching on parliament hill over.

Good luck to you.


----------



## the 48th regulator (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> My  :2c: is that anyone who has even participated or had supportive thoughts about an anti-war protest let alone organized several has no place in the CF especially not in the combat arms.. I just dont understand why you would want to join if those are the beliefs you have.. all politics aside anyone right wing, centre or left wing or anything else inbetween that ever is involved in an organized protest is a moron  regardless of the cause. Go out and be proactive, holding up signs and yelling when a president of another country comes to ours does nothing but embarrass all of the other canadians. When I saw people actly so rudely and ridiculously when George W. Bush came to visit a few years back all i could do was feel shame.. I was ashamed that those fools came from the same country as me, and fear.. fear that all of us normal decent, hard working Canadians would be judged on a few crack-pot's actions.. If ever have the priveledge to defend my country in battle I sure hope to god that no one like you has anything to do with it.. Id prefer if your sort stuck to protesting or hanging out at organic coffee shops/cafes or whatever else it is you do.




You do understand, that protest is one of the fundamentals of a democracy, right?  If you can not speak your mind, then what is it you have?  We do serve, so that we as citizens have that right you know.  And, because you have done it, does not exclude you from serving your nation. 


I feel shame and fear in your views, actually....

It echoes the views of some countries that we are at odds with, at the moment.

dileas

tess


----------



## Roy Harding (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> My  :2c: is that anyone who has even participated or had supportive thoughts about an anti-war protest let alone organized several has no place in the CF especially not in the combat arms.. I just dont understand why you would want to join if those are the beliefs you have.. all politics aside anyone right wing, centre or left wing or anything else inbetween that ever is involved in an organized protest is a moron  regardless of the cause. Go out and be proactive, holding up signs and yelling when a president of another country comes to ours does nothing but embarrass all of the other canadians. When I saw people actly so rudely and ridiculously when George W. Bush came to visit a few years back all i could do was feel shame.. I was ashamed that those fools came from the same country as me, and fear.. fear that all of us normal decent, hard working Canadians would be judged on a few crack-pot's actions.. If ever have the priveledge to defend my country in battle I sure hope to god that no one like you has anything to do with it.. Id prefer if your sort stuck to protesting or hanging out at organic coffee shops/cafes or whatever else it is you do.



Get off your high horse.

People (especially young people) get involved in all kinds of things, for all kinds of reasons.  Somewhere else on this board you'll find my explanation of my "protest days".

People explore new ideas - they try to fit those ideas into what they see in the world.  Some change their minds about those ideas - that's called growth.

Your profile doesn't say much about you - but your posts indicate that you are a young guy getting ready for Basic.  Good for you.  I'm sure that you're full of piss and vinegar, and that you and your ideas are God's gift to human kind.

You know what - some OTHER young guy, who doesn't happen to think that armed conflict is the answer is ALSO full of piss and vinegar, and he's pretty sure that his ideas are God's gift to human kind.

Which one of you is right?  Neither.

Which one of you is entitled to express their ideas?  Both

Which of you is entitled to serve their country in the CF?  Both

Stop trying to prove what a MAN you are by belittling other peoples thoughts, I'd take the mature former peace-nik to war with me over a blustering, macho child anytime.

Roy Harding


----------



## Smity199 (26 Jul 2009)

LOL.. I'm not belittling anyones views, those views belittle themselves.
and I'm far from a "macho child", As I tried to say but I guess you chose only to read what you felt like seeing so Ill repeat myself, I could care less about someones political views, for example someone could have made an identical post to this but on the polar opposite point of the political spectrum, although it rarely happens or we rarely hear about it theoretically some right wing youths could have been protesting something somewhere and I would have posted the exact same thing as I did in this situation.. what I was and am saying is that protesting ie. heckling, sitting in, and so on is moronic. It rarely accomplishes anything save infuriating those who take opposite views on the particular subject and those middle of the road type of people who are sitting at home watching it on tv, well it makes those people less sympathetic towards the cause (I know this because My mom is one of those people) and Living in B.C. we see allot of protests having to do with the Olympics but anyways my point is that yes FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the RIGHT TO PROTEST are integral parts of any democracy.. the way in which most protesters seem to protest is ineffective and moronic. I'm the kid here yet I seem like I'm trying to explain algebra to a 3 year old.. I wont argue anymore but you calling me out for "belittling others" and then continuing on to "belittle" me by calling me a "Macho child" kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?


----------



## ltmaverick25 (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> LOL.. I'm not belittling anyones views, those views belittle themselves.
> and I'm far from a "macho child", As I tried to say but I guess you chose only to read what you felt like seeing so Ill repeat myself, I could care less about someones political views, for example someone could have made an identical post to this but on the polar opposite point of the political spectrum, although it rarely happens or we rarely hear about it theoretically some right wing youths could have been protesting something somewhere and I would have posted the exact same thing as I did in this situation.. what I was and am saying is that protesting ie. heckling, sitting in, and so on is moronic. It rarely accomplishes anything save infuriating those who take opposite views on the particular subject and those middle of the road type of people who are sitting at home watching it on tv, well it makes those people less sympathetic towards the cause (I know this because My mom is one of those people) and Living in B.C. we see allot of protests having to do with the Olympics but anyways my point is that yes FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the RIGHT TO PROTEST are integral parts of any democracy.. the way in which most protesters seem to protest is ineffective and moronic. I'm the kid here yet I seem like I'm trying to explain algebra to a 3 year old.. I wont argue anymore but you calling me out for "belittling others" and then continuing on to "belittle" me by calling me a "Macho child" kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?



Its not what you are saying thats at issue, its the way you are saying it.  You cannot expect to make posts like this one, or the one previous without inciting a fiery responce.

As for protests, when I see them on TV, or I get stuck in traffic because they blocked the road or something, in all honesty I usually have the same reaction as you, it aggrevates me to no end.  However, I do not begrudge them for exercising the rights we serve to protect.  Moreover, take a look at the news.  What about whats happening in Iran right now?  They have a phony election that re-appointed a radical islam dictator.  Tens of thousands of iranian citizens are rising up to protest in Iran and let me tell you, IT IS making a difference.  You and I may not agree with an anti-war protestor, but we should always be thankful they are there, and in Iran's case, be especially supportive of those brave citizens for standing up for what they beleive in.


----------



## Roy Harding (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> LOL.. I'm not belittling anyones views, those views belittle themselves.
> and I'm far from a "macho child", As I tried to say but I guess you chose only to read what you felt like seeing so Ill repeat myself, I could care less about someones political views, for example someone could have made an identical post to this but on the polar opposite point of the political spectrum, although it rarely happens or we rarely hear about it theoretically some right wing youths could have been protesting something somewhere and I would have posted the exact same thing as I did in this situation.. what I was and am saying is that protesting ie. heckling, sitting in, and so on is moronic. It rarely accomplishes anything save infuriating those who take opposite views on the particular subject and those middle of the road type of people who are sitting at home watching it on tv, well it makes those people less sympathetic towards the cause (I know this because My mom is one of those people) and Living in B.C. we see allot of protests having to do with the Olympics but anyways my point is that yes FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the RIGHT TO PROTEST are integral parts of any democracy.. the way in which most protesters seem to protest is ineffective and moronic. I'm the kid here yet I seem like I'm trying to explain algebra to a 3 year old.. I wont argue anymore but you calling me out for "belittling others" and then continuing on to "belittle" me by calling me a "Macho child" kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?



I don't recall calling you a "macho child" - read my post again.

NOW, I'm belittling you:

Learn to format your thoughts into small "chunks" of related sentences - these are called "paragraphs", usually delineated by "paragraph breaks".  This practise makes understanding your thoughts much easier for the intended recipient.

Yes indeed - "the way in which most protesters seem to protest is ineffective and moronic" - and so is the way you chose to express your thoughts on this board.


Roy


----------



## ltmaverick25 (26 Jul 2009)

Folks I really dont think a back and forth exchange of belittling one another is going to accomplish anything here..


----------



## Roy Harding (26 Jul 2009)

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Folks I really dont think a back and forth exchange of belittling one another is going to accomplish anything here..



You're right.

I apologize.


Roy


----------



## Smity199 (26 Jul 2009)

lol How I format my posts has nothing to do with it but thanks for the tip, I'll try to break my thoughts into paragraphs from now on. 

Ltmaverick now that you make such a good point, I do now think that the universe does have a place for everyone and I am in way grateful that some people do exercise their rights even though I may not agree with them personally. 

ps. Roy harding just out of curiosity, what did you or do you do in the military?


----------



## Roy Harding (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> ps. Roy harding just out of curiosity, what did you or do you do in the military?



Check my profile.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> lol How I format my posts has nothing to do with it but thanks for the tip,



Here's another tip,[ no charge]

It will have a lot to do with you whether you either wish to make this a career, or just stick around for a few years.


----------



## Smity199 (26 Jul 2009)

I'm confused.. how so?
the fact that I didn't break up my thoughts into seperate paragraphs will dictate whether I will have a career in the army or just a 3 year stint? I could see your point if I had spelling/grammar errors or I just seemed uneducated in general in my posts, how that might raise some flags.. oh well, you guys probably do know best


----------



## aesop081 (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> especially not in the combat arms..



What does "combat arms " have to do with this ?

I am not in the combat arms, yet if i do my job right, dozens ( sometimes  hundreds) of people die a pretty terrible death.

Everyone in the CF has a significant role to play in the delivery of violence to the ennemy.


----------



## chris_log (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> I'm confused.. how so?
> the fact that I didn't break up my thoughts into seperate paragraphs will dictate whether I will have a career in the army or just a 3 year stint? I could see your point if I had spelling/grammar errors or I just seemed uneducated in general in my posts, how that might raise some flags.. oh well, you guys probably do know best



I think people took issue mostly with the fact that you launched into what was a series of generally thoughtfull posts with an illogical rant. I get it, you're a true blue conservative (judging by your posts and Bush quotes) and the thought of a dirty leftist joining the ranks of the CF annoys you.  

However, I think this thread came to the conclusion that most of us are willing to serve with anyone who has the will to serve and is halfways competant. Political views don't play into it, and neither does one's activist history (as long as it was legal). I used to be a deeply ideological conservative who used all the rhetoric in the world, like yourself. As I go along, however, I learn that politics isn't as clear cut as you'd like it to be. I even participated in a protest (albeit on the 'good' side ), does that preclude me from serving...according to you?



> especially not in the combat arms..



And that has what to do with it?


----------



## ltmaverick25 (26 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> I'm confused.. how so?
> the fact that I didn't break up my thoughts into seperate paragraphs will dictate whether I will have a career in the army or just a 3 year stint? I could see your point if I had spelling/grammar errors or I just seemed uneducated in general in my posts, how that might raise some flags.. oh well, you guys probably do know best



This thread really isn’t about grammar and paragraph structure.  It’s about attitude.  Your poor attitude has inspired others to take shots at you and here we are.  If you really want to know why good writing skills are required in the CF then it should be taken to another thread (and they are important).

The moral of the story here is disagree, without attacking.  I have often been critical of the negative tone that veteran posters sometimes take towards new people; however, in this instance it’s the reverse.  

If all goes well, you will soon be one of us, and you are going to have to be able to work in a team environment and support your peers even when you disagree with them.  We're all on the same team.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Jul 2009)

How about you check your grammar and spelling?



> The pen, err keyboard is *mightyer* *then* the sword!


----------



## ltmaverick25 (26 Jul 2009)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> How about you check your grammar and spelling?



And here I thought I had invented a word of my own.  Oh well.


----------



## aesop081 (26 Jul 2009)

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> And here I thought I had invented a word of my own.  Oh well.



You invented a few things of your own alright......... :


----------



## ltmaverick25 (26 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You invented a few things of your own alright......... :



Care to elaborate?


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Jul 2009)

When comparing one thing with another you may find that one is more appealing “than” another. “Than” is the word you want when doing comparisons. But if you are talking about time, choose “then".


----------



## Another Mom (26 Jul 2009)

I would be interested in hearing from the more experienced here, how a COIN model of fighting intersects with some of the opinions here  that their job is to kill, a la  WW II style.   Not  mutually exclusive , I would gather, but it must be a delicate dance reconciling the two.  Is  a need for COIN thinkers reflected in what kind of people  are recruited? Is war itself becoming more "left wing"?


----------



## mellian (26 Jul 2009)

Wow. Meanwhile I can get that sort of response by certain individuals among other groups about myself joining the CF. 

As for protests being effective or not, I would say not completely by itself. Combine it with education of the issues to those that ask on the street, calling and emailing and writing letters to MPs and PM, inviting all sort of media to record the demonstration (even thought some have the habit of focusing on those with the silliest of signs or anything they deem hypocritical or belittling such as throwing rocks or vandalizing), and so on. 

Protests and Demonstrations have been used for all sort of issues, and by those of various parts of a political spectrum. I am from Ottawa, and I have seen many protests and marches of all sorts, many I disproved. Anti-War, Pro-War (they had some big ones themselves in 2003), Anti-Bush, Pro-Bush, Pro-Choice, Pro-Life, Pro Gay Marriage, Anti Gay Marriage, Pro-Palestine, Pro-Israel, Pro Natives, Anti-Capitalists, Unions, Strikes, and the lists go on. Other cities in Canada had their own fair share of protests and demonstrations, with some becoming annual thing for people to hang out and even celebrate like Pride Parades to remind people they too exist. 

That are just some more recent ones. If one looks at history, many social changes has been precipitated by protests, which in the end help improve the quality of life for ALL people.   

These days, with the populace having massive amount of accessible information, many people tend to gradually become accustom to them, and in turn apathetic, yet protests still serves a purpose even it does not seem like it changes anything. It provides the people an opportunity to vent, especially if they feel like they cannot do anything else, which in a way benefits society and keeps it stable and safe. Otherwise, history has shown what can happen when those in power try to suppress demonstrations and ignore those who initiating them. It gradually becomes from peaceful protests to riots, martyr type acts like standing in front of a moving tank or lighting themselves on fire, and even hijacking and terrorism to get societal attention to certain issues. 

Probably the key thing that got me involved into protesting is not so much the issues it is focusing on, but police brutality and violent protesters. First protest I ever attended was the G20 in 2001. I did so to observe, as the UofO student newspaper I was doing high school co-op with was covering it, and I was curious as what was the big deal, why so many is attending it, why the authorities were worried it would become another Seattle or Quebec City, and so on. Those few days were pretty formative in term of life experience, got to see all sorts of things, the good and bad of both protesters and police, spoke to all sort of people including few officers who were friendly enough to talk to. I almost got arrested few times as the police were actively partitioning and pushing the demonstrators or grabbing all those wearing black, which only caused people to stampede, and pissing off people who would otherwise would stay on the sidelines to watch. That and smelling my share of tear gas, oi, but fortunately had roaming medic who were supplying filter masks with vinegar to avoid breathing the stuff. 

So since then, started getting involved in some of the organizing committees, and from there made sure I was there to help coordinate and organize, making sure people are safe, and to discourage somehow silly nonsense like vandalism or throwing stuff at the police. By the first Bush visit, police got accustom to peacefully handling large protests with lot less officers, a long with the organizers in terms of coordinating such a large amount of people, with compromises with groups to allow their own time period of being pushy, allowing the police to focus on a particular group and not all demonstrators.  During that period, I have worked with police officers on other issues with one of the police liaison committees, getting to know various officers even some I met during protests. 

Even had the Chief of Police at the time (if I still had his new contact info, probably would have asked him as a security reference) ask me at an unrelated event for my perspective the protests, which to me I believe made some kind of difference. I think at one point it was suggested I could apply to join the force, and possibly help enact some of my suggestions, and trust, I was really tempted then I guess for similar reasons why I am applying for the CF.    

So yes, eventually started focusing on other aspects of life and activism, and gradually moved away from protest and demonstration organizing, both because of lack of issues I would like to focus on or agree with, and because I guess gotten my fill, or felt like there was no further difference I can make. In Montreal, I simply do not have enough time for it, with University and Roller Derby and all, nor have the inclination for it at this point of my life. 

Okay...I think I went on longer than planned.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> I would be interested in hearing from the more experienced here, how a COIN model of fighting intersects with some of the opinions here  that their job is to kill, a la  WW II style.   Not  mutually exclusive , I would gather, but it must be a delicate dance reconciling the two.  Is  a need for COIN thinkers reflected in what kind of people  are recruited? Is war itself becoming more "left wing"?




COIN has nothing to do with whom is being recruited.  The CF will teach the Recruits the "BASIC Building Blocks" necessary to make them effective members of the CF.  If they are being deployed to an area/Region where COIN operations are taking place, then they will be given the training they need to operate there.  The "Basics" don't change.  COIN is just another form of 'battle' for which we will adapt our basic drills and procedures to overcome.

War is not "Left" or "Right", it is "Organized CHAOS".   >


----------



## mellian (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> I would be interested in hearing from the more experienced here, how a COIN model of fighting intersects with some of the opinions here  that their job is to kill, a la  WW II style.   Not  mutually exclusive , I would gather, but it must be a delicate dance reconciling the two.  Is  a need for COIN thinkers reflected in what kind of people  are recruited? Is war itself becoming more "left wing"?



As in applying COIN theory to the Canadian Forces as its own gravity well, and how it is attracting people to applying? If so, I can see how that would work, and how it may attract diverse amount of recruits to the CF. 

I can even see how it can be applied to my life, as a single node floating through space of social networks that comprises our society.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> As in applying COIN theory to the Canadian Forces as its own gravity well, and how it is attracting people to applying? If so, I can see how that would work, and how it may attract diverse amount of recruits to the CF.
> 
> I can even see how it can be applied to my life, as a single node floating through space of social networks that comprises our society.



 :

COIN has absolutely NOTHING, again, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with recruiting people into the CF.  Once again; the CF does not train its Recruits for COIN.  They will be taught all the basics soldier skills that have been taught as the basics for centuries.  Once they have become trained members of the CF, and have to oportunity to train to deploy on COIN operations, then they will be trained for such operations.  We are not Recruiting for COIN.

Just forget all about COIN and get back on topic.


----------



## Another Mom (26 Jul 2009)

Mellian: In my admittedly little research, it seems the XXXX (that, which must not be named)  warrior of the future would also benefit from education/ experience  in psychology, sociology, anthropology, languages,  economics, etc.  In the  US Army/Marine XXXX (that, which must not be named)  Center pamphlet, there is a quote "In small wars, tolerance, sympathy and kindness should be the keynote to our relationship with the mass of the population".   Sounds if not left wing, then the left arm of the right wing.


----------



## chris_log (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> Mellian: In my admittedly little research, it seems the XXXX (that, which must not be named)  warrior of the future would also benefit from education/ experience  in psychology, sociology, anthropology, languages,  economics, etc.  In the  US Army/Marine XXXX (that, which must not be named)  Center pamphlet, there is a quote "In small wars, tolerance, sympathy and kindness should be the keynote to our relationship with the mass of the population".   Sounds if not left wing, then the left arm of the right wing.



As was stated earlier, a soldier's political views have no bearing on their ability to be a good soldier.


----------



## aesop081 (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> (that, which must not be named)



You think you are being cute but........


----------



## Roy Harding (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> Mellian: In my admittedly little research, it seems the XXXX (that, which must not be named)  warrior of the future would also benefit from education/ experience  in psychology, sociology, anthropology, languages,  economics, etc.  In the  US Army/Marine XXXX (that, which must not be named)  Center pamphlet, there is a quote "In small wars, tolerance, sympathy and kindness should be the keynote to our relationship with the mass of the population".   Sounds if not left wing, then the left arm of the right wing.



Another Mom:

It would seem to me (based on a lot of experience with both UN and NATO ops) that most successful armies promote those very same qualities you mention.

For what it's worth, one of my (left wing) sons is pursuing a PhD in Psychology - and it bugs the hell out of him that the insights he is gaining in that academic pursuit are the SAME insights I gained whilst serving as a soldier in various war zones around the globe.

Those insights are neither right wing, left wing, OR "left arm of the right wing" (good phrase, by the way - may I borrow it from time to time?) - they are realpolitic in nature.

Roy


----------



## mellian (26 Jul 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> COIN has absolutely NOTHING, again, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with recruiting people into the CF.  Once again; the CF does not train its Recruits for COIN.  They will be taught all the basics soldier skills that have been taught as the basics for centuries.  Once they have become trained members of the CF, and have to oportunity to train to deploy on COIN operations, then they will be trained for such operations.  We are not Recruiting for COIN.
> 
> Just forget all about COIN and get back on topic.



I was referring to the theory/model of how communities and organizations are formed and how they attract people to it, not the operations themselves or recruitment into it.   :


----------



## mellian (26 Jul 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> Mellian: In my admittedly little research, it seems the XXXX (that, which must not be named)  warrior of the future would also benefit from education/ experience  in psychology, sociology, anthropology, languages,  economics, etc.  In the  US Army/Marine XXXX (that, which must not be named)  Center pamphlet, there is a quote "In small wars, tolerance, sympathy and kindness should be the keynote to our relationship with the mass of the population".   Sounds if not left wing, then the left arm of the right wing.



Ah I see, yes, I agree. Hence part of the idea of officers requiring some educational background to join.


----------



## aesop081 (26 Jul 2009)

2 virgins talking about the best way to have sex...........


----------



## mellian (26 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> 2 virgins talking about the best way to have sex...........



It does not hurt to discuss the theory to provide some idea of what is going to happen and what to do before the practical happens. It why Sex Ed is effective in promoting safe sex and avoiding unwanted pregnancies or STDs.

Metaphorically speaking and sarcasm aside of course.


----------



## aesop081 (26 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> It why Sex Ed is effective in promoting safe sex and avoiding unwanted pregnancies or STDs.



I would say however, that the person teaching sex ed, usualy has direct experience in the subject.


----------



## mellian (27 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I would say however, that the person teaching sex ed, usualy has direct experience in the subject.



True, but does not hurt for the students to discuss it or read up on it before the course/workshop.


----------



## Kat Stevens (27 Jul 2009)

HOLY SHIT!!  Everyone...just...stop...typing...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Ah I see, yes, I agree. Hence part of the idea of officers requiring some educational background to join.



Yea, because until a few years ago we just took anyone who asked.

EDIT: Kat's right


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Jul 2009)

At the risk of typing too much, I would offer these links from Milnet.ca Admin:

•	Tone and Content on Army.ca;

•	Milnet.ca: Setting proper expectations;

•	We Are Family; and, especially

•	Milnet.ca Conduct Guidelines.

I’m not a moderator, but may I invite, indeed may I *BEG* members, junior and senior alike, to remind themselves of what makes Milnet.ca so valuable and what threatens to drag it down to the level of about 99.9% of the internet.


----------



## helpup (27 Jul 2009)

Whew, I was going to quote and reply to a earlier post but I think that enough has been said on the topic of someones personal thoughts on protesters.

Good reminder ER,  So back to the topic, "does being part of the military make you right wing"

Some here obviously feel strongly about extremes from either side being in the military. Personally and in my experience the addadge of the CF being a microcosim of all Canadians does hold some water.  However due to our job's and life experiences we tend to take on a less tollerant for B.S persona that can straddle both sides of the spectrum of left or right.  

We as a reflection of Canada are still lacking in the full diversity that is prevalent in most major Canadian cities. ( and I am not espousing afrimative action here, This is something that recruitment will have to look at and time will eventually find a happy medium for)  

So my point of view being a "conservativly liberal" who does not like the mind set of any large group of people who want to protest or not.  Care not one wit what a persons leanings are as long as they are willing to listen to other points of views rather then rely on jignostic replies or statements to any idea that does not coincide with thiers. What I do care about is anyone who serves with me to be able to do thier job to the best of their ability.  That may include being a humanitarian, a separator of two factions, a warrior, a life safer.  It all depends on what the mission is.  Above all regardless of political bent I want people working for me able to do what the Govt of Canada requires.  

As a note with in our Dag process for most of our deployments there is a range and scope to say nope I dont want to go.  Will that change for a full out war or the current conflict requiring more troops for longer....... Yup you betcha. but we are not there yet.  Will saying "no" have carreer consequences..... Yes it does. especially after signing a Wng Order, but a firing squad is not one of them.


----------



## chris_log (27 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> Some here obviously feel strongly about extremes from either side being in the military. Personally and in my experience the addadge of the CF being a microcosim of all Canadians does hold some water.  However due to our job's and life experiences *we tend to take on a less tollerant for B.S persona that can straddle both sides of the spectrum of left or right*.



I think that just about sums it up. CF members, of all political stripes, do not tolerate or fall victim to the BS that spews from all sides of the political spectrum (left, right and in between). 

LIke I said earlier, most of the military is far too busy to concern itself with politics beyond election season.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Jul 2009)

Whether you are left, right or centre does not make any difference. This does:

You are duty bound to obey the legal orders of your superiors, and the Parliament of Canada. If you disagree strongly about government policies, or the direction the Parliament of Canada wants the CF to take, you are free to take your release and express your point of view.


----------



## helpup (27 Jul 2009)

OldSoldier said:
			
		

> Whether you are left, right or centre does not make any difference. This does:
> 
> You are duty bound to obey the legal orders of your superiors, and the Parliament of Canada. If you disagree strongly about government policies, or the direction the Parliament of Canada wants the CF to take, you are free to take your release and express your point of view.



Good point OS, and this is something I dont think the original poster was intending and yet some viewed she would by default bring that into the CF with her.  

Along with everything I stated I should also add that you are severly limited in your ability to partake in these protests, or support for a political party ect when you join the CF.  ( at least as long as you live in a PMQ, Govt quarters.  We are a Govt tool and are suppose to outside of voting hold a nuetral face.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Jul 2009)

In the 80's many of the rank and file voted NDP as it was more of a labour based organization then. The Officers generally voted Conservative. As the NDP became more anti-military, I think they lost most of the serving members. The Liberals screwed the military over badly and hurt morale, so I am guessing they also lost Lot's of military support as well. The current CPC has been very supportive of the military despite making a number of goofs along the way. It's natural to support a political party that doe not piss on you and treat you like a 2nd class citizen or a mindless zombie. It really depend on what your primary issues are. As I am a gun owner, there is only the CPC for me as the others treat me like a deranged criminal.


----------



## Roy Harding (27 Jul 2009)

Colin P said:
			
		

> In the 80's many of the rank and file voted NDP as it was more of a labour based organization then. The Officers generally voted Conservative. As the NDP became more anti-military, I think they lost most of the serving members. The Liberals screwed the military over badly and hurt morale, so I am guessing they also lost Lot's of military support as well. The current CPC has been very supportive of the military despite making a number of goofs along the way. It's natural to support a political party that doe not piss on you and treat you like a 2nd class citizen or a mindless zombie. It really depend on what your primary issues are. As I am a gun owner, there is only the CPC for me as the others treat me like a deranged criminal.



Really?  Have you got a source for those "facts" regarding the voting patterns of the rank and file, and the officers then serving?

I was serving (rank and file) in the '80s - and I've never voted NDP in my life.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Really?  Have you got a source for those "facts" regarding the voting patterns of the rank and file, and the officers then serving?
> 
> I was serving (rank and file) in the '80s - and I've never voted NDP in my life.



Same here. I was a Cpl/MCpl/Sgt in the 80's - and I realized the NDP was basically in the pockets of the Communist party.....unwittingly maybe, but they were.


----------



## Shec (27 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Really?  Have you got a source for those "facts" regarding the voting patterns of the rank and file, and the officers then serving?
> 
> I was serving (rank and file) in the '80s - and I've never voted NDP in my life.



Ah, so that explains why my Reg. force instructor in Wainwright in asked me if I was "some kind of a Bolshevik" when asked where we could cast our ballots in the 1974 Federal election.  BTW I would have most likely voted for the "right" of the spectrum.


----------



## Roy Harding (27 Jul 2009)

Shec said:
			
		

> Ah, so that explains why my Reg. force instructor in Wainwright in asked me if I was "some kind of a Bolshevik" when asked where we could cast our ballots in the 1974 Federal election.  BTW I would have most likely voted for the "right" of the spectrum.



I'm not sure what you're driving at here - in my time I voted in Federal elections while deployed to foreign nations - thrice (that I recall).

The ability of the troops to vote in elections - no matter where they are deployed - is taken very seriously in the Forces.

I don't know the background to your story - but I assume that your instructor (BTW - what does the fact that he was Regular Force have to do with anything?) was "being witty".


----------



## mellian (27 Jul 2009)

Colin P said:
			
		

> It's natural to support a political party that doe not piss on you and treat you like a 2nd class citizen or a mindless zombie. It really depend on what your primary issues are. As I am a gun owner, there is only the CPC for me as the others treat me like a deranged criminal.



Or on those you care about. One's life experiences and present status in life will always influence one's political views. Like someone previous said in this thread, one is a staunch conservative when they are rich and of the upper class, and staunch socialist if one is poor and of the lower class, with extremes of both. 

Goes back to the question I asked in the OP, would one's experiences in the military influence their views more towards the right, no matter their views before joining? Not sure if it would, but the experience would have an influence.


----------



## Kat Stevens (27 Jul 2009)

I don't know if it shaped my political opinion, but it opened my eyes. Spend a few years going to some disagreeable shit holes seeing people at their absolute worst, with no regard for their fellow human being, and see if your views aren't altered somewhat.


----------



## Smity199 (27 Jul 2009)

My dad always said to me whenever politics came up in conversation: If you aren't a  liberal when you're young, you have no heart and if you aren't a conservative when you're old then you have no brain.

It doesn't always ring true but its a good saying, I think peoples views change as they age regardless if they are in the military or not..

But seeing as how I am young and a conservative I guess I have no heart and the day I become a liberal feel free to call me senile and put me in a home. lol Just kidding of course


----------



## ltmaverick25 (27 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Or on those you care about. One's life experiences and present status in life will always influence one's political views. Like someone previous said in this thread, one is a staunch conservative when they are rich and of the upper class, and staunch socialist if one is poor and of the lower class, with extremes of both.



I dont think this is always the case.  I have never been a rich man, not anywhere near close, and neither has my family and I have always leaned towards the conservative side of the spectrum.  When I got to university and started to learn more about politics, I started to lean even more to the right.  The military never really influenced my political outlook.  That I am conservative had nothing to do with joining the military and nothing to do with financial standing.


----------



## mariomike (27 Jul 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I don't know if it shaped my political opinion, but it opened my eyes. Spend a few years going to some disagreeable shit holes seeing people at their absolute worst, with no regard for their fellow human being, and see if your views aren't altered somewhat.



Which is why whenever I talk to a soldier, I ask where they have served, and say "thank you". I was never put to the test in my youth, and looking back, I'm thankful I didn't have to find out.


----------



## Jungle (27 Jul 2009)

Smity199 said:
			
		

> My dad always said to me whenever politics came up in conversation: If you aren't a  liberal when you're young, you have no heart and if you aren't a conservative when you're old then you have no brain.



My interpretation of this Winston Churchill quote is that as a young adult, most want to have an "equal" chance of making it in the world; as we age and build a "life" (pension plan, paid off mortgage, money invested) we do not want to share all of it with the "losers" who made some wrong moves and did not do well, or were just lazy.

The aspect I appreciate the most about the right is that their programs tend to encourage people to develop a certain level of autonomy, whereas the left likes to treat the government like a milking cow.


----------



## Shec (27 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what you're driving at here - in my time I voted in Federal elections while deployed to foreign nations - thrice (that I recall).
> 
> The ability of the troops to vote in elections - no matter where they are deployed - is taken very seriously in the Forces.
> 
> I don't know the background to your story - but I assume that your instructor (BTW - what does the fact that he was Regular Force have to do with anything?) was "being witty".



Indeed he was "being witty".  And I appreciated tbe witicism which is probably why I still get a chuckle from it 35 years latter.  As if a Bolsheviks ever had the right to cast a ballot that indicted anything but "Da".   No disrespect of Instructors, reg or res, intended on my part.


----------



## Roy Harding (27 Jul 2009)

Shec said:
			
		

> Indeed he was "being witty".  And I appreciated tbe witicism which is probably why I still get a chuckle from it 35 years latter.  As if a Bolsheviks ever had the right to cast a ballot that indicted anything but "Da".   No disrespect of Instructors, reg or res, intended on my part.



Ain't the Internet grand?  I mis-interpreted your intent in the original post.  A thing (mis-interpretation of intent) which has lead to more senseless arguments here (on Army.ca) than I care to contemplate.

Thanks for your response - and for the record - I agree with you.


----------



## benny88 (27 Jul 2009)

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> When I got to university and started to learn more about politics, I started to lean even more to the right.  The military never really influenced my political outlook.



  For me, it's hard to separate the two influences, as I joined the military and started University just months apart. For the OP's reference, I believe  I have become more politically conservative in the past two years, but I can't say for sure whether it's because of the military.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Jul 2009)

To be honest, there is no room for politics (the real politics ie elections etc) in the military. We have a mission and a duty to support our legally elected government. 
We have enough "politicians" in the military.... >


----------



## mellian (28 Jul 2009)

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> I dont think this is always the case.  I have never been a rich man, not anywhere near close, and neither has my family and I have always leaned towards the conservative side of the spectrum.  When I got to university and started to learn more about politics, I started to lean even more to the right.  The military never really influenced my political outlook.  That I am conservative had nothing to do with joining the military and nothing to do with financial standing.



That was just an example of certain factors that can provide different set of experiences which in turn influences one's views of the world.  

Apart from economic factors, there is also family, education, ethnicity, culture, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, geographical, social, physical, mental, occupation, etc. Change any factors in a persons life and experiences, who they are as person and their outlook of the world at large will change. One is not born, they are made.


----------



## 2 Cdo (28 Jul 2009)

Colin P said:
			
		

> In the 80's many of the rank and file voted NDP as it was more of a labour based organization then. The Officers generally voted Conservative. As the NDP became more anti-military, I think they lost most of the serving members. The Liberals screwed the military over badly and hurt morale, so I am guessing they also lost Lot's of military support as well. The current CPC has been very supportive of the military despite making a number of goofs along the way. It's natural to support a political party that doe not piss on you and treat you like a 2nd class citizen or a mindless zombie. It really depend on what your primary issues are. As I am a gun owner, there is only the CPC for me as the others treat me like a deranged criminal.



As others have asked, what rank and file voted NDP? I joined in 81 and in all those years I have never met a single person in the Forces who voted NDP! There probably are a few simple souls voting NDP but I've yet to meet them. 8)


----------



## mellian (28 Jul 2009)

2 Cdo said:
			
		

> As others have asked, what rank and file voted NDP? I joined in 81 and in all those years I have never met a single person in the Forces who voted NDP! There probably are a few simple souls voting NDP but I've yet to meet them. 8)



I probably should re-think my vote then when I join?   

Bah, only reason I am really is that some of their MPs at least are pushing for policies and amendments that affects me positively, while the tories would like to prevent that and remove some other existing ones. I would only vote lib if I am in the Papineau riding, or maybe if their MP is party leader eventually.


----------



## Roy Harding (28 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> I probably should re-think my vote then when I join?
> 
> Bah, only reason I am really is that some of their MPs at least are pushing for policies and amendments that affects me positively, while the tories would like to prevent that and remove some other existing ones. I would only vote lib if I am in the Papineau riding, or maybe if their MP is party leader eventually.



To be honest - in the last Federal election I destroyed my ballot, I just couldn't stomach any of the choices presented to me.  AND - I think my MP is doing a wonderful job of representing our riding, and he's NDP.  I've emailed him (with a CC: to Taliban Jack, of course), that I think he's doing a good job, and that I'd work for him if he became an independent - but I couldn't in good conscience vote for him as I am diametrically opposed to the majority of the stated policies of his party.

Democracy is hard work and messy - especially if you think about it, rather than just voting party lines.


----------



## aesop081 (28 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> I would only vote lib if I am in the Papineau riding, or maybe if their MP is party leader eventually.



 :rofl:


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Jul 2009)

Does being part of the military make you 'right wing'?

This may be an important question if you are planning to join anything other than infantry. The only 'right' you need to think about in the infantry is 'right flanking', and then you get to smash things up. That's why I like the infantry. Hehehehehehehe ( eace: through speed and violence)


----------



## mellian (29 Jul 2009)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> :rofl:



I figured someone would laugh at that.


----------



## OldSolduer (29 Jul 2009)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Does being part of the military make you 'right wing'?
> 
> This may be an important question if you are planning to join anything other than infantry. The only 'right' you need to think about in the infantry is 'right flanking', and then you get to smash things up. That's why I like the infantry. Hehehehehehehe ( eace: through speed and violence)



Agreed....its a simple person's life is it not? ;D


----------



## helpup (29 Jul 2009)

WOW is the site slow

Roy, I understand the concept behind the destroy ballet in protest but I don't follow the practice myself.  If there is not canidate that I want then I don't vote, If I dont vote I have removed myself from participating and in my mind reduced my ability by not participating.  

I know we vote local but in a reality we vote for who is the leader of the party ( as in if Lib's win enough seats Iggy is PM ( currently)  So what a party's platform is comes very much into play.  Due to Jack being....... well Jack I dont vote NDP.  There are people who even though they are military do vote NDP, I doubt however it was in great numbers as posted during the 80's.  For the troops who do and bring it up I ask them why they are and actually listen to thier points.  Mind you I generally counter them with my own if they are voting with the blinders on but hey devils advocate is what I do.


----------



## Roy Harding (29 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> ...
> Roy, I understand the concept behind the destroy ballet in protest but I don't follow the practice myself.  If there is not canidate that I want then I don't vote, If I dont vote I have removed myself from participating and in my mind reduced my ability by not participating.
> 
> ...



In my mind - I'm at least registering my protest/disgust in at least SOME manner.  I know that nobody really cares - but it works for me.

Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Jul 2009)

Oh!  He is talking about destroying his ballot.  I was trying to figure out why someone wanted to destroy a ballet.  Which Ballet?  Swan Lake?  Took me a while to catch on to what was being said.




See what kind of confusion bad spelling can cause.


----------



## Roy Harding (29 Jul 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Oh!  He is talking about destroying his ballot.  I was trying to figure out why someone wanted to destroy a ballet.  Which Ballet?  Swan Lake?  ...



For what it's worth - I have a thing against 'The Nutcracker Suite' - but I'll save that for sometime around Christmas.

To the subject at hand - I DO wish there were a "None of the above" option on ALL ballots - and that those votes were counted and reported in the media.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Jul 2009)

....or the Write in Option.


----------



## Shec (29 Jul 2009)

Ticking an "All of the Above" box would make things entertaining interesting !


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Jul 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Really?  Have you got a source for those "facts" regarding the voting patterns of the rank and file, and the officers then serving?
> 
> I was serving (rank and file) in the '80s - and I've never voted NDP in my life.



BC was a fairly heavy union province a lot of the guys grew up in NDP families. They voted NDP for Labour reasons rather than anything else. I read the the statment way back when and it jived pretty much from what I heard in the various messes. At the end of the day no one has those "facts" as there is no real way of collecting them.


----------



## Roy Harding (29 Jul 2009)

Colin P said:
			
		

> ... At the end of the day no one has those "facts" as there is no real way of collecting them.



Precisely my point.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Jul 2009)

Colin P said:
			
		

> BC was a fairly heavy union province a lot of the guys grew up in NDP families. They voted NDP for Labour reasons rather than anything else. I read the the statment way back when and it jived pretty much from what I heard in the various messes. At the end of the day no one has those "facts" as there is no real way of collecting them.



So?  How does this equate to a majority of CF members?  I think statistics still show that a very large percentage of the CF is made up of Maritimers.  Most of them are Liberals.......well......very few of them are NDP.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Jul 2009)

I should have been more precise, as at the time most of my contacts were in BC. I will stand by the statment that it is likely that the existing political trends in the recruiting pool played a greater role, then the fact they were in the military. If this is not clear, understand that I have a 1 and 4 year crawling over me


----------



## mellian (30 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> Due to Jack being....... well Jack I dont vote NDP.



I am not a big fan of Jack either. I met the guy when he showed up at a bush protest organizing meeting. We generally ignored him as we followed the policy of not showing any kind of political party preference. 

Did get quite annoyed at him for standing in the middle of the elgin & laurier intersection surrounded by media at the start of the morning bush protest march, forcing everyone to get around them. Trying to coordinate ten thousand big march with that kind of obstacle was not easy...


----------



## mellian (30 Jul 2009)

In terms of voting trends by those in the Canadian Forces, is it generally to which ever party that provides better funding and support to the military? I can understand dislike of the liberals during the Trudeau era and on not being the greatest for the CF, but the Conservatives historically were not always the greatest in that area either.


----------



## Nemo888 (30 Jul 2009)

At the station I was at two soldiers got married. They happened to be gay. The ultra right wing conservatives were never told about it or even knew there were gays on the station. The views on this site are the guys who weren't invited to the reception.  ;D

Personally I find the whole right/left thing very 20th century. Both sides produced many crazies who thought a death camp was the best place for those who disagreed with them. I primarily look at the libertarian/totalitarian leanings of the party first. That ends up putting all the kooks in one basket. If you are in the other basket you probably have some good ideas to bring to the table.

My 2c.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> In terms of voting trends by those in the Canadian Forces, is it generally to which ever party that provides better funding and support to the military? I can understand dislike of the liberals during the Trudeau era and on not being the greatest for the CF, but the Conservatives historically were not always the greatest in that area either.



The current Conservatives have been the only political party to stand up and support the deployed Battle Group with both words, funding, and equipment. The Liberals sent us there and could care less what happened after. As soon as they were out of government, they flipped and demanded we be brought home. I'd rather support a political party that knows what a military is actually for, instead of trying to create the Team Canada World Police with Vietnam-era  kit that Chretien and Martin tried to do.


----------



## Jungle (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> At the station I was at two soldiers got married. They happened to be gay. The ultra right wing conservatives were never told about it or even knew there were gays on the station. The views on this site are the guys who weren't invited to the reception.


 :


----------



## Nemo888 (30 Jul 2009)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> The current Conservatives have been the only political party to stand up and support the deployed Battle Group with both words, funding, and equipment. The Liberals sent us there and could care less what happened after. As soon as they were out of government, they flipped and demanded we be brought home. I'd rather support a political party that knows what a military is actually for, instead of trying to create the Team Canada World Police with Vietnam-era  kit that Chretien and Martin tried to do.



Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> At the station I was at two soldiers got married. They happened to be gay. The ultra right wing conservatives were never told about it or even knew there were gays on the station. The views on this site are the guys who weren't invited to the reception.  ;D
> 
> Personally I find the whole right/left thing very 20th century. Both sides produced many crazies who thought a death camp was the best place for those who disagreed with them. I primarily look at the libertarian/totalitarian leanings of the party first. That ends up putting all the kooks in one basket. If you are in the other basket you probably have some good ideas to bring to the table.
> 
> My 2c.



congrats on you and your partner tying the knot...


----------



## aesop081 (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.



I'm sure i would have.


----------



## Franko (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.



What's your point? We go where the government tells us to go, we have no say and you know it.

At least with the PCs in office we are getting out of the hole the Liberal government made for us in the early 90's.

Ever have a wage freeze for over 6 years? How about a posting and promotion freeze at the same time? Now throw in reductions in everything from no purchasing of new equipment to parts. Hell I even remember mileage restrictions on vehicles. Literally drive for 10km and then stop for the rest of the day. Then there was the hanger foundations crumbing to the point that whole buildings were shifting off their foundations, troops walking around with sleeves on their jackets falling off (gen 1 Gortex jackets)because of "lowest bidder" clothing competitions.

Meanwhile Liberal coffers get bigger, and troops in the Balkans at the time couldn't even get the tools to do the job.

The list goes on and on.

I'd take the PCs over the Liberals any day...and I used to vote Liberal.

Regards


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.


I think that you're confusing our military with that of some banana republic.  In the military, I have met those who supported NDP, Liberal, Conservatives, Reformers and even the BQ.  Those are our political views, which we keep to ourselves.  As an example, when asked how I voted, I answer "Same as last time: by secret ballot."  I have voted Liberal, Conservative and Reform, all depending on the candidate, the political climate, what was happening, etc.

As for your troll, had we "deployed" to Iraq, our mission to Afghanistan (from 2003 onwards) was to keep us (read: Canada) out of Iraq.  If you recall, there was some pretty heavy pressure to go, and polls at the time were pretty nearly split on the decision.  But that matters not.  If the government of the day said to us tomorrow "Leave Afghanistan and deploy to Darfur", then we'd salute and get the job done.  Whether we like it or not has little to do with it.  We have all volunteered, and after all, it's not the military that's in Afghanistan (or wherever), it's Canada.  

'Nuff said.


----------



## Smity199 (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.



What does enjoying it have to do with anything.. When something is your job, you do it, period.
And anyone who joins the forces joins knowing that they may be deployed anywhere in the world whenever told to. You can vote for a certain party for many reasons but Im sure not many people in the forces vote based on where exactly, when or if they will be deployed overseas, and if they do then shame on them.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.



I'd grin and bear it. If you had any clue what being a soldier is all about, you wouldn't have made that comment. I'm fully prepared to die for my country, and die for your right to make ridiculous statements about something your empty profile states that you know nothing about. Whether its in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Darfur or Bosnia; we have a job to do. However, just like everyone else in the world, the CF members here like to be paid properly, and have the right equipment to do the job.


----------



## helpup (30 Jul 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> At the station I was at two soldiers got married. They happened to be gay. The ultra right wing conservatives were never told about it or even knew there were gays on the station. The views on this site are the guys who weren't invited to the reception.  ;D
> 
> My 2c.


Station?????? What bus station are you talking about. 

Was it Mark Twain who stated,  " better to be silent and be thought a fool then open your mouth and remove all doubt" ( or words to that effect)


----------



## dustinm (30 Jul 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> Station?????? What bus station are you talking about.
> 
> Was it Mark Twain who stated,  " better to be silent and be thought a fool then open your mouth and remove all doubt" ( or words to that effect)



I think you'll eat those words, helpup:



> Minor installations are named Canadian Forces Station or CFS (French Station des forces canadiennes or SFC).
> 
> A Canadian Forces Station could host a single minor unit (eg. an early warning radar station). Many of these facilities are now decommissioned for administrative purposes and function as detachments of a larger Canadian Forces Base nearby.


----------



## Kat Stevens (30 Jul 2009)

What's that sound, rushing water?  This one is circling the drain, gathering momentum.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jul 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> What's that sound, rushing water?  This one is circling the drain, gathering momentum.


And spiraling out of control.

Now I've said it before, but repetition is the key to retention.

It doesn't matter what political stripe your are...whether it be red, blue, orange, green or purple with pink polka dots...if you are a serving member of the Canadian Forces, you do what the Government of Canada tells you to do, via the Chain of Command, providing its legal. We have political views, but we keep our mouths shut....as it should be.
If you feel that strongly that the Government of Canada is doing something wrong, you have the right to take your release and protest/counter etc.
Being part of the military doesn't make you any more right wing than frying eggs makes you Julia Childs. ;D


----------



## SeaKingTacco (31 Jul 2009)

> Being part of the military doesn't make you any more right wing than frying eggs makes you Julia Childs.



Oooohhh- I like that.  Can  I use it?


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jul 2009)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Oooohhh- I like that.  Can  I use it?



Go for it. I have some time on my hands to think more up.


----------



## Edward Campbell (31 Jul 2009)

Since Journeyman appears to have taken his bike to Sturgis, I will take up the grammar cudgels:



			
				OldSoldier said:
			
		

> Go for it. I have some time on my hands to think more up think up more.


 >           >        >      >    >


But I do like the Julia Child quip.


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jul 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Since Journeyman appears to have taken his bike to Sturgis, I will take up the grammar cudgels:
> >           >        >      >    >
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mariomike (31 Jul 2009)

OldSoldier said:
			
		

> Being part of the military doesn't make you any more right wing than frying eggs makes you Julia Childs. ;D



That's a pearl of wisdom you won't find in your fortune cookie!


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Jul 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> That's a pearl of wisdom you won't find in your fortune cookie!



Maybe I should copyright that one.


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Aug 2009)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Would you have enjoyed your deployment in Iraq? The Conservatives wanted that as well.



I did.

I find your attitude distasteful, with that I guarantee you've been no where.

OWDU


----------



## helpup (4 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> I think you'll eat those words, helpup:



Nah, I know what a Station is and have been to a few. My Comment was dealing with your Pedantic drivel on how progressive you are vice those not invited to the "gays" cerimony.  And the jab you took at those on this site.


----------



## dustinm (4 Aug 2009)

helpup said:
			
		

> *Nah, I know what a Station is and have been to a few.* My Comment was dealing with your Pedantic drivel on how progressive you are vice those not invited to the "gays" cerimony.  And the jab you took at those on this site.



I apologize; I was having a bad day when I wrote that. However I do believe the remainder of your comment should be directed to the original writer of that post in question.

Again, sorry.


----------



## helpup (5 Aug 2009)

No Problem NEO, and I thought I was quoting the orriginal poster.  Just confirmed it was Nemo,  My station comment was directed orriginally at him and through not proffing who was replying wound up quoting you.  All around group hug.


----------



## 223ofDemocracy (13 Aug 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Since making the decision to join, I occasionally joked that I may end up ostracizing myself from a lot of the activist groups that I have been involved with over the years as most do not have the positive views of the military. Then now after reading some comments about the 'left wing' dim views of the military, made me wonder if it is some kind of social requirement to have some kind of 'right wing' view to be in the military?
> 
> I mean, a lot of my political views are left leaning. I am anti-war and helped organize and coordinate protests in the past on that basis, a long with against Bush when he came to Ottawa couple of times, against security certificates, pro-choice, etc. Guaranteed to have appeared in many of the photos and videos the police has taken in all the those protests too.
> 
> ...



Being part of the miltary makes you patriotic towards your country. Patriots can be found within all forms of political oriented society, both left and right wing. So no, being in the military does not make you right wing.

just my  :2c:


----------



## gcclarke (14 Aug 2009)

223ofDemocracy said:
			
		

> Being part of the miltary makes you patriotic towards your country. Patriots can be found within all forms of political oriented society, both left and right wing. So no, being in the military does not make you right wing.
> 
> just my  :2c:



Now personally I think that first sentence is backwards. Nothing about being in the military makes you patriotic. Being patriotic may make one more inclined to chose a career in the military, but at the same time you may also find the least patriotic individuals who signed up because it's a decent job with good pay and benefits.

Last half was bang on though.


----------



## vonGarvin (14 Aug 2009)

mellian said:
			
		

> Since making the decision to join, I occasionally joked that I may end up ostracizing myself from a lot of the activist groups that I have been involved with over the years as most do not have the positive views of the military. Then now after reading some comments about the 'left wing' dim views of the military, made me wonder if it is some kind of social requirement to have some kind of 'right wing' view to be in the military?
> 
> I mean, a lot of my political views are left leaning. I am anti-war and helped organize and coordinate protests in the past on that basis, a long with against Bush when he came to Ottawa couple of times, against security certificates, pro-choice, etc. Guaranteed to have appeared in many of the photos and videos the police has taken in all the those protests too.
> 
> ...


Short answer: being part of the military does NOT make you 'right wing'.  It does mean you may have to do some things that you (by you I mean "mellian") may or may not find troubling.
From your statement, one may conclude that you have problem with authority, and you have no problem voicing your opposition.  In the military, that is highly "not encouraged".  You are told what to do, when to do it and (at least early in your career) how to do it.  By definition you subordinate yourself to the whims of the government and your chain of command, from the CDS all the way down to your immediate supervisor.  You will be ordered to do things unquestioningly (except when given an order that is unlawful, when you are then *expected by law* to oppose said direction).
The only part that perplexes me is when you say you are "anti-war".  Does this mean that you think war is never an option?  If so, the military is not for you.  If by this you mean "war is the last resort", to paraphrase Hill, it is "an ugly, horrible thing, but not as bad as the alternative" in some cases.  If that is the case, then you are a perfect fit.  Contrary to popular misconception, military members are not (by and large) "pro-war". 
As for "political stripes", we get all kinds in the military.  "Centrists" who vote Liberal/Conservative, "Leftists" who vote NDP/Green, "Rightists" who vote Christian Heritage, or whatever.  There are pro-choicers and pro-lifers.  There are Catholics, Jews and Atheists.  There are social conservatives and there are social liberals.  There are some common denominators:
We are all Canadian Citizens
We all subordinate ourselves to the lawful direction of our superiors
We are all subject to unlimited liability.  This is the part that separates us from the rest of the Public Service.  We can be legally ordered to do stuff that will put is in harms' way, even "certain death", if the situation warrants.

It's not an easy choice to join the military, and yes, I agree that some stereotypes are there because they are true, but in the case of the military, there are so many that could not be further from the truth.

I hope this helps, and I certainly hope I didn't cover anything that was previously covered in the 17 (!) previous pages.


----------



## Jungle (15 Aug 2009)

Midnight Rambler said:
			
		

> From your statement, one may conclude that you have problem with authority, and you have no problem voicing your opposition.  In the military, that is highly "not encouraged".  You are told what to do, when to do it and (at least early in your career) how to do it.  By definition you subordinate yourself to the whims of the government and your chain of command, from the CDS all the way down to your immediate supervisor.  You will be ordered to do things unquestioningly.
> The only part that perplexes me is when you say you are "anti-war".  Does this mean that you think war is never an option?  If so, the military is not for you.


Yeah... tried to explain something similar here: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/88355/post-866184.html#msg866184 but I guess I just don't "get it"...  :


----------



## a_majoor (15 Aug 2009)

I would suggest that military members have common values like duty, honour and the desire to accomplish something worthwhile with their lives, as well as desires for action, adventure and travel, which broadly speaking are not the "norm" in modern Canadian society.

The last time these values were the norm of the overwhelming majority of Canadians was the end of the 19th century and early in the 20th, when the Government of the day was pretty much overwhelmed by the flood of volunteers for the Boer War and the early pahses of WWI. Not only were there lots of people lining up to be foot soldiers, but even the then elites contirbuted by volunteering as officers and even providing the funds to create two new units which serve in our order of battle today (the LdSH(RC) and PPCLI)

If those sorts of attitudes held today, there would be fully manned expeditionary forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and Darfur and wealthy Canadians would be funding the units to take part (rather than, say, trying to buy a NHL hockey team).

Of course values change over time, by the early 1930's only "Progressives" could be induced to volunteer for military action (_against_ government policy of that day, we are talking about the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War), and the military establishment was virtually non existent. You can try to picture Jack Layton or Elizabeth May leading armies of progressives into Darfur today...

The military is its own culture and has its own values out of a 5000 year old history of what works and what is needed to successfully accomplish the mission, so if soldiers and servicemembers in general don't seem to be in step with society it may be because what society values isn't fully in accord with what servicemembers value. So long as this is a source of creative tension, then there is nothing to fear.


----------



## pbi (15 Aug 2009)

What I enjoy about serving in the Canadian Army (and I suppose, by extension, the greater CF) is that I have never felt pressured to support any particular political party, social view, or religious faction. To tell the truth, I've generally found that none of these things matter much to most of us in uniform: we generally have the decency and professionalism to see them for what they are: personal matters. As long as we all serve  our country well, as loyally and capably as we can, I can't really see how much  difference these things make. Fortunately we don't serve in a country where there is pressure for soldiers to have fixed political or religious beliefs. Soldiers aligning themselves with a particular political party leads us to things like Nazi Germany. Soldiers, above all, should be political pragmatists.

Cheers


----------



## Nauticus (16 Aug 2009)

pbi said:
			
		

> What I enjoy about serving in the Canadian Army (and I suppose, by extension, the greater CF) is that I have never felt pressured to support any particular political party, social view, or religious faction. To tell the truth, I've generally found that none of these things matter much to most of us in uniform: we generally have the decency and professionalism to see them for what they are: personal matters. As long as we all serve  our country well, as loyally and capably as we can, I can't really see how much  difference these things make. Fortunately we don't serve in a country where there is pressure for soldiers to have fixed political or religious beliefs. Soldiers aligning themselves with a particular political party leads us to things like Nazi Germany. Soldiers, above all, should be political pragmatists.
> 
> Cheers


On the other hand, I believe that everyone is "allowed" to have their own beliefs. I'm left-wing myself, but I have no issue with supporting the government in power.


----------



## pbi (16 Aug 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> On the other hand, I believe that everyone is "allowed" to have their own beliefs. I'm left-wing myself, but I have no issue with supporting the government in power.



My point exactly. Recently I was in the US at a large Army base and a full Col mentioned in passing that "no US Army Officer would be caught dead admitting he listens to NPR (national public radio)". He is not the only US Army officer I have heard making similar comments. I found this a bit odd because I just can't recall any situation in which Canadian soldiers might judge each other by what radio or TV networks they patronize. To me, all politicians and all political views need to be regarded with healthy skepticism by soldiers (not to say disloyalty or subversion). In my view, giving yourself over wholly and without questionto any poltical party in this country is bound to lead to disappointment for a soldier.

Cheers


----------



## Roy Harding (16 Aug 2009)

pbi said:
			
		

> ... In my view, giving yourself over wholly and without questionto any poltical party in this country is bound to lead to disappointment for a soldier.
> 
> Cheers



It's a disappointment for civilians, too.

On the NPR thing - I've been an inveterate listener to CBC since I was a kid, I even purchased a Short Wave radio receiver so that I could listen to "As It Happens" while deployed (long time ago - before the internet, or the "in camp" radio feeds that are currently available).  Although I don't think I was ever "judged" for my listening preference, I have been looked askance for my choice.  Even here on Army.ca I _sometimes_ feel the need to justify my choice of radio stations.

So, while the attitude you describe is certainly more _SEVERE_ than attitudes here - I don't think it's a _completely_ unknown phenomenon.


----------



## GAP (16 Aug 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> On the NPR thing - I've been an inveterate listener to CBC since I was a kid, I even purchased a Short Wave radio receiver so that I could listen to "As It Happens" while deployed (long time ago - before the internet, or the "in camp" radio feeds that are currently available).  Although I don't think I was ever "judged" for my listening preference, I have been looked askance for my choice.  Even here on Army.ca I _sometimes_ feel the need to justify my choice of radio stations.
> 
> So, while the attitude you describe is certainly more _SEVERE_ than attitudes here - I don't think it's a _completely_ unknown phenomenon.



On reflection, I think you will find a goodly number of CF personnel are inherent news junkies and "As It Happens" fits that bill perfectly.....If CBC produced nothing else of merit, this programs has endured for decades simply because it's good....


----------



## Roy Harding (16 Aug 2009)

GAP said:
			
		

> On reflection, I think you will find a goodly number of CF personnel are inherent news junkies and "As It Happens" fits that bill perfectly.....If CBC produced nothing else of merit, this programs has endured for decades simply because it's good....



Yeah - but I listen to the REST of CBC One's offerings, too - don't always AGREE with their programs, but I listen.  That's where the "looking askance" part comes in.


----------



## Antoine (16 Aug 2009)

I am a CBC fan, Radio 1, Radio 2, French and English CBC but mostly the radio not fan of CBC TV.


----------



## Old Sweat (16 Aug 2009)

At the risk of being the only one in step, I stopped listening to the CBC during the 1998 ice storm. When we lost our power at about 1800 hours on Wednesday, the whatever of January, I turned on CBC Radio for news. Nothing, just the national schedule and this seemed to be the pattern whenever I checked. A local Ottawa commercial station dropped all its scheduled, revenue producing programming and ran virtually non-stop programming of the important things, like weather, Hydro's progress reconnecting service, the arrival of troops in the area, location of shelters, emergency medical news, etc. (At the end of the operation Rick Hillier, who had run things in Eastern Ontario, dropped in to the station to present it a plaque and certificate of appreciation.)

I must admit the network was on permanent C&P for quite some time. As It Happens had annoyed me with a long item about how the American military would not be able to beat the Iraquis in Gulf War 1 because the officers were incompetent and the troops were either drug addicts, criminals from the 'hood or inbred hillbillies. A few years later I had almost put my fist through our car radio when a commentator stated that the young Somali had been beaten to death because nobody in the military knew it was wrong to torture and kill prisoners. 

We used to listen to Radio 2, espcially on weekends, but CBC managed to make it unattractive to us. In our RV down on the St Lawrence we listen to the North Country NPR station, even if some of its stuff makes CBC look like Fox News Channel.


----------

