# Some new JTF2 Pics



## scm77 (7 Dec 2004)

Some interesting pictures of JTF2 both in training and operating in Afghanistan.

They're are big so 56kers beware.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=32128


----------



## Sheerin (7 Dec 2004)

They should really get those whiteheads looked at...

okay i couldn't resist.


----------



## Big Foot (7 Dec 2004)

Question: Why are they wearing american combats in the second pic from the bottom?


----------



## MikeM (7 Dec 2004)

Nice pics!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (7 Dec 2004)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> Question: Why are they wearing american combats in the second pic from the bottom?



Perhaps to blend in with a unit they are currently operating with...


----------



## Q.Y. Ranger (7 Dec 2004)

Before CADPAT was issued, JTF-2 use to where American DEU's, i guess they figured that the US pattern worked better then OD. I dont blame them. 

Rangers Lead The Way!


----------



## GerryCan (7 Dec 2004)

American DEU's? Are you quite sure about that?


----------



## MikeM (7 Dec 2004)

Do you mean BDU's or DEUs...

BDU = Battle Dress Uniform.


----------



## Q.Y. Ranger (7 Dec 2004)

O yes...sorry...i meant BDU's.


----------



## McG (7 Dec 2004)

Q.Y. Ranger said:
			
		

> Before CADPAT was issued, JTF-2 use to where American DEU's, i guess they figured that the US pattern worked better then OD.





			
				Q.Y. Ranger said:
			
		

> O yes...sorry...i meant BDU's.


Are you certain of that?  And do you know that the pictures were taken before CADPAT?  Could there be some other operational/training reason?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Dec 2004)

Our Recce boys used to wear British Smock tops prior to the CADPAT.  LCF thing I think.  Damn pretty boys
Couldn't find a handle on a coffee cup.


----------



## Big Foot (7 Dec 2004)

Judging by the fact that many of the pics show guys in OD, i'd assume they were taken prior to the introduction of CADPAT. And I guess crappy camo is better than no camo at all.


----------



## Acorn (7 Dec 2004)

Q.Y. Ranger said:
			
		

> Before CADPAT was issued, JTF-2 use to where American DEU's, i guess they figured that the US pattern worked better then OD. I dont blame them.



Really?
 (I know you meant BDUs, but the question stands)
Acorn


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Dec 2004)

"Before CADPAT was issued, JTF-2 use to where American DEU's, i guess they figured that the US pattern worked better then OD. I dont blame them."

Based on what information?

"Rangers Lead The Way"=American and should be left to them along with "hooah"


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

Q.Y. Ranger said:
			
		

> Before CADPAT was issued, JTF-2 use to where American DEU's, i guess they figured that the US pattern worked better then OD. I dont blame them.



Stay in your lane cadet.



			
				CFL said:
			
		

> "Rangers Lead The Way"=American and should be left to them



Yup



> along with "whoaa"



Silly, it's "Hooah"!

Whoaa sounds like something the Dukes of Hazzard would say.


----------



## ibucephalus (8 Dec 2004)

Well, the fellow on the left is clearly wearing a CadPat shirt or jacket underneath his winter whites. You can see it peeking out of his collar. I give them a C- for camo effort. The mix of 3 or 4 patterns in the same outfit is a bit gauche. And they've made little effort to match their rifles to the environment. As well, the wearing of only the white top in an environment clearly needing bottoms as well smacks of laziness.

Perhaps the American woodland trousers their wearing are goretex?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (8 Dec 2004)

I suppose you could do better? Looks like they took a break and are relaxing a bit, does not speak of laziness to me.

Then again its easy to be critical when there is nothing in your profile....  :


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (8 Dec 2004)

Infanteer you know what I meant.


----------



## ibucephalus (8 Dec 2004)

Sir,

Well, I don't wanna argue with the DS , but whether I can do better or not isn't relevant in regards to the _truth_ of my statement. Likewise, if someone's profile states "secret super-commando" or "member of Canada's Elite Forces", does it make what they say _more_ true? No. We have to consider statements on their own merits.

When considering whether my statements are true, we should look at the photo and  compare their attempts at personal camouflage with CF doctrine as layed out in BGL-392-009/FP-001 - Fieldcraft, available online from the Army Electronic Library in PDF format. BGL-364-001/FP-001 - Land Force Counter-Surveillance is another very useful text on this subject. 

While the fellows are clearly on exercise (why else would they be posing for photos?), it behooves them to practice their fieldcraft skills at every available opportunity as their lives will likely depend on it. Like an imagery analyst once told me, "I'll trust my eyes before I trust other sources", and my eyes tell me these two are less camouflaged than they could be. 

Regards,

ibucephalus


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

I am sure the JTF guys appreciate tactical advice and PAM references....

How is that everytime someone posts a random picture of some Spec Ops character, these boards abound with analysis of "what they're wearing" and "why they're doing that".   It's like some stupid glamour magazine.



			
				CFL said:
			
		

> Infanteer you know what I meant.



Yeh, I was just giving you a hard time.   You're lucky it was me and not one of the "Rangers" on this site!

Hoohah!


----------



## ibucephalus (8 Dec 2004)

> It's like some stupid glamour magazine.



Well, that is  the joke I was making with my original post (calling his wearing of multiple cam patterns "a bit gauche") but it was taken rather seriously, so I offered a serious response. No offense was meant gents. Can I stand everyone a round in the virtual mess? 

PS why are there no beer emoticons?


----------



## scm77 (8 Dec 2004)

There you go.


----------



## Acorn (8 Dec 2004)

I'm just wondering which end of Alexander's horse is talking   ;D.   :dontpanic:

Acorn


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (8 Dec 2004)

what's a "hourse"?


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

It's the Macedonian word for Horse....


----------



## Acorn (8 Dec 2004)

"Hourse, of course" is bad spelling and worse proof reading. Not bad pronunciation though, eh?

Acorn


----------



## Infanteer (8 Dec 2004)

Now I'm just trying to find the thread where you dinged me for a spelling mistake.... :warstory:


----------



## KevinB (8 Dec 2004)

ibucephalus said:
			
		

> , it behooves them to practice their fieldcraft skills at every available opportunity as their lives will likely depend on it.



 :

Buy a bigger hat kid.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (9 Dec 2004)

A horse is a hourse, of course, of course...  

Nice to see one of them has a SOG seal pup...kinda makes me feel like less of a twink for getting one a few years ago.

Funny thing though...I'd swear that one of the lads in those photos is wearing a ball cap that looks the spitting image of one from that lot of JTF Haiti from awhile ago. Same cap = same guy? 

Hmm...I think I may have carved out a new niche in the Branch...Fashion Intelligence! 

 :dontpanic:
J.M.


----------



## ibucephalus (9 Dec 2004)

> Buy a bigger hat kid.



I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean I shouldn't presume to offer advice to a _photo_ of an "operator"? 

Regardless, I was introduced to you this summer at the NSCC, very briefly. We are both formerly of the same reserve unit.


----------



## Slim (9 Dec 2004)

ibucephalus said:
			
		

> > Buy a bigger hat kid.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The Chap is perhaps a little more oriented towards Revolutionary Etiquette though. I'm all for the spreading of Anarcho-dandyist writing. 

The photos from the Chap's "Civilize the City" protest are most entertaining (at the bottom of the page). I believe they've made it an annual event.

Call me crazy Mr Phalus but somehow, being the revolutionary guy you are (or pretend to be) I don't really see a future for you here amoung professional soldiers...

Of course that s just me and I could be wrong... :

Slim

PS-Kev...You have my sympathy!


----------



## ibucephalus (9 Dec 2004)

> Of course that s just me and I could be wrong...



Sir,

But I'm the most _notorious_ (anarcho)dandy in the CF. You don't mean to suggest that being well dressed somehow _precludes_ someone being a "professional soldier"?



> PS-Kev...You have my sympathy!



I make no pretense towards being Mr B's aquaintance. Only that I actually, physically met him _very briefly_ at NSCC 04 (that is in the real world, not cyber-space).


----------



## Tpr.Orange (9 Dec 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> > along with "whoaa"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually it's 

HUA=heard understood and acknowledged.


----------



## Infanteer (9 Dec 2004)

Thanks tips.


----------



## Slim (9 Dec 2004)

> But I'm the most notorious (anarcho)dandy in the CF. You don't mean to suggest that being well dressed somehow precludes someone being a "professional soldier"?



Personally I think the only reason you're here is to stir the pot. We've seen it before and there'l be many of the same ilk after you've grown board with wasting our time and leave. Just hurry up and do it quickly please, will you.

Slim


----------



## PARAMEDIC (9 Dec 2004)

Nice pics..... especially like the second last one ...dude has some great whiskers ;D

reminds me of pictures I have seen of my great great grand pappy, during his hunting days with his whiskers all curled up like that.


----------



## ibucephalus (9 Dec 2004)

*PARAMEDIC*,

The funny part is that the photo of Cpl Mustache is fairly recent (within the past 5 years). The army is the only place, besides The Handlebar Club, where someone can _unironically_ wear those kinds of whiskers.

Although looking at the photo again, I see that the real point of interest for the militaryphoto.net-types is the menacing safari-vested fellow in the background. It is nice to see that operators also enjoy the privilege of dress-down Friday. ;D


----------



## Inch (9 Dec 2004)

All, sorry for jumping in a little late, but I have had 3 ROE/Rules of Armed Conflict lectures in the past 3 months and I'm pretty sure that it's against Canadian policy to wear other country's uniforms. There may be an exception for the unit that must not be named, but I don't see how since they're still Canadian soldiers. Though it could be alright as long as you don't wear the other country's flags/insignias.

Can anyone clarify?


----------



## foerestedwarrior (9 Dec 2004)

I would assume, as long as there are no markings saying they are form another country. It should be fine


----------



## Acorn (9 Dec 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Now I'm just trying to find the thread where you dinged me for a spelling mistake.... :warstory:



Heh! At least your mistake, IIRC, was something that you could easily have claimed was a play on words. I just get the lame "hourse sounds like course, of course." I can't even fall back on the old standard "my fingers are too fat, and 'u' is right next to 'o' on the keyboard."

Acorn


----------



## CT554 (9 Dec 2004)

Inch said:
			
		

> All, sorry for jumping in a little late, but I have had 3 ROE/Rules of Armed Conflict lectures in the past 3 months and I'm pretty sure that it's against Canadian policy to wear other country's uniforms. There may be an exception for the unit that must not be named, but I don't see how since they're still Canadian soldiers. Though it could be alright as long as you don't wear the other country's flags/insignias.
> 
> Can anyone clarify?



Well i think that if they are allowed to grow their hair, and beards, and have slight difference in cadpat uniforms. Have the choice of weapon they wanna use, i think they can wear different uniforms.

Sorry if I sound rude ,don't mean to be.


----------



## Inch (9 Dec 2004)

CT554 said:
			
		

> Well i think that if they are allowed to grow their hair, and beards, and have slight difference in cadpat uniforms. Have the choice of weapon they wanna use, i think they can wear different uniforms.
> 
> Sorry if I sound rude ,don't mean to be.



Hair, beards and choice of weapons doesn't make you look like another country's soldiers, uniforms do. The American's allow it, but to my knowledge we don't. I'm not looking for speculation, I'm looking for someone in the know that can confirm what the JAG told us last month.


----------



## CT554 (9 Dec 2004)

I know for a fact that they are entitled.....really good sources


----------



## Slim (10 Dec 2004)

> All, sorry for jumping in a little late, but I have had 3 ROE/Rules of Armed Conflict lectures in the past 3 months and I'm pretty sure that it's against Canadian policy to wear other country's uniforms.



The last time i was in Gagetown, all of the instructors at the Infantry Sniper School were wearing Brit combat smocks...

Slim


----------



## nULL (10 Dec 2004)

...and the US woodland camo hats are still in use (though apparently being replaced by ill-fitting Cadpat ones - are they making the hats for 6 year olds?)


----------



## 4CDO PARA (10 Dec 2004)

Can anyone who has saved these images please re-post them? They have become inactive and no longer work.. I would like very much to see them...


----------



## Inch (10 Dec 2004)

Maybe it was just the intention to look like a US or Brit soldier, so long as you can still be identified as Canadian it might be alright.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (10 Dec 2004)

Lame? Ouch, Acorn. I have _feelings_, you know. I guess I'm the only one that finds Mr. Ed witty... :crybaby:

About the uniforms: IMHO, I believe the spirit of the law intended for people to not to wear insignia and/or complete uniforms. Parts thereof should be okay. 

 :dontpanic:
J.M.


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (10 Dec 2004)

> "Rangers Lead The Way"=American and should be left to them along with "hooah"



Tell the rest of the Regiment that (not necessarily cadets).


----------



## Inch (10 Dec 2004)

JavaMan said:
			
		

> About the uniforms: IMHO, I believe the spirit of the law intended for people to not to wear insignia and/or complete uniforms. Parts thereof should be okay.



Right on, that's pretty much what I remember from the briefs, I just wanted to know if someone had heard the same thing from a JAG type character.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (10 Dec 2004)

It has been awhile since the Law of Armed Conflict brief at the PSC, but IIRC that is the way it goes. 

 :dontpanic:
J.M.


----------



## armyrules (10 Dec 2004)

Love the pics!!


----------



## 4CDO PARA (10 Dec 2004)

Am I the only sucker that can't see these pics? I have tried the MilitaryPhotos.com page but they all appear disabled.


----------



## Bartok5 (10 Dec 2004)

ibucephalus ,

Congratulations!  I have been away for the past week, but in reviewing this thread it is abundantly clear to me that in the space of a mere few posts you have attainted unquestionable "F&#ck-tard" status.  

By all means, keep it up.  We need folks like you, if for no other reason that to demonstrate to the rest of us how not to portray ourselves.

Well done....NOT!....


----------



## Infanteer (10 Dec 2004)

Sh0rtbUs said:
			
		

> Tell the rest of the Regiment that (not necessarily cadets).



I don't know what you're talking about, but if I was in a reserve Armoured Recce unit, I wouldn't want to copy the motto of the US Ranger Regiment simply because it was en-vogue and made us appear "cool" and "high-speed".   Seems kind of pathetic to me.


----------



## ibucephalus (11 Dec 2004)

*Mark C*;

Kind sir,

Thank you for the warm welcome. I'm glad to see there are still a few true gentlemen left in the officer corps. I look forward to many hearty exchanges with you via this interweb message board.

Warmest regards,

ibucephalus

P.S. I have been a fan of your internet uniform collection for some time. I find it a valuable reference.


----------



## Cold Warrior (14 Dec 2004)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I suppose you could do better? Looks like they took a break and are relaxing a bit, does not speak of laziness to me.
> 
> Then again its easy to be critical when there is nothing in your profile....   :



Hmm,, and who are you rescueing?,,
How dare anyone be critical of the JTF,, I find it humerous that all these others seem to take offence lest anyone even remotely take a critical look at them.
Are they Gods?,, Nope,, they can be just as lazy as the rest of us,, and yes,, mixing cam into a jumble of stuff doesn't work.  They are probably just dressed for comfort with little or no regard for the cam factor.
And yes,, he can do better.


----------



## Bartok5 (14 Dec 2004)

> And yes,, he can do better.



Perhaps, but he has yet to do so.   All that I have have seen thus far are largely irreverent and "oh so witty" troll-posts characterized by an annoyingly superior "wink and a nod".

Not impressed, and can't be bothered further.   If and when "Ibucephalus" deems to offer the forum members something of positive substance, I may pay attention.   Until then, I am inclined to ignore his posts on this forum.   One of the myriad joys of a scrolling mouse...... 

Ibucephalus, if I have erred WRT my perception of your intentions thus far, then by all means feel free to send me an e-mail me and sort me out off-line.  I am not a moderator of this board, and my perceptions are admittedly not always correct.  I am simply a member of the board who calls 'em like I see 'em.  Thus far, in this particular thread I haven't seen anything that contributes to the discussion.  But like I said, those perceptions are my own.  By all means, prove me wrong.  Perhaps you could start by filling out your profile so that we know where you are coming from....


----------



## KevinB (14 Dec 2004)

FWIW it is not illegal to use other nations uniforms.

 The snipers from 3VP did it on Op Apollo -> US deserts.
We briefly issued Brit Deserts for some of the engineers deployed after the Iran-Iraq war.  And as Slim noted until recently the Sniper school and the cells in the Bn had been using the Brit sniper smock.

I find it interesting that some feel it necessary to slag the guys from the DH Ski Team - and no while they dont need those of us underperformers from regular units to come rushing to their aid I would like to see the resume of those who feel qualified to judge them or their tactics and equiptment based on a photo from the stupidest site (abd yes that woudl be wannabees.com there at milphoto's) on the net...


----------



## IPC10 (15 Dec 2004)

Here's a tangent,

Seeing all of those pictures with the guys wearing the 'old' tan combats reminded me that one of thethe ski team told me that they recieved the new arid CADPAT soon after 3 VP left K'har.

This made me somewhat upset.  I felt that the powers that be had withheld the CADPAT uniforms from the ski team until 3 VP left so that there would not be an us v. them situation.  Have or have nots type thing.  It doesn't take an MBA to understand that it is easier to out fit a small group with uniforms vice a larger formation.  I do not like to think that a piece of equipment was keep from an operational unit due to a misguided political decision by a person in uniform.....then again that might just sum up that whole tour.


Then again I still like the tale from the Falklands on a Sgt who was sent to Acension Island as part of the Advance party for the paras.  The story goes that this individual was observed in the back ground of a news report by the RSM not wearing his regimental belt and when the Bn arrived at Acension Island was promptly given extras.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Dec 2004)

> FWIW it is not illegal to use other nations uniforms.



Is it illegal for a soldier to  use the uniforms of an enemy country?  I remember hearing that was a rule. I would assume wearing the enemy uniform with an intention to impersonate them or something.


----------



## 45B (15 Dec 2004)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> > FWIW it is not illegal to use other nations uniforms.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it illegal for a soldier to   use the uniforms of an enemy country?   I remember hearing that was a rule. I would assume wearing the enemy uniform with an intention to impersonate them or something.



I'm not a JAG but I think what is illegal is to don't have any identification signs, I think just the flag is ok. A good example is a sniper in ghillie suit. But anyway, every respected country conducts covert missions, and in that case even tattoos (like in stupid movies when the guy has his SF unit on the arm) can give you away. Unless you are retired, having 22SAS or BUD/S promotion whatever written on you is very foolish and can bring you to tortures.
BTW I saw a picture with one JTF in CADPAT and another one in US Woodland.


----------



## Horse_Soldier (15 Dec 2004)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> > FWIW it is not illegal to use other nations uniforms.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it illegal for a soldier to   use the uniforms of an enemy country?   I remember hearing that was a rule. I would assume wearing the enemy uniform with an intention to impersonate them or something.


Leaving aside the question of "illegal" or "legal" (which, in a warzone get kind of confused at times anyways), getting captured by the enemy while wearing their uniform will have you treated as a spy instead of a legitimate combatant and you can forget the Geneva convention pretty much entirely, i.e. you won't be treated as a PoW.  Of course, in places like Afghanistan, the Geneva convention (at least as far as the Talibs, Al-Qaedists and other assorted enemies would apply it) isn't worth the paper it's printed on, so take your pick.


----------

