# Hong Kong- Merged



## Gate (12 Aug 2006)

An old friend ( since passed away ) was once telling me about a Canadian Infantry unit at the beginning of World War II was defeated at Hong Kong . I can't remember the name of the battalion .
Where can I find out about the Canadian Army participation in battle for Hong Kong ?


----------



## Danjanou (12 Aug 2006)

Two Canadian infantry Battalions The Royal Rifles of Canada and The Winnipeg Grenadiers designated C Force under Brigadier J K Lawson were despatched in Oct/Nov 1941 to reinforce the British Garrison there. Neither Battalion was fully trained or equipped at the time. It was thought the training could be completed there prior to a coming wart with Japan. As it happened there was no time as the Japanese attacked on December 8, 1941

Despite their lack of training and support the Canadian’s made a fanatical if futile attempt to defend the island against overwhelming odds and accounted for more Japanese casualties than any other unit in the garrison (2 under strength Brigades). Most of this information was provided by Japanese testimony after the war and contradicts the statements made by the overall garrison commander General Maltby who according to some sources tried to blame the Canadians for the loss of the vital port.

After the garrison surrendered on December 25th, the survivors were interred by the Japanese under brutal conditions until 1945.

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

Lawson was Killed in Action. Company Sergeant Major John Robert Osborn of the Winnipeg Grenadiers was posthumously awarded the VC, the first won by a Canadian in WW2.

There is a more than one argument that the mission should never have been undertaken and was a waste of two battalions.

Incidentally the ship carrying their vehicles and heavy equipment was diverted to Manila after Hong Kong fell and then used by the Americans to defend Bataan.


----------



## Gate (12 Aug 2006)

Thanks for information . I had to start somewhere . Jim was an old friend , an Englishman who volunteered for the Canadian Army in World War II . I could not remember the battalion he was referring to . He had originally been in, I think, a Winnipeg battalion . He had been transferred out to the Engineers before they sailed for Hong Kong . He had known many of the men who had died both in the fighting and captivity .

  Thanks for the many sources .


----------



## FascistLibertarian (15 Mar 2007)

Hey all
I do not know that much about military law.

The following can be found in many accounts but the best I have come across is The Battle for Hong Kong 1941-1945 Hostage to Fortune by Oliver Lindsay (with JR Harris) Chapter 15 pp 145-152
On page 150 he makes the claim that Wallis wanted to or considered shooting the Canadians who wished to surrender!

On Dec 25th (1 day before the colony surrendered) Lt. Col Holmes of the RRofC (who was the highest ranking "C" Force officer still alive) tried to stop the Canadians from fighting because he felt further resistance was useless and a waste of lives.  He came into conflict with his commanding officer Brig. Wallis, who wanted the Canadians to launch a counter attack.
Holmes eventually gave in and D Company was sent in and largely destroyed (much has been written about this)

One of the best accounts of D company is MacDonell, George S. One Soldier’s Story 1939-1945: From the fall of Hong Kong to the Defeat of Japan. Dundurn Press Toronto 2002.
Pp 84 talks about the events of the 25th dec 
(he claims D Company 26 killed 75 wounded, in other places I have seen 16 killed and 78 wounded)

Wallis has stated after that he thought about having Holmes arrested, would this have been legal?

My question is what was the proper action of Holmes?  What if he had refused to let Canadians fight?
On the one hand he was the commander of the Canadians, on the other he was fighting as part of a coalition under British leadership.

The instructions given to Lawson were:
To participate to the limit of your strength in the defence of the colony.
Insofar as discipline is concerned, the General Officer Commanding has not … been vested with authority to convene and confirm the findings and sentences of Court-Martial, in respect of Canadian personnel serving under your command.
You will keep constantly in mind the fact that you are responsible to the Canadian Government for the Force under you command

Instructions to Lawson from Government of Canada in Stacey Six Years if War Volume 1 pp450


BUT the Visiting Forces (British Commonwealth) Acts of 1933 states:
any officer of the other force appointed by His Majesty … to command the combined force, or any part thereof, shall be treated and shall have over members of the home force the powers of command and punishment, and may be invested with the like authority to convene, and confirm the findings and sentences of, court martial as if he were an officer of the home force of the relative rank and holding the same command
Stacey pp 255

This seems to me to be a contradiction and open to interpretation so I was wondering about your thoughts.
I have no idea if Holmes or Wallis would be aware of Lawson's instructions or the Visiting Forces act.
This is confusing as it is so during active operations I think we can all appreciate how stressful this could be.

Stacey also writes:
In field operations, in which other considerations are secondary to the defeat of the enemy, Canada inevitable surrendered a very large measure of operation control over her troops to the designated supreme Allied commanders in the theatres, and to the commanders of higher formations in which her troops were serving.
pp. 212

Hope that helps a bit
Also the Wikipedia Battle of Hong Kong has some good links
Thanks


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Mar 2007)

Do you have references for your statements?  While the question is interesting, to get into a discussion without being familiar with the background would be time consuming.


----------



## Shec (10 Aug 2009)

A memorial wall dedicated to the Canadian Army's "C" Force that was overrun defending Hong Kong that fateful December of 1941 will be dedicated this Saturday in Ottawa: 

http://www.hkvca.ca/index.htm

1100 hrs. at the corner of King Edward Avenue and Sussex Drive.

Note the 3rd vignette in this series of Military Heritage Minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T34lzgr_XME

We Will Remember Them !


----------



## PMedMoe (16 Aug 2009)

*Canadians gathered in Ottawa for a solemn ceremony today, to recognize the nearly 2,000 men who fought to protect Hong Kong during the Second World War.*
*Article Link*

In 1941, the island was under British rule when the Japanese military invaded. The Canadian soldiers were vastly outnumbered and faced insurmountable odds -- about 290 died in the fighting.

The rest were held captive under horrible conditions, and another 300 died as they were starved and tortured by their captors until the war ended four years later.

On Saturday, officials unveiled a granite wall etched with the names of every Canadian who fought in the battle.

Among those attending the ceremony was International Trade Minister Stockwell Day, whose grandfather was captured.

"These veterans have sort of felt like the forgotten heroes of the Second World War," he told CTV News Channel. "The Battle of Hong Kong, until today, really hasn't been memorialized.

Day's grandfather survived his imprisonment and was taken back to Canada, but died shortly afterwards in hospital.

Only about 90 of the veterans are still alive, and some were healthy enough to attend the ceremony. 

More on link, including video


----------



## erik.hillis (16 Aug 2009)

263 died in the battle, 294 died while in captivity.

*Sgt. Major John Osborn** - Winnipeg Grenadiers - Victoria Cross*
Several enemy grenades were thrown which Company Sergeant-Major Osborn picked up and threw back. The enemy threw a grenade which landed in a position where it was impossible to pick it up and return it in time. Shouting a warning to his comrades this gallant Warrant Officer threw himself on the grenade which exploded, killing him instantly. His self-sacrifice undoubtedly saved the lives of many others.


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (17 Aug 2009)

The one thing I dislike about being Canadian. It happened in 1941 it is now 2009. 68 years later we get  around to building a memorial for for almost 600 men whp died in distant lands for King, Country, adventure and the glory.
I hope we do not have to wait 68 years for memorial to the warriors we lost in this battle. 68 years is too long to wait. I am glad it is done.
Those men earned it the hard way. Well done troops


----------



## mariomike (17 Aug 2009)

There is a story in the Star from 1998 about the compensation package for surving Hong Kong ( and Buchenwald ) POW's:
http://img15.imageshack.us/i/hongkongvets.pdf/


----------



## Petard (17 Aug 2009)

Also renown for his valour, and lost during the battle, was Sgt Gander

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Gander+Royal+Riflemen+best+friend/1896089/story.html


----------



## dapaterson (7 Dec 2009)

See the following blog post by John Ibbitson on the PM's visit to the Hong Kong Commonwealth War Graves cemetery.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/the-too-forgotten-war-dead/article1390412/


----------



## 54/102 CEF (17 Oct 2010)

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/entertainment/books/ottawa-historian-honours-battle-of-hong-kong-vets-105093309.html

I worked on maps for Nathan Greenfield`s book called Baptism of Fire (Ypres 1915) and if that`s any indication this book should be worth the effort.

Book show at War Museum early Dec.

Enjoy! Xmas is coming.


----------



## Ignatius J. Reilly (17 Oct 2010)

Thanks for the heads up. By sheer coincidence, I was reading about this tragic affair this very morning in Tony Banham's "Not The Slightest Chance". 
It's most certainly a topic that has been overlooked by many Canadian military historians, and any new study is sure to be a welcome addition.


----------



## cphansen (17 Oct 2010)

54/102 CEF said:
			
		

> Book show at War Museum early Dec.
> 
> Enjoy! Xmas is coming.



Thanks for the information. I will have to arrange to be at the War Museum to attend the book show.
I am very interested in this because my old Militia unit perpetuates the history of the 7th/11th Hussars who provided several hundred volunteers to flesh out the Royal Rifles of Canada. The 7th/11th huddars were granted the right to display 1941 Hong Kong on their guidon. I am always amazed at the willingness and sheer enthusiasm people displayed at the start of WWII.

FYI the small village of Bury, Quebec, lost 30 men because of Hong Kong. This gave Bury the unhappy distinction of having lost the largest proportion of its volunteers of any municipality. It's a sad thing to be able to stand at their war memorial and read the list of  names, so many names for such a small village


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Nov 2012)

Prime Minister Harper will, once again, spend Remembrance Day in Hong Kong, at the Sai Wan War Cemetery, at the end of his current Asian (mostly to India) trip.

I hope that he and, especially, the journalists attending reflect on what happened there 70 years ago. Despite the heroism, and there was plenty, the Battle of Hong Kong was a colossal failure: at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. Unfortunately the tragedy was magnified when some senior officers tried to blame their subordinates for systemic failures. There was never a sensible sane plan for the defence of Hong Kong, and it is wrong to blame Maj Gen Maltby for that (there are plenty of reasons to blame Maltby for many other things) because his ability to craft and implement a sound plan were circumscribed by:

1. Orders from London; and

2. Resources - he did not have enough and most of what he had was inadequate in quality.

The simple fact is that, with exception of the Indians (Punjabs and Rajputs), none of the troops were ready or properly equipped to face the Japanese. Just before being promoted and sent to command them, then Col J.K. Lawson, a skilled and experienced regular officer and the Director of Military Training in Ottawa, had declared both the Royal Rifles and the Winnipeg Grenadiers to be unfit for combat, despite the fact that both units had been mobilized for months. The Canadian Army was growing too fast and, for the most part, only units in England were receiving anything like adequate training and equipment. But they were, at the end of October 1941, sent to Hong Kong anyway. Didn't Ottawa know that a war with Japan was looming on the horizon? Yes, probably, but, in fairness, not so soon and they (Prime Minister King, Defence Minister Ralson and Chief of the General Staff (then Maj Gen) Harry Crerar) were unprepared for the speed and violence of the Japanese offensive. Maj Gen Maltby wasn't a bad general, but he wasn't a good enough leader: he understood his grave, even hopeless situation but he lacked the moral where-with-all to defy London and mount a defence that had some remote chance of success ~ and please don't ask me what that defense might have involved: look at the maps, looks at the ORBATs and comprehend futility. Then, as now, Hong Kong Island needs the mainland ("Kowloon side") for survival, but the island, itself, _might_ have been defensible, with adequate troops, supplies and preparations ... until the water ran out.

Canadians have much about which to be proud, despite Maj Gen Maltby's and Brig Wallis' self serving accounts of the battles, both of which tried to lay of blame on to brave Canadian officers, one of whom, Lawson, had died, in battle, with two guns blazing; the Canadians fought as well as one might expect given their poor states of training and inadequate support. But: Canada did not perform well - our whole Army, and the Navy, too, had grown too fast and both were, broadly, unfit to fight until much later in the war. The British "plan" for the defence of Hong Kong was to add minimal resources - Britain was stretched too thinly - and hope the bluff would work. I don't know if King, Ralston and Crerar understood the poverty of London's "thinking," if we can call it that, but they went along.

The lessons of Hong Kong are, or should be, clear:

1. We, Canada, never know when or where we will have to fight. The admirals, generals, bureaucrats and officials in DND, the PCO, DFAIT and the PMO are not doing/thinking _strategy_, they are planning and programming for the next election. That's what King was doing in the 1930s; Lawson, Hennesy (Lawson's principle staff officer) and the men of The Royal Rifle of Canada and the Winnipeg Grenadiers would pay dearly for our failure to plan, adequately, for the defence of our country. I say "our failure" because most, indeed almost all Canadians, agreed with King's decisions to fight the Great Depression rather than prepare the CF for a war King did not believe would come just as almost all Canadians support Prime Minister Harper's decisions to fight the Great Recession by, in part, starving the CF of the resources it needs to keep itself fit to fight.

2. We cannot mobilize quickly or well - we lack stocks of materiel and enough trained officers and NCOs who can, in their train, train new troops.

3. We should not assume that our "senior partner," now the USA has any useful, sensible plan for much of anything.


----------



## dimsum (4 Nov 2012)

ERC, awesome and informative post as always.  Lots to think about.


----------



## Old Sweat (4 Nov 2012)

Good post, Edward. A couple of points to help put things in context:

First, the Canadian Army was not alone in experiencing growing problems. All the western armies went through the same sort of process, which in the case of the British and Commonwealth nations was exacerbated because no one had really spent much time thinking about anything but a replay of the Great War. Heck, the Germans had their share of challenges in Poland and they had been getting ready seriously for a fairly long time. It is true that the Canadian government and especially Prime Minister King was not keen on the idea of an expeditionary force and did not really get serious until after the invasion of France and the Low Countries on 10 May, 1940.  As for the two battalions, their personnel were probably a good cross section of what one would have found in the rest of the army. The Winnipeg Grenadiers had been mobilized as a machine gun battalion on 1 September 1939, converted to infantry when the number of thse units in a division was reduced from one per brigade to one for the division and sent to garrision Bermuda and Jamaica. The Royal Rifles mobilized on 24 May 1940 and within a few months were sent to Newfoundland. Neither unit had a chance to train at much above the section and platoon level.

That is only  part of the lesson. The major lesson is that pitching to do one's bit is all very good, but one had better think through the implications. We are probably lucky that the bungle in the jungle was stillborn and today's Canadian Army is light years ahead of what existed on 1 September 1939 in terms of organization, training, equipment and just about any other category one could think of, except perhaps for the potential to expand rapidly. However, as the flavour of the week is the come as you are war, that is not a bad thing. I wonder how we would have coped if Afghanistan had begun to generate casualties even on the scale of Korea.


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Nov 2012)

I knew a man in my hometown who was there with the Winnipeg Grenadiers.  He had been, my Dad told me, a Medic and his experiences in both battle and captivity scarred him mentally for life.  I can only imagine.

 :brit poppy:


----------



## Rifleman62 (5 Nov 2012)

I always thought Hong Kong rhymed with Norway. Sort of Hong Kong North.

Gave MHO to a guest speaker from NDHQ. The General was not pleased.


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 Nov 2012)

Reproduced, without comment, under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _Metro_:

http://metronews.ca/news/canada/436031/harper-remembers-war-dead-in-hong-kong-2/


> Harper remembers war dead in Hong Kong
> 
> By Jennifer Ditchburn
> The Canadian Press
> ...


----------



## McG (6 Sep 2016)

A good show of respect for our fallen.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/trudeau-honours-fallen-canadian-soldiers-at-hong-kong-war-cemetery-1.3059438


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Sep 2016)

And a good concrete example of the consequences for soldiers of decisions made at his level by his predecessors as well that he won't gain as easily with Nov 11th services in Ottawa, however poignant.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 Sep 2016)

At least he managed to keep his shirt on, so, y'know, progress there.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Sep 2016)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> At least he managed to keep his shirt on, so, y'know, progress there.



That didn't take long.....spiral..... [


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Sep 2016)

I think it's also a move to remind China that we to paid in blood.


----------



## Lightguns (6 Sep 2016)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I think it's also a move to remind China that we to paid in blood.



Not that I am trying to be disagreeable but WW2 started for the Chinese in 1937 and the lost a quarter of their land mass and almost 15% of the pre war population.  I doubt they think often of our Hong Kong sacrifice.  They tend to think of us in WW2 as we think of the WW1 Americans; "late to the party".


----------



## Lumber (6 Sep 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Not that I am trying to be disagreeable but WW2 started for the Chinese in 1937 and the lost a quarter of their land mass and almost 15% of the pre war population.  I doubt they think often of our Hong Kong sacrifice.  They tend to think of us in WW2 as we think of the WW1 Americans; "late to the party".



That, and we were defending British territory, not Chinese.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Sep 2016)

It's all we got, unless you want to bring up Korea  [


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Sep 2016)

It's a nice gesture of course but the Liberal staff are savvy enough to realize if Trudeau didn't "support the troops" there would be the typical blow up over social media.

It would have been impressive if he asked not to be photographed while paying paying respects.


----------



## medicineman (6 Sep 2016)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I think it's also a move to remind China that we to paid in blood.



There is one Canadian that is actually considered a hero in China - Dr Norman Bethune.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bethune

MM


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Sep 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> It would have been impressive if he asked not to be photographed while paying paying respects.


At which point the haters would say, "hey, doesn't Selfie Boy think this is important enough to make public?"


----------



## George Wallace (6 Sep 2016)

So he visited a Commonwealth War Cemetery and paid his respects.  Good.  Now let's move on.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Sep 2016)

medicineman said:
			
		

> There is one Canadian that is actually considered a hero in China - Dr Norman Bethune.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bethune
> 
> MM


There was quite an article on this doctor in one of the MSM - can't remember which, but it was not flattering to the good doctor.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Sep 2016)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> There was quite an article on this doctor in one of the MSM - can't remember which, but it was not flattering to the good doctor.


While he may have been a hero to the Chinese and Republicans in the Spanish Civil War in the 1930's, he likely drew a lot of fire in this part of the world as an out-in-the-open Communist in those days.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So he visited a Commonwealth War Cemetery and paid his respects.  Good.  Now let's move on.




Except that if he had been in HK and had _*not*_ visited _Sai Wan_ the howls of outrage would have been deafening. It was the right thing to do; it's what we expect our PMs to do; he met our expectations; that's newsworthy ... sadly.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Sep 2016)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Except that if he had been in HK and had _*not*_ visited _Sai Wan_ the howls of outrage would have been deafening. It was the right thing to do; it's what we expect our PMs to do; he met our expectations; that's newsworthy ... sadly.



Exactly.  

The media needed a story.  His "followers" and his "haters" on all sides are making/willing to make a big deal out of any event.  No matter what he had done in HK, someone would have made some sort of waves in the media.


----------



## medicineman (7 Sep 2016)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> While he may have been a hero to the Chinese and Republicans in the Spanish Civil War in the 1930's, he likely drew a lot of fire in this part of the world as an out-in-the-open Communist in those days.



That would be the reason...though he was a very good doctor for his time, devising novel ways of treating TB and was big in bringing the blood transfusion into it's being...the important parts of medical history people like to ignore.

MM


----------



## ModlrMike (7 Sep 2016)

I watched the movie "Bethune" and thought it was actually rather good. It helps to keep the context of the time in mind though. The later half of the 1930s was something of a heyday for socialists.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Sep 2016)

I saw that movie when it was made too, IIRC I felt that Donald Sutherland did a good job of making Bethune to be what the Chinese believe him to be, a hero, for his actions as a Dr.  To be fair to him and the MacPaps who fought in Spain, they were different times indeed and not without some validity on behalf of those who were fighting Fascism in it's various forms.

However heroic (or not) Bethune might have been in reality, he was only human after all and we all have our flaws in the cold light of day and hindsight which is always 20/20.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Sep 2016)

medicineman said:
			
		

> ... he was a very good doctor for his time, devising novel ways of treating TB and was big in bringing the blood transfusion into it's being...the important parts of medical history people like to ignore.


I see that in what little reading I've done about him, too.


			
				jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> To be fair to him and the MacPaps who fought in Spain, they were different times indeed and not without some validity on behalf of those who were fighting Fascism in it's various forms.


That was a time when a lot of folks didn't realize how much the "good guys" were really quite like the "bad guys".



			
				jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> However heroic (or not) Bethune might have been in reality, he was only human after all and we all have our flaws in the cold light of day and hindsight which is always 20/20.


And Lord only knows how his day-to-day would have held up under today's social media scrutiny/cage rattling ...


----------



## Pusser (7 Sep 2016)

Back to the PM:  I wonder if he hoisted in the fact that many of the Canadians who are buried in Hong Kong are there because of a lack of preparation, planning and proper equipment - all political failures...


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Sep 2016)

My thoughts of reply # 1.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Sep 2016)

Well, he must be a hero, we have an official statue of him erected in a square that bears his name downtown Montreal.  :nod:

As for Trudeau's visit at the War cemetery, I agree that this is a "haters gotta hate" and "lovers gotta love" situation. But regardless of your personal side of the debate on the individual at issue, I for one believe that it is a sacred duty for our Prime Ministers to attend at war cemeteries of Canadian soldiers whenever they happen to be in the vicinity on other business - and that it should be publicly acknowledged.

These soldiers were sent there by Canada, and they gave their lives for Canada. It is a solemn duty of our PMs to acknowledge their sacrifice.

I also have to say that, for once, I thought the coverage by the CBC's National was in good tone, and I particularly appreciated the reference to the fact that the service of these Canadians in defence of Honk Kong is an often overlooked or ignored contribution to the war effort. If this makes some kids want to know more and discovered that they were basically sacrificed uselessly by Churchill, who would not countenance the strong urging of Australian PM Menzies (who foresaw clearly the Japanese intent) to strongly reinforce the colony and stop Japanese expansion there and then. I would also hope those same kids would then discover how the Japanese treated the Commonwealth soldiers captured as POW.


----------



## Lightguns (7 Sep 2016)

My biggest take away from Hong Kong is the  necessity of National political and Military command of own troops and the unity of those commands.  The rationalization of Canadians in Hong Kong would never be considered reasonable by our standards today.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Well, he must be a hero, we have an official statue of him erected in a square that bears his name downtown Montreal.  :nod:
> 
> As for Trudeau's visit at the War cemetery, I agree that this is a "haters gotta hate" and "lovers gotta love" situation. But regardless of your personal side of the debate on the individual at issue, I for one believe that it is a sacred duty for our Prime Ministers to attend at war cemeteries of Canadian soldiers whenever they happen to be in the vicinity on other business - _and that it should be publicly acknowledged.
> 
> ...




I think that's the key point and it's why public reporting is right and proper (it is something more than just a photo op) and why it is equally right and proper to discuss it in open fora like this.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Sep 2016)

Valid points. I'm wrong. I'm probably just afflicted with JT photo-op fatigue.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Sep 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Valid points. I'm wrong. I'm probably just _afflicted with JT photo-op fatigue_.




Many people are, but not everything the prime minister says or does is, automatically, wrong just because he was your or my choice ... he has done, is doing and will do some smart, helpful, useful and "good" things for Canada, too.


----------



## mariomike (7 Sep 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> These soldiers were sent there by Canada, and they gave their lives for Canada. It is a solemn duty of our PMs to acknowledge their sacrifice.





			
				Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I would also hope those same kids would then discover how the Japanese treated the Commonwealth soldiers captured as POW.



 :goodpost:


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Sep 2016)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Many people are, but not everything the prime minister says or does is, automatically, wrong just because he was your or my choice ... he has done, is doing and will do some smart, helpful, useful and "good" things for Canada, too.



True but in fairness I think the credit should really go to the advisors (mandarins?) you mentioned in the past.  I find the PM seems to space out when someone asks him unrehearsed questions. But yes, haters gonna hate  ;D


----------



## YZT580 (8 Sep 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> True but in fairness I think the credit should really go to the advisors (mandarins?) you mentioned in the past.  I find the PM seems to space out when someone asks him unrehearsed questions. But yes, haters gonna hate  ;D


  A good manager/leader is one who is not afraid to rely upon the advise of others.  Trudeau will end up as a good leader if he learns to surround himself with independent thinkers and listens to them instead of or along with the cadre of 'old boys' that the party has foisted upon him.  (and no, I did not vote for his party's candidate in my riding)


----------



## CountDC (8 Sep 2016)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Many people are, but not everything the prime minister says or does is, automatically, wrong just because he was your or my choice ... he has done, is doing and will do some smart, helpful, useful and "good" things for Canada, too.




missed them as I am still waiting for him to do some.  maybe all the photo-ops made me blind.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Dec 2016)

Via the Info-machine:


> The Honourable Kent Hehr, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, issued the following statement to mark the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Hong Kong:
> 
> “Tomorrow marks the 75th anniversary of the beginning of the Battle of Hong Kong, an important and solemn chapter in Canada’s long military history. On this day, we take time to honour and remember the brave Canadian heroes who fought to protect the people of Hong Kong and suffered extreme hardships both during and after the battle.
> 
> ...


----------



## MarkOttawa (24 Dec 2016)

The start of a major _NY Times_ article on the Canadians at Hong Kong, 1941:

A Doomed Battle for Hong Kong, With Only Medals Left 75 Years Later

BARRIE, Ontario — John Lawson has only a few tokens to remember his father by: military medals, a couple of dog tags and a silver ID bracelet that encircled his father’s wrist as bullets did their work in Hong Kong one terrible winter day 75 years ago this week.

There was a little pocket diary once, too, but that was lost in a fire. Mr. Lawson remembers two of the last words that his father wrote, summing up the situation before the ordeal that led to his death: “Quite impossible.”

Remembrances of war are worth noting not just for the lives lost but for the bad decisions that led inexorably to the waste of those lives. Mr. Lawson need not have grown up without a father, but misinformation, poor planning and simple incompetence left him with little more than a pocketful of ornaments instead of a man.

Brig. John K. Lawson, Mr. Lawson’s father, was the highest-ranking Canadian soldier killed in action during World War II. He was cut down by machine-gun fire in the doomed defense of Hong Kong, a largely forgotten battle that claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 soldiers, 290 of them Canadian.

The debate over what went wrong raged in the aftermath of the war but has long since grown cold. These days, the sacrifice and courage of those who died are remembered more than the senselessness of their deaths. But historians have long acknowledged that it was a mistake to send untested Canadian boys to defend an indefensible island...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/world/canada/a-doomed-battle-for-hong-kong-with-only-medals-left-75-years-later.html?emc=edit_th_20161224&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=19349345&_r=0

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Chispa (27 Dec 2016)

*Source: DHH 2 H.Q., “unofficial” Report No. 52.,  31st., May 1952:* On all occasions when Canadian forces operated detached during the Second World War, their commanders were provided With special directives defining their relationship to the British or Allied forces With and under Which they were acting. They were normally accorded the right of reference . (i.e., of appeal) to the Canadian Government in extreme cases.

Commanders placed under United Kingdom higher command were advised that they were acting within the framework of the Visiting Forces Act. They were informed that they had authority to remove their forces from "in combination  with the British forces under the terms of that Act - that is, to take them from under British operational commend - but that this should not be done except in extreme cases. For example,


Parts of the directive issued to The Canadian Brigade Commander sent to Hong Kong in 1941 as fallows:

*5.* While the designation referred to in paragraph 3 of these instructions allows you discretion, you will not take the forces under your command out of combination with the British Forces serving in Hong Kong other than in circumstances that you judge to be of compelling necessity, in which case you are to seek further instructions from Canada.
*6.* In the fulfillment of )'our mission, you will bear in mind that all matters concerning Military operations will be dealt with by you through the General Officer Commanding Hong Kong, whose powers in these respects in relation to the Force under your command are exercisable within the limitations laid down in the Visiting Forces Act (Canada) •.••
*8.* You will keep constantly in mind the fact that you are responsible to the Canadian Government for the Force under your command. In consequence your channel of authority end communication on all questions (except those concerning military operations referred to in paragraph 6 of these instructions) including matters of general policy as well as of• transfers , exchanges, recalls and reinforcements, will be direct to National Defence Headquarters, (HQS 20-1-20, 20 Oct 41).


Privy Council Office: Report on the Canadian Expeditionary Force to the Crown colony of Hong Kong. 1942, 61 p. http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/472900/publication.html



*Hong Kong Inquiry:* Abstract Editor’s note: This document, dated 1 March 1942, is Stuart’s brief to the Royal Commission which examined the Hong Kong operation—Sir Lyman Duff, “Report on the Canadian Expeditionary Force to the Crown Colony of Hong Kong” (Ottawa, 1942), commonly referred to as the “Duff Report.” 

*Recommended Citation:* Stuart, Kenneth (2001) "Hong Kong Inquiry," Canadian Military History: Vol. 10 : Iss. 4 , Article 6. Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol10/iss4/6 


C.U.


----------

