# State of the Army



## SFontaine (15 Nov 2003)

I‘m relatively sure we have the best trained regular troops in the world but some of the worst equipment. But is it really as bad as I heard? 

IE: Griffons not being able to hold more than 8 people with full combat gear etc.


----------



## OLD SCHOOL (15 Nov 2003)

That‘s a BIG 10-4 good buddy.


----------



## SFontaine (15 Nov 2003)

I heard we have the best regular soldiers in the world and a Canadian Infantry soldier is the equivalent of a US Army Ranger. That true?

Oh and I hear we soon maybe getting some new choppers which would be great.


----------



## SFontaine (16 Nov 2003)

Dual post ignore.


----------



## Ruthless4Life (16 Nov 2003)

I won‘t exactly say they are equivalent, but as a country as such a small number of personnel, their quality is extremely crucial.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Nov 2003)

Having the best "trained" troops still does not amount to having soldiers actually experienced in a theater of war.  Even the americans admit much of what they learned in training or on courses was quickly revised once the bullets started flying. 

I‘m as proud as any canadian soldier, about our honour pride and training. We could have the best equipment in the world but without a chance to see how it performs for real, when our lives depend on it, were lacking a major ingredient in being the "best"


----------



## SFontaine (16 Nov 2003)

You guys see any end to this crap with our Army?


----------



## patrick666 (16 Nov 2003)

We already have a post about the discrepencies between the US and CDN armies. 

US has their advantages, and we ours. 

On the subject of the CDN army, is it true that we do not have enough rifles for all members of the CF? I read that last week, don‘t remember where though.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Nov 2003)

We could always compare the 3rcr para company/november company to the 101st airborne regiment.  I heard the 101st are still upset over that eye opener


----------



## northamericanrebel (16 Nov 2003)

Lets hope the new PM will set the canadian military as a whole, on the right track


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Nov 2003)

Only time will tell with regard to that....even if he does put the CF on the right track there will be a Federal election soon and the process will start all over again.


----------



## RCD (16 Nov 2003)

We are in very poor shape for a country of are stature & size.
--------------------------------------------------Nobdy respects a country with a poor army,but everybody respects a country with agood army.
                              Joesph Stalin


----------



## SFontaine (16 Nov 2003)

I‘m just goin by what some American SF Operator told me about Canadians.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Nov 2003)

S_Baker...your opinion on the CF seems to be more and more negative. If that is the case why do you still post here? I think if anyone else here said the same thing in a US Army forum they would have been run out a long time ago. Just a trend I have noticed from you over the past couple of weeks.


----------



## Duotone81 (16 Nov 2003)

S_Baker, I think the point Ghost was trying to make was quality in terms of soldier to soldier.


----------



## SFontaine (17 Nov 2003)

You do realize I‘m only basing my facts on what an AMERICAN Special Ops Operator told me.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Nov 2003)

I agree with you Major. Over all Canada does not have a balance. We have some very well trained soldiers. If we don‘t have vehicles that can make it to the battlefield, our helicopters cannot stay in the air that long or theres no fuel for our transport aircraft, what good will all that training be? Peacekeeping where we can afford to shuttle resourses around easily is one thing, theater of war, probably not as easy.

In my reference to the 101st it was actually a company + platoon from 3Rcr (one of our light infantry battalions) who played some war games with a Brigade (including all the fancy atts and dets such as armored support, helicopters with thermal imaging etc..) from the 101st. Either by training or a great deal of luck, the 101st were decimated. At the end of the game they were rendered unable to carry on as a brigade. In other words they would not be combat effective after suffering the amount of losses they did.  The opfor for the americans had 4 (?) platoons of light infantry with pretty much only what they can carry on their back.    Your right, a battery would wipe them out if caught in the open but the americans also learned not to chase the canadians too far into the woods after they did an ambush or raid.

I bet we would have a division if we lumped together all  our reg force and reserves, we‘d just have to remain stationary


----------

