# Why are these freaks allowed to wear the uniform?



## reccecrewman (4 Mar 2006)

This has been eating at me all day, and I'm sure others here have encountered this type of person in the CF.  When I got to work this morning, the topic of discussion was the Taxi VBIED on the LAV III..  One moronic individual in the group turned around and says "Wow, it's getting pretty hairy over there - lot of sh!t goin down, I think I'll find a way to DAG red so I don't have to go" Arrrrrrrggghhh!!!  :brickwall:  I snapped and lost it on him. "You've been in the Army for nearly 5 years, taking money from Canadian taxpayers to do the job and now when it matters most, you want to stay here in Canada and let some other soldier go over and do YOUR job? Do you think this is welfare with guns? People like you sicken me and shouldn't be allowed to wear the uniform - you need to go home and take a long hard look in the mirror, and if a steady paycheck is the only reason you can come up with for being here, put your VR in most ricky tick and stop being a leech on Canadian taxpayers"  

This really has been eating at me that there are actually people like this in our Army.  These bloodsuckers need to be weeded out of our ranks ASAP.


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (4 Mar 2006)

If he ain't goin, i will  

In all seriousness, they're everywheres. Anyone can BS their way through an interview, so their motives for joining are really up in the air. In the end, if he'll cower back, fine. Better to have these types get their way and sit at home, and have someone who cares takes their place and actually get the job done, am I right?

Like i said, they're everywheres.


----------



## TCBF (4 Mar 2006)

You did him a favour by outing on him.  Now, he will either grow up or get worse.  Either way, he should get noticed.

Tell everyone in your unit the story.  They deserve to know.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Mar 2006)

Reccecrewman, yes...that is absolute BS!  :rage:  

We are way too small for what we're being called to do to have that kind of shite individual "on the team".  I'd rather see LMF discharges and go short than have that kind of a 'soldier' in my unit!

Duey


----------



## army outfitters (4 Mar 2006)

I can one up you on that one. I knew a guy who was in the reserves still as a weapons tech. Oka hit the fan and he kept going on about how he wanted to go and "kill some wagon burners" So the fatefull day comes and his unit calls him and wants to send him to Oka. He promptly quit the military and grew his hair out. There are lots of people like this and I think it is great you called him out in front of everybody. Good luck


----------



## Haggis (4 Mar 2006)

reccecrewman:

Arrange for your SSM to find out.  He'll love you for it.


----------



## Franko (4 Mar 2006)

Troops who DAG red prior to deployment in the Regiment are flagged for a few reasons and it's taken very seriously too boot.

His career is done if he tries it....and a posting to the school would follow soon after.

As for ratting him out to the SSM....don't bother. I'm sure he already knows...and noted it no doubt.

Troops like that are spotted pretty fast and their reputation destroyed....and it's the slippery slope to "shyteville" for them.

Things like that get around pretty quick in the RCD. If he still refuses without a damn good reason....

He'll be infront of the RSM.

If you did what you said you did.....Well done you.

Regards


----------



## reccecrewman (4 Mar 2006)

Well Franko, I guarentee you know the guy, and I can also guarentee you don't have a high opinion of him.....................


----------



## parkie (4 Mar 2006)

Hello all
 I sit here typing this for my father a vet ppcli 1st division 39-45,I can not print what he said on a public forum
 but whoever this guy is he wants him to know he is crapping on the souls of hundreds of his brothers that fell beside him overseas and thousands of others who fell for the call.
 one quote:the streak of yellow runs the length of him 
                                                                                                   thanks


----------



## painswessex (4 Mar 2006)

parkie said:
			
		

> Hello all
> I sit here typing this for my father a vet ppcli 1st division 39-45,I can not print what he said on a public forum
> but whoever this guy is he wants him to know he is crapping on the souls of hundreds of his brothers that fell beside him overseas and thousands of others who fell for the call.
> one quote:the streak of yellow runs the length of him
> thanks



Could not have said it better myself. I joined because it was the only thing i ever wanted to do and will do. I just wish that i could get out of the QM and go with the boys on a mission and help out.


----------



## parkie (4 Mar 2006)

painswessex said:
			
		

> Could not have said it better myself. I joined because it was the only thing i ever wanted to do and will do. I just wish that i could get out of the QM and go with the boys on a mission and help out.



He said to tell you it matters not what you do,everyone has a part to play what matters is that you do your part and do it well,i asked him once why he answered the call to duty during the war looking for some explaination like maybe there was no work or perhaps it just seemed like the right thing to do,I got set straight right off He sat straight up and you could see the soldier in him,and he bellered at me,Because that lunatic SOB was trying to take over the world and we had to stop him,I guess it's what honor is all about.


----------



## Jungle (4 Mar 2006)

Parkie, thanks for typing your Father's comments. And please thank your Father for his Service.
He is from a generation we will never forget.


----------



## orange.paint (4 Mar 2006)

Franko said:
			
		

> His career is done if he tries it....and a posting to the school would follow soon after.



Don't send it here....please. happy thoughts...happy thoughts...

Heres an idea im getting "the itch again" someone organise a 1 for 1 exchange me for him.


----------



## medicineman (4 Mar 2006)

Why are these freaks allowed to wear the uniform?

Me thinks it is because it is such a problem to get rid of them.

MM


----------



## ZipperHead (4 Mar 2006)

The sad thing is that this individual will probably get posted to the School. The Career Manager mentioned in his briefing this year that the Regt's want to take admin action against people who DAG Red twice, so rather than go through that paperwork, they will likley send him to Gagetown, where only about 1% of the School ever deploys (yes, soldiers from the School do deploy (on occasion) overseas), and this POS will never have to worry about DAG'ing red here (because if he does get tagged, there are literally 100's of people who would be willing to take his place). I would like to see the School do a DAG once a year, just to get rid of the chronically under-employed. Alas, I am living in a dream-world.

I hope the Regt doesn't take the path of least resistance, and they make him put up or shut up. I personally think that if this individual hasn't signed his IE yet, this is enough (IMO) for them to do everyone the favour and not sign off on it.

Al


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Mar 2006)

Al, doesn't the Army have to annually assess everyone's ability to DAG?  Or even the CF?  I ask because I know that everyone at 1 Wing units must complete a pers readiness state / pseudo-DAG annually...it may even be Air Force wide.  When I deployed, I only had to get a shadow file for the URS, tick the PSTC box, see the Padre with my better half and get the CO to sign the DAG form...that was it, everything else was already done.  I'll try and get more info about the program, unfortunately I can't for the life of me remember what the program is called  :-\ , but we had someone from HR(Mil) brief us in the Wing at Kingston last spring.  That kind of activity would hopefully pick the subject individual out well before a unit was actually tagged for any particular op.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## NCRCrow (4 Mar 2006)

We have whole ships of Red Daggers! and NATO knee & back

People with pre-written memos (just insert date).........


----------



## Franko (4 Mar 2006)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I hope the Regt doesn't take the path of least resistance, and they make him put up or shut up. I personally think that if this individual hasn't signed his IE yet, this is enough (IMO) for them to do everyone the favour and not sign off on it.



Knowing the CO and RSM as I have gotten to know them extremely well during the past tour....he's not long for a good punt.

They have very little time for chronic abusers of the system....and wait until Kevin Lee gets here.

The house cleaning is only beginning...and it's about time.

Regards


----------



## sdimock (4 Mar 2006)

Maybe what the Forces needs is a base up north, way up north, way up in the coldest most misserable rocky, wind blown place on earth north, with no television, gameboy, or even electrical power, then send these people there so they have time to consider their choice of careers.

That island we wanted to assert our sovereignty over? Say a couple 1000 km toward the north pole of there.


----------



## GINge! (4 Mar 2006)

Wow. Meanwhile there is a waiting list in my MOC to get on the tour. 

And the idea of posting your problems to the school is arse backwards. It boggles my mind that some units still have that mentality.


----------



## TCBF (4 Mar 2006)

Then we have the huggy gallery in the MFRC Mafia that states we can't take action such as only promoting or putting on course or posting those who DAG Green for 9/10 service (which would avoid people getting their TG3O3 dropped just to get ahead, then dagging Red again).

Tom


----------



## Cabose (4 Mar 2006)

People like that should be asked to turn there uniform in on the spot.  Also what is "DAG red" and "the school" its sounds ominous ;D


----------



## Franko (4 Mar 2006)

reccecrewman said:
			
		

> Well Franko, I guarentee you know the guy, and I can also guarentee you don't have a high opinion of him....



Thanks for the PM....yep, he's a waste of rations.

Regards


----------



## Armymedic (4 Mar 2006)

GINge! said:
			
		

> Wow. Meanwhile there is a waiting list in my MOC to get on the tour.
> 
> And the idea of posting your problems to the school is arse backwards. It boggles my mind that some units still have that mentality.



Arcs, Sir, stay within them...

In this context, the sad sack of shit would be sent to the Armour school where all he  would do is drive and maintain under strict supervision the armour vehicles which Sr NCOs, and Officers learn their trade as Crew Commanders.

A most appropriate spot.

Not at all the same as sending a POS medic, Nurse or HCA to our "Center of Excellence", to corrupt the training of our young.


----------



## medicineman (4 Mar 2006)

Armymedic said:
			
		

> Not at all the same as sending a POS medic, Nurse or HCA to our "Center of Excellence", to corrupt the training of our young.



Don`t get me going about who gets sent to the school - not alot of rhyme or reason it would seem.

MM


----------



## Thompson_JM (6 Mar 2006)

You know, I'll be honest, after whats happened this week, its not like I would be jumping up and down to go over to A-Stan. (Truthfully I think id be a little scared. okay maybe more then that..) But regardless of my personal feelings on the matter, I swore an Oath. meaning Reg or PRes, If i was called to go, I go. And when I go, I do the best damned job i can. I dont find some sorry excuse to weasel out of it....

as someone put in their Sig line here, "Id rather Die on my feet then live on my knees". 

what the heck were these guys thinking when they signed up anyways?

Regards

      Josh


----------



## medicineman (6 Mar 2006)

Dude if you're not scared even a little, I'd be worried about sending you over there...the guys that aren't a little worried or concerned are the ones that get people killed or worse.

Courage isn't doing something brave - it's taking control of your fear to do what is required of you when the time comes that you need to do it.

MM


----------



## orange.paint (6 Mar 2006)

Armymedic said:
			
		

> Arcs, Sir, stay within them...
> 
> In this context, the sad sack of crap would be sent to the Armour school where all he  would do is drive and maintain under strict supervision the armour vehicles which Sr NCOs, and Officers learn their trade as Crew Commanders.
> 
> ...



Stay withing arc eh?
Per's sent here to the school are far from under direct supervision.PT is sort of on your own,vehicle maintenance is more or less left to the dvr.DONT GET ME WRONG shitty people get sent here all the time,but don't use the sweeping generalisation on all pers here.

A most appropriate spot?
To be part of a young CC training.I beg to differ,Anyone on a cc course here can say how much easier it is on the student when they aren't babysitting their driver/crew.

Some people are here for a check in the box,a change,or to regenerate after tours (which is the plan right now to shuffle people through bringing fresh experience and sending fresh pers back to the regiment.

Here's an Idea ....release.These are the admin nightmare guys who get sent here and do nothing putting stress on guys who have been in the field for 9 months of the year already.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (6 Mar 2006)

I had something like that happen to me in the last month. These two bigger ladies I work with found out about the new PT test that they want everyone in the force to pass or at least go thru in the next month or two. The first thing they said to me was they have to find away of not doing it and sadly...they have. Good news one of them is posted to Gagetown(good news for me)!!! Sorry to Gagetown!!!


----------



## herseyjh (6 Mar 2006)

I have been looking at this thread for a while wondering if I should read it or not.  I did and now I am mad just like I knew I would be.  These type of people are both in the military and in the civi world.  With that being said I work in the civi world now and it is union environment I didn't realize such wasters could exist in the world... Hmm should I post this as it all negative?  Yes!


----------



## Sig_Des (6 Mar 2006)

You know, this is the kind of thing that disgusts me. If I was offered the chance to go on tour, I'd jump.

Does what's happening worry me, yes...but to shy away from it, when there's other people there. no.

I remember on BMQ/SQ, talking with the roomates one night, and buddy said, he'd never go on tour. I was flabbergasted....I couldn't believe someone would put on the uniform, and not be ready to accept the consequences and responsibilities associated with it.

People purposely dagging Red, IMHO, are a waste of skin....and in the end, you probably wouldn't want that kind of person out there with you.

As far as the new fitness testing requirement, I'm just wondering what's going to happen to some of the people in downtown Ottawa. I know everyone in my office is tested or on the way, and has the PT time to train for it, but some other places....


----------



## armyvern (6 Mar 2006)

Bobbyoreo said:
			
		

> I had something like that happen to me in the last month. These two bigger ladies I work with found out about the new PT test that they want everyone in the force to pass or at least go thru in the next month or two. The first thing they said to me was they have to find away of not doing it and sadly...they have. Good news one of them is posted to Gagetown(good news for me)!!! Sorry to Gagetown!!!


Well...she'll be doing it here....


----------



## Bobbyoreo (6 Mar 2006)

I hope so.....might get rid of some extra weight...not her the army!!!


----------



## mover1 (6 Mar 2006)

You know. This is everyones fault......

Its your fault for not telling your buddy to put the beer or the chocolate bar down and telling him/her to go to the gym.

Its the bosses fault for not enforcing the rules and letting things slide for fear of upsetting that person.

Its the systems fault for letting these people (the lower standards) to join in the first place.

Its the governments fault for giving everyone the right to protest every decision that is not made in their favor...

Esprit de Corps and Physical fitness are two factors that can be settled at the lowest level in the forces. Its up to each and everyone of us to develop that team spirit and encourage people to be the best. Don't blame the individuals for being fat and lazy with no pride. 

Sometimes we just have to beat it into people.
Or have the collective scroties to give out punishment or terminate their services.. :blotto:


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Mar 2006)

mover1 said:
			
		

> You know. This is everyones fault......
> 
> Its your fault for not telling your buddy to put the beer or the chocolate bar down and telling him/her to go to the gym.



Are you talking about personal appearance or physical fitness with this comment?

Will it be possible for a beer-bellied dude to pass the PT test?  I'm guessing it is.

Image is not the same as combat capability....not that I'd be heartbroken to see nothing but slender people in uniform; I worked hard to lose a bunch of weight last year and felt quite pleased with myself, and my eating habits have remained healthy.  But the real world doesn't work that way - I noticed some pudgy soldiers on that CTV report last night, and the more historical photos I pore through, I see that the occasional combat soldier in the wars was not exactly Mia Farrow in proportions either.


----------



## reccecrewman (6 Mar 2006)

> Courage isn't doing something brave - it's taking control of your fear to do what is required of you when the time comes that you need to do it.



This quote from medicineman reminded me of a quote I read somewhere from a WWI infantry vet.  "Courage is not something that exceptional and brave men have........ We are all cowards at heart, but the courage comes through when the bullets start to fly because the fear of being branded a coward and letting down our brothers in arms far supercedes our fear of death"

Sadly, I can't remember the name to give credit - just know it came from a WWI Infanteer.


----------



## TCBF (6 Mar 2006)

".. I see that the occasional combat soldier in the wars was not exactly Mia Farrow in proportions either."

- I'm more the Raquel Welch type, myself.

 ;D

Tom


----------



## mover1 (7 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Are you talking about personal appearance or physical fitness with this comment?
> 
> Will it be possible for a beer-bellied dude to pass the PT test?  I'm guessing it is.


you read too much into the statement. Not everyone is G.I. Joe. 

I am talking about the guy/gal who cannot pass the test. But nothing is done to him. Or the weenie who has been able to not do his test for years because he A. Played the system
                                                                       B. knows the peri staff and gets it written off
                                                                       C. is on category after category whenever thier time is up.

I have the belly too. I pass the test. Yet I have young soldiers here pushing the 300 lb envilope who hold up the PT test because they are too busy puking between excercises. 
Here we have taken everyone aside explained to them the career implications, explained our trade size and the impacts of having people who are undeployable. 
We make sure our troops are at PT and if they cannot make it, then we make sure there is ample time during the day to go.


TCBF since when did you grow man boobs?


----------



## RCD (9 Mar 2006)

He must be an agent for the NDP


----------



## beentheredonethat (16 Mar 2006)

this is a topic that burns me. i have served overseas on several tours. cyprus 1986, africa 2001, camp mirage 2002(oops sorry that secret place that no one in the world knows we're there) and afghanistan 2004. not to say i wasn't a little concerned going over or a little bruised coming back but we are here to do a job. that job includes going to places that  are unsafe. i have been damaged slightly but  will go again when i am called upon. these red daggin losers should get the hell out. we are too few and deploy too much to have useless resources as such in uniform. either get on the plane or get lost.


----------



## highlandranger (16 Mar 2006)

At 19, I sat in the recruiting office. My father had given me a quote that his father (a CDN WWII Vet) told him before enlistment. " Once you sign, prepare to serve wherever you may be needed." This weighed on me for awhile. After looking at the paper for about a minute, I signed into the Canadian Army. This lad has been given the chance to defend the rights and freedoms of Canada and her allies. If not to Afghanistan, then ship him to Club Ed.


----------



## Spr.Earl (16 Mar 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> ".. I see that the occasional combat soldier in the wars was not exactly Mia Farrow in proportions either."
> 
> - I'm more the Raquel Welch type, myself.
> 
> ...


Oooh you have long hair and good rack 

I have read all the posts and can't believe the firts one.Here's me and other Militia plug's I know who have worked our arse's off to get selected to go overseas and now this dip stick say's this infront of his pears.

DISGUSTING!!!

I have a buddy at C.I.A. right now who is 53,he told me he wanted to go,so over a 6 month period and as he was on work up's I told him what to expect,he got in shape,did his combat team assult's etc. and he made it with a lot of hard work.Yes it's harder for us Militia as we must take a full year away from our families and work to serve our Country and we have this dip stick trying to dodge!
Punt the oxygen thief! 

If I met the above said Gent I would take him out back and we would have a private discussion!


----------



## medicineman (16 Mar 2006)

I say get them on a breach of contract, give them the old kiss off with extreme predjudice, oh and make them pay back their salaries for the time already served  ;D.  Make them think twice about trying to dodge things.

MM


----------



## ZipperHead (16 Mar 2006)

I'm loath to blame the "system" for people who can't accept the responsibilities that they have taken on, be they at work, in society or wherever, but: the system has become such that rather than "They" (I capitalized it because they're freakin' huge!!) will ASK people if they WANT to: deploy overseas ("Nah, I got tickets to NASCAR around that time frame. Can't be bothered...."), be posted ("Well, I've really grown attached to the local Public Radio station..... Can I stay here, huh, pleeeeaaaaaseeeee?!?"), do their job ("I'd rather be fishing..... can I take the afternoon off instead of doing what I get paid good money to do?"). Whatever happened to telling someone to do something, they do it (with or without a smile on their face) and they will come back and ask for more. Oh yeah. We have more social workers per base than pay clerks, and the Ombudsman is just a speed-dial away to make the bad man stop..... :crybaby:

The chronically pathetic have to be rooted out, shamed into work (or be released), or deported (even if they were born here) to an Al-Qaeda R&R center to be comfort-boys or -girls for them. Vaseline will definitely be spiked with sand.....and glass....and....

Al


----------



## Pte.Shrubb (19 Mar 2006)

What a tool...if hes not willing to do his job he needs to get out of the forces, and again if hes not willing to go overseas i would take his space


----------



## theseeker (19 Mar 2006)

Sh0rtbUs said:
			
		

> If he ain't goin, i will
> 
> In all seriousness, they're everywheres. Anyone can BS their way through an interview, so their motives for joining are really up in the air. In the end, if he'll cower back, fine. Better to have these types get their way and sit at home, and have someone who cares takes their place and actually get the job done, am I right?
> 
> Like i said, they're everywheres.



i agree get them out now before you are in a sitution and they trun and run 

"life is easily trusted to the hands of a friend and easily lost off the backs of runners" theseeker


----------



## Missybee (20 Mar 2006)

:tank: Sorry for my lack of knowledge, but I was wondering what the acronyms mean---( if "acronyms" is the right word!)--for DAG red? And for MQ?

Thanks!


----------



## mechanic_chick (20 Mar 2006)

It's funny... that theres people IN the forces who dont want to be there..

Then theres people like me whos willing to do the job and do it well and want to go over.... and it takes forever to get in..

Makes no sense to me..

And explain to me how these woman who didnt even want to do their PT test even got in , in the first place???

The army standards have dropped incredibly , it makes me mad.. they let anyone in.. and make the people who are incredibly willing .. wait.


----------



## combat_medic (20 Mar 2006)

Mechanic_chick

Yes, there are people who are in who no longer want to be there, and people who want to get in that can't. However, it's pretty presumptuous of you to make sweeping statements like "they let anyone in" and that "army standards have dropped incredibly", especially considering you aren't even in yet.

And wait, if their standards are so low, and they will let anyone in, what are you saying about yourself when you can't get in?


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Mar 2006)

Missybee said:
			
		

> :tank: Sorry for my lack of knowledge, but I was wondering what the acronyms mean---( if "acronyms" is the right word!)--for DAG red? And for MQ?
> 
> Thanks!



DAG = departure assistance group.  It's the organization at a base or wing that assists members preparing for a deployment prior to the actualy deployment departure.  We sometimes mis-use it as a verb to indicate the process of preparing to deploy.  "Green" means everything is good to go and a member is ready to deploy, "Yellow" means there is something keeping the member from deploying but that it wan be worked out/remedied and permit subsequent change of status to "Green".  "Red" means there is a showstopper that will keep the member from deploying (failing a PT test, having a family issue that requires the member to stay at home, etc...)

MQ is Married Quarters, the housing for families on military bases.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## FateumetMeum (20 Mar 2006)

Glad you said something.
5 years ago the member had to swear to do such a thing in order to get that paycheck.
But to be honest I don't want him on my 6 anywhere, he should be reported as a danger to his platoon and his country.
Held back for pysch evaluation and spit home wrapped in his 5 year pension donation check.

YOU GO ... I GO!
our fate is our own


----------



## shadow (22 Mar 2006)

This is a topic that really irks me as well.  After 9/11, I couldn't believe the number of people who put in their releases!!  It was incredible.  They said "when I joined the army I never thought we would go to war".
I was like, "what did you think we are here for?"
I was in Bosnia in 2000.  I asked for an extension on my tour.  I spent a year and a half back in Canada, begging to sign a waiver and go to Afghanistan.  I ended up going to some imaginary support base somewhere near Afghanistan   in 2002/2003.  I would have been on another tour if I didn't accept UTPNCM.  I graduate in less than two months and be sure I'll be putting my name in right away to deploy.  That is my job.  If I couldn't deploy, I wouldn't be a soldier.
Some people signed up for the military because it's a guaranteed job with benefits (usually better than they can get on civvie street) and as a [historically] peacekeeping country the chances of spending your career on a base were pretty good.
It's sad really.
Shadow


----------



## MOOXE (23 Mar 2006)

People join the military for a very wide variety of reasons, theres too many to even start contemplating about. Its better to just accept it than reject it cause these people are here to stay. Many currently serving members do have valid reasons to keep them back in Canada also, this isnt all cut and dry blood and guts do or die stuff were talking about. For those people that keep complaining the standards have dropped reference PT, you might as well get over that whining to. The problem with standards is rooted from recruitment, the problem with recruitment is rooted from the lower quality of life the Military has endured over years of cutbacks from the government. Go for the head of the snake, not the tail, that only makes bad behind thier back coffee break talk.

IMO this thread reeks of dissent and sedition which goes against conformity. Before anyone rebuts that, remember conformity doesnt just mean 1 single standard.


----------



## ZipperHead (23 Mar 2006)

MOOXE said:
			
		

> People join the military for a very wide variety of reasons, theres too many to even start contemplating about. Its better to just accept it than reject it cause these people are here to stay. Many currently serving members do have valid reasons to keep them back in Canada also, this isnt all cut and dry blood and guts do or die stuff were talking about. For those people that keep complaining the standards have dropped reference PT, you might as well get over that whining to. The problem with standards is rooted from recruitment, the problem with recruitment is rooted from the lower quality of life the Military has endured over years of cutbacks from the government. Go for the head of the snake, not the tail, that only makes bad behind thier back coffee break talk.
> 
> IMO this thread reeks of dissent and sedition which goes against conformity. Before anyone rebuts that, remember conformity doesnt just mean 1 single standard.



Yeaaaahhhhhhhh...... OOOOOKKKKKKK (avert your eyes children, HE can take many forms.......)

Al


----------



## mitch83 (23 Mar 2006)

Well I have a hard time believing any DRAGOON would say that not our style, no one i know or would associate with but again hard to believe a DRAGOON would act like this.


----------



## pbi (24 Mar 2006)

shadow said:
			
		

> This is a topic that really irks me as well.  After 9/11, I couldn't believe the number of people who put in their releases!!  It was incredible.  They said "when I joined the army I never thought we would go to war".
> I was like, "what did you think we are here for?"...
> 
> Some people signed up for the military because it's a guaranteed job with benefits (usually better than they can get on civvie street) and as a [historically] peacekeeping country the chances of spending your career on a base were pretty good.
> ...



I think its an occupational hazard in any force that recruits the wrong way, then does little to reinforce the true meaning of military service. You need look no  farther than the reactions of many US Army and ARNG/Res soldiers (and their families) when the US got into the First Gulf War. I recall reading about desertions, attempts to avoid reserve call-up, and expressions of foolish (but familiar...) comments such as "I just joined the Army to be a truck driver". The Jessica Lynch incident displayed this attitude, both from serving members as well as from families of some of the soldiers in the Maintenance Company that was hit.

If you tell people it's a job, and treat it like its just a job, and let people act like that for a ten or twenty year career, don't be surprised that you get negative reactions when the bell finally goes.

Cheers.


----------



## shadow (24 Mar 2006)

pbi said:
			
		

> I think its an occupational hazard in any force that recruits the wrong way, then does little to reinforce the true meaning of military service. You need look no  farther than the reactions of many US Army and ARNG/Res soldiers (and their families) when the US got into the First Gulf War. I recall reading about desertions, attempts to avoid reserve call-up, and expressions of foolish (but familiar...) comments such as "I just joined the Army to be a truck driver". The Jessica Lynch incident displayed this attitude, both from serving members as well as from families of some of the soldiers in the Maintenance Company that was hit.
> 
> If you tell people it's a job, and treat it like its just a job, and let people act like that for a ten or twenty year career, don't be surprised that you get negative reactions when the bell finally goes.
> 
> Cheers.



It's true...  good points.  We can't really put the blame soley on them.  How many people went into the recruiting office and were told that joining the infantry was "just like camping"?  I was 17 years old and said cooool!!!!  Then I signed up for the militia.


----------



## fat kid (25 Mar 2006)

Well done the Military should have more people like you


----------



## Lance Wiebe (25 Mar 2006)

This problem has been around for a while.  I was posted to Germany (RCD), and was back in Canada on course when Ronald Reagon was elected president.  I remarked to one of my coursemates "One way or another, this means a showdown with the USSR.  We may be putting our training to use soon."

He looked at me, all bug-eyed, and within a week had put in a request to LOTEP to another trade, and putting in a VW from the course.

I was floored.  I could not figure out why a guy would join the army, and not be mentally prepared to go to war.  Actually, it still puzzles me. It could be the fact that the US and Cdn recruiting ads make lots of mentions of "adventure" and show clips of fun things to do, without ever talking about getting placed in a location where there is someone doing his very best to kill you.  It could be many things, but I'm thinking that something has to change within our recruiting and BQ...

I wonder if administrative actions can be placed on people consistently dagging red.  Place them on C & P, or whatever...

And having deadweight posted from the Units to the School(s) is taking the easy way out!  The School is not, and can't be, a dumping ground.  The School, and MTSC, and all of the range controls have enough people with administrative or career problems.  To be fair, there are many (single parents and such) who get posted out of Units because of legitimate administrative problems, but too many are posted there because they should be released, and the Unit took the easy way out.

And I know that many of us can think of a few names........


----------



## Recce41 (28 Mar 2006)

Reccecrewman
 Send me his name, I never have a problem about phoning back to the Regt. Well for now, don't know if I'm CSOR bound this yr (fingers crossed), or back to the Regt next. I enjoy having soldiers like that. A Duty here, a Duty there. Soon he ether growsup or quits. As for posting to the school, it would be another was of rations here. 

 :evil: :tank:


----------



## Franko (28 Mar 2006)

:tsktsk:

Not so fast....he's mine first.    

I know who he is....he'll be sorted out upon my return if he hasn't already.

Regards


----------



## Recce41 (28 Mar 2006)

FRANKO
 WOs always get first shot.


----------



## Franko (28 Mar 2006)

Ahhh yes they do....but first the lowest form of heat is applied.

Then if that fails....feed them to the troop WO    

Regards


----------



## ccdec (28 Mar 2006)

Lance Wiebe said:
			
		

> This problem has been around for a while.  I was posted to Germany (RCD), and was back in Canada on course when Ronald Reagon was elected president.  I remarked to one of my coursemates "One way or another, this means a showdown with the USSR.  We may be putting our training to use soon."
> 
> He looked at me, all bug-eyed, and within a week had put in a request to LOTEP to another trade, and putting in a VW from the course.
> 
> ...


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (3 Apr 2006)

Well, there are people in uniform, in all services, that are missing something that we had pounded into our heads in Cornwallis in '89;  "Learn to Serve"...or they have learned to serve "themselves".  I think "careerism" is one of the terms used these days.

As for the Reg Frce soldiers who are trying to DAG red, shoudn't the same apply to Reserves in full time positions who get whiney when they have to do anything as well?  Last summer, we had an ex-Reg Frce Snr NCO (Navy) who threatened to "put in his 30 days" if he got sent to ARCON...as EXCON on Base no less!  And guess what?  They didn't send him!  (They being Reg Frce senoir offcr).  We couldn't believe it.  I looked at a well-respected Inf MWO in our HQ and said "well Sgt-Mjr, I guess thats the standard."  Pathetic.

Same as the PT test.  I hear people whining about the new policy of min Expres-test every year...umm, its not a new policy folks...just actually being enforced now.  You want to see a collection of PT misfits?  Come to the Stadacona gym in Halifax any day of the week and see all the butterballs on remedial PT...playing indoor soccer and looking like they are going to die.  

"It" (IT being big green machine, and the people in it) has let some people become weak, let their dedication waver, let their personal discipline go to pot.   Supervisors are SUPPOSED to make sure their people are up to snuff.  There is supposed to be ramifications for not passing DAGs, PT tests, etc etc.  There is a system.  It a matter of if its employed.  Some people look for the easy way out so they don't have to do all the paperwork on their people that are below standard.  That is part of the problem too.

Reg or Res force, servicemembers should be held to the standards across the board, and when it comes down to it, who wants someone that is not dedicated or weak in character and conviction in their foxhole or turret?  Not me.  No thanks.

Now to go out on a limb and compare to a movie, does anyone remember Pte Blithe from Band of Brothers?  Eventually, he got himself sorted out.  Maybe, the "Pte Blithe's" in the CF will sort themselves out, or get out.  

I just try to make sure that my own troops aren't "Pte Blithe's".  And myself.

Give me a spot on the plane to A-Stan, and I am there.  Not to proud either, you need a Res Snr NCO to be part of Admin Tp, slingin' jerry cans?  Done.  Everyone has a part.  Step up and do it.  Thats what counts in the end.

"Learn To Serve"


----------



## ArmyRick (3 Apr 2006)

Sad, just plain old sad. How could one look into a mirror and say "I am a soldier" is beyond me if they are one of these sh*tpumps...


----------



## Bartok5 (3 Apr 2006)

17th Recce Sgt said:
			
		

> Well, there are people in uniform, in all services, that are missing something that we had pounded into our heads in Cornwallis in '89;  "Learn to Serve"...
> 
> Supervisors are SUPPOSED to make sure their people are up to snuff.  There is supposed to be ramifications for not passing DAGs, PT tests, etc etc.  There is a system.
> 
> ...



17th Recce Sgt,

Please excuse my abbreviation of your former post.  I simply wanted to encapsulate the elements that struck me as being absolutely pertinent to the current business of soldiering.  The CF is not a "McJobs" organization.  We have a national imperative to satisfy foreign policy objectives.  More often than not these days, we must achieve that mandate by "doing the business" in the field.  Anyone who joined the CF under false pretences with different expectations is more than welcome to seek alternate employment.

Everyone currently serving at the pointy end of Canadian foreign policy deserves our utmost respect.  But more importantly, they deserve our collective readiness to step up to the plate in their place if required.  Reg F or Res F, we have a duty to be prepared to cover them off.

Anyone who joined under misguided pretenses is now faced with the "put up or shut up" connundrum.  Those who mistakenly joined the CF thinking that they "would never go to war" now need to seriously reconsider their motives and current service.  If the response is that the ongoing campaign is something they didn't "sign up for", then those people wearing the uniform under false pretences need to do us all a favour and quit.  Now.  Because their personal "services" are no longer required.  The rest of us are busy fighting a war, and "dead weight" is counter-productive.

You are correct in stating that personnel in leadership positions at all levels need to pony up and do their jobs - especially where it concerns initiating administrative action against unsuitable subordinates who can't or won't deploy.  We have collectively accepted such "dead weight" for far too long, under the self-delusional guise that they fulfill otherwise essential functions when employed in adminstrative positions.  Bull-crap.  Anyone in uniform who refuses to deploy is a waste of rations.  It is well past time for them to go.  There ought to be no such thing as a "non-deployable" position. 

Having said that, our injured soldiers who are unable (as opposed to unwilling) to deploy are a different case deserving of due consideration and compensation.  We have permanently injured soldiers who can continue to serve in useful functions that take full advantage of their professional training and experience.  And where those circumstances occur, we ought to take full advantage.

But when it comes to the so-called "civvies in uniform" that serving soldiers all know and universally despise?  They ought to be shite-canned ASAP with no mercy.  Time to cull the herd.....  

Just my personal thoughts,


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (3 Apr 2006)

Agreed.  100%.  

Very frustrating to hear people trying to duck and cover when there are those of us asking for tours that they don't have place for us to go on... 

 :threat:


----------



## Michael Dorosh (3 Apr 2006)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Sad, just plain old sad. How could one look into a mirror and say "I am a soldier" is beyond me if they are one of these sh*tpumps...



What makes you think they ever aspired to calling themselves that? They clearly joined the army with no intention of being soldiers. Oxymoron? Not really. Certainly a different point of view. But don't judge them the way you would judge yourself, they obviously have clearly different values (or lack of same).


----------



## aesop081 (3 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> What makes you think they ever aspired to calling themselves that? They clearly joined the army with no intention of being soldiers. Oxymoron? Not really. Certainly a different point of view. But don't judge them the way you would judge yourself, they obviously have clearly different values (or lack of same).



Micheal, you make a good point about differing values.  But would joining the military and refusing to deploy because "this isnt what i signed up for" be the same as someone joining a fire department and, when the alarm bell sounds, refusing to go saying "fighting fires is not what i signed up for " ?


----------



## 17thRecceSgt (3 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> What makes you think they ever aspired to calling themselves that? They clearly joined the army with no intention of being soldiers. Oxymoron? Not really. Certainly a different point of view. But don't judge them the way you would judge yourself, they obviously have clearly different values (or lack of same).



I am not sure I agree totally with you on this one MD...here's why.  What exactly do the good citizens of Canada think they are doing when the swear the Oath?  I knew what I was doing...aand where it could lead, oddly enough, by a book I had read before Basic called "Urgent Fury", a book on the 82nd AB up to the Grenada operation.  It eluded to what being "in the service" was all about in the opening...I have never heard it put any way better since that day in 1989.  Almost 17 years later, the same conviction is there, but I base that on one premise;  I remember hearing "we are here to defend democracy, not practice it!!!!" (with some other words added for humour  ;D) from an old RSM that had been with the Blackwatch when they disbanded.

I would suggest that, these people, from the get-go, were more dedicated to themselves than to the Service.  Its a "job" to them, vice a "lifestyle" for those who try to be dedicated professionals.  They have no more commitment to the country, its citizens, and comrades -in-arms than the Walmart Greeters have for each other.   

Again...

"Learn to Serve".  I got that point early in Basic...fortunately it never escaped me...unfortunately...some folks missed it.   :-\


----------



## ZipperHead (3 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> What makes you think they ever aspired to calling themselves that? They clearly joined the army with no intention of being soldiers. Oxymoron? Not really. Certainly a different point of view. But don't judge them the way you would judge yourself, they obviously have clearly different values (or lack of same).



The fact that a) I am beginning to understand Michael, and b) I am defending him, disturbs me on soooooo many levels, but I will actually do so: his point (as I understand it) is that "these people" (being the crybabies who don't wanna play soldier when the going gets rough) never planned on being soldiers. They just planned on joing the military and getting a steady paycheck. The rest of us (I would assume everyone reading this post falls into this category) joined the military knowing full well that we would pick up the rucksack and march off to war if that was expected of us. There is a difference. I refer to the other type of people as "civvies in uniform". They may look like us, but they certainly *aren't* like us. 

I think that when somebody like that is "outed", they should be forced to do a march of shame between 2 ranks of soldiers facing each other, and be Tasered by each soldier they pass. And EVERY soldier on the Base/Wing/Ship gets to take part. I don't think the novelty of doing this to someone would ever wear off for me. Make it a Friday afternoon activity, with beer and hamburgers (though the smell of burnt flesh may be a bit much for rookies to this event).

Al


----------



## George Wallace (3 Apr 2006)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I think that when somebody like that is "outed", they should be forced to do a march of shame between 2 ranks of soldiers facing each other, and be Tasered by each soldier they pass. And EVERY soldier on the Base/Wing/Ship gets to take part. I don't think the novelty of doing this to someone would ever wear off for me. Make it a Friday afternoon activity, with beer and hamburgers (though the smell of burnt flesh may be a bit much for rookies to this event).
> 
> Al


Yeah!

We can have a Bde Pde and have their Regt'l Buttons and accoutraments, their awards and decorations, and their rank torn off their uniforms.......then the March of Shame to the front gate......it has the makings of a movie or TV Series, don't you think?  Oh!  Sorry!  I am dating myself.  Chuck Connors in "The Rifleman".   ;D


----------



## ArmyRick (3 Apr 2006)

Which of the following best describes service in the Army .... 
(A) A 9 to 5 job;
(B) A welfare system with a uniform;
(C) A optional deployment service; or
(D) None of the above

If you need to be told the correct answer, please apply for a release from the CF immediately.


----------



## Kat Stevens (3 Apr 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Yeah!
> 
> We can have a Bde Pde and have their Regt'l Buttons and accoutraments, their awards and decorations, and their rank torn off their uniforms.......then the March of Shame to the front gate......it has the makings of a movie or TV Series, don't you think?  Oh!  Sorry!  I am dating myself.  Chuck Connors in "The Rifleman".   ;D


The show was called "Branded", it starred Chuck Connors as a disgraced cavalry officer..... After The Rifleman met his demise. The coolest part was the opening credits, when he was stripped of his rank, sword broken and returned, and drummed out.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Apr 2006)

Branded....it was.   :-[


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Apr 2006)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> The show was called "Branded", it starred Chuck Connors as a disgraced cavalry officer..... After The Rifleman met his demise. The coolest part was the opening credits, when he was stripped of his rank, *sword broken and returned*, and drummed out.



Actually his boss broke it in half and threw it out the gate. Connors walked out, and they closed the gate behind him. He picked up the top half of the sword and walked away. Later he sharpened what remained, and it was used in many episodes as a weapon. IIRC. 

Shit, but I can't remember what I did last week!!! :blotto:


----------



## George Wallace (3 Apr 2006)

Just a little cross-referencing here, but this is an example of what we are talking about:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37604/post-361292.html#msg361292


----------



## orange.paint (3 Apr 2006)

There are a lot of dragoons on this website,how about a name to fit this story?


----------



## Franko (3 Apr 2006)

PM inbound....you'll want to gouge out yer eyes though.

Regards


----------

