# More "Army" in Army Cadets (combat training, etc.)



## Sgt O`Hara

I am writing this to ask about wether cadets in canada would like to do more combat traing,I mean like shooting higher caliber weapons and do war game type exercises cause the cadet system is turnin in to a bunch of pussies unlike how we used to be years ago... 
So i want a reply on your thoughts on wether a petition should be started on this because if we get enugh cadets to sign yes to it the commitee has to consider it. I talked to a Brig. General (Kilby) and he is on the comitee and he said a bunch of the people on the comitee would say yes to it but we have to get signatures so please reply to this.

Thank you.
Sgt.O‘Hara
2510 RMRang Sicamouse B.C


----------



## casey916

I don‘t think cadets should be doing combat training.  First of all, if you happen to look at the three (3) roles of the CCM, you will see that it implies nothing about combat training.  The basic aim of the movement is to give teens life skills (ie.  finding themselves, learning leadership roles, teamwork, and such)  Secondly, I have trained with guys that are no where near physically nor mentally capable of being put into situations like that.  And lastly I don‘t think the parent of a 14 year old would love having there son or daughter come home and tell them they are doing combat training as a cadet.  I suspect the numbers would decline in the CCM.  I was a cadet for 7 years, and I don‘t feel that it should be there.
The reason the combat training came out of the system is because it was not seen fit for teenagers to do, that and there were to many training accidents.


----------



## D-n-A

no

why, whats the point, there kids, kids dont goto war

Cadets have no need to do any sort of combat training, this stuff is left up to the real soldiers


also, think about the liability, having young kids doing this sort of thing


----------



## Gibson

Having been a cadet I think there is no problem with "stimulating" an interest in the CF.  Learn how to build shelters, first aid, etc in a military environment.  The last thing they need however is training of the combat sort.  In my opinion there are enough wannabes as it is.

Don‘t get me wrong, a challenge is always good.  But you can do that without parents learning their kids are being taught how to shoot someone.


----------



## alan_li_13

oops! double post


----------



## alan_li_13

The UN and international treaty does not allow children to be recruited or trained as soldiers. Combat training would be classified as soldiering.

In this case, children are anyone under the age of 18 if conscripted or 16 if volunteered. 

Since Canada is part of the UN and has signed the treaty, we‘re not gonna get any kind of combat training. There‘s no point in starting the petition. I sure wouldn‘t waste my precious ink and paper.


----------



## 1feral1

Keep the combat trg out of cadets. One can learn competition, team work, leadership, and discipline by other methods. There is plenty more to do in the Fd than advance to contact.

I am in favour of competition shooting though.


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Infanteer

> the cadet system is turnin in to a bunch of pussies unlike how we used to be years ago...


So what were you guys before, snake-eaters?

"Combat training" requires prior "combat indoctrination" (as much as the CF ignores the fact).  This is something that you are unable to give to kids who just want to do something with their spare time.


----------



## 1feral1

Good post Inf!

Cheers and beers,

Wes


----------



## chalk1

Simply put, I agree. Im not going to even try and sound as though I have such experience, but from just three weeks of only a taste of combat training on Maple Leaf exchange 2 years ago, Ive come to realise that there is no way you can throw a 12-14 yr old child into a man‘s world and expect good results. Some kids can handle growing up too fast,but whether they turn out ok or not they will always have that lingering sadness/depression about not having the oppurtunity to have experience their teenage years properly. Granted, they will experience those years with other teens, but those other teens would more than likely be in the same situation as them. It‘s too much of a risk for a child/young man-woman who‘s still growing and developing.

 Im quite sure that there would be excellent results if the instructors would be actual NCO‘s(because i wouldn‘t trust a 15 yr old to lead an attack, patrol etc.), but then you would have such problems resulting from this as manpower shortages - as if there aren‘t already. By the time you are considered old enough to train for combat, you may as well join the reserves if your craving for adventure is so great that it completely overwhelms the sense of satisfaction you (I) get from developing 12-17 yr olds into thoughtful, professional, knowledgeable young men & ladies, while still giving them the chance to experience adventure. 

Even having a split program ( ex:beginning training at 16) It would be pointless to train them, as they can simply join the reserves and be actual soldiers.

Im not completely against the idea, though. I regard the UK‘s Army Cadet Force and Combined Cadet Force very highly. I believe that if Canada could find some middle ground between the two organisations, it would be a substantial improvement.


----------



## Gibson

So your saying because there isn‘t combat training in Army cadets there is no point to Army cadets?  Cadets and scouts are entirely different organizations.  It is ok to have more than one young organization in the country, it isn‘t illegal.


----------



## sgt_mandal

I am all for it! That would be so amazing.


----------



## chalk1

> Originally posted by Intelligere:
> [qb] Gosh, I see I‘m in a minority on this one too.  May be you guys are right, and we should take the Army out of Army Cadets.  The original question was about "like shooting higher caliber weapons and do[ing] war game type exercises".  For want of a better term, this was described as "combat training".  I guess shooting anything bigger than an air rifle, or learning proper voice procedure on actual military radios would be too advanced for cadets.  Maybe the cadets should just compete directly with Scouts Canada for recruits.  After all, there isn‘t much difference between Cadets Caring For Canada and ScoutTrees.  They‘re both good old citizenship training, aren‘t they! [/qb]


Army cadets are given a familiarization shoot on the C7 once a year (25 rounds ). This doesn‘t include the various rifles fired on the marksmanship courses at Connaught, but you‘d have to ask someone else about the specifics on the rifles used; Im not a great shooter myself. Radio procedures are taught.

Im not sure how aware you are of the program nowadays, but much has changed. I know you were an instructor back in the 70‘s. However, the system and the direction has changed, resulting in changes in the staff as well. Many hold full time jobs or have families, or both. On top of this, most Corps are situated in rural areas, far from armouries where they would be able to learn combat-related training. How would they be able to train, on weekends like the reserves? (not to diminish the reserves in any way-just a comparison) 

One could haughtily argue that "Well, they musn‘t be devoted enough, then." Well, besides being absolute rubbish, being alone as a child or losing income/employment isn‘t the happiest thing in the world, and all parties involved lose.

If we try the summer training-only way, then you‘re just asking for lower standards. How would the staff be able to keep their skills sharp throughout the year?

That‘s officers only. What would we do about training seniors with all the conditions above? Even in a hypothetical situation where a corps is near an armoury, there‘s always the possibility that the affiliated unit isn‘t supportive at all. 

I don‘t believe that there is a problem with the "army" in army cadets; it‘s just a matter of ensuring that the training is properly taught. We could complain all we want that we should be doing patrols and so on, but how can we send the kids out on a patrol if they can‘t even pack a ruck properly?


----------



## 1feral1

Air rifles.

The main reason they were introduced was the indoor ranges were inadequate in lead fumes extration, as tests on random cadets proved that lead levels were too high. So instead of spending tonnes of dosh (money) on remodelling indoor small bore ranges, they went to air rifles.

Back in 92, I was a test guinea pig for this, and all these gurus from 15 Wg, MJ came out on day, and hooked up all this test gear to me. little pumps and filkteres etc, and for a few hrs on a Monday afternoon, we spent shooting 9mm until they got their info.

The Regina Armouries got better ventilation, but over all, it was still not meeting the grade.

In the two indoor ranges, I am now told one is FATS, and the other air rifle. So it look like all live ammo is no longer used in that loc.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## chalk1

Double post.


----------



## chalk1

Heh. Sorry about that. I mistook what you said in your first post:



> Originally posted by Intelligere:
> [qb]   When I was in cadets and the CIL in the late 60‘s to mid-70‘s, we did things like fire the FN rifle.  [/qb]


as meaning that you had been in at that time only, and no longer were in. My apologies, sir     

I believe, however, that we may very well be arguing the same side of this debate! 

Now, this is an excellent topic, and we‘ve already had a discussion about what needs to be fixed in cadets (in our opinions) in another thread. But this an excellent thread, and it brings about a good conversation (which is rarely seen in this area of the forum, unfortunately). 

So, my question is: If we were to change the program to include more military training, what could be done? Also, could we have ideas of what military (not combat) training would be considered?


now taking bets on how long this thread will last before becoming degrading....     :dontpanic:


----------



## chalk1

Okay...Im just very tired and not paying attention    . Is this the first time someone has done a triple post?


----------



## cdhoult

Of course, like all threads, I need to throw in my 2 cents...

We must never lose site of one thing....cadets IS a ‘youth organization‘. Boy Scouts is a TYPE of ‘youth organization‘, but it isn‘t the definition. 

As stated above, the direction of the movement has changed. We are stimulating an interest in the forces through different means, and while it is a aim, it isn‘t drilled into cadets heads, "HEY, JOIN THE FORCES!". For the percentage of cadets that go on (I‘m not actually sure what it is, I‘d be curious to know) I don‘t see it being worth it to combat train cadets, as if they were combat trained (or exposed to a more ‘military training‘ atmosphere), what is the upside? Would they be exempt from training? Would it just be a few classes, or entire courses? As the age for many of the courses would have to be older anyway (14 year olds on a BMQ type course? Not likely), it seems redundant, as they could go and join the reserves. 

As also mentioned, many units are in rural areas, and turn into ‘Ma and Pa‘ operations, where some poor parent got conned into being the CO of a unit...how would they teach this training? When would they learn themselves?

The reason (in my opinion) that this issue is raised more in Army Cadets than it‘s respective counterparts, is because the Sea/Air Cadets have ‘shiny‘ things.

For example, the Sea Cadets have their YAG‘s (75 foot vessels), tallships, and CYA (Canadian Yachting Association) training, and can regularly be seen learning to sail, or learning seamanship. Does this have ANYTHING to do with the Reg Force Navy? Well, no more than working on a Yacht has to do with it....the Engineers, of which 16 are trained annually, get their class ‘a‘(?) ticket, which is transferable to the CF (in all fairness, the army cadets can get their wings).

Air cadets, of course, get to fly, and can wear their wings on the CIC Uniform. While more are trained and awarded their wings annually than sea/army get their CF qual, it‘s none the less very related to their element. Is it ‘military training‘? No, not really...you can get the same lisence in the civvie world.

The problem is that all the ‘purple‘ training (Drill, leadership, IT, OAT, etc) is taught to all elements. This makes the army cadets lose some ‘uniqueness‘, and being someone that has been in both systems (Sea/Army), the army system has a much more intense citizenship/OAT sections, but it isn‘t seen as ‘unique‘, because well, the other elements have the same sections. 

Even at HQ, it isn‘t ACO(Army), the position is ACO(Land)...but ‘Land Cadets‘ would sound weird....But does anyone at least see the point I‘m attempting to make?

Trianing is what you make of it...the Army System has an awesome training program that meets the aim of the cadet movement quite adequetley....

CH


----------



## The_Falcon

Not going to get into this other than to say, stop comparing it to "BOY" Scouts.  The Boy Scouts have not existed for about 14 years when they decided to go co-ed. It is just Scouts.  Thank you it is just a pet peeve of mine.


----------



## NormR

This Topic is interesting and has become more so... and this is just a sidebar to the original question but it also will answer the question ... Just read...
Is there a difference between Army cadets and Scouts?  
Right now I would say yes and No... Why??? well the funny thing is .. is that Scouts are out there doing the same stuff Army cadets do and often at the same intensity... 
I am talking about 
- exercises in all  weather including patrols(Hiking)outdoor weekends (camping)
- ranger type projects such as rope work and bridge building, navigation by map and Compass
- citzenship
- team work
etc.
Now I know there are many of you who will disagree... and I am not an Army cadet expert.. I only have about 1 year in as a CI but I do have over 17 years with the Scouting movement... I joined up because Army cadets was the closet one to the Scouting program but had a military basis.. But I will agree there needs to more Military training.. it depends on the Corps and the Officer/CI and now Parent Support committee‘s. But we are there to run a Youth type program based on Citizenship, Health & Fitness and several other factors and all are very similar to scouting except for ONE item... Exposure to the military.All things military...
So the more military we get the better off we will be in differentiating Army cadets from Scouting.
So the original question was "about whether Cadets in Canada would like to do more combat traing(Read military),I mean like shooting higher caliber weapons and do war game type exercises"...
Well in my own corp, there are senior cadet(2-3 this last spring) who were invited to go out on a Reserve Ex.with our local Regt... 
The juniors are aware that this is a possibilty...Something to shoot for.
So the option is there but it also depends on the Regiment your affliated with and the initiative of both your Corp officers and the Regiments to make it happen.  So yes we do need more Military type training. The real question is what can added that will make it more military and that has been covered throughout this thread already...but to add to it...
1] more outdoor patrol type activities
2] more team building activities using military objectives to develope them
3] better communication between the corp and its affliated regiment.
4] more interaction between the corp and the regiment by having regiment members involved in Corp training exercises 
5] including senior corp cadets in training ex‘s run by the regiment.
anything else please add....


----------



## DogOfWar

Suck it up 2 more years and you can be a "real soldier" until then pretend and play nice. I know it seems as though im condescending when I talk to cadets but I was in a troop of 40 people and 5 were former cadets. Ive never met such poor recruits in my life. They though they had everything figured out and wouldnt listen to our instructors on drill or most anything. 3 went home and 1 barely passed. Attitude city.


----------



## alan_li_13

Sorry WetGrunt. I guess u got the bottom of the barrel there. 

Not all of us are like that, atleast i hope i wouldn‘t be. Five cadets don‘t represent the whole lot of us out there. I‘m sure there are atleast a few ex-cadets who ended up being fine soldiers.


----------



## DogOfWar

I have no doubt. And its all in fun.....the last one got top recruit....although the brass wanted to take t from her 3 days later because she turned into a major disciplinary problem. But she was good at drill and making her bed. As for the rest of you be content with what cadets is. Drill and uniforms and some chances to do some neat stuff. Dont try and make it something it isnt. Crawl before you walk.


----------



## 1feral1

Hey Int, the times are a changing. Back in the late 60‘s and 70‘s there was no definition or even a word such as pollitically correct. Now its everywhere. Personally I find the language of political correctiveness a language of COWARDS.

I was never in any cadets, but I seen many who were that made the jump to the PRes (some also stayed in the RCACC as long as they could), and then to the Regular Force. Others (the weak and wannabees) who came accross, just fell thru the cracks and were consumed like old fire wood.

I reckon good cadets who accept the challenge of the CF during their recruit trg, would keep their mouths shut uising what ever they picked up during cadets (however small)to their advantage, and somehow assist others out within their sections who need it. Thats team work, and good coursemanship!

When I left the CF, and enlisted in the Australian Army back in Feb 1995, I kept my mouth shut, and used what I had learned over 18yrs in the CF to my advantage. Mind you I was accepted at the rank of Sergeant (which was a real eye opener - let me tell you!), and after a few months was in the thick of it doing a CLC type course in some of the worst terrain I have ever seen, all over again, which is ‘X‘ times worse than any recruit trg. I came thru it all. Better,and stronger. More educated in every sense of the word than ever.

So use what you have learned as a true advantage, if you are a braggart, or a wannabee ‘sniper‘, or have the attitude "in cadets we did it this way... etc". Dont even bother sniffing around the CFRC‘s out there.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## DogOfWar

You‘d know better than i would. My experience with current and former cadets has left a sour taste in my mouth. So if your old style cadets made a better individual Im all for it. If it gave dangerous skills/ and larger egos to the ones ive delt with then shelve it. But you‘d know more about this than I.


----------



## corporal-cam

Combat training is not a good idea for Cadets. You are probally 15 or over like I am but do you want to teach 12 year olds how to fight? -.^ Doesn‘t sound like a great idea. I think what the army cadets lack are exs that have more to do with the forces and less to do with adventure. If I want to rock climb I can join a rock climbing group but If I want to know SAR techniques, shelter building and self decipline I don‘t know a group that does more of that than Air Cadets and the RCAC should do more similar stuff. But on the other hand Air Cadets should get to fire c7s and go parachuteing , I would love to do both but aparently jumping out of airplanes only makes sence for Amry Cadets and not the guys flying


----------



## tabernac

Giving a 12-14 yo Combat Training would not be a good idea. Not sure many folks would like RCAC training future Washington snipers. But military experience would be nice.   





> whether cadets could be seen by the public even holding a C7.


A couple years back 2PPCLI set up some tables, equipment,etc.  for Canada Day. They had C7s C8s,and M72s etc.     obviouly with no rounds in the magizine. They also had a C3 set up and were letting people look through and aim the sights. I‘m sure I saw a Scout group.....


----------



## wongskc

> Originally posted by corporal-cam:
> [qb]But on the other hand Air Cadets should get to fire c7s and go parachuteing , I would love to do both but aparently jumping out of airplanes only makes sence for Amry Cadets and not the guys flying     [/qb]


I heard that a long time ago (even before they got rid of the Cadet MP course) that Air Cadets actually had their own parachute course running out of Edmonton.  It was canceled due to a couple incidents involving cadet pancakes.


----------



## DogOfWar

Give em combat training...and live rounds.....tell them only half get to go home...and do it every weekend.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Canada is a signatory to an agreement not to field "children soldiers", and combat training for cadets would put Canada in violation of international agreements it has signed.  End of story.


----------



## XHighlander

The cadet system now is not the system that i went though in the late 70‘s & early 80‘s.......... now it‘s just a joke some place to dump troubled teens off from the group home to give the staff a break.

I have gone out as a cadet with the Mother regiment on ex‘s back in the early 80‘s & used the FN and I'm not a drug dealer, or a car thief.

The tiny minded people who sit back and write off the youth of this country make me sick......... it‘s time to train our children with discipline and not computer‘s and video games... parents have to take responsibility for their children.

Stop making excuses. Society is not at fault, parents are!

Cadets should be trained as micro soldiers by real soldiers not civvies in uniform.

A real CWO & Sgt's, M/Cpl's, trained me. Not the Mickey Mouse system in place now.

Let them do the training they might just like it and join the forces afterwards

I will sign any petition that will put the word ARMY back into ARMY CADETS...

As for the UN saying â Å“putting children in combat situationsâ ?, as far as i am Concerned this is not a combat situation it is simply training them to become someone who is going to contribute something to society.

THE END!!!!!!


----------



## xFusilier

Gee, what about all the other contributing members of society who never touched an FN as an adolescent.  Bit of a straw man there me thinks.

As our resident SME Itchyscratchywoolenkit has stated the concept of "combat training" for Cadets is a red herring.  Does anyone really think that the ensuing Globe and Mail or Toronto Star story on how the CF was training 13 year olds to kill (and make no mistake that is exactly how it will be portrayed in the press) would help the Cadet Movement or the CF en masse.  Doubtful...


----------



## cdhoult

Cadets _are not meant to be_ little soldiers. At all. You‘re right, it‘s not the same organization that you were in, and in the 70‘s/80‘s, it wasn‘t the same organization as in the ‘50‘s. It changes over time. It is now a Youth Organization.

I‘m still waiting for the benefits of training a 13 year old to kill...so far we know they‘re probably not psychologically ready for it, and that it would be horrible press for the CF, and even if they were trained, it‘s not like they could get out of any CF training anyway, so they‘d have to redo it later on; that‘s usually a bad thing.

The reason I say that is because of Navy League Cadets (10-13 year olds, NOT part of the CCM). What used to happen, and still does to an extent, is that you‘d get cadets who were trained in Navy League to do Phase I (and sometimes II) training in the Sea Cadet Program. When they ‘aged out‘ of NL, they‘d come to Sea Cadets, already know everything, and them some units didn‘t have a plan already in place to deal with them, sot hey‘d go to another element to learn something new. If we‘re essentially going to teach a kid BMQ over the course of 7 years, why should he have to do it again?

Having been part of quite a few units due to my travel, I can say that for the most part, the cadets are usually of fairly high caliber. Have I run into the occassionally cadet who probably does drugs, etc, on the side? Yup. You‘ll get soldiers like that too, so clearly it isn‘t being combat trained that makes them valuable contributing members. I meet a lot of cadets who want to eventually join the CF, some ‘just for something to do‘ (and do it well), some to learn, and yes, the occassional one whose parents told them to be there. The latter actually aren‘t that bad to deal with, you just have to help them find motivation. 

There are quite a few ex-cadets who go on to the forces, in different elements, different trades, etc. The purpose of cadets is to STIMULATE an interest in the CF; and it does. The army side is lucky, because a lot of affiliated units will bring cadets with them on exercises, the sea/air side, this doesn‘t happen nearly as often (actually, I‘ve never heard of it, but I‘m sure it happens), and they do just find for bringing people into the forces.

Maybe it won‘t be Reg Force...maybe it‘ll be PRes, or the CIC, either way, they‘re branches of the forces, so if an ex-cadet enrolls in the CIC, their interest was stimulated. Without learning to kill someone.

CH


----------



## XHighlander

They don‘t need the CF to "train them to kill" Sony, x-box & Nintendo are doing just fine.... as well most other video & computer games.

I am saying that with the proper training they will have respect for weapon's handling as i do.


----------



## stukirkpatrick

Has anybody seen the movie Taps? (**** I‘ve seen a lot of movies  :blotto: )  There‘s a good reason why cadets should not receive military combat training.  Its too early in their life, they don‘t need to know things like weapons drills etc (not ‘drill‘ drill, combat drills).  
The reason we train soldiers in this manner is because they may be called upon to utilize these skills in a combat situation.  Cadets are unlikely to be employed in such,

just some thoughts.


----------



## D-n-A

ahh.. TAPS, the move about Military Cadets who take over their school, an try to take on the Military, haha


----------



## kurokaze

I‘m all for cadets receiving "military" training... if that training includes discipline and PT.

From the cadets I‘ve seen (air and army) these were the two biggest issues.  I wouldn‘t even think about giving these kids a C7 when they can‘t even be trusted to stand still while at attention.

Whats worst is that the senior cadets (and the CIC officer with them) didn‘t do anything about it!

Before you people talk about combat training, patrols, fieldcraft, etc.  the discipline issue has to be fixed first.  If not, your robbing these kids of one of best things the cadet program has to offer.


----------



## XHighlander

> Before you people talk about combat training, patrols, fieldcraft, etc. the discipline issue has to be fixed first. If not, your robbing these kids of one of best things the cadet program has to offer.


here here...........

they need instructors that have military training

Reg Force or Militia.... not CIC


----------



## chalk1

Well, it‘s still a problem. How are we going to find the people not only willing to train?, but also people to train them? The CF already has problems with manpower, but if that was no longer an obstacle for us we would be faced by the CF‘s recruiting & retention problems.


----------



## cdhoult

CIC Officers are members of the CF, even if you don‘t beleive the training reflects that (and I‘d be inclined to agree in some cases).

That being said, some of the top cadet units the country are made of CIC Officers with no other military training -- they‘re just good at what they do.

The standard that a region is at, as well as how closely rules are followed at cadet units, heck, even the training at a National level are all reg force postings. 

The ACO is a Reg Force Capt, RCO is a LCol, and the ACA‘s range in rank, usually a Sgt or WO though. At the national level, the respective DCdt(3 I think...) are LCol. If there is a problem with CIC training, then why aren‘t these reg force people doing anything about it? They‘re in a position to make changes. The fact is, many people who end up getting posted to these positions have a hard time understanding the program, and have to adjust to the program, and learn all about it. It isn‘t overly complicated, but you can‘t learn the whole program in a day. And if you think you can, well, I encourage you to apply for a posting at one of the RCSU‘s. Go nuts, and tell the staff what‘s what.

The top Sea Unit in BC (who usually wins drill, very close in band, dominates sports weekends, and is the largest in the province) is run by a woman from Saskatchewan with no military backgrounf except for the CIC....her staff, if I remember correctly:

XO -- Was the first Coxswain of the corps, 25 years ago...fully CIC Trained
TrgO -- Was the Quadra Chief, fully CIC Trained
SupO -- Ex-Coxswain of the corps, fully CIC Trained
BandO -- Ex-Coxswain, fully CIC Trained
StandardsO -- I think was a CPO2...fully CIC trained

The have 1 reg force LS Engineer who runs a diving program for them, and a reg force Lt(N) who set up a database for them. They aren‘t intimedtly involved with the training at all. 

I seem to hear more about this ‘lack of discipline‘ on the Army side, and everyones solution to to bring in the reg force or ‘military‘ officers. If Sea Units and Air Units can do it without ‘proper‘ military officers, why does the army have such a hard time? 

My reasoning is that the army is so hard to standardize, because of affiliated unit traditions, or militia/reg force people trying to turn Sgt‘s and WO‘s into reg force Sgt/WO‘s, which many of them don‘t have the maturity for, or if they do, they don‘t have the experience. Cadets don‘t learn to respect Orders, because their officers and volunteers don‘t respect the CATO. I know we have a volunteer at my unit who is Reg Force, and his line was, "Oh, the CATO are just guidelines, we don‘t have to follow them" yeah...swell example. The Orders, issued by DCdt‘s, aren‘t REALLY orders, just pretend orders...and this is the example I‘m supposed to follow? No thanks.

Reg Force members can volunteer with a corps, and most corps officers are willing to accept a volunteer, especially if they have some valuable experience that will benefit the youth. 

As to the comment that the senior cadets/officers aren‘t doing anything about that cadet moving, sometimes it‘ll depend on the situation at hand. Does the cadet have a problem? Is the officer evaluating the senior cadets to see if they do anything about it? Remember, a Cadet WO does not have the same experience as a Reg Force WO, so you‘re comparing apples and oranges. 

I‘ll re=phrase the "Youth Organization" remark, perhaps to say that the definition of it has changed, and what cadets do has changed; I don‘t really see how it‘s for the worse. Like any program, it has it‘s faults.


----------



## dano

Manpower is not an issue at all for this type of thing. Its allocating what manpower they have now.


----------



## cdhoult

Thank-you, Intelligere    I‘d be interested to hear the outcomes as well...

Daniel,

It is a manpower issue though...we have a specific MOC to work with cadets...it‘s hard to justify posting someone to JUST work with a cadet corps, what officers would we take? They aren‘t trained to work with youth, and I‘ve heard of officers and NCM‘s leaving the forces for getting posted to NDHQ and RCSU....if someone joins the Reg Force, it probably isn‘t to work with 12 year olds...

CH


----------



## Sgt O`Hara

This is O‘Hara I am the person who started this topic because i and hundreds of other cadets would like to see the Army Cadets shooting a weapon like the FN rifle or other 303calibre weapons and also do some sort of patroling with like a combat scenario sort of thing  so please reply with a YES or a NO
Thank you very much!


----------



## DogOfWar

NO. Join a shooting club if you want to shoot.


----------



## kurokaze

No.


----------



## D-n-A

No


O‘Hara, apparently you failed to read all the threads pointing why Cadets shouldent do combat training, an how it is illegal

you guys arent the HitlerJugend, you dont need combat training


----------



## Eowyn

O‘Hara
If you are interested in a yes/no question instead of an interesting discussion, why don‘t you set up a poll instead.


----------



## DogOfWar

Yeah heres some "military training"-

Have them fill out a next of kin form over and over again. Thats real "military training".


----------



## stukirkpatrick

exciting military tasks for cadets (see above)?  Sure, why not.

Shooting weapons?  No.  The FN C1 doesn‘t exactly fire a small calibre, and its not .303 .  Not exactly target shooting rifle calibers either...


----------



## Cpl. Williamson

The FN has put many a Bruise and Blemish on Grown Man 

What exactly Will that Do to A Pre-Teen/ Teen  Cadet?


----------



## DogOfWar

"When I hold that gun I feel like how God must feel...when he‘s holding a gun."-Homer


----------



## willy

No.  You‘re going to have to deal with the fact that cadets are cadets and not members of JTF2.  This is the way it is, and the way it should be.


----------



## condor888000

No! I wouldn‘t trust 3/4‘s of my squadron with an air rifle!


----------



## DogOfWar

Wait they arent? HEY THATS AN IDEA!!!

A new cadet league!!! If they get consent from their parents they can attend meetings at dweyer hill for "combat training"....and the child soldier thing wont apply because the government will deny their very existance!!!! Brilliant!!

Canadian Corps of Space Ninja special forces Cadets....Please make the age limit 30 so I can come down too!!


----------



## DogOfWar

That wasnt an attack. Thats pretty clever. And theres a dark secret about law enforcement pal. Theres nice cops and then theres the cops who go in when someone wont listen to the nice ones.

Im a "break glass in case of emergency type". I also think you need to factor in the internet Ahole mulitplier. I cant say whatever I want at work but I can on the internet. I said I wouldnt be a prick. I made a joke. I believe I said I also wanted to apply for my dream cadet corps as well.

PS. I am NOT a huge hit with the citizens but I do MY job well.


----------



## DogOfWar

Thats cute. I bet your coworkers love you. Im saddened by the prospect of us not being friends.


----------



## dano

No offence WetGrunt.
But have already broken the agreement you made when you registered to the forum. Guess you did‘nt read it? 

No profanity in the Army Cadet forum.


----------



## pte anthony

Combat training should not be given to cadets if they want to recieve combat training they should join the Military when they reach the age to do so.


----------



## DogOfWar

I mean the minimum age is 16. Thats pretty young.(Reserves) If you love cadets accept Cadets for what it is. If you want combat sign the line when you are 16. I think its pretty cut and dry. Im not sure which "profanity" you are alluding to....


----------



## zbtneg

I‘m a bit puzzled. I guess I‘ve been away from the cadet corps for a while. Don‘t the sea cadet on Vancouver island still fire their FNs at The Ceremony of the Flags?  http://www.tourismvictoria.com/Content/EN/1097.asp 

My vote is a yes for firing weapons. Doing it in a controlled situation under qualified instructors teaches more respect for the weapon that shooting at cans out on the back porch does. 

But I‘m a no for combat training. Firing a weapon at a target for points is one thing. Teaching the attitude necessary to fire a weapon at a live enemy is far different. 

Yes for survival, yes for radio communication, yes for parachuting. 

What about something from the engineers? Those skills are not necessarily combative, and are good to have. 

Also, can anyone who has access to DND law books take a look for something involving petitions? I seem to recall that petitions can be held as an intent to mutiny, and should never be used for any reason.


----------



## DogOfWar

> Originally posted by Daniel:
> [qb] No profanity in the Army Cadet forum. [/qb]


I thought you wanted "military training"???
 

I still dont see any profanity.


----------



## cdhoult

I‘ve never supported petitions....cadets isn‘t a democracy. I‘m all for fair treatment, and if you have an idea, etc, by all means, write it out, pass it up the chain of command. Mutiny = bad (although cadets can‘t really be charged).

Sea Cadets fire blank rounds at the Ceremony of the Flags from Lee Enfields and 3 Field Guns...I believe the army cadets do soemthing similar (feu de joie, or something like that), save the field guns. There are for ceremonies, are fired under strict command, and god help the cadet who so much as thinks about doing anything else with the blank rounds.

CH


----------



## cdhoult

To add:

I‘m all for Radio Communications, I‘d like to see the army side actually do some certification....on the Sea Side, you usually have the opportunity to get your Restricted Operators Certificate (Maritime), which is ncie to have


----------



## tabernac

I am for shooting live rounds, in a controled setting. But going out on "patrol" would be a good idea. Not with live rounds but with modified paint ball guns. My dad told me of stories when he was in Cadets, they did use modified paint ball guns, modified in a way that the shot would travel between 150-200 feet per second, meaning no big welts from getting hit.


----------



## cdhoult

Very much doubt that will happen....the old DCdt‘s (Col. Ambler) wrote an article in one of the issues of Cadence on paintball -- it simply doesn‘t have to do with the aims of the movement...and it‘s also a matter of CYA (Cover your...bum). 

All it takes is one kids parent (and most units have this one parent) to make a big snag because Jonny got shot in the eye because Jonny was stupid and not wearing eye protection, and well...think about the big picture if something like that happens...there isn‘t much of an upside to it, the downside counters it.

CH


----------



## dano

I remember that article.


----------



## XHighlander

> The FN has put many a Bruise and Blemish on Grown Man
> 
> What exactly Will that Do to A Pre-Teen/ Teen Cadet?


at thirteen i live fired both the c1 & c2 with no bruises.........guess i was smart enough to adjust the gas regulator


----------



## 1feral1

Ah, yes the trusty ole C1. I sometimes used to get ‘rifle cheek‘ but not normally. I also used to shoot an Aussie L1A1 rifle, and later purchased an OPP 8L C1 in Toronto in 1987, and shot them frequently for target and competiton out west. Sold em all to come down here for complete and entire fresh new start. 

In Australia, I sure miss not only shooting such a fine rifle, but miss owning one too. One must have a special licence to own such things now, and for the average guy, its an imposibility.

Australian Army Cadets here do not shoot period, although some introductry F88 shoots do happen under close one on one supervison, and with the ‘single shot‘ lock out engaged (semi only).

FATS or WTSS as its called here, and .22LR F88T‘s are also used for trg (not for cadets). 

Cadets get DP F88s, and these rifles are de-milled to such a degree, the only operating thing is the sling swivels. 

Hence only for drill. Yet they are as controlled as a regular rifle is. Thats just how it is.

Cheers, 

Wes


----------



## Eowyn

Combat training - no, for all of the good reasons given in previous posts.
Military training - yes.  I‘m all for putting the "Army" back into Army Cadets.


----------



## cdhoult

What is everyone‘s idea of ‘Military Training‘?


----------



## stukirkpatrick

Military training...hmmm...

~well, theres drill, lots of drill   

~you could probably learn good standards for dress and deportment, 

~maybe allow cadets to learn first aid from St Johns for free, (not necessarily military-oriented, do they do this anywhere)

~Perfect the art of memo writing,

basically all of the fun non-combat stuff you can master before/if joining the forces.


----------



## cdhoult

--> Drill, yes    Standard varies corps to corps though, depending on the quality of their officers/seniors cadets.

--> Deportment/Dress, same as above. 

--> I know on the see side, all TG2 (...CL I think would be the closest Equiv) are trained and certified with Standard First Aid. On MedA, we did Enhanced Standard (All modules, including all the Military ones).

--> This is taught I believe, on the army side (or I saw it in the reference book, anyway....I learned to write them on the Sea side, but it isn‘t in the Sea training). I believe it‘s taught on the air side as well. So Sea might be the ones not teaching this.


----------



## tabernac

> All it takes is one kids parent (and most units have this one parent) to make a big snag because Jonny got shot in the eye because Jonny was stupid and not wearing eye protection, and well...think about the big picture if something like that happens.


What happened to permission slips and good old common sense?


----------



## Sgt O`Hara

Ok you people arnt very smart ,keep on the swubject ok i want to shoot lets say the fn or the c7 or even the c11(special c7 made for cadet use) So please JUST write what you think about that.  :sniper:


----------



## 48Highlander

I don‘t know about other cadet corps, but I‘ve taken our own cadets on to our SAT range a couple times, so they‘ve gotten to handle a C7, C9, and C6.  Might not be as "cool" as live rounds, but they all seemed to enjoy it just fine.  I also know that the CF DOES allow cadets to fire C7‘s live as long as certain procedures are followed.  For example, no more than 5 rounds in a mag, only single shots, and there has to be 1 reserve or regforce DS staff for every 3 cadets firing.  If  you want to do any of these things, it‘s up to you and your chain of command.  Your best resource is your local armories.  If the CO of your corps wants to, and has sufficient funding, he can get on the phone to one of the regiments there and they can either open up the SAT range for you or arrange some kind of live range on a weekend.  The SAT range is probably the cheapest option because you‘ll only be paying for 1-2 personnel to run the range, and about 2 cents per round fired.  Submit a memo up your chain of command and see what happens.

As to doing patrols with paintball guns as was suggested earlier....when I was a cadet we did get to that.  With todays kinder, gentler, and safer army, I doubt it‘ll be allowed.


----------



## willy

"Ok you people arnt very smart ,keep on the swubject"

Listen kid, before you start judging the relative intelligence of members of this board, you might want to learn to spell and use correct punctuation.  As to the smarmy nature of your post, the people on this forum have given you an answer: it is, overall, NO.  If you don‘t want them to discuss the issue, set up a freaking poll next time.  If you want to do "combat training" so badly, then wait until you‘re old enough to shave, and then join the CF.  I‘d love to have you as a student on one of my courses: I guarantee that you‘d change that attitude pretty quickly.


----------



## alan_li_13

What‘s a SAT range? sounds interesting, please tell me more


----------



## 48Highlander

SAT = Small arms trainer.  It‘s a $60,000 video game with real weapons hooked into it.

you‘re a QYRANG cadet?  I didn‘t know they had cadets.  as long as I know you guys don‘t have a SAT range in your armrories, but there‘s one in Moss Park.


----------



## alan_li_13

Yep, actually, we have 2 cadet corps, 337 in TO and 2799 in Aurora.
I‘m the captain of the rifle team of 337. 
Would it be too much of a nuisance if our CO tried to book a session with SAT down at Moss Park?


----------



## 48Highlander

shouldn‘t be a problem.  I added your address on MSN, talk to me there if you need more info.


----------



## alan_li_13

Thanks for the help, I‘ll talk to my CO tomorrow and see what he thinks.


----------



## chalk1

Well, this brings another interesting point: support from the affiliated unit. Im assuming that in this theoretical scenario, corps would still be attached to a unit. Would regiments willingly give their up their own resources for cadet purposes?


----------



## 48Highlander

It‘s not theoretical at all.  My unit has a cadet corps attached to it, and "rifle_team_captains‘s" core is attached to another unit.  Generaly the corps have their own funding and can afford to cover the costs of their training.  The units in turn can provide qualified members to conduct the training, and the facilits and equipment which are required.  We do on occasion provide members to conduct cadet ranges, and summer training.  However the salary for those members is generaly paid out of the cadet budget, so it costs the units very little.


----------



## elscotto937

48Highlander, that is the negative point of having a Reserve unit as your Affiliated unit, ...the cost.

I thought I would pipe in on this topic because it has generally been beat to death, and I‘m all for assisting in beating a topic to death. 
People have talked about first establishing discipline before they could expand the "military training." Well, cadet discipline is based on a reward system rather than a punishment system. And good leadership is the key, without it the system will not function. 

Military training can be done and it can be done within the confines of the current rules. Any attempt to create "combat" training(war fighting) would devolve into Cadets play time. To those who think that paintball and the like, are Combat training, they are not. I realize that cadets enjoy the military aspects of the program and want it to be more realistic. However, practicing "soldier skills" is more realistic than playing soldier. Patrolling, navigation, tent routine, physical fitness, the estimate process, etc...These can be done, it takes some creativity, and some initiative, and I don‘t just mean on the officer side of cadets...


----------



## Jarnhamar

I always thought the cadets do quite a bit of army training. I‘ve always said cadets do much more survival and fieldcraft training than the reserves and from what i‘ve seen of the regs and the reserves could stand to do more of it.

A week-end of digging a platoon size defensive might even be interesting to some but i have a feeling not many would appriciate the finer points of it heh.


----------



## elscotto937

Ghost you definately highlighted the diferences between playing soldier and being one....A month of platoon attacks might also be nice...


----------



## cdhoult

I recall talking to a CI not too long ago, and when he was a cadet, he was an an exchange I think to Germany (maybe the UK, I don‘t know). 

He said they were out in the field with paintball guns for a few days, and he can remember being cold, wet, tired, and scared crapless because he didn‘t know where the enemy was...all he remembers thinking is, "This sucks, I want to go home"...He said it was a huge reality check for all the cadets who want to ‘play soldier‘.

CH


----------



## Jarnhamar

Thanks Scott.
Some people might be interested in it, obviously many others won‘t. I think cadets would be more interested in the high speed aspect of the army and not the mundane side of the house. I don‘t fault them for it either. Recruits are the same way in the army. One needs only look to the few posts on this board.
"Im on # whatever week of my BMQ, this is boring, does it get any funner? Im not challanged".
The navy and air cadets have flying and sailing as focal points for their training with the army its more difficult.

I do think cadets should be given more access to shooting guns, be it C7s, maybe a C9 on the range or especially the SAT system. I mean lets face it. Kids see guns every day on TV. They play airsoft and paintball. They shoot pellet guns. Video games with graphic violence. It‘s better to introduce kids/young adults to firearms and firearm safty than it is to treat guns like some evil killing toy. It‘s like sex. Its there. You see it every day you can‘t hide people fromit and think they will remain oblivious. Give them proper training with weapons on a range, use circular targets instead of figure 11‘s.


----------



## tabernac

> He said they were out in the field with paintball guns for a few days, and he can remember being cold, wet, tired, and scared crapless because he didn‘t know where the enemy was...all he remembers thinking is, "This sucks, I want to go home"...He said it was a huge reality check for all the cadets who want to ‘play soldier‘.


If every cadet had this experience they would not want to do it again. Image all the money you would save by not buying range time, additional C7s, and moded C7s.

    Just kidding. But it might work.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Pretty dumb statement dude. Cadets get money from a different place than reserves and regular force.
Just as many recruits get a culture shock when they play soldier and want to go home.


----------



## flip_masta

i think its time cadets went back to its original status like it was over 40 years ago...where cadets get to fire high powered weapons   :fifty:  and actually have fun.....and for those of you that are against it then too bad for you...if you dont like it then leave..dont take the fun out of cadets just because of sum stupid law that no one listens to. if they want to be trained as soldiers then let them. at least this way... the young teens of Canada can do something with there lives then just sit back and go lazy. I say bring in the weapons and let it work its magic  :threat:


----------



## alan_li_13

You know what i wouldn‘t mind? If they took away the "Don‘t beat cadets" rule. I think a pace stick to the head would some good to some cadets. But it would need to be justified and used in moderation of course. 

I‘ve been hit (stabbed actually) with a pacestick by my RSM (Zaap!, lol) its not that bad. It teaches respect and to "Respect my authority!"


----------



## Cpl. Williamson

> Originally posted by flip_masta:
> [qb] i think its time cadets went back to its original status like it was over 40 years ago...where cadets get to fire high powered weapons    :fifty:   and actually have fun.....and for those of you that are against it then too bad for you...if you dont like it then leave..dont take the fun out of cadets just because of sum stupid law that no one listens to. if they want to be trained as soldiers then let them. at least this way... the young teens of Canada can do something with there lives then just sit back and
> go lazy. I say bring in the weapons and let it work its magic   :threat:  [/qb]


Who agrees the Geneva Convention is "sum stupid law"?


----------



## alan_li_13

OH! Burn!!!lol
Speaking of the Geneva Convention, i read in a book that 50 cal weapons are not allowed to be used on personnel? I‘ve read the whole thing and i still havnt came across it. If it is true, someone tell me which article it is.


----------



## leopard11

50 calibre weapons are only to be used against armour and soft skin vehicles


----------



## chalk1

> Originally posted by flip_masta:
> [qb] i think its time cadets went back to its original status like it was over 40 years ago...where cadets get to fire high powered weapons    :fifty:   and actually have fun.....and for those of you that are against it then too bad for you...if you dont like it then leave..dont take the fun out of cadets just because of sum stupid law that no one listens to. if they want to be trained as soldiers then let them. at least this way... the young teens of Canada can do something with there lives then just sit back and go lazy. I say bring in the weapons and let it work its magic   :threat:  [/qb]


I agree with the Sapper.
Also, don‘t fill out your profile as having 4 years of military experience when you‘re only in cadets. I can‘t believe that someone with such small opinions would be allowed the responsibility of a troop.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

We‘ve covered this. Do a search.
The idea of .50 not being used on pers is false.

RTC13,
Just cause you read it, doesn‘t make it true.

m_a_r_c
Quite talking about something you know nothing about.


----------



## cdhoult

> Originally posted by flip_masta:
> [qb] i think its time cadets went back to its original status like it was over 40 years ago...where cadets get to fire high powered weapons    :fifty:   and actually have fun.....and for those of you that are against it then too bad for you...if you dont like it then leave..dont take the fun out of cadets just because of sum stupid law that no one listens to. if they want to be trained as soldiers then let them. at least this way... the young teens of Canada can do something with there lives then just sit back and go lazy. I say bring in the weapons and let it work its magic   :threat:  [/qb]


.....wow......

You get trained on marksmanship, maybe not on a .50, but you still get to shoot, and for the most part, that treats respect for the fire arm...at least with cadets I‘ve dealt with. 

If YOU don‘t like the current system, leave when you turn 16, and join the reserves. Go out, and be trained to be a soldier. It isn‘t the purpose of cadets, and as outlined in this thread, several times I may add, there are reasons for it not being the purpose. 

Personally, I find cadets quite fun...it‘s why I‘m part of the organization. I‘ve learned tonnes. I‘m not a lazy person, I tend to be dedicated to what I do, I‘ve learned the value of loyalty and hard work....I didn‘t need to fire a .50 to learn that, funny enough. 

Part of cadets in today‘s world is also to develop better citizens. I love working with people who are cadets at school, because we tend to be fairly efficient and have good work ethic.

This leads into why beating cadets = bad. First of all, beating people is wrong anyway....beating people with a weapon is even worse. It doesn‘t teach the cadets anything, because for the msot part, they won‘t encounter it in the real world....I‘m sure my dad doesn‘t beat his employees to keep them in line. By teaching cadets altrenate methods to conflict resolution/earning respect, it‘ll be far more applicable to them in the ‘real‘ world. 

In addition, how would we train these cadets? I have a large amount of respect for a lot of cadets I meet, but I wouldn‘t trust most of them with the power to beat a cadet. Regardless of training, these are still cadets, and they‘re still youth. Instill some discipline, but beating them? It doesn‘t make sense, and it isn‘t part of any of the aims...it‘s not something that needs to be taught. 

CH


----------



## willy

flip_masta:

You are a ridiculous human being.  "sum stupid law that no one listens to"?  How dare you insult both Canadian and international law in such fashion and in the same breath call yourself a "WO".  You are nothing but an ignorant child.  Are you 40 or more years old?  Of course not,  you are still a cadet. I doubt very much that you have done any real research on the topic of Canadian Army Cadet training history.  So with no personal knowledge, and no real research under your belt, how do you suppose that you know anything about the cadet program circa 1964?  Lose the attitude until you‘re old enough to get a zit, at least.  

I realize that this post was made in the cadet forum, but I will nonetheless make the following comment.  All cadets, and other non members of the CF take note:

I think I speak for all members of the CF when I say this:  we don‘t hate cadets, nor do we hate civilians, at all.  We just hate the ignorant, cocky little ****s who keep jumping onto and ruining posts made on this board through their brazen ignorance/attitude.  Such people do nothing but a disservice to all the legitimately interested civilians/non-obnoxious cadets who come to this forum to discuss and learn.  To all such dumbasses, I say this: grow the **** up, because I for one am sick of kids like you.


----------



## leopard11

> Originally posted by recceguy:
> 
> 
> m_a_r_c
> Quite talking about something you know nothing about. [/QB]


I guess they should really stop teaching us that on BMQ then,  i remember quite clearly that discussion, and have talked to sum course mates about this and they remember the same thing i just said, at any rate, i will ask the course staff again,  and hopefully get a copy of the lesson plan


----------



## Jarnhamar

Marc it‘s very safe to say Recceguy knows exactly what he‘s talking about. Leave it at that.


----------



## 1feral1

In Australia, we have adopted the 12.7 x99mm Accuracy International AW AMR. WTF is an AMR? A: AMR - ‘Anti Material Rifle‘ and thats the politically correct term for sniper rifle of larger calibres. Right now AI‘s AW is in our operationally deployed areas, and I am sure they are not there for target practice.

Thats a crock, in fact a big giant crock of shyte you cant use .50 on ‘soft fleshy tgts‘ which are trying to kill you.

Australia uses the fol 12.7 x 99mm wpns in flex and fixed roles:

US/UK/FN manufactured/ADF FTR .50 M2 HB HMG
FN/US manufactured/ADF FTR .50 QCB HMG

Plus the ‘sniper rifle‘ the UK manufactured AI AW .50 AMR

What next? No Mk19‘s or M203‘s? Dunno who told ya that rumour, but they are wrong.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## 1feral1

That comment that ‘flip-masta‘ made is just plain foolishness, but coming from a ‘child‘, but with 4 years of real military experience‘ why am I not suprised. What a joke, and a POSER!

Mate if you spent one hr with us in the field on a full-tac ex, on the guns, in 45C, 95% humidity, in the sun, you‘d be reduced to tears with an hr from all the hard work, and want to go home berfore you finished your first water bottle.

Wake up to yourself!

Cadet activities here include map and compass, competition day and night nav ex‘s, basic fieldcraft, bush survival techniques, first-aid trg (snake and spider bites included), radios and comms, team building exercises, plus a host of other related activites army related, but not combat trg.

And they LOVE it!

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## D-n-A

going from memory

the geneva convention doesnt allow the use of .50cal rounds on personal(I havent looked at the rules in awhile, so dont quote me on that), but in War, have fun trying to tell the trooper who‘s manning the .50cal not to shoot at the people who are trying to kill him


and m_a_r_c, dont argue with people who have a lot more time in and experiance than you, you will lose


----------



## flip_masta

if u guys feel so strong about your views on cadet combat training should be regulated then fine so be it.........but i agree with 3005_MWO...if a person wants to train to be a soldier then as soon as u turn 16...join the reserves. also i still believe that army cadets is goin down.....and it needs a boost whether it be more live fire activities or even excercises with your affiliated unit...i mean cmon lets be serious, even for one moment, i have been discussing a matter with an officer at the cadet support unit for ontario and they were thinking of removing all weapons affiliated with the army such as the c7 and the cadets will not have access to them....now tell me that is a stupid move or not


----------



## 1feral1

So Flip, say you are firing a C7, and a bit of the extractor fractures, and sticks to the bolt face.

Then as the next rd is picked up from the mag and is driven into the chamber, the fractured piece sticking to the bolt face acts as a firing pin, strikes the primer, and and fires the rifle out of battery (that means before the rd is fully chambered) and the rifle blows up in your face, not killing you, but blinding you and disfuguring you, or someone next to you. 

You end up blind and disfigured, and your parents are gonna want compensation arent they!

So whos gonna get a law suit filed? IVI? Diemaco? the CF? Hummm.

Although not common, weapons/ammo do malfunction and people are often injured, sometimes killed. 

Its best that RCACC and other ‘Service‘ cadet corps stick to air rifles or FATS. 

Regards,

Wes


----------



## cdhoult

> Originally posted by flip_masta:
> [qb] if u guys feel so strong about your views on cadet combat training should be regulated then fine so be it.........but i agree with 3005_MWO...if a person wants to train to be a soldier then as soon as u turn 16...join the reserves. also i still believe that army cadets is goin down.....and it needs a boost whether it be more live fire activities or even excercises with your affiliated unit...i mean cmon lets be serious, even for one moment, i have been discussing a matter with an officer at the cadet support unit for ontario and they were thinking of removing all weapons affiliated with the army such as the c7 and the cadets will not have access to them....now tell me that is a stupid move or not [/qb]


As explained earlier, it all depends on how you look at it...

Sea Cadets doesn‘t really do anything ‘Navy‘, aside from the uniform and some Naval Traditions (Boatswains call, etc)....When I was a Sea Cadet, we didn‘t learn how to fire weapons on a ship, or go out to sea in the YAGs and fight against eachohter...We did Seamanship, Dinghy sailing...nothing you can‘t do in the civilian world. Aside from Marine Engineering, which is a CF Ticket...they don‘t learn combat, they just learn how to engineer on a YAG.

Air Cadets certainly don‘t do any ‘air force‘ training that I know of...They don‘t learn combat tactics, or anything of the sort. They learn to fly, but that‘s civilian certification.

Army Cadets is a bit misleading, because even at HQ, it‘s the ACO(Land), not ACO(Army), so ‘Land‘ Cadets may be a better term to think along the lines of. The most Army thing is the CF Jump Course, which can sometimes be a dream for Reg Force Soldiers (so I‘m told). That‘s pretty ‘army‘ if you ask me. Beyond that, Army Cadets isn‘t anymore or less ‘military‘ than Sea is Navy or Air is Air Force.

CH

CH


----------



## Michael OLeary

For anyone wishing to refer to the Geneva Conventions (one of the tangents in this discussion thread), I dropped links to the Conventions‘ texts in a new post at   http://army.ca/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/7/241 .


----------



## Michael Dorosh

> Originally posted by 3005_MWO:
> [qb]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by flip_masta:
> [qb] if u guys feel so strong about your views on cadet combat training should be regulated then fine so be it.........but i agree with 3005_MWO...if a person wants to train to be a soldier then as soon as u turn 16...join the reserves. also i still believe that army cadets is goin down.....and it needs a boost whether it be more live fire activities or even excercises with your affiliated unit...i mean cmon lets be serious, even for one moment, i have been discussing a matter with an officer at the cadet support unit for ontario and they were thinking of removing all weapons affiliated with the army such as the c7 and the cadets will not have access to them....now tell me that is a stupid move or not [/qb]
> 
> 
> 
> As explained earlier, it all depends on how you look at it...
> 
> Sea Cadets doesn‘t really do anything ‘Navy‘, aside from the uniform and some Naval Traditions (Boatswains call, etc)....When I was a Sea Cadet, we didn‘t learn how to fire weapons on a ship, or go out to sea in the YAGs and fight against eachohter...We did Seamanship, Dinghy sailing...nothing you can‘t do in the civilian world. Aside from Marine Engineering, which is a CF Ticket...they don‘t learn combat, they just learn how to engineer on a YAG.
> 
> Air Cadets certainly don‘t do any ‘air force‘ training that I know of...They don‘t learn combat tactics, or anything of the sort. They learn to fly, but that‘s civilian certification.
> 
> Army Cadets is a bit misleading, because even at HQ, it‘s the ACO(Land), not ACO(Army), so ‘Land‘ Cadets may be a better term to think along the lines of. The most Army thing is the CF Jump Course, which can sometimes be a dream for Reg Force Soldiers (so I‘m told). That‘s pretty ‘army‘ if you ask me. Beyond that, Army Cadets isn‘t anymore or less ‘military‘ than Sea is Navy or Air is Air Force.
> 
> CH
> 
> CH [/qb]
Click to expand...

"Military" doesn‘t mean "combat".  Army cadets shine boots and press uniforms and polish brass.  Boy Scouts, Beavers, Cubs and Venturers don‘t do that.  Army Cadets drill and march using the same drill the Army uses.  Army Cadets have a rigid rank structure; they salute commissioned officers and stand at attention to talk to superiors. They have career progression (star levels) in the same manner as the Army (the old TQ, QL, or now the DP system).   That is all good "military" stuff that other civvie organizations don‘t do, so don‘t diss cadets as being "unmilitary" either.  They are very much military, they‘re just not trained for combat.


----------



## combat_medic

The Geneva Convention does not prohibit the use of .50 cal weaponry against soft targets (soft vehicles, personnel etc.). 

However, in several overseas operations, particularily those under the jurisdiction of the UN, the use of .50 against personnel was prohibited according to the particular rules of engagement (ROEs) of each mission. ROEs change all the time... even the same mission will have changing ROEs as the situation evolves.

However, I remember reading a while back about certain weapons being prohibited for use against personnel because they cause "undue pain and suffering." Things like flechette arty rounds and white phospherous are in this category, but I don‘t know if .50 cal is included, and I don‘t remember the paper that it was in.


----------



## cdhoult

MD, I don‘t believe I was implying that, especially if you‘ve read my other posts in this thread. I was just pointing out that maybe people are looking at it the wrong way when they compare it to Sea/Air Cadets and claiming that there is no ‘army‘ in ‘army‘ cadets.

The Air/Sea elements also have what you mentioned, hence why Air/Sea are no more or less ‘military‘ than army. 

My apologies if this was misinterpreted.

CH


----------



## Excolis

Wait a min here.   cadets can be 19.. where as the entry age for PRes is 16.   so tell me why people are saying they are just kids.  if we uped the training a bit, maybe it would make for easier transfer from cadets to PRes.


----------



## kurokaze

> Originally posted by 48Highlander:
> [qb] I don‘t know about other cadet corps, but I‘ve taken our own cadets on to our SAT range a couple times, so they‘ve gotten to handle a C7, C9, and C6.  Might not be as "cool" as live rounds, but they all seemed to enjoy it just fine.  I also know that the CF DOES allow cadets to fire C7‘s live as long as certain procedures are followed.  For example, no more than 5 rounds in a mag, only single shots, and there has to be 1 reserve or regforce DS staff for every 3 cadets firing.  If  you want to do any of these things, it‘s up to you and your chain of command.  Your best resource is your local armories.  If the CO of your corps wants to, and has sufficient funding, he can get on the phone to one of the regiments there and they can either open up the SAT range for you or arrange some kind of live range on a weekend.  The SAT range is probably the cheapest option because you‘ll only be paying for 1-2 personnel to run the range, and about 2 cents per round fired.  Submit a memo up your chain of command and see what happens. [/qb]


As far as I know, the SAT at Moss park STILL ISN‘T WORKING!    :rage:   

If CSM McIntyre gets it up and running I have some troops I want to put through it.


----------



## 48Highlander

well good news Kurokaze, I ran a range practice for our officers on the SAT in Moss Park a week ago, and it‘s working just fine.  There‘s a problem with the number 2 C7, but other than that the system functions fine.

and "combat_medic", I don‘t see how anyone could think that the .50cal would cause "undue pain and suffering"     a gut shot with a 12.7mm round would cause immediate death, whereas a gut shot with a 5.56 would result in a great deal of pain, and problems which would last for the rest oh the individuals life.


----------



## combat_medic

48Highlander: I didn‘t write it. I know that a .50 round at any range would turn a human being into crimson vapour and bone chips. Then again, an arty  flechette round would reduce a human being into grated cheese, and that‘s on the list. I don‘t write these documents, I‘m just passing on what I read.


----------



## alan_li_13

> Wait a min here. cadets can be 19.. where as the entry age for PRes is 16.


Not entirely correct. Cadets must leave when they turn 19. But yes, there are cadets from 16 to 18.


----------



## cdhoult

> Originally posted by hopefully airborne soon:
> [qb] Wait a min here.   cadets can be 19.. where as the entry age for PRes is 16.   so tell me why people are saying they are just kids.  if we uped the training a bit, maybe it would make for easier transfer from cadets to PRes. [/qb]


But what about the 12-15 year olds? A cadet has the option to leave whenever they like. They aren‘t bound to anything, and don‘t have to give notice. If they choose to join the PRes at 16, more power to them...But what bout those who don‘t want to?

Plus, senior cadets are trained to be instructors/leaders within the corps...going from let‘s say a MWO to a Pte with little responsability, doesn‘t really allow cadets to ‘give back‘ to their corps.

CH


----------



## Excolis

another +aim in the CCM is to promote interest in the Canadian Forces.  now this might be a stupid thought, but why not give the cadets the correct view of the canadian forces.  if the cadet doesnt like combat training, they should join boy scouts.  they have taken the "army" out of army cadets.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

3005_ MWO...we have have had Sea Cadets with us on things like soverignity (sp) patrols and coastal watch exercises and while they didn‘t fire the guns we have had them sit on the radar and do general seamanship duties.


----------



## D-n-A

if cadets want to know what combat training is, the best way is to set up something with their affliated reserve unit

the cadets an reserves can go out to a training area, and the reserves can do a section attack

and have the cadets on the sideline watching


----------



## bossi

So, let me get this straight ...
Those who advocate combat training for cadets are willing to defy the U.N.?
Grow up.

United Nations - Child Soldiers 



> CHILD SOLDIERS: AN AFFRONT TO HUMANITY
> One of the most alarming trends relating to children and armed conflicts is their participation as active soldiers. Children as young as 8 years of age are being forcibly recruited, coerced and induced to become combatants. Manipulated by adults, children have been drawn into violence that they are too young to resist and with consequences they cannot imagine.
> The children most likely to become soldiers are from impoverished and marginalized backgrounds or separated from their families. Children from wealthier and more educated families are often left undisturbed or are released if their parents can ransom them back.
> 
> Child soldiers are recruited in many different ways. Some are conscripted, others are press-ganged or kidnapped, and still others are forced to join armed groups to defend their families. In many instances, recruits are arbitrarily seized from the streets, or even from schools and orphanages, when armed militia, police or army cadres roam the streets, picking up anyone they encounter. Hunger and poverty may drive parents to offer their children for service; armies may even pay a child soldier‘s wage directly to the family. And parents may encourage their daughters to become soldiers if their marriage prospects are poor.
> 
> Sometimes, children become soldiers simply in order to survive. Indeed, a military unit can be something of a refuge, serving as a kind of surrogate family. Children may join if they believe that this is the only way to guarantee regular meals, clothing or medical attention.
> 
> Children are also used as soldiers in support functions such as cooks, porters, messengers and spies. While these may seem to be less harmful, these functions entail great hardship and risk bringing all children under suspicion. Reports tell of forces deliberately killing even the youngest children on the grounds that they were dangerous. For girls, their participation often entails being forced to provide sexual service. While children of both sexes might start out in indirect support functions, it does not take long before they are placed in the heat of the battle, where their inexperience and lack of training leave them particularly vulnerable.
> 
> 
> * At the age of 13, I joined the student movement. I had a dream to contribute to make things change, so that children would not be hungry.... Later I joined the armed struggle. I had all the inexperience and the fears of a little girl. I found out that girls were obliged to have sexual relations to alleviate the sadness of the combatants. And who alleviated our sadness after going with someone we hardly knew?... There is a great pain in my being when I recall all these things.... In spite of my commitment, they abused me, they trampled my human dignity. And above all, they did not understand that I was a child and that I had rights. (From a Honduras case study) *
> 
> 
> Preventing the future use of children in armed conflict
> 
> Building on the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a number of organizations are working to raise the minimum age for recruitment and participation in armed forces to 18 years. In 1994, a United Nations working group was established to develop an Optional Protocol to the Convention in order to achieve this.
> 
> Several measures have been identified which can reinforce the local capacity to minimize or prevent the use of children as soldiers. For example, local communities should be made more aware of national and international laws governing the age of recruitment. Non-governmental organizations, religious groups and civil society in general can play important roles in establishing ethical frameworks that characterize children‘s participation in armed conflicts as unacceptable. In Peru, forced recruitment drives have declined where parish churches have denounced the activity. In El Salvador, Guatemala and Paraguay, ethnic groups and the mothers of child soldiers have formed organizations to pressure authorities for the release of under-age soldiers. Another important preventive measure is the active and early documentation and tracing of unaccompanied children in refugee or displaced persons camps. Locating refugee camps far from conflict zones can also reduce the chance of children being enticed or recruited into warring groups.


----------



## Eowyn

> Originally posted by D-n-A:
> [qb] if cadets want to know what combat training is, the best way is to set up something with their affliated reserve unit
> 
> the cadets an reserves can go out to a training area, and the reserves can do a section attack
> 
> and have the cadets on the sideline watching [/qb]


There is a problem with that.  Not all Reserve units do section attacks.  We do recce patrols, road moves, occupy hides.


----------



## kurokaze

> Originally posted by Eowyn:
> [qb]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by D-n-A:
> [qb] if cadets want to know what combat training is, the best way is to set up something with their affliated reserve unit
> 
> the cadets an reserves can go out to a training area, and the reserves can do a section attack
> 
> and have the cadets on the sideline watching [/qb]
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with that.  Not all Reserve units do section attacks.  We do recce patrols, road moves, occupy hides. [/qb]
Click to expand...

Which is all valid "combat" training.  We had our cadets come out and watch us do a live fire shoot with the guns.  Mind you they had to be about 50m back of the guns.. but they were there.

I don‘t think however, that the cadets should actually be taught these things.  The discipline isn‘t there for most of these kids, and I shudder to think what they might do if they were taught something like section attacks.


----------



## cdhoult

> Originally posted by Ex-Dragoon:
> [qb] 3005_ MWO...we have have had Sea Cadets with us on things like soverignity (sp) patrols and coastal watch exercises and while they didn‘t fire the guns we have had them sit on the radar and do general seamanship duties. [/qb]


That‘s actually really cool    I know the occassional cadet gets deployed (Senior Cadet goes on board a ship, and gets some basic...boatswain training, I think...I‘ll look into it. But the rough equiv. would be like an army cadet doing Para, except the Sea Cadet doesn‘t get any official qualification I don‘t think), but it‘s getting rarer and rarer, and it also depends on where the units are located (i.e. Central vs. Pac vs. Atlantic)

CH


----------



## D-n-A

Eowyn: that is true, but every soldier should know how to do a section attack, it was taught on the older QL2 course, an now the SQ course. And I believe its also in the Warrior Course.

Kurokaze: I agree with you that cadets shouldent be taught this stuff, but I dont see any harm in letting them watch a section attack. Maybe pass around somones webbing, an they get to feel how heavy, show off some of the kit.


----------



## cdhoult

I‘m all for that, handing around the kit, etc....I know some schools run a "Soldier for a Day" program out here, for those 16+....I didn‘t go on it, but it sounded interesting.

Maybe run a Cadets-to-Reserves Information night for cadets 16+ (or information weekend...bring them out to the bush).

CH


----------



## chalk1

The idea of holding a day of famil trg with the affiliated unit is good, except for the fact that not all units want to support their corps in that way, and simply don‘t.

Bossi...thanks for that last post.


----------



## Harris

OK.  I think we‘ve heard enough on this topic.  It‘s been beaten to death.  For those of you just catching up I‘ll summarize and then close the thread.

1. Some Army Cadets would like to do more Amry like training.  In some instances this is good (ie.  Map and Compass, First Aid etc...)  In some instances this is bad (ie. Section Attacks, unarmed Combat, etc...)

2. Canada has agreed to the Geneva Convention, therefore you will not see Cadets taking training that is similar to Combat training.  It is illegal and if units are doing this they are beaking the law.

3. There are lots of opportunities to create interest in the military without breaking the law, small arms training under strict supervision, field craft, map and compass, etc.. are all good examples.  The onus is on the individual Cadet Corps and or Affiliated Units to encourage these activities.

4. If you personally feel that you "have" to be taught these skills (Combat oriented) then when you turn 16, hit up your parents to sign a permission form and go apply to join your local Reserve Unit.  Until then try to get the most you can out of the Cadet Unit you are with.

The end.


----------



## Sgt O`Hara

I am just trying to say that we should be shooting 303‘s and the fn again. I remind you that when we did do these things the #‘s in cadets reached the hundred thousands and they would again is we did more stuff like that,we arnt even allowed to do recce‘s or patrols anymore like wtf....


----------



## Fishbone Jones

O‘Hara,
You wonder why people get PO‘d at some cadets, and then it washes over all of them. This topic was beat to death and closed by the Moderator. Low and behold, you need your extra two cents, so you reopen it. It was closed BY A MODERATOR. Get over it!


----------



## shreenan

Army Cadets- Why don't we do section tactics on FTXs? 
Im wondering if their is CATOs restricting this and if so whats the number?


----------



## RCDtpr

Why would you need to do a section attack?  I don't know if anyone told you this...but you're kids...not soldiers.

Cadets is meant to teach leadership, confidence, make new friends etc etc.  You're not there to learn how to fight.


----------



## c.jacob

Yes, there are restrictions on what cadets can do during training in regards to what you are talking about.   There are activities your unit can do for CF familiarization and it is your training officer that plans it.  It is more a question for your chain of command.  Take note of what the scope of the cadet program is before asking your NCO's in order to be taken seriously.


----------



## marshall sl

They used to do them back when I was in (71-77)  The senior cadets would get to go on Ex with the regiment as well. Things have changed I guess.


----------



## Prototype

Instead of copying and pasting all the international laws that contraindicate this, I'll just leave this here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_use_of_children

It's wikipedia, but it's a good jumping off point for relevant international law and treatise that outline why Canada does not teach it's children to fight war.

You really want to serve? Then you can join the reserves when you're 16.


----------



## rmc_wannabe

Prototype said:
			
		

> You really want to serve? Then you can join the reserves when you're 16.



Or if you can't wait that long, Somalia is always up for new recruits... along with DRC and Sierra Leone  :


----------



## Kalatzi

Prototype said:
			
		

> Instead of copying and pasting all the international laws that contraindicate this, I'll just leave this here...
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_use_of_children
> 
> It's wikipedia, but it's a good jumping off point for relevant international law and treatise that outline why Canada does not teach it's children to fight war.
> 
> You really want to serve? Then you can join the reserves when you're 16.



I was thinking of posting the same. 

And since I tend to ramble on - diluting the point - Much Thanks


----------



## JB 11 11

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> Why would you need to do a section attack?  I don't know if anyone told you this...but you're kids...not soldiers.
> 
> Cadets is meant to teach leadership, confidence, make new friends etc etc.  You're not there to learn how to fight.



You were never in Cadets were you? Either that or you Corps really sucked.

Just curious why people have to dump all over Cadets all the time? Sure they ask bone questions a lot of the time, but mostly its because they're keen. Give the kid a break. He wants to be like YOU!

As for section attacks in Cadets, I did em (1990-1997) and myself and senior Cadet NCO's went on Field exercises with our regiments on a regular basis. But back then we also had our own armory filled with FN C1A1's and full bore .308 Lee Enfields and shot till we were blue in the face. Most of this was down to the fact that our Corps was well endowed in the finance department thanks to an active Parents comity, but we had to get permission to spend that money the way we did. It was common practise for Cadet Corps to emulate as close as possible their parent regiments  and thus would train in a military manner. Hell, when I was 16 I could completely disassemble (100%... not field strip here) an FN blind folded, and then reassemble it no problem. 

I'm not sure why there is such an anti-military attitude with Cadets now? If that's the way we think about the organization as Canadians these days, then whats the point of even having them wear a uniform or be affiliated to any military unit? If it is just about Leadership, confidence and Map and Compass, then there are other non-military organizations for this: Scouts and Venturers

Personally, the reason I joined Cadets instead of Venturers was because I wanted to be in the Military, but as I was just a wee lad still, Cadets would have to do. And it did. Come to think of it, I distinctly remember the local Cadet Corps (Oshawa) pulling security along side the Ontario Reg. guys during Canada Day down at the lake (Talking '80's here).

All that said, I am sad to say that toward the end of my day things like field Ex's with the regiment and shooting real weapons were quickly going the way of the Dodo. From what I hear now, airguns are where its at with most Corps and Lee Enfields for the ranges...maybe. No FN's, which is a shame because like it or not, I was taught how to not only shoot (which by the way, I still can...and well) but more importantly how to properly handle and respect a firearm. 

However, referring to OP, if your senior NCO's and CO are supportive and you also have the support of your Parent Reg. then I do not see why you would not practice Section attacks and the like.
I can tell you that had we not had support from our Parent Reg. we most likely would not have done a lot of the amazing things we got to do. Creating a good, solid relationship with those guys is definitely the key. 
My :2c:
JB


----------



## Jammer

Perhaps you should go back and read the Mission Statement of the Army Cadets:

The Royal Canadian Army Cadets appeal to teenagers craving exciting outdoor activities where their personal limits as individuals and team-members will be tested. The hardcore outdoor-oriented will love the challenge!

Army cadets develop abilities in the use of map and compass, GPS technology, orienteering, first-aid, camping and survival skills, canoeing, abseiling, trekking, mountain biking, etc. As they get more experienced, some will be selected for parachuting, white-water rafting and glacier climbing. They will also learn to become outdoor leaders.



Army Cadets get involved in ceremonial military events and citizenship activities that allow them to connect to their Canadian heritage. They develop a great sense of pride and discipline through their involvement in a hierarchical system that allows them to hone their leadership skills as they grow older and they learn to care for younger cadets.



In addition to their specialty training, Army Cadets may become involved in other exciting activities like competitive Olympic-style marksmanship and biathlon, sports competitions, music training and competitions, cultural outings, volunteer community support, etc.

Canada represents the best playground for teenagers interested in the outdoors. We are the organization of choice for teens and adults interested in getting out of the classroom to explore the planet the way it should be.

Join the reserves if you want begin to learn The Profession of Arms.


----------



## ballz

JB 11 11 said:
			
		

> You were never in Cadets were you? Either that or you Corps really sucked.
> 
> Just curious why people have to dump all over Cadets all the time? Sure they ask bone questions a lot of the time, but mostly its because they're keen. Give the kid a break. He wants to be like YOU!
> 
> *As for section attacks in Cadets, I did em (1990-1997) * and myself and senior Cadet NCO's went on Field exercises with our regiments on a regular basis. But back then we also had our own armory filled with FN C1A1's and full bore .308 Lee Enfields and shot till we were blue in the face. Most of this was down to the fact that our Corps was well endowed in the finance department thanks to an active Parents comity, but we had to get permission to spend that money the way we did. It was common practise for Cadet Corps to emulate as close as possible their parent regiments  and thus would train in a military manner. Hell, when I was 16 I could completely disassemble (100%... not field strip here) an FN blind folded, and then reassemble it no problem.
> 
> I'm not sure why there is such an anti-military attitude with Cadets now? If that's the way we think about the organization as Canadians these days, then whats the point of even having them wear a uniform or be affiliated to any military unit? If it is just about Leadership, confidence and Map and Compass, then there are other non-military organizations for this: Scouts and Venturers
> 
> Personally, the reason I joined Cadets instead of Venturers was because I wanted to be in the Military, but as I was just a wee lad still, Cadets would have to do. And it did. Come to think of it, I distinctly remember the local Cadet Corps (Oshawa) pulling security along side the Ontario Reg. guys during Canada Day down at the lake (Talking '80's here).
> 
> All that said, I am sad to say that toward the end of my day things like field Ex's with the regiment and shooting real weapons were quickly going the way of the Dodo. From what I hear now, airguns are where its at with most Corps and Lee Enfields for the ranges...maybe. No FN's, which is a shame because like it or not, I was taught how to not only shoot (which by the way, I still can...and well) but more importantly how to properly handle and respect a firearm.
> 
> However, referring to OP, if your senior NCO's and CO are supportive and you also have the support of your Parent Reg. then I do not see why you would not practice Section attacks and the like.
> I can tell you that had we not had support from our Parent Reg. we most likely would not have done a lot of the amazing things we got to do. Creating a good, solid relationship with those guys is definitely the key.
> My :2c:
> JB



Emphasis mine. UN Security Council Resolution 1261 was passed in 1999. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1261

As I understand it, cadets are no longer allowed to shoot at targets that have a human silhouette pictured on it, because this is "conditioning" a minor to kill.

I don't know why it's hard for anybody to guess why it would be frowned upon by the international community if we had 12 year olds practicing section attacks : I mean, section attacks have a variety of purposes other than killing a human being that a cadet might find useful right?


As for why people in the military have a negative stigma against cadets, there's enough discussion on that in some of the recruiting threads if you're actually interested in finding out.


----------



## JB 11 11

Jammer said:
			
		

> Perhaps you should go back and read the Mission Statement of the Army Cadets:
> 
> The Royal Canadian Army Cadets appeal to teenagers craving exciting outdoor activities where their personal limits as individuals and team-members will be tested. The hardcore outdoor-oriented will love the challenge!
> 
> Army cadets develop abilities in the use of map and compass, GPS technology, orienteering, first-aid, camping and survival skills, canoeing, abseiling, trekking, mountain biking, etc. As they get more experienced, some will be selected for parachuting, white-water rafting and glacier climbing. They will also learn to become outdoor leaders.
> 
> 
> 
> Army Cadets get involved in ceremonial military events and citizenship activities that allow them to connect to their Canadian heritage. They develop a great sense of pride and discipline through their involvement in a hierarchical system that allows them to hone their leadership skills as they grow older and they learn to care for younger cadets.
> 
> 
> 
> In addition to their specialty training, Army Cadets may become involved in other exciting activities like competitive Olympic-style marksmanship and biathlon, sports competitions, music training and competitions, cultural outings, volunteer community support, etc.
> 
> Canada represents the best playground for teenagers interested in the outdoors. We are the organization of choice for teens and adults interested in getting out of the classroom to explore the planet the way it should be.
> 
> Join the reserves if you want begin to learn The Profession of Arms.



Wow. Things HAVE definitely changed. Fair enough. As for the negative stigma, given that mission statement I can certainly see why when a lowly Cadet talks as if they have military experience, they look ridiculous and are treated as such. They no longer have any. 

As for Conditioning 12 year olds, that's one way to look at it. But i don't see many former Cadets going into their high schools and shooting up their entire class, or robbing 7-elevens at gun point, but then again its all about the optics these days isn't it.

I'll take the hint and keep m'trap shut now. :-X


----------



## RCDtpr

JB 11 11 said:
			
		

> You were never in Cadets were you? Either that or you Corps really sucked.
> 
> Just curious why people have to dump all over Cadets all the time? Sure they ask bone questions a lot of the time, but mostly its because they're keen. Give the kid a break. He wants to be like YOU!
> 
> As for section attacks in Cadets, I did em (1990-1997) and myself and senior Cadet NCO's went on Field exercises with our regiments on a regular basis. But back then we also had our own armory filled with FN C1A1's and full bore .308 Lee Enfields and shot till we were blue in the face. Most of this was down to the fact that our Corps was well endowed in the finance department thanks to an active Parents comity, but we had to get permission to spend that money the way we did. It was common practise for Cadet Corps to emulate as close as possible their parent regiments  and thus would train in a military manner. Hell, when I was 16 I could completely disassemble (100%... not field strip here) an FN blind folded, and then reassemble it no problem.
> 
> I'm not sure why there is such an anti-military attitude with Cadets now? If that's the way we think about the organization as Canadians these days, then whats the point of even having them wear a uniform or be affiliated to any military unit? If it is just about Leadership, confidence and Map and Compass, then there are other non-military organizations for this: Scouts and Venturers
> 
> Personally, the reason I joined Cadets instead of Venturers was because I wanted to be in the Military, but as I was just a wee lad still, Cadets would have to do. And it did. Come to think of it, I distinctly remember the local Cadet Corps (Oshawa) pulling security along side the Ontario Reg. guys during Canada Day down at the lake (Talking '80's here).
> 
> All that said, I am sad to say that toward the end of my day things like field Ex's with the regiment and shooting real weapons were quickly going the way of the Dodo. From what I hear now, airguns are where its at with most Corps and Lee Enfields for the ranges...maybe. No FN's, which is a shame because like it or not, I was taught how to not only shoot (which by the way, I still can...and well) but more importantly how to properly handle and respect a firearm.
> 
> However, referring to OP, if your senior NCO's and CO are supportive and you also have the support of your Parent Reg. then I do not see why you would not practice Section attacks and the like.
> I can tell you that had we not had support from our Parent Reg. we most likely would not have done a lot of the amazing things we got to do. Creating a good, solid relationship with those guys is definitely the key.
> My :2c:
> JB



Nope...i never was a cadet.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not trashing cadets.  I think it's a great way for KIDS to learn leadership, build confidence and make friends.  I'm not down on the kid for asking a question or being keen either.  But if he joins the army he has an entire career learning how to fight etc.  Enjoy your childhood while you can.

Kids don't need to practice killing, attacking etc.  Some of the older cadets might be ok, but the younger ones simply do not have the maturity to understand what it is they are doing and why they are doing it.  The goal of the program is not to teach kids violence.

Dear god...I'm sounding like a hippie here so I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## shreenan

Yeah im 16 now and the age for the Primary reserve has changed from 16-17.

Now about the section attacks and such, in the 40's-90's CADETS did alot more military like things like why have ARMY cadets if the only army thing is the uniforms (more less). 

Iv been in cadets for four years and only shot the C7 once but in older pictures cadets are firing the bren gun and now we can only shoot the C7 five rounds in a mag at one time and semi auto and yes cadets are shooting pelt rifles now it gets boring after four years


----------



## Michael OLeary

The cadet program of today must meet the expectations and limitations placed upon it today. Wishing it to be something it once was, but can no longer be is wasted energy. You have been offered the reasons why this is so, and none of us have the power to change them, nor can you expect the federal government to do so. If you want to be trained as a soldier, you will have to wait until you are old enough.


----------



## shreenan

I only asked why people think it changed :facepalm:     and yes I will wait.


----------



## the 48th regulator

shreenan said:
			
		

> I only asked why people think it changed :facepalm:     and yes I will wait.



Because Canada invented a social engineering concept known as political correctness.  Now, to have children running around with guns in the woods, was almost as bad as having Soldiers walking around with guns in cities.

You are only 16, not much long before you are eligible to join.  So be patient padwan, the force will be your soon.

dileas

tess


----------



## rmc_wannabe

shreenan said:
			
		

> Now about the section attacks and such, in the 40's-90's CADETS did *a lot* more military like things like why have ARMY cadets if the only army thing is the uniforms (more less).



And during the 40-90's it also was acceptable to smoke while pregnant, drive without a seatbelt, and beat your children...whats your point? 

Society changes for the better, most of the time, due to knowing better. If even a corrupt Taliban commander can deem that "only men of beard growing age" can join their desperate cause, do you think progressive Canadian society will deem it acceptable for kids to train as a military force? that is definitely not for the benefit of Canada or Canadian society.



> Iv been in cadets for four years and only shot the C7 once but in older pictures cadets are firing the bren gun and now we can only shoot the C7 five rounds in a mag at one time and semi auto and yes cadets are shooting pelt rifles now it gets boring after four years



I was in cadets for 6, I saw all the same pictures and heard the same stories about the good ol days.  Times change, get over it.

If you do join, you'll find out that the "excitement" of firing heavier weapons lasts less than 5 minutes, but the more exciting two thirds of the day are spend cleaning said weapons  8). Oh my, the though of cleaning carbon out of a C9 just gets me PUMPED  :shooter2:! Or waiting in line at the CQ and having the weapon turned away for the 5th time. That would have to be the best part of the day, right there


----------



## dapaterson

rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> If you do join, you'll find out that the "excitement" of firing heavier weapons lasts less than 5 minutes, but the more exciting two thirds of the day are spend cleaning said weapons  8).



[war story]
In the 1990s, CFB Chilliwack had a well-oiled machine in place to kit out young officers arriving for training.  Your stop at the weapons lockup would have the staff tell you your weapon serial number, you'd recite it back, they'd drop a bolt in the C7, screw on the BFA, slap in a magazine of 5.56 blank, set it to auto, fire off the mag into a clearing bay, then remove the magazine and bolt, hand your course staff the bolt, and hand you the freshly soiled weapon, all with a smirk on their face.
[/war story]


----------



## JB 11 11

RCDcpl said:
			
		

> Nope...i never was a cadet.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not trashing cadets.  I think it's a great way for KIDS to learn leadership, build confidence and make friends.  I'm not down on the kid for asking a question or being keen either.  But if he joins the army he has an entire career learning how to fight etc.  Enjoy your childhood while you can.
> 
> Kids don't need to practice killing, attacking etc.  Some of the older cadets might be ok, but the younger ones simply do not have the maturity to understand what it is they are doing and why they are doing it.  The goal of the program is not to teach kids violence.
> 
> Dear god...I'm sounding like a hippie here so I'll just leave it at that.



To be clear, I never advocated that 12 year old's be given a loaded weapon and taught to shot "human" shaped targets or how to do section attacks. I was talking in terms of Cadets as a whole. Sure back when I was a Cadet we did a lot of cool stuff that today is Verboten, what ever the reasons, BUT... and here's the kicker.. YOU had to EARN the privilege to do those cool things. It was never, ever forced on those who did not want to partake.

To be honest, I thought Cadets was really boaring for the first few years bacuase you had to be senior to be allowed to do a lot of the extra trainning they offered. And there were plenty who did not want to do extra range days, or mock tower jumps out at Pet. or go on FTX with our Parent Reg. It's just a bit sad that all of that has been taken away. 



			
				rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> And during the 40-90's it also was acceptable to smoke while pregnant, drive without a seatbelt, and beat your children...whats your point?



LOL!... thats a great comparison.... smoking while pregnant= Cadets post 1999.  :facepalm: 

Look, times have changed and things are the way they are now. Im not saying we need to change it back, Im just saying I think its too bad that kids arent being given the chance to prove themselves capable of handling something a little more than Drill and absailling. 

And for those of the opinion that kids should be left to be kids and enjoy there child hood.... again, I totaly agree. It is not mandatory for your child to go to Cadets. If you do not want them to be in that type of evironment, them put them in Soccer, or Scouts... rock climbing classes.


----------



## Jammer

You promised you would keep your trap shut.


----------



## Franko

This has spun nicely around the bowl and I hate doing the mandatory "second flush" to rid it of the corn, so I'll lock it up.

Normal caveats apply.

*The Army.ca Staff*


----------



## shreenan

How would you put more army back into army cadets?

my  :2c: is go shooting the service weapons more and just not the C7 but the C9 would be interesting and learning how to field strip,clean and maintain the weapons as well.


----------



## Hurricane

As fun as that may be for you. That would make Cadets Canada seem more like Child Soldiers. Cadets is a youth organization that is based on the community first, with some military traditions and drill for pride and discipline. They already have access to the C7, as well as Basic Para which seems easier to get as a cadet than a member of the canadian forces. You want to be more army than that? My  :2c: join the reserves when you come of age.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Introducing 2 x 10s, trench digging, and wearing numerous pounds of equipment in both very hot and Cold weather and making them do inhumane amounts of needles mind numbing duties.

dileas

tess


----------



## dogger1936

The army cadets are beyond repair. They have A GREAT well written program but no way of implementing it outside of the pretty little QSP's. CIC officers are not held to any form of standard and many of those in "charge" at the HQ's are afraid to upset anyone as they are all on a class B and waiting for someone to take their jobs.

The CIC officers I have met out at the corp levels have little to no experience in anything military; and ACO's have slipped from regular force officer positions to CIC officers as there isn't enough reg force per's to fill the billets. These men and women are buddies with everyone at the corps and afraid of enforcing any kind of standard. The CIC officers for the most part at corp level WANT to know how to do their jobs but are never corrected due to the corrupt B class system that inflicts fear in these people to correct faults.

Many corps are losing members to the junior ranger program which is by far a better program for youth. I would never allow my son or daughter to be involved in the cadet program. The army is gone from the program and as the numbers suggest it is a fading out at least here on the east coast.

This is from the point of view of an ACA within the program. The HQ is scared of addressing problems such as mandatory training being...well...if they don't do it they don't do it training instead. As a regular force member I have been jacked up by CIC officers for THEIR incompetence showing through and there is nothing I can do or say as they hold a commission. 

I came into the ACA job with a open mind and a willingness to help out as I'm still awaiting some surgeries from my lovely time in afganland. I have tried my best but I would advise any reg or res members thinking about getting involved in the program to stay out. As a regular force NCO with excellent service record I have been talked down to like a cadet NCM by career CIC officers.

I have never been so disrespected in my career and if as a regular force NCO I am getting treated like this there is no way I would put my children in these "mens" hands.  

(On a lighter note there have been some outstanding CIC officers I've met here. Guys who are here for the kids and not their egos...like too many are.)


----------



## Prototype

You want to get something out of army cadets that will help you in the Canadian Forces?

*Pay attention in map and compass classes*

You want to start being a better soldier. Be the one who doesn't get lost.


----------



## chriscalow

Hurricane said:
			
		

> , as well as Basic Para which seems easier to get as a cadet than a member of the canadian forces. You want to be more army than that? My  :2c: join the reserves when you come of age.



Really? How many times is this going to come up?  What? Upset because some kid who probably spent the last two years of his life working towards a chance at competing for one of the 50 or so slots on course, out of how many cadets that meet the age across the entire country, got on a course that you didn't?

I'm not even going to waste my time to read your profile.  You have to compete with what? Your platoon? Company at best?  If your unit can't get slots on para courses, then they probably don't require paratroopers... If theydoneed spots, and they just aren't getting offered to you..... Best get up on that chin up bar and work to set yourself up to shine against your mates.

Every time there is a thread on this site re: para, wings, or JTF-2, some putz with an attitude comes on here being all bitter about kids getting the opportunity to strive for something really great.  I can personally attest to the fact that cadet programs offering things such as para, gliding etc, really go a long way with helping at risk youth keep focused and on the right track.  Can't have a problem with that can you?


----------



## Snaketnk

Shooting and section attacks is 0.1% of what it is to be in the army, let alone being a soldier. 

Want to put the army back in cadets? Instill discipline, motivation, respect, integrity and competence in them. Far too often I see Cadets walking around the Fredericton mall, in service dress, with headphones in their ears and hands in their pockets and aviators hanging off their shirts. I'm not a D&D stickler but holy crap, maybe have a try at the basics before asking to do section attacks and JTF2 sniper school.

A good majority of the ex-cadets I met in my training VR'd at one point, usually because they realized the real CF isn't just fun ranges and getting free stuff from the government. From ex-cadets I do know, they tell me that the D&D and discipline have gone to shit in recent times.

If you want more army, then try to meet the standards of behavior of the army before asking for the high-speed go's that real infanteers don't even get.


----------



## RememberanceDay

Here in Sea cadets (A little OT) our D&D is horrible. Our instructors try their best, and so do our POs and CPOs, but the NR/OS/AB's just won't listen/pay attention/care. One kid turned up in civvies with out a good explanation (or any) for CD's one night. It's bad! I love the idea of cadets, I love what it stands for and all, but if the newbies won't stand up and at least _try_.... It's them that make up the majority. We can never get through a class because they're talking/laughing/calling/texting in the back. Oh yes, the instructors try to instill discipline, but when they are still going on at 'room'... There's a MAJOR problem. Most of them are forced by their parents, so they don't give a shit.


----------



## the 48th regulator

When a unit deploys, working with;

The rear party.
Padre.
Military Family Resource Centre
Charitable organizations like Wounded Warrior, and Soldier On.
The local Legion

You want to feel what soldiering is like?  Get the feel of the emotional part.  I have posted twice.  Once talking about the physical challenges involved being in the "Army".  The second, the emotional portion.

Son, there is a hell of a lot more to soldiering, than firing a few rounds down range.

dileas

tess


----------



## rmc_wannabe

I like to stay away from these kinds of discussions because often I feel it reverts to the constant "it was so much better back in..." battle.

However, being said I do have some ideas:

*OVERHAUL OF THE CIC BRANCH*

In my experience working with the CIC, there are people I can work with and people I cannot. Ultimately, I cannot and will not refer to these people as _officers_. At least military ones. 

There seems to be an attitude that they are not really in the CF or that they are and have an extremely skewed impression of what it means to be in the CF. Most of this is due to the fact that the training of CIC members is done by other CIC officers. 

I would reccommend that  BMOQ should not be instructed by fellow CIC members. What better way to initially curb systemic problems within an organization than to involve persons at the ground level who are not overly involved emotionally in the organization? A Res or Reg Snr NCO is not part of the CIC old boys club. If a candidate is out of dress or screwing up somewhere, they will be very prompt and direct in telling them so. By all means, for MOC training have it done by a CIC officer, but make sure they have a concrete basic training in military life from someone in the military.

Secondly, I would recommend that things such as Universality of Service and Physical Fitness apply to CIC members. Too often I have seen CIC members that do not have a level of fitness required to participate in some of the activities they are trying to get their cadets to participate in. This completely undermines the "lead by example" responsibility of a superior. When I was volunteering with a Corps, I was the only adult staff participating in the fitness testing with the cadets. This not only motivated some of the cadets who normally didn't participate, but it gave the cadets a role model to try to follow. Which brings me to my second point...


*REG/RES FORCE INVOLVEMENT (MORESO)*

Some units provide excellent support to their cadet corps (LdSH(RC) comes to mind). Others do not.

A lot of the time I would find the LO from the Affiliated unit was the only person that was involved in anything the cadet unit was doing. This was either due to apathy from both COs or a lack of understanding of what activities are in each others respective arcs. A parade twice a year doesn't give either organization much of a face to the other.

I would reccommend with the Jr NCM level (closely supervised of course) with cadet organizations to help mentor cadets in things they are superior in compared to the CIC officers instructing them in (i.e. Map and Compass, Fieldcraft, Marksmanship). A lot of Reg/Res Force personnel I know look down on cadets, however I do not.

The cadet you look down upon is probably the most likely person to be the FNG when the time comes. You reap what you sew in this case. I was astonished to find a former cadet I helped mentor as a Reg force Adult staff sitting in the canteen of my unit. You can start them out right in every opportunity you're given... or let the system in place bastardize their training and then you're molding someone with bad habits.



Ultimately, this is just my experience. I'm sure everyone could argue for or against any portion of what I just stated, however I can say one thing that rings true in any facet:

If you want to put the "Army(Sea, Air)" back into cadets, then put it back systematically into the training of CIC and the mentoring of cadets. 

Just my  :2c:


----------



## Scott

Gumby said:
			
		

> Really? How many times is this going to come up?  What? Upset because some kid who probably spent the last two years of his life working towards a chance at competing for one of the 50 or so slots on course, out of how many cadets that meet the age across the entire country, got on a course that you didn't?
> 
> I'm not even going to waste my time to read your profile.  You have to compete with what? Your platoon? Company at best?  If your unit can't get slots on para courses, then they probably don't require paratroopers... If theydoneed spots, and they just aren't getting offered to you..... Best get up on that chin up bar and work to set yourself up to shine against your mates.
> 
> Every time there is a thread on this site re: para, wings, or JTF-2, some putz with an attitude comes on here being all bitter about kids getting the opportunity to strive for something really great.  I can personally attest to the fact that cadet programs offering things such as para, gliding etc, really go a long way with helping at risk youth keep focused and on the right track.  Can't have a problem with that can you?



Actually, it seems to me like you went on the bigger rant about it. But then I didn't read what Hurricane said and take it out of context.

Cheer up a bit, k?

Staff


----------



## Neill McKay

Hurricane said:
			
		

> You want to be more army than that? My  :2c: join the reserves when you come of age.



That's a popular argument, but the fact remains that there's a pretty substantial body of belief among army cadets that they're lost a lot of the military aspect of their programme so it doesn't offer much by way of a solution.

I agree that the answer is not section attacks and bigger weapons, but there's a lot more to the army than closing with and destroying the enemy.  I work in the sea cadet programme so I'm not an SME on army cadet training, but I've always been a proponent of their having more exposure to other areas of the army like engineering, vehicles, medical, etc.  As one example there used to be a driver-mechanic course for army cadets in which they learned to drive and perform basic service on military vehicles.  There's no end of training of that nature that could put the army back into army cadets without risking a "child soldiers" label.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Just to provide some context, here's what the Cadets.ca site says about how "military" the Cadet movement is supposed to be:


> The Cadet Program is the largest federally-sponsored youth program in Canada that includes the Royal Canadian Sea, Army and Air Cadets. It is a national program for young Canadians aged 12 to 18 who are interested in participating in a variety of fun, challenging and rewarding activities while *learning about the sea, army and air activities of the Canadian Forces*.



In regards to these suggestions:


			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> When a unit deploys, working with;
> 
> The rear party.
> Padre.
> Military Family Resource Centre
> Charitable organizations like Wounded Warrior, and Soldier On.
> The local Legion


the attached lesson guide from the Cadets.ca site outlines other ways to get involved (write the troops, etc.) in learning about the CF.

Another factor probably affecting how much "army" stuff Cadets can be exposed to, and what kinds, is what kind of unit (often PRes) is in or close to the smaller communities hosting Cadet units.  I remember in the 'Mo bringing senior cadets along on ex with the infantry (but that was when the earth was still cooling) because we were the closest "army" game in town.  The Army Cadet corps associated with the local Service Bn probably had more of a chance to be exposed to non-close-with-and-destroy elements of the CF.

Edited to add:  Does anyone have any experience with this group that seems to be set up to get input from serving Cadets (although I'd work on the acronym if I was in their position)?


----------



## dogger1936

rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> I like to stay away from these kinds of discussions because often I feel it reverts to the constant "it was so much better back in..." battle.
> 
> However, being said I do have some ideas:
> 
> *OVERHAUL OF THE CIC BRANCH*
> 
> In my experience working with the CIC, there are people I can work with and people I cannot. Ultimately, I cannot and will not refer to these people as _officers_. At least military ones.
> 
> There seems to be an attitude that they are not really in the CF or that they are and have an extremely skewed impression of what it means to be in the CF. Most of this is due to the fact that the training of CIC members is done by other CIC officers.
> 
> I would reccommend that  BMOQ should not be instructed by fellow CIC members. What better way to initially curb systemic problems within an organization than to involve persons at the ground level who are not overly involved emotionally in the organization? A Res or Reg Snr NCO is not part of the CIC old boys club. If a candidate is out of dress or screwing up somewhere, they will be very prompt and direct in telling them so. By all means, for MOC training have it done by a CIC officer, but make sure they have a concrete basic training in military life from someone in the military.
> 
> Secondly, I would recommend that things such as Universality of Service and Physical Fitness apply to CIC members. Too often I have seen CIC members that do not have a level of fitness required to participate in some of the activities they are trying to get their cadets to participate in. This completely undermines the "lead by example" responsibility of a superior. When I was volunteering with a Corps, I was the only adult staff participating in the fitness testing with the cadets. This not only motivated some of the cadets who normally didn't participate, but it gave the cadets a role model to try to follow. Which brings me to my second point...
> 
> 
> *REG/RES FORCE INVOLVEMENT (MORESO)*
> 
> Some units provide excellent support to their cadet corps (LdSH(RC) comes to mind). Others do not.
> 
> A lot of the time I would find the LO from the Affiliated unit was the only person that was involved in anything the cadet unit was doing. This was either due to apathy from both COs or a lack of understanding of what activities are in each others respective arcs. A parade twice a year doesn't give either organization much of a face to the other.
> 
> I would reccommend with the Jr NCM level (closely supervised of course) with cadet organizations to help mentor cadets in things they are superior in compared to the CIC officers instructing them in (i.e. Map and Compass, Fieldcraft, Marksmanship). A lot of Reg/Res Force personnel I know look down on cadets, however I do not.
> 
> The cadet you look down upon is probably the most likely person to be the FNG when the time comes. You reap what you sew in this case. I was astonished to find a former cadet I helped mentor as a Reg force Adult staff sitting in the canteen of my unit. You can start them out right in every opportunity you're given... or let the system in place bastardize their training and then you're molding someone with bad habits.
> 
> 
> 
> Ultimately, this is just my experience. I'm sure everyone could argue for or against any portion of what I just stated, however I can say one thing that rings true in any facet:
> 
> If you want to put the "Army(Sea, Air)" back into cadets, then put it back systematically into the training of CIC and the mentoring of cadets.
> 
> Just my  :2c:



100% correct
Placing reg force WO's and Sgt's into the cadets however corrects nothing. CIC like it or not hold a commission same as a reg force officer and when push comes to shove they outrank you and there is nothing you can do to fix the old boys club system they have created....believe me I have and am attempting to try to no avail. 

I dont think extra training by reg force officer would be effective, economically or institutionally. To fix this system CIC officers need to lose their commission and be administered by reg and per's reserve. However as I stated earlier when CIC officers are ACO's in a position that should be held by a reg officer it defeats the purpose of having snr ncos there to ensure guidelines are met. No CIC officers should be ACO's. ACO';s should be regular force officers who dont have to worry about losing their B class fancy job. Their only worry would be the implimentation of the program. Then the ACA's could focus on ensuring the standards are kept, and aide the corps with our knowledge.

I have seen what this program is and it is not following the program set out in the QSP's.

CIC officers are for the most part great people in their communities doing something for their communities. However the LHQ's are full of B class buddies who will never enforce anything and are stonewalling ACA's from doing their jobs.

Thats the truth of the program.


----------



## Neill McKay

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Edited to add:  Does anyone have any experience with this group that seems to be set up to get input from serving Cadets (although I'd work on the acronym if I was in their position)?



No direct experience, but you're correct about its purpose.  Interest from cadets was solicited last year (and presumably will continue to be periodically).

dogger1936: You have, I'll guess, something in the order of two or three years of experience in the cadet programme which, I'll further guess, has been in one job in one Detachment of one RCSU.  (Correct me if I'm wrong, of course.)  There are seven thousand CIC officers across the country.  I think you could dial back your rhetoric a notch; you've only seen a relatively small slice of the programme and its people.


----------



## dogger1936

I also have enough military experience to know when a simple PO/EO isn't being implemented; to name a small slice of the problem. As you stated a small slice is what I am seeing and I'm far from being impressed. It is a corrupt B class system. LSA of goods going out to corps for thousands of dollars and not tracked or placed on a SCA.I was sent here to #1 recover from injuries and #2 enforce standards and ensure the program is being implemented.

There is no rhetoric involved. CIC should not have commissions; what purpose does it really serve? From my view point as someone who came into the cadet program wit ha open mind and a desire to ensure quality; we are blocked by a commission and a old boys club. A CIC commission does nothing but pad certain peoples ego's...which does nothing for the Program, corp or most importantly the kids.

It would be a great start to enforce standards that can be blocked within LHQ's as is happening now.

And as I said earlier do not get me totally wrong. there are amasing people in this program who are 100% in this not for the money but to make better future citizens of canada. However a LHQ who blocks the snr nco's from ensuring this plan is followed as "Bill and steve" are their buddies is a corrupt broken system.

All is left for us as ACA's to do is not complete the RCP1's due to improper use of funds. And who does that hurt? a CIC CO who really doesnt know how to put the program in place and would most likely love to have your input and again the cadets.

The star program is not being followed in my area due to inaction by the HQ element due to the CIC B class corruption. Fact.

Currently in my province money is being spent like drunken sailors on LSA request that disappear into the pockets of those who order it. So many QSP's are not followed in the slightest and my ACO refuses to address the problem and the det OC is his BFF. It is a corrupt system rife with incompetence, use of funds, and Career cadet officers who are focused on TWO THINGS: Their next B class contract, and their personal advancement. Not the support of Corps, not the PROPER implementation of the program, or as i said the biggest focus which should be the children in the program.

And while I could "Dial" all that stuff back; it doesn't change the fact that CIC officers shouldn't have commissions as it serves ZERO purpose in the implementation of the cadet program.


----------



## Nault_army

The aim of the Cadet Program is to develop in youth the attributes of good citizenship and leadership; promote physical fitness; and stimulate the interest of youth in the sea, land, and air elements. It isn't to militarize teenagers, for a lack of better term. Didn't you learn that in class ?  You can't always get what you ask for, and this is one of these things.


----------



## Rheostatic

"the sea, land, and air elements"... of the Canadian Forces.

Surely there is an acceptable middle ground between Child Soldiers and Cub Scouts that can satisfy most.


----------



## dogger1936

IF the new program was followed it would have a great army taste to it, yet kids would be laughing and having fun. The CO's want to implement it (for the most part...some decide a bivouac site means a corporate retreat center...and are get funding for it.)

I challenge any CIC officer to follow the directives given in the star program. And complete the mandatory training!!! Years have slipped by where this was acceptable. In my eyes if you as a CO cannot successfully complete the mandatory training you will not get the complimentary training funding. Zero cents. UNFORTUNATELY the past few years going to the mall has been more important than NAV ex's in a bivouac site.

The newly developed program has taken iirc 7 years to get on the books. In writing the program looks fantastic with just enough mix of armyish stuff with a emphasis on things like expedition treking as the civilian side of the program. Unfortunately the program was developed without the thought process that 31 corps cannot get the support or resources that this new course requires. So CO's have had to try and make things work. When I looked into what was being done to ensure the corps have these resources I was met with blank stares, political speak that didnt answer anything,anger, threats, and overall.....discovered LHQ's have no desire to help out these corps. 

I've been waiting for resource requests to come in from training officers......you know....the stuff you require to meet the PO/EO's of mandatory training. I've already been advised that that day will not come..... and instead they will adrep 1 arctic tent and stay at a chalet. Unfortunately its not our mandate to check up on training and when we have we have been told its the training cell in another provinces responsibility to check up on them and we had over stepped our boundaries. I will not mention the mess we found in "the field" as to not identify people.

On a lighter note I've seen some fantastic programs and adventure things I would LOVE to take part in. Great treks sea kayking etc. Unfortunately the numbers accepted is of course low. Army cadets at corps are forced to stay in chalets and learn very little, while people in LHQ jockey and accept the status quo not providing aid to the corps that they desperately need.


----------



## Neill McKay

Let's take it in bits:



> I was sent here to #1 recover from injuries and #2 enforce standards and ensure the program is being implemented.



First things first, best wishes for a good recovery.  I'm glad that a meaningful position was found for you, frustrating as it may be.

The role of an ACA is to provide logistical and administrative support, not to be the standards cell and certainly not to tell a unit's officers how to do their jobs.  If it were the latter, it would be a LCdr/Maj position, not a PO1/WO position.  That's what the Det Comd is, and that's his job.  Unit COs don't work for the ACO's shop.



> A CIC commission does nothing but pad certain peoples ego's...which does nothing for the Program, corp or most importantly the kids.



As currently constituted, cadet units are administered by officers.  If you want to argue that they should be administered by NCMs you may, but that argument has been long since decided by people with more stripes that you and me.  In CSTCs you will find CIC officers commanding establishments the size of a small base.  You will find CIC officers in charge of ships at sea (most notable the ORCA-class off the west coast).  And in many communities the cadet unit is the only CF presence.  Finally, most cadet units operate some distance from their Detachment.  In all of these circumstances it is appropriate for officers to be employed.



> The star program is not being followed in my area due to inaction by the HQ element due to the CIC B class corruption. Fact.



In my area (and we're not too far apart -- I'm in the Atlantic region too) units that are struggling to deliver the programme are offered help.  I've just finished three years as a unit CO and have been tasked by the Det Comd to provide mentorship to the staff of a unit in the area that is having problems.  (Still Class A, and I'll be reporting to a Class A ACICO.)  It's no secret that not every unit gets the quality of staff that we would all like -- but in some areas you staff the unit with the local talent or it closes.



> Currently in my province money is being spent like drunken sailors on LSA request that disappear into the pockets of those who order it.



That's something you should be bringing up the chain of command, of course, since it would, if correct, be a criminal matter.  It's not something I've ever seen in my twelve years at the coal face.  I've found everyone concerned to be very diligent with expenditures of public funds, and have never drawn a cent of LSA without thoroughly documenting my claim.  (The fin clerk -- a class B sergeant -- sees to it that everything it well squared away.)

Overall it's not a perfect system but if you ask ten cadets what they think of it, I'm confident that nine of them will tell you they love what they do.  (But they would like more "army" in the army cadets!)



> I challenge any CIC officer to follow the directives given in the star program.



Accepted, and done! (But does it still count if it was a sea cadet unit?)


----------



## dogger1936

Cheer's Neil

As an ACA out here we are grading the corps, grading the CIC officers including the CO;s during the SAV visits. If I was just doing 
logistic and admin I wouldn't have my nose in what I believe is a league responsibility. Why am I doing SAV visits and officer grading. I've also been asked to go out weekends on ex with the corps. So maybe there is some ACO's pushing their duties down onto the ACA's and I would love to discuss this via pm or cadetnet/dwan.

The units here are not being offered any help here. They are told to do their best, providing a crap program.


The example for LSA is a grey area in terms of expenditure management. The problem exists as corp 9999 can order 9 high speed stoves. they do not go on the SCA. And no record is kept aside from the rcp1. These things disappear somehow.
According to the rule is not suppose to be stored at peoples houses. Yet it is, and is it the corps fault? In my opinion no. the fault lies on the people who have done savs for the past eon who looked the other way. And instead of coming up with a solution to their lack of storage they allow infractions to happen as it is way easier to do nothing.

The commission gets in the way of doing the ACA job as directed here. I would love to discuss the ACA roles and TOR from your area. In my opinion we are way too far into league responsabilities, and with the responsabilities we have it's impossiable to suceed in "the mission" with a "lack" of a commission ourselves.

drop me a PM please.


----------



## dogger1936

And thanks a bunch. Im healing up a few small surgeries to go all the while getting a admin ticket punched. 

The sea cadet program is an excellent program from what I've seen. Not without it's issues of course; but overall much better to conduct than the current army program.

Glad you accept the challange, which I'm sure most of you out there do strive to do.


----------



## Northalbertan

I have been a CO for the past year and Trg O of our corps for the year prior to that.  I am former service but that service was many years ago.  I am in Prairie Region, specifically Alberta.  Things are obviously done differently out in your region, for example, we no longer have ACAs.  

To receive my LSA funds I must provide receipts, proof the money was spent where it was supposed to.  The money is spent first and then reimbursed.  It goes back into the bank account our sponsoring committee has set up.  If anyone sees money going anywhere else, call the MPs.  Get an investigation started and charge someone's @#$.

I PROVIDE THE PROGRAM I HAVE BEEN TASKED TO DELIVER.  I work very hard to so, that is what the DND is paying me to do.  I have a lot of oversite to ensure I am providing that program.  Yes My ACO is a CIC officer.  A competent, knowledgeable, and professional individual who is there to assist me in delivering the program.  I have done my best to ensure a competent and professional staff helps me deliver the program at the corps level.   I have on staff myself, My Trg O who was a Lt Commander in the Royal Navy and a COATS Sgt who was a Reg Force infantryman for 23 years.  I have some CIs and one young lady who is a new member of the CIC.  I have quite a few volunteers who help out as well.  Everyone is here for the right reason.  The cadets.  Period, dot.  If anyone is here for any other reason they are simply gone.  

Yes, when the cadets do their fitness test we do too.  I have heard there is supposed to be a fitness standard coming to the CIC effective 1 April 2012.  I hope so.  I have no idea how stringent it will be but at least there will be a standard. 

We perform our FTXs in the field where they are supposed to be conducted.  Sometimes in the area around our LHQ sometimes, when we have the budget to support it, in the mountains and foothills of the Rockies.

I agree with many that CIC should take at least the Reserve BMOQ.  I am guessing budgetary restraints come into play here, and some may ask why we need it if we are leading kids.

In regards to the CIC being commissioned officers and is that necessary?  I don't know.  There are people who have far more experience and hold far more rank than I do who must think that a commission is necessary or I would be an NCM, I have been an NCM and so have no actual problem with that if that were their decision.  With COATS coming in we can now have NCMs at the corps level.  As I mentioned above I employ one, he holds a postion on my slate and has the same responsibilities as a CIC officer.  He is a great addition to our staff and I believe is instrumental in our delivery of the program to the standard that we are.

I have met some officers of the type Dogger 1936 has described.  I don't like them.  I agree that those of this ilk should not hold a commission.  I have also met the other kind.  The kind who are respectful of NCMs, take their jobs seriously and behave as an officer should.  In our corps we are more than willing to take advice from an individual with 20 plus years experience in the CF regardless of rank.

One thing bugs me.  I just love how everytime a thread gets started that involves the CIC in any manner X amount of people go off on a rant on how the CIC is crappy, incompetent, out of shape, #$@holes.  I am a CIC officer and I am none of that.  I take pride in what I do and I think I do it well.  There are 7000 of us, quit painting all of us with the same brush.  I have met some senior NCMs who are complete #$@k ups and I don't think the whole senior NCO corps of the CF (sorry, Canadian Army) are complete boobs. 

Simple solution to "more army in army cadets".  Good affiliated unit support.  Just show up, doesn't have to be every parade night, and let the cadet corps know you know they exist.  I like to have the affiliated unit hand out cap badges when our cadets "qualify" for them.  Have a member teach the regimental history to the cadets.  Give the kids that connection.  Yes a little C7 time is appreciated.

The program works if the staff at the LHQ do their jobs and get the support they require from the RCSUs.  We get that support, we deliver the program.  It is a lot of work, if you do it right.  It is worth it.

To Dogger 1936:  Thanks for putting the effort in.  There are some of us who appreciate what you guys do for us.  Sorry a few have made a bad impression on you.  If your COs aren't taking advantage of your experience, their loss.


----------



## Northern Ranger

First, I love the Cadets, my daughter has been in them for two years and my son is joining this year.  The self esteem that the kids get from this program and the sense of responsibility is awesome, the CIC officers in her corps are great, lacking funding from the major sponsor, they had been paying the rent out of their pockets for a few years for the school gym that they parade at.  I am now part of the parent committee and we are raising funds to pay them back.  There is no need to have any more "Army" put in the Corps that already is.  I have nothing bad to say about the CIC officers in the Corps.....

CIC officers that are filling staff postions outside of the youth program, i.e. EA to a Comd , need to give their heads a shake, thinking that they are anything other than a Commissioned Officer that should be working in a Youth Program, takes away all the hard work that our current officers have put into the current Officer Corps.

Your commissioned to take care of my kids in a youth program, it doesn't need to be more army, just make sure that you send them home at the end of the day feeling proud to belong to a great nation with great traditions, I have seen the effort that the CIC group in the local two Corps do and the crap that they have to deal with from some of the kids that are in the Corps because mom and dad said they have to be there.  It can be a thankless job and I would like to publicly thank them for doing what they do.  Thanks.


----------



## chrisf

We've done little bits and pieces over the years for our affiliated corps. Take out some radio gear, spent a night teaching VP and did a VP ex with the radios. We've brought a few senior cadets+CIC officers out on a few exercises as well (I don't know if it's something that we were "allowed" to do or not, I really don't care, all parties involved seemed pleased)

I'm confident there's plenty the army can do to keep the "army" in "army cadets" without crossing the "child soldiers" line...


----------



## Colin Parkinson

As a reserve unit our cadet corp would select cadets who would work with us on the 105mm as part of the gun crews, they did very well and many went on to join the reserves and regs. Cadet units used to a place where kids who wanted to join the reserves/regs went to learn skills and slowly become part of the parent unit. 
While changes in the way the leadership operates may be required. I suspect that educating parents as to what cadets are supposed to do is part of the problem. When I was a cadet, training with firearms was normal even for a sea cadet.


----------



## Pusser

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> And while I could "Dial" all that stuff back; it doesn't change the fact that CIC officers shouldn't have commissions as it serves ZERO purpose in the implementation of the cadet program.



I can't agree with that statement.  Not only do CIC officer have real commissions, I believe they should.  The management of a youth program is important enough that it requires an appropriate level of leadership and that level exists within the commissioned ranks.  Don't let a few bad apples allow you to draw a negative impression of the entire Branch.

The problems you have described are not unique to COATS.  I can tell you as a Logistics officer that fudged claims, poor management of SCAs and LSA and fumbled administration exist everywhere across the CF, but no one is saying that officers in infantry batallions, air squadrons or ships at sea shouldn't be commissioned.  Those of us in the audit business do our best to find and correct these things, but it is a neverending task.  Luckily, most people want to do the right thing, so correcting problems isn't usually too difficult.  The most frustrating part  is having to re-invent the wheel everytime we go through a posting cycle.

Yes, there is an old-boys network at play in some parts of the CIC, but the same can be said of many Reserve units as well.  Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Remember also that commissions are not just about priviledge for officers, they are also tools for holding them accountable.  Because CIC officers are members of the CF and because they are commissioned, the full weight of the QR&O can be brought to bear should they stray outside the lines.  Not only are they subject to criminal prosecution for transgressions, they are also subject to the Code of Service Discipline, which itself is harder on officers than it is on NCMs.


----------



## dapaterson

Pusser said:
			
		

> Yes, there is an old-boys network at play in some parts of the CIC, but the same can be said of many Reserve units_* and Regular Force branches * _ as well.  Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.



Fixed that for you.


----------



## ballz

Pusser said:
			
		

> The management of a youth program is important enough that it requires an appropriate level of leadership and that level exists within the commissioned ranks.



This argument sucks. The standard of leadership to which they are awarding a commission to CIC officers is quite different from the standard of leadership they are measuring Reg and PRes officers by. I know you are not doing so on purpose, but it comes across as you saying that a CIC officer makes for a better leader because he holds a commission than if he did not have one. That sure isn't true, because while a commission is an important piece of paper, it is still a piece of paper and does not change or add to the character of a man (or woman). And if it's easy to obtain, it means a lot less to the holder.



			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> Remember also that commissions are not just about priviledge for officers, they are also tools for holding them accountable.  Because CIC officers are members of the CF and because they are commissioned, the full weight of the QR&O can be brought to bear should they stray outside the lines.  Not only are they subject to criminal prosecution for transgressions, they are also subject to the Code of Service Discipline, which itself is harder on officers than it is on NCMs.



This is a way better argument, and something I had not thought of before.


----------



## Pusser

Yes, there is an old-boys network at play in some parts of the CIC, but the same can be said of many Reserve units and Regular Force branches  as well.  Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.



			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> Fixed that for you.



Fair point, but what I was getting at was that Reserve units often have members that have been there their entire careers (sometimes 30+ years) allowing the old boys club to thrive.  Reserve units also often have multiple generations of entire families serving at the same time.  These situations cause problems, which although not unheard of in the Regular Force, are somewhat mitigated by the posting cycle.


----------



## Pusser

ballz said:
			
		

> This argument sucks. The standard of leadership to which they are awarding a commission to CIC officers is quite different from the standard of leadership they are measuring Reg and PRes officers by. I know you are not doing so on purpose, but it comes across as you saying that a CIC officer makes for a better leader because he holds a commission than if he did not have one. That sure isn't true, because while a commission is an important piece of paper, it is still a piece of paper and does not change or add to the character of a man (or woman). And if it's easy to obtain, it means a lot less to the holder.



You're right.  I didn't mean it the way you initially took it.  My point is that the junior officer level is the appropriate level of leadership required for a cadet corps, so yes, it is appropriate to commission CIC officers to do that.  However, I also agree that perhaps we should be holding CIC officers to a higher standard commensurate with the commission they hold (which, by the way is way more than just a piece of paper).  I would say that the majority of CIC officers do meet the standard, but I would also argue that there are a higher percentage of CIC officers that do not than there are in other branches, largely because they're harder to get rid of.  Unfortunately, the bad ones tend to be more noticeable.  There are plenty of idiots in the CIC, but that is not the only Branch afflicted by that problem.


----------



## Hurricane

Gumby said:
			
		

> Really? How many times is this going to come up?  What? Upset because some kid who probably spent the last two years of his life working towards a chance at competing for one of the 50 or so slots on course, out of how many cadets that meet the age across the entire country, got on a course that you didn't?
> 
> I'm not even going to waste my time to read your profile.  You have to compete with what? Your platoon? Company at best?  If your unit can't get slots on para courses, then they probably don't require paratroopers... If theydoneed spots, and they just aren't getting offered to you..... Best get up on that chin up bar and work to set yourself up to shine against your mates.
> 
> Every time there is a thread on this site re: para, wings, or JTF-2, some putz with an attitude comes on here being all bitter about kids getting the opportunity to strive for something really great.  I can personally attest to the fact that cadet programs offering things such as para, gliding etc, really go a long way with helping at risk youth keep focused and on the right track.  Can't have a problem with that can you?



A: There was no attitude in that post, I was merely suggesting that if you compare the numbers of cadets that are even close to meeting the reqirements to apply for the course, VICE the military members who are in trades that have no jump requirement. The odds are better if you are a cadet. I have never applied for para nor do I intend to. Best get on that chinup bar and work off that stress.


----------



## MedCorps

One of the techniques for putting the "army" back in Army Cadets I think really hinges on the interaction with the affiliated unit.  The goal is to familiarize the RCAC with the Army, and inspire interest without training them to be child soldiers.  There is plenty of pretty neat (to a 12-18 year old) army stuff that is done and that has civilian cross over.  

We not not need to teach the Gun Fighter program to cadets in order to put the "army" in army cadets.  A few examples in include having a soldier teach. 

Sigs unit --> radio's, voice procedure, antennas, etc. 
MP unit  --> basic law, self defence (not unarmed combat)
Log unit --> for Cdt's 16 and over basic vehicle maintenance (a green truck is much like ones blue car), safe backing, DDC, etc.  
EME unit --> think of all the cool things Mat Techs do, teach some of these basic skills out of the back of an MRT.  Wpns techs could teach very basic gun smithing on non restricted weapons.   
Med unit --> advanced first aid, wilderness first aid, stretcher drills 
Eng unit --> basic field tools and construction skills, the list here is endless. 

The other inf/armd/arty can talk about history, tradition, situate real world events, talk about missions and equipment and such.  PT, GPS nav, compass nav, field craft, etc, etc,  

The options are endless, and what seems dull to a solder who does this stuff every day can really be exciting to a Cadet, espcially when taught by a "real" soldier.  When I was a cadet, other than all the cool "child soldier" stuff I was taught, I still remember some of the best lectures from my affiliated unit during weekend ex's being things like basic vehicle recovery (with the 5/4 ton), wilderness survival, the use of a chain-saw mill, and antennas.   All stuff which spawned my interest and I have used both in and outside the army since.  

Food for thought... if you want more depth let me know. 

MC


----------



## Pistos

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I agree that the answer is not section attacks and bigger weapons, but there's a lot more to the army than closing with and destroying the enemy.  I work in the sea cadet programme so I'm not an SME on army cadet training, but I've always been a proponent of their having more exposure to other areas of the army like engineering, vehicles, medical, etc.  As one example there used to be a driver-mechanic course for army cadets in which they learned to drive and perform basic service on military vehicles.  There's no end of training of that nature that could put the army back into army cadets without risking a "child soldiers" label.



I agree with the idea of exposing them to more aspects of the CF than just infantry.  I went through cadets back in the day and never once gave a thought to reg force service...because I didn't want to be an infantryman.  We did drill, went out in the field, learned first aid, and even went out on the range in Cornwallis with the FN's.  It was fun, social, relaxed (mostly) and beneficial but never once did I think, "This is what I want to do for a career".  It was much later in life that I began to understand the CF was much more than basic training.


----------



## chrisf

MedCorps said:
			
		

> Sigs unit --> radio's, voice procedure, antennas, etc.
> MP unit  --> basic law, self defence (not unarmed combat)
> Log unit --> for Cdt's 16 and over basic vehicle maintenance (a green truck is much like ones blue car), safe backing, DDC, etc.
> EME unit --> think of all the cool things Mat Techs do, teach some of these basic skills out of the back of an MRT.  Wpns techs could teach very basic gun smithing on non restricted weapons.
> Med unit --> advanced first aid, wilderness first aid, stretcher drills
> Eng unit --> basic field tools and construction skills, the list here is endless.
> 
> The other inf/armd/arty can talk about history, tradition, situate real world events, talk about missions and equipment and such.  PT, GPS nav, compass nav, field craft, etc, etc,



Many of those things are stuff *any* army unit can do... almost any army unit should have at least one SMP pattern vehicle, should have a few radios and few troops with a comms course, any army unit can support a nav ex, or field craft training...

All sorts of things the army can do to support the cadet movement, and cost effectively... is it a lack of will? Budget? Lack of knowledge? Lack of official guidelines?


----------



## 211RadOp

a Sig Op said:
			
		

> All sorts of things the army can do to support the cadet movement, and cost effectively... is it a lack of will? Budget? Lack of knowledge? Lack of official guidelines?



Yes, Not really, Yes, No.

I have volunteered with the PWOR Cadet Corps in the past.  I left for a couple of reasons, the biggest was that I was posted out of Kingston.  Most of the Reg F that helped there either used to belong to the Corps, or their children where in the Corps.

Most of the support the Corps need are manpower and drive from the people helping.  As it is all volunteer, there is no budget constraints.  When I tought First Aid there, all the training supplies came from my unit (with the CO's permission) but all consumable were supplied by the District HQ in Trenton.

Most Reg F members do not know that they can help with a Cadet Corps, but how to go about it is clearly written in various orders and are easy to find if  you are looking for them.


----------



## AJC

Interesting topic, have heard it all from my nephew. Agree with a lot of comments out there, here's mine:
1. Comparing CIC officers to other CF officers is futile. They are not leading in TFA. They are entrusted with the cadet program and have the responsability to conduct safe trg for the kids. The position of trust/authority, emphasized by being an officer should ensure they are accountable for any funny business. The fact they go through recruiting process should screen out most of the wierdos. They are however in the same position as PRes units in that they have to generate their own succession plan. Not easy when the rewards are few and the bureacratic BS is many. Unfortunately there are a few CIC out there that figure they are ready to lead the next crossing of the Rhine. There are asshats everywhere. Most I have dealt with do what they do pretty well but suffer from inexperience. Subalterns are the same everywhere. 
2.  ACA's / ACO's or whatever, when I was in cadets were PPCLI Sgts who most times provided some really good guidance, especially during the summer camps. One of the last ones I dealt with (yr 2000) was an asshat who was well past his expiry date. They should be Reg F in order to provide some military guidance and have an outside view. Their opinions should be backed by their C of C  and not be subject to anything but respect from Corp Officers. 
3. It would make a big difference if there were more incentives for Reg F / PRes officers and Sr NCM's to be part of the cadet system after retirement. Current pension arrangements make that difficullt and more bureaucratic BS makes it unattractive. Knowing some of the leaders have real Army experience makes a big difference with a cadets preception, unless they are asshats.
4. I don't think that sniper training or underwater knife fighting courses are required in order to bring army to the cadets. Change the names back to army names, insert a little more rifle trg and fieldcraft, and thats all you need. Its only Army Cadets. The adventure trg army cadets do now is leaps beyond what we used to do.
5. The cadet training system as I see it could not get more complicated if we tried. Seemed to me it used to be pretty simple yet it worked. Whatever  happened to Gold Star testing, staff cadet inst to be Master Cadet and thats it. I also remember Gold Star being fairly tough and not everybody made it. My oldest son got his with little effort and a poor attitude. The more you overmanage the cadets the more %^$ ups you will find.
6. I think the biggest thing to sort out cadets is to fix the summer camps. I went to Vernon three years as a Cadet, went back as a WO trg Advisor, and have watched my kid be a cadet and staff cadet.  Its changed alot. The senior officers when I went through in my old days had army and some, war experience (Lilley, Beer, Kinloch etc etc). That is needed. The last camp I was at shocked me at the level of indecision and faulty direction from the highest levels down to the RSM (Asshat who should have known better).  Complete s&*%show.  CIC Lcols should be the exception, based on a really strong CF resume. Army has to support the camps with Sgts & WO's, whereever they can find them. The Staff Cadets need better M of I training before camp starts conducted by army NCO's, and need guidance through out the summer. Get the Staff cadets and CIC Officers off the Parades and let the Cadets develop their leadership by being in charge at least for the parades. Whoever thought it was a good idea to put CIC Officers on the parades either never saw some of the larger ones, or had dreams of leading a BN. The parades are for the cadets.
7. The first corp son #1 joined was run by the parents committee. His chance of going to camp, going on trips, and even getting promoted depend on parents fundraising participation. Complete BS, hence he joined a second one. There should be no parents inspecting parades, advising CO's or designing training plans. 

Most of the checked out senior cadets I remember never joined the CF. They would have done well but did other things with their lives. I am sure that the cadet system was a huge benefit for them. My last son is joining this week. I know I will cringe at what I see and hear at the corps, but I also know that in the end it will make him a better Cdn.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

211RadOp said:
			
		

> Yes, Not really, Yes, No.
> 
> I have volunteered with the PWOR Cadet Corps in the past.  I left for a couple of reasons, the biggest was that I was posted out of Kingston.  Most of the Reg F that helped there either used to belong to the Corps, or their children where in the Corps.
> 
> Most of the support the Corps need are manpower and drive from the people helping.  As it is all volunteer, there is no budget constraints.  When I tought First Aid there, all the training supplies came from my unit (with the CO's permission) but all consumable were supplied by the District HQ in Trenton.
> 
> Most Reg F members do not know that they can help with a Cadet Corps, but how to go about it is clearly written in various orders and are easy to find if  you are looking for them.



I noticed in the 80's very few reg force guys were aware they could volunteer to help the various groups on the bases. it seemed all they did was work and party. I think the leadership should have made it clear to the younger guys that helping these groups was important, would be noticed and wpuld play a part in promotions.


----------



## rwgill

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> In my opinion we are way too far into league responsibilities, and with the responsibilities we have it's impossible to succeed in "the mission" with a "lack" of a commission ourselves.


Grading CIC officers is not a League responsibility, it's a CF one.  Until recently, all CIC promotions and appointments required League approval.  Now, League approval is only required for enrollment of a new CIC officer (possibly transfer of a CIC officer to a LHQ establishment but nobody has answered that question for me yet).  The League, should it have concerns about specific officers, should be addressing them with the CF chain of command.  Though both you and I have a stake in the program, CIC training, promotions and appointments are CF issues.

Placing the _Army_ back into Army Cadets falls into quite a bit of grey area.  Training is a CF issue.  Complimentary and Optional training falls under CF direction, with both CF and League (Sponsoring Committee) funding.  The Affiliated Unit (and other non-CCO CF support) falls under the League.  In order to do what some cadets wish, full cooperation and a mutual understanding would be required.  Most importantly though, someone needs to step to the plate and assume "command" of the issue at ALL levels.  Unfortunately, very few do or can. 

The CPU is fantastic and I know several CIC officers who have been on the writing boards.  While it is great (a huge improvement over what we had) it does have some major faults.  The mandatory program is the _meat and potatoes _ of the program, with full CF funding.  The complimentary training (some required for successful completion of Star Level training) is the _soup, salad, desert and drinks_, with partial CF funding and partial League (Sponsoring Committee) funding.  Many local League branches are struggling to pay rent, so how do they pay for fun _Army_ training?


----------



## Neill McKay

rwgill said:
			
		

> Now, League approval is only required for [...] (possibly transfer of a CIC officer to a LHQ establishment but nobody has answered that question for me yet).



No, the League no longer signs the 324 for this.


----------

