# UN service



## ab136 (2 May 2004)

This is probably not the proper forum section for this question but I‘m hoping I could get the answer or the proper direction.
When you join the CF does that mean that you will automatically do peace-keeping duties or is that something you volunteer or are selected for.  The chance to do that kind of work is one reason I am hoping to be accepted.


----------



## D-n-A (2 May 2004)

in the reserves, to go overseas on deployment, your must volunteer

if you go reg force, you go to where ever they want you to go


----------



## ab136 (2 May 2004)

does that mean that all CF members of UN members


----------



## ab136 (2 May 2004)

I guess I should have said, are all CF members considered Peace-keepers.


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by D-n-A:
> [qb] in the reserves, to go overseas on deployment, your must volunteer
> 
> if you go reg force, you go to where ever they want you to go [/qb]


In Reg Force, even if your unit isnt tasked, can you volunteer for a specific operation?


----------



## ZipperHead (2 May 2004)

I think that most, if not all, civilians consider members of the CF "peacekeepers", whether we like it or not. It probably  makes them feel all warm and fuzzy to think of us that way, rather than as people who are trained to kill other human beings in the defence of our country, or our "interests" or ideals.

I think that people should look at us as soldiers who occasionally are assigned the role of peacekeeper or more aptly nowadays, peacemaker.

It seems that politicians like to get a lot of mileage out of the high-profile and warm and fuzzy images of CF members handing out humanitarian aid to refugees, and doing other all around nice guy stuff. The reality is, that if we weren‘t soldiers first and foremost, we wouldn‘t have the respect of the "belligerents" that we go in to separate from trying to wipe each other out. If we were all soft and cozy (well, more soft and cozy than we are now :0 )they‘d take advantage of that and carry on their bad-guy ways. Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Anyway, in a nutshell, not all soldiers are or have been employed as "peacekeepers", either under the UN or NATO (or other) flag. Some guys (and girls) have been on a lot (there is a Sigs Sgt back at the LdSH in Edmonton who has been on 9(!!!!!) UN, NATO and other (Afghanistan) missions). Then there are those who have 20+ years without doing any missions. We won‘t get into that here.......

Hope that helped.

Allan


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 May 2004)

ab136,
IF it‘s a peacekeeping operation, and that is what we‘ve been tasked with, Canadian soldiers will go as peacekeepers. As much as the politicians and press like to hang the moniker on us, we are soldiers trained for war, peacekeeper is just one of the jobs in our toolbox.


----------



## rdschultz (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by ab136:
> [qb] I guess I should have said, are all CF members considered Peace-keepers. [/qb]


There are different ways to interpret what you said.  From everything I‘ve read, all CF members have the potential to be deployed on UN peacekeeping missions.  Not all CF members are deployed on those missions however.    Peacekeeping could be part of your job, but there are other parts that aren‘t peacekeeping.  In the event that Canada is required to commit troops to a NATO mission, you wouldn‘t likely be a peacekeeper.

As for the chance of being a peacekeeper, or what steps a person could take to increase their chances, I have no idea.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 May 2004)

Peacekeeping/making is a mission for us. We as members do not identify ourselves as such but as what element we belong to.


----------



## ab136 (2 May 2004)

I am trying to get into a support service role.  And I was hoping that I may have a better than average chance to do Peacekeeping.  I guess its not the warm and fuzzy feeling I‘m looking for but more of a (sorry for this one) "making a difference" feeling. God I can‘t believe I typed that line


----------



## IceHawk (2 May 2004)

I don‘t want to come across as harsh or anything because that is not my intent at all.  However you may want to re-evaluate your idea of a peacekeeper.  Before I joined the military I thought as you do about the whole peacekeeping concept so I understand where your questions are coming from since I‘ve asked them myself.  That said I now better understand what peacekeeping is and although I‘ve never been on a peacekeeping tour I know many people that have.  Peacekeeping, although very noble and important, is not what it sounds like.  I‘ve heard the term "bullet catchers" used on more than one occasion to describe what peacekeepers do but there is a quote I heard my section commander say once and it went a little like "Peacekeeping is not a job for soldiers to do but a job ONLY soldiers can do." 

I‘m sure there are people on this forum far more qualified to comment on peacekeeping operations than myself but wearing the blue helmet isn‘t all about handing out food and does carry considerable risk.  You mentioned making a difference and that is a very commendable motive for joining up but I think you may want to research a little bit more into what peacekeeping missons consist of, you are joining the military afterall and peacekeeping is only a part of what the military does.


----------



## ab136 (2 May 2004)

I guess there is always more to consider.  That is the great thing about these forums...others experiences. thanks


----------



## stukirkpatrick (2 May 2004)

Just to be sure of this, I understand that regular Canadian soldiers are deployed according to the government‘s needs, but does this cover the United Nations peacekeeping role of unarmed military observer?  - I‘m currently reading LGen Dallaire‘s book, where MILOBS feature prominently and it would suck to be deployed unwillingly into a hostile situation without even your personal weapon for self-defence.


----------



## Bert (2 May 2004)

ab136>
"When you join the CF does that mean that you will automatically do peace-keeping duties or is that something you volunteer or are selected for. The chance to do that kind of work is one reason I am hoping to be accepted."

I don‘t have enough experience in the Forces to answer this with confidence.  Maybe others do.

From my understanding, you could be deployed with your unit under certain conditions like in Haiti and Afganistan. You could volunteer for UN or NATO duty and go through a selection process and find yourself anywhere like Syria, Alert, Bosnia, Toronto.  You could also be invited if you have special skills or skills the CF has in short supply.


----------



## Redeye (2 May 2004)

Peacekeeping is a noble ideal that is one thing that Canadian soldiers are frequently tasked with - but it is NOT the role of the CF.  Our job, our primary reason for existing, is to fight and win wars, not to keep peace.


----------



## 48Highlander (2 May 2004)

No it‘s not.  We like to think it is, and we like to train for it, but like it or not, we couldn‘t fight a war.  Everyone knows it.  People think of us as peacekeepers because at this point that‘s all we can effectively do.


----------



## The_Falcon (2 May 2004)

Sad but true statement.  NYC has more cops than we have reg force army soldiers (NYPD 39,110  http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/misc/pdfaq2.html#41  ). I hope we start beefing up soon, I really don‘t want to work in the salt mines when the Americans take us over.


----------



## MedCorps (2 May 2004)

Bert is pretty much on the mark.  

In the RegF you can be deployed as part of a formed body (e.g. 2 RCR in Haiti), or as a single person from your unit who is attached to another unit / formation for the mission.  

If you are interested in a mission that your unit has not been tasked for, do some looking into it and then let your chain of command know you are interested.  One of two things happens.  The Area HQ is looking for people and contacts the unit.  "Hey, we need 4 Veh Techs for Xland, do you have any?" Or... the OpsO surfs CFPTO (or whatever it is called now) and finds a spot for you in a open position in the organizational charts on the program.  

As I tell my guys... if I don‘t know where you want to go, I cannot help you get there.  Let yout chain of command know you are interested, the worst they will say is no. 

MC


----------



## devil39 (3 May 2004)

> Originally posted by 48Highlander:
> [qb] No it‘s not.  We like to think it is, and we like to train for it, but like it or not, we couldn‘t fight a war.  Everyone knows it.  People think of us as peacekeepers because at this point that‘s all we can effectively do. [/qb]


I think we are capabable of tactical warfighting operations at the Bn/BG level, did we not already do that on APOLLO at a BG level?  Could we pull it off at Bde level?  Maybe.  Our HQs could, and CSS would be achievable.  Forget aviation.  Airlift would kill us if the theatre resupply was dependant upon it.  

Can we fight a war at the operational or strategic level?  I would think not.

At lower tactical levels, Coy and Bn/BG, we have an extremely good army from a skills and competence perspective.  Soldier for soldier I would not trade the Canadian soldier for any other.  I might be somewhat biased however.


----------



## The_Falcon (3 May 2004)

I think you are a bit optimistic devil39. We did do some fighting on Op Apollo Yes, a couple of skirmishes and firefights here and there, but no major battle lasting more than a few days. You also can‘t fight very long with adequate resup, which you would need aviation for. Which we do not have much of, and are becoming increasing reliant on the Americans for (don‘t forget they provided the choppers for us when the PPCLI went in to the mountains.  And they are the ones who provided the airlift to Germany after they bombed us.).  

You can‘t fight wars with a Coy here and a Bn there. Right now I agree that we have top notch soldiers, but for how much longer can we maintain our skill levels and still be effective? Take the new DP2A course for infantry. I don‘t know about the reg infantry DP2A course, but for the reserves it does not impart a whole lot of knowledge about properly employing a GMPG (one day of shooting 3 boxes of ammo during the day and one box at night). As 48highlander (instructor), portcullis guy and myself (candidates) can atest there were few people who need way more time on the guns and laying on targets, and some people who should been failed off the course (but were not, because this is the new army).

I think we should be able to fight wars, but the sad, cold, hard facts are the Canadian military could not hope to fight in a major conflict anymore and probably for some time down the road.  No amount of wishful thinking is going to change that reality.


----------



## Meridian (5 May 2004)

I wonder why that NYPD stat keeps coming up? Its not like its comparable really....

anyway....

the other thing that must be mentioned is that while reservists CURRENTLY volunteer for service abroad, in a time of war, they would be the first (obviously following the RegFor) to be called up into active duty without the explicit permission of the member.

What I mean to say here is that the reserves isnt all voluntary.


----------



## ZipperHead (24 May 2004)

I‘m trying to decipher what "What I mean to say here is that the reserves isnt all voluntary" means. Do we have consription now to fill the ranks of the reserves? Are people forcably taken from their homes to be part of the militia? 

Are you saying that you are unaware that if the poop hit the fan, and you happened to be in a reserve unit, they need you to willingly go out to do what the good people of Canada have paid you to do? How do you justify that type of thinking? "I want the money and the training, but not the responsibility that goes with accepting it....". Even Pauly Shore figured this sh!t out in that "In the Army Now" (or whatever it was called) movie.

Please do me a favour, and never, ever darken the hallways of a recruiting center, Reg Force or Reserve (cadets, for that matter).

Allan


----------



## Paul F (24 May 2004)

Allan, when Meridan says the reserves isn‘t all voluntary I think he is refering to deployments (and he is right. All the government to do is pass a piece of legislation when the poop hits the fan and off Canadian reservist soldiers go to ****‘s half acre.).

Currently the reserves is totally voluntary in regards to signing up. And I would suspect it will always stay that way. When (or if) conscription comes back sometime in the future, the conscriptees will be conscripted into the Regular Force I assume since that is where they would be most effective.


----------

