# Indian or Chinese Regiment



## Matt_Fisher

I'm just throwing this one out in the wind to see where it goes.

The Canadian Army has units of ethnic origin, namely the Irish and Scottish/Highland regiments due to the ethnic makeup of Canada at the time of the inception of these said units.

Times have changed and there are other large groups of immigrants in Canada now, two groups being Indian and Chinese.

Has there ever been any thought of forming an "Indian Regiment of Canada" or a Canadian perpetuator to the Royal Hong Kong Regiment, ie. "Royal Hong Kong Regiment of Canada"?

This may sound silly, but I'm interested in the feedback it genarates.

Cheers!


----------



## chrisf

No, you're right... it does sound silly.


----------



## Inch

I could be way off here Matt, but I was under the impression that most of our Regiment's names come from the British system for naming Regiments.   Highland/Scottish/Irish regiments were founded based on a tie to a British regiment, not because they were mostly made up of Irish/Scottish troops, at least here in Canada, the Brits may have had a different idea on the subject.   Of course the French regiments are made up of French people, but one could argue that we're all the same race. 

I also think that setting up a regiment for a particular ethnicity is just an invitation for disaster.   Who are you going to send into battle first?

Even with the different make up of Canada's ethnicity, the majority still come from British/French backgrounds.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers


----------



## BDTyre

I'm not sure if there's been any official thought on it, but I personally would not object.   At the same time, I can see the idea not flying because really, what is the point?   Yes, we could create such reigments in honour of the contribution of those ethnicities to Canada, but they would be ethnic in name only which doesn't really go with Canada's image of being multicultural.   Point in case are the Highland units.   The majority of people in Highland units are not of Scottish descent.   (Point in case: I've known four or five Seaforths, none have been of Scottish descent, and one was Hungarian and one of asian descent).   Realistically, asians and east indians do not enter the Canadian Forces as often as people of European descent.   While creating such regiments might encourage them to join, it would also encourage ethnic divisions among the forces.   (i.e., whites saying "I can't join an East Indian unit, I'm white" or Asians saying "If I join an Irish unit, I'll get treated poorly").   And in all fairness, would an East Indian from Edmonton join the Royal Ghurkas of Toronto reserve regiment?   What would decide which city gets which unit?   Would it be based on what percentage of what minority is largest in which city?   This again promotes division along ethnic lines.   Should Vancouver get an asian regiment because it has one of the largest Chinatowns in North America.   Should Surrey get a Sikh regiment or Hindu regiment because it has a large population of both?   Should Nova Scotia get a black or West Indian regiment because they tend to be numerically stronger there than in Regina?   What about Italians, or Russians, or Iranians?

On the plus side, it would encourage minorities to join as they know they could go to a unit which would observe there traditions and they would be serving with other members of their community.   I think it would also foster multiculturalism, our government being able to say "We have a strong multicultural military, so much so that we've created regiments to reflect the make up of our forces."

Again, I'm not opposed to this idea.   However, I think in today's world, it is a loaded issue.


----------



## Rfn

Interesting idea Matt. Here in Winnipeg the Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders were formed after the St Andrew's society, the Sons of Scotland and the rest of the Scottish mafia petitioned for a highland regiment to be formed.

I would be for it, IF these groups asked for one. I think it would help develop unit cohesion right off.


----------



## winchable

Loaded Issue is right,
Never thought of it though.

CF infrastructure and funding aside it's an interesting idea to look at theoretically.

It would be interesting to see the "Mesopotamian Regiment" or "Shang Hai Light infantry"
Nicknames would be intersting too.



> Who are you going to send into battle first?


"Right then, the first wave will be made up of the Mesopotamian 1st mechanized infantry and the Royal Canadian Ghurkas, which from here on in will be referred to as 'Operation Human Shield'"

Although I've always maintained if you could raise an entire unit of Arab soldiers on modern training, tactics and equipment you would find they'd be an awe inspiring fighting force, it's an interesting thought experiment but realistically would probably create more politicall fallout than the CF can handle.


----------



## pbi

I've often thought along these lines. As Matt pointed out, we have spent the public penny for over a century on dressing Canadian Infantry soldiers (Regular and Reserve) in the ethnic dress of Celts and Gaels, while maintaining various traditions connected to these ethnic groups. We also maintain units (in fact a full Bde) that are largely French-unilingual in function if not in law. So, you could certainly argue that some precedent exists.

The problem arises if you intend to restrict membership to a a particular ethnic group-how would you realistically do that in Canada today, in a publicly funded institution? The point about the Highland, Scottish and (one) Irish units is that as long as you don't mind wearing the gear, you can join regardless of ethnicity. Could that be the case in a Sikh Regt, or a Chinese Regt?

One case in which I would definitely encourage this approaxh would be amongst our First Nations: we already have Rangers (quite successful) and out here in LFWA we have Bold Eagle (fairly successful) and Tommy Prince (very mixed reviews...) so why not take the next step and form Res units in First Nation communities? Talk about the "warrior spirit"!

Cheers.


----------



## Acorn

We used to add "Mac" as a prefix to non-Scottish names in the Seaforth. Lots of Chinese and Greek names. It seemed kind of weird.

This issue is one of the things that used to get under my skin when people were making big noise about turbans. My point is that Sikhs have been serving the Empire for as long as any Canadian regiments, with laurels well deserved.

Indian and Pakistani regiments have the same base of tradition that we do. The only reason for not adding an Indo-Canadian regiment to the OB is that we don't have a place to put them.

Acorn


----------



## Deleted member 585

Something I've not thought about much -- however, traditions, practices and regulations _do_ shift to reflect (1) cultural changes within the Forces, i.e. significant Sikh, Muslim, and Aboriginal presence; and (2) socio-economic changes, i.e. education, literacy and familiarity with technology of enrolees.  Whether it is productive or even practical to further culturally sequester troops, I am uncertain.

All seriousness aside, how about modelling a Regiment after the largely contrived "urban" cultural element, complete with a hip-hop Regimental march, "Ostendo Mihi Viaticus" (Show Me Da Money) as the Regimental motto,  extra-baggy-crotch-to-the-knee CADPAT uniforms, and a custom LBV to accomodate excess _bling-bling_ and spare Mac-10 ammo.  :threat:

Cheers.


----------



## pbi

> All seriousness aside, how about modelling a Regimant after the largely contrived "urban" cultural element, complete with a hip-hop Regimental march, "Ostendo Mihi Viaticus" (Show Me Da Money) as the Regimental motto,  extra-baggy-crotch-to-the-knee CADPAT uniforms, and a custom LBV to accomodate excess bling-bling and spare Mac-10 ammo.



You laugh, but years ago I visited the State Street Armoury in Buffalo, NY. Located in the armoury was an ARNG MP unit. For recruiting purposes, they had taken one of their MUT jeeps (anybody remember those shitboxes when we used them..) and painted it metallic purple with chrome fittings and fancy upholstery, as well as extra lights and sirens. The Sgt Maj told me (this is the truth now, "PC" or not....) _"it's great for recruiting those coloured guys"_. I do not necessarily agree with the implied assumptions, but that is what he said. Cheers.


----------



## xFusilier

[Although I've always maintained if you could raise an entire unit of Arab soldiers on modern training, tactics and equipment you would find they'd be an awe inspiring fighting force, it's an interesting thought experiment but realistically would probably create more politicall fallout than the CF can handle.

Already done, it was called the Arab Legion, granted it wasn't the CF it was the British Army.


----------



## winchable

> Already done, it was called the Arab Legion, granted it wasn't the CF it was the British Army.



That's generally the historical example I cite when ranting.
In fact the Arab Legion still lives on today, they police the Desert where the borders are undefined in the Arabian Peninsular.
Very unique to the region, they've perfected policing the desert against illegal trade, arms running, drug running etc. Mostly Bedouin so they can cross the things like "The suns Anvil" and actually live, so that's neat.

And we can't forget Al-Lawrence and the Arab Revolt against the Ottomans who if I'm not mistaken were the predecessor for the Arab Legion. That is once the Brits figured out if they could actually get the Arabs to fight for them they would fight well.
The Mamluks, brutal poets who saved Islam from numerous invading armies, although not predominately Arab, very Spartan if not even better. Maybe a bit too old of an example.

"Oh get off your horse Che"
Or is it a camel.
Sorry, sorry, Straying off topic, I'll send myself a warning.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

The days of raising regiments - any kind of regiments - are largely over, so I suspect the discussion is quite moot.

If we were to raise new units, rather than basing them on ethnic origin with associated "funny dress", they would probably be based on function - Light Infantry, Mountain Infantry, Mechanized Infantry, Armoured Recce, Airborne, etc. and I suspect their name would be associated with their function, or some traditional monicker (ie Foresters) based on location of the regiment also.  Yorkton Light Infantry, Cranbrooke Foresters, Banff and Canmore Alpine Regiment....

Ukrainians are a far more important segment of ethnic society in places like Edmonton, Saskatchewan and parts of Manitoba, they would probably be a better candidate for ethnic representation - and I don't see anyone doing it.  What would their traditional dress look like?  Fur hats and bandoliers like the cossacks?  Interesting, but unnecessary, in my opinion.  In many ways they are a founding "race" of Canada if you will, and their representation in military dress has been nil.  Can't see giving over to the Sikhs or Natives at this point.

I also can't see anybody in power seroiusly suggesting something so potentially devisive.


----------



## R031button

pbi said:
			
		

> I've often thought along these lines. As Matt pointed out, we have spent the public penny for over a century on dressing Canadian Infantry soldiers (Regular and Reserve) in the ethnic dress of Celts and Gaels, while maintaining various traditions connected to these ethnic groups. We also maintain units (in fact a full Bde) that are largely French-unilingual in function if not in law. So, you could certainly argue that some precedent exists.
> 
> The problem arises if you intend to restrict membership to a a particular ethnic group-how would you realistically do that in Canada today, in a publicly funded institution? The point about the Highland, Scottish and (one) Irish units is that as long as you don't mind wearing the gear, you can join regardless of ethnicity. Could that be the case in a Sikh Regt, or a Chinese Regt?
> 
> One case in which I would definitely encourage this approaxh would be amongst our First Nations: we already have Rangers (quite successful) and out here in LFWA we have Bold Eagle (fairly successful) and Tommy Prince (very mixed reviews...) so why not take the next step and form Res units in First Nation communities? Talk about the "warrior spirit"!
> 
> Cheers.



You know, you could probly help out native communities (espeically in the west) by have Res units with large bases built around smaller, poorer reserves. Build them up in the community and give the dissillusioned youth so prevelent there something to aspire to become.


----------



## Kirkhill

> In fact the Arab Legion still lives on today, they police the Desert where the borders are undefined in the Arabian Peninsular.



They also have some pretty fair pipers....


----------



## Erborn

Don't we have enough problems without creating more.


----------



## pbi

> I will be sure alawys




??????????????  ???  Cheers


----------



## Shec

Just a couple of observations and then a comment:

Wasn't there an all-Japanese Canadian battalion in the CEF during WW1?
And, arguably the Canadian Rangers are an ethnic unit.

Now having said that why are we even going here?   One of my cherished memories of my short stint of service in the CF was the opportunity to meet and befriend people from all walks of life and ethnic and religious backgrounds.    Sometimes the PC philosophy of accomodating minorities goes to far and the policy of multi-culturalism has the potential to divide rather than unify this country.  I think this where the Americans have us beat with their melting pot rather than our cultural mosiac ethic.  At least they are, in theory anyway, Americans first.   Sorry for the rant.

And for the record - I'm a member of a religious minority.


----------



## pbi

Shec said:
			
		

> Just a couple of observations and then a comment:
> 
> Wasn't there an all-Japanese Canadian battalion in the CEF during WW1?
> And, arguably the Canadian Rangers are an ethnic unit.
> 
> Now having said that why are we even going here? One of my cherished memories of my short stint of service in the CF was the opportunity to meet and befriend people from all walks of life and ethnic and religious backgrounds. Sometimes the PC philosophy of accomodating minorities goes to far and the policy of multi-culturalism has the potential to divide rather than unify this country. I think this where the Americans have us beat with their melting pot rather than our cultural mosiac ethic. At least they are, in theory anyway, Americans first. Sorry for the rant.
> 
> And for the record - I'm a member of a religious minority.



Shec: Not sure about the Nisei unit, but Rangers are not specifically aboriginal: a very high percentage are, but there are also non-aboriginal Rangers, and the C2 of the CRPGs is mostly non-aboriginal.

On the issue of the ethnically based units, while I have advocated exploring this idea in the past, I think that in the end you are probably right. IMHO we make a mistake when, as soldiers, we pay so much attention to what makes us different from each other. We should focus on what unites us and what we have in common, and on the goal of being the best soldiers we can be. IMHO we don;t need "days" for certain visible minorities, because by extension the other days of the year are.......what?........ "Not-(Insert Minority Here) Days"?-- I would much rather that we built units with strong cohesion and good leadership that cut across ethnic lines. I believe that if we genuinely did that, issues of racism and sexual harassment would dwindle. Cheers.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Shec said:
			
		

> Wasn't there an all-Japanese Canadian battalion in the CEF during WW1?



AFAICT they were integrated into regular battalions.   Some battalions refused, preferring white troops.   The Tenth Battalion had what I believe is one of the largest contingents of Japanese-Canadians (our regimental museum has an entire display devoted to them (we perpetuate the Tenth)) on its rolls.   Some officers didn't want them, but several were decorated for bravery and were good soldiers.   Many of them were interned in 1942, medals or no.

But from my (poor) understanding of the situation, they did not have their own battalion as the Japanese-Americans did in WW II.   I stand to be corrected, however, but given the description of the handful of Japanese soldiers in the Tenth as one of the largest drafts of such, I'd say it wasn't likely?

Canadian Rangers may be in fact an ethnic unit but I don't think it is reflected in their organization, uniforms or traditions other than in practical terms as far as use of civilian clothing, red ball caps, Lee Enfields, etc. go.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

And to PBI - you are absolutely correct.  It sickens me to see US news reports stating "IBM got its first black CEO today" - crap like that only implies that black people aren't equal and should be patted on the head every time one of "them" achieves something, because no one expected them to otherwise.

We will have many more of them in the press in years to come - first black American to walk on the Moon (or Mars), first black President of the United States, etc.

I think we had the same reaction to Kim Campbell who was hailed as "the first woman Prime Minister of Canada" but I like to think we didn't make THAT big a deal of it...


----------



## Shec

Thanks Michael.     I probably was thinking of the 10th.   I seem to remember Pierre Berton referencing a predominantly Japanese-Canadian Battalion in his book Vimy.   Mind you its been years since I read it.

And Bravo PBI when you write "I would much rather that we built units with strong cohesion and good leadership that cut across ethnic lines."


----------



## Deleted member 585

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> And to PBI - you are absolutely correct.  It sickens me to see US news reports stating "IBM got its first black CEO today" - crap like that only implies that black people aren't equal and should be patted on the head every time one of "them" achieves something, because no one expected them to otherwise.
> 
> We will have many more of them in the press in years to come - first black American to walk on the Moon (or Mars), first black President of the United States, etc.
> 
> I think we had the same reaction to Kim Campbell who was hailed as "the first woman Prime Minister of Canada" but I like to think we didn't make THAT big a deal of it...



Michael, for now, suspend your shame of our antecedents' ignorance.  I'll try to suggest an alternative view that may not sicken you so much.

We make the _first_ of anything in human achievement a big deal, whether good or bad.  Take America's first female serial killer (Aileen Wuornos) for example -- her crimes set a precedent and illustrated that a woman is indeed capable of such atrocity.  The nature of the event is heinous of course, however, it provided proof of ability -- something previously entertained only by theory.

High profile precedents can reshape conventional wisdom, and in the event of _the first Black President_ for example, would this not indicate a departure from convention -- a step in the evolution from racial bias towards racial indifference?  One can't ignore that a "majority" typically favours it's own (whether by gender, race, wealth, or faith) so any shift to a less discordant state is favourable... especially for the government, as it's task of ruling peacefully is made easier by less internal conflict.  This kind of thing really appeals to a Liberal.

Is any demand shouted louder in the West than the _beau ideal_ of Equality?  If you favour it -- be patient.  There's much ground to cover before historically downtrodden minorities are no longer a factor in the equation.  The political spectrum will shift, reflecting new priorities -- and the social consciousness (bringing moral implications into _everything_) will exhibit a replacement set of biases, like "Humans tend to accommodate one another, but they hate those robots..."

Cheers.


----------



## foerestedwarrior

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> If we were to raise new units, rather than basing them on ethnic origin with associated "funny dress", they would probably be based on function - Light Infantry, Mountain Infantry, Mechanized Infantry, Armoured Recce, Airborne, etc. and I suspect their name would be associated with their function, or some traditional monicker (ie Foresters) based on location of the regiment also.   Yorkton Light Infantry, Cranbrooke Foresters, Banff and Canmore Alpine Regiment....



A) there are only two Forester units in teh Commenwealth, The Grey & Simcoe Foresters, and The Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters, the later of which is on the brink of disbandment. 
B) I highly dought that there would be a Forester unit made, even IF there was a new unit made, there would be quite alot of pissed of people.


----------



## Brad Sallows

I find the whole notion of "celebration of diversity" peculiar for an organization which thrives on sameness (uniforms, SOPs), teamwork, and merit.


----------



## Kirkhill

The whole argument that is going on in Britain right now about disbandment of Regiments is all about distinctness and tribal identities.  It is why the British Army could effectively combine Royalist (Guards Regiments) and Government (County Regiments), English, Welsh, Scots Lowlanders and Scots Highlanders and even Gurkhas.  It is why the also incorporate and operate with Sikhs, Pathans, Pushtuns, Punjabis, Gujarattis, Persians and even Omani and Jordanian Arabs.

Uniformity of purpose and command doesn't have to mean sameness, nor even blandness.  It might be useful and instructive if Canada did field a Sikh Unit or a Muslim unit where the membership was one of choice and not exclusion.  ie anybody could join, regardless of background, just because they liked the Regimental "Culture".  Hence we have Chinese in Scots Regiments because the like the kilt, the pipes, Robert Burns and haggis.....OK maybe the haggis stretching a point. 

But anyway supplying homes for people to be comfortable, places where the are not isolated but mix with others, and homes that show to the rest of the world that you can be different and co-operate, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing....


----------



## a_majoor

Just a note from the opposite extreme: Years ago in Wainwright I was having "some" beers with a group of British soldiers, when one of them loudly declaimed how great the "Iron Lady" had been as a Prime Minister. "Thatcher sorted out those spooks and wogs" he roared, to the loud approval of all there. He was also perhaps the blackest individual I had ever seen, so the comment about "spooks and wogs" seemed rather bizzare.

The reason he felt able to say such things (and get full approval of his fellows, including a few other gentlemen of the black persuasion) was that in the British Army, everyone is "Green". 

Here in Canada, Regimental titles are mostly historical artifacts of the past two centuries, and like a lot of posters have noted, there is no big deal if (for example) a person of Asian background wants to join a Highland Regiment. If anyone was to seriously start pushing for a new unit with religious/ethnic overtones in its charter or Regimental title, there would be a horrible uproar, and the end result might actually be the disbanding of current units with ethnic charters. It would be a sad day when units were forced to lay up their colours for this reason, sacrificed on the alter of political correctness. Let everyone who wants to join, meet the standards and carry on the fine traditions of the last century.


----------



## alan_li_13

Being a first generation Chinese, i think this is a EXCELLENT idea. I've always had a dream that someday i'll raise my own reg't, however unlikely. 
I'm sure many people feel different, but i believe having our own unit gives us all something to take pride in.  
If there was a Chinese regiment, i would definately join, and i know many others who would. Especially if it perpetuates the RHKR(V)


----------



## pbi

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> The whole argument that is going on in Britain right now about disbandment of Regiments is all about distinctness and tribal identities. It is why the British Army could effectively combine Royalist (Guards Regiments) and Government (County Regiments), English, Welsh, Scots Lowlanders and Scots Highlanders and even Gurkhas. It is why the also incorporate and operate with Sikhs, Pathans, Pushtuns, Punjabis, Gujarattis, Persians and even Omani and Jordanian Arabs.



Kirkhill: I think I know what you're driving at, but I'm not sure that the recent amalgamations in the British Army are quite as sweeping as all that. I do not know of any case in which a Household unit (Foot Guards or Household Cavalry) have been merged with a County unit, nor English units with Scots, nor Gurkha with anybody else. Do you mean merger or just different units serving alongside each other? As for the Indian tribes you listed, I think that in the British Army they were kept fairly well segregated by tribe. To a certain extent this remains the case in the armies of the sub-continent today.



> Uniformity of purpose and command doesn't have to mean sameness, nor even blandness. It might be useful and instructive if Canada did field a Sikh Unit or a Muslim unit where the membership was one of choice and not exclusion. ie anybody could join, regardless of background, just because they liked the Regimental "Culture". Hence we have Chinese in Scots Regiments because the like the kilt, the pipes, Robert Burns and haggis.....OK maybe the haggis stretching a point.



The trouble with the first two examples is that they are not merely "ethnic" but are actually very distinct religious groups as well. You could not separate the religious aspect from the units or the designation would be meaningless. Unfortunately, forming units alomg these lines would be equivalent to having "Roman Catholic" or "Anglican" -designated units: a non-starter. The Highland, Scots and Irish regimental traditions seem to be flexible enough that anybody can feel a comfortable part of the Regt: my Portuguese-Canadian cousin is in the 48th Highlanders, for example.  I agree with your contention that a unit (especially a unit Mess) should feel like a "home" and not just a "job", but I think we might want to stress the "family"  rather than the "tribe" aspect. Cheers.


----------



## a_majoor

If you founded your regiment, would I be welcome to join?

I feel the best answer to the question that started the thread is:


			
				Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> If we were to raise new units, rather than basing them on ethnic origin with associated "funny dress", they would probably be based on function - Light Infantry, Mountain Infantry, Mechanized Infantry, Armoured Recce, Airborne, etc. and I suspect their name would be associated with their function, or some traditional monicker (ie Foresters) based on location of the regiment also.   Yorkton Light Infantry, Cranbrooke Foresters, Banff and Canmore Alpine Regiment....



I'll see you in the mess of the Royal Highland Heavy Artillery (Dismounted).


----------



## Michael Dorosh

a_majoor said:
			
		

> (Dismounted).



I suspect in a few very short years, that designation will be a "given" and quite superfluous.  

I still recall being on a practice field at the Guards Depot in 1990, chatting with a Royal Tank Regiment corporal piper.  Silly me, being a 20 year old private, asked him if all the battalions of the RTR had tanks.

"Of course," he replied.  "Do you mean there are are tank regiments in Canada without tanks?"

"Most of them...." I could only reply....



> Royal Highland Heavy Artillery



Highland Alpine Heavy Artillery has a better ring to it - I can see the combat title and brass shoulder titles now...


----------



## alan_li_13

HAHA ;D haha indeed!


----------



## Kirkhill

> Quote from: Kirkhill on Yesterday at 17:39:51
> The whole argument that is going on in Britain right now about disbandment of Regiments is all about distinctness and tribal identities. It is why the British Army could effectively combine Royalist (Guards Regiments) and Government (County Regiments), English, Welsh, Scots Lowlanders and Scots Highlanders and even Gurkhas. It is why the also incorporate and operate with Sikhs, Pathans, Pushtuns, Punjabis, Gujarattis, Persians and even Omani and Jordanian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> Kirkhill: I think I know what you're driving at, but I'm not sure that the recent amalgamations in the British Army are quite as sweeping as all that. I do not know of any case in which a Household unit (Foot Guards or Household Cavalry) have been merged with a County unit, nor English units with Scots, nor Gurkha with anybody else. Do you mean merger or just different units serving alongside each other? As for the Indian tribes you listed, I think that in the British Army they were kept fairly well segregated by tribe. To a certain extent this remains the case in the armies of the sub-continent today.



Poorly explained on my part pbi.  In one sense you are correct,  the Household Regiments are not being amalgamated with the Counties, nor English with Scots.  No the "tribalism" I was referring to was Edinburgh's Royal Scots being pitted against the Kings Own Scottish Borderers for example.  The recruiting pools for these two regiments are adjacent to each other and Edinburgh is only about 50 miles from the English Border that the KOSB's were raised to guard.  Unfortunately the locals can recognize folks from the adjacent recruitment area because they talk differently.  Different dialects - different tribes.  That's the tribalism I was talking about.  The same problem exists in England.  Devonshire isn't Cornwall much less Northumberland.

The Regiments have traditionally allowed local regional and county identities to flourish.  In Scotland the intention is to create one Regiment (possibly even called the Royal Scots) but the current 1 Bn regiments will become subordinate to the Regiment and most critically could be filled by bodies from any place in Scotland.  Strangely enough it seems that Fijians are better accepted in an Edinburgh regiment than Glaswegians (folks from Glasgow). 

The suggestion with respect to the Household Division is similar, they are all to become battalions in a Household Regiment it seems, and in that case you might, horror of horrors, find an Englishman in the Scots Guards.  Actually I believe there are some there already but its the principle of the thing.

As to your point about keeping the peoples of the sub-continent segregated, that is actually the point I was trying to make.  Keep in mind that the "quaint" regimental characteristics so often found in Canadian regiments, especially the Militia originated in British regiments.  Those British Regiments reflected the regional characteristics of their personnel .  Often those Regiments were incorporated into the British Army after some rebellion or civil war or other.  It was a means of keeping all those warlike impulses in line.  The Highlanders rebel?  Recruit them into the Black Watch and the Fraser Highlanders and send them off to North America to die fighting the French and the Indians.

The Regimental system allowed the British Army to manage "diversity"



> Quote
> Uniformity of purpose and command doesn't have to mean sameness, nor even blandness. It might be useful and instructive if Canada did field a Sikh Unit or a Muslim unit where the membership was one of choice and not exclusion. ie anybody could join, regardless of background, just because they liked the Regimental "Culture". Hence we have Chinese in Scots Regiments because the like the kilt, the pipes, Robert Burns and haggis.....OK maybe the haggis stretching a point.
> 
> 
> The trouble with the first two examples is that they are not merely "ethnic" but are actually very distinct religious groups as well. You could not separate the religious aspect from the units or the designation would be meaningless. Unfortunately, forming units alomg these lines would be equivalent to having "Roman Catholic" or "Anglican" -designated units: a non-starter. The Highland, Scots and Irish regimental traditions seem to be flexible enough that anybody can feel a comfortable part of the Regt: my Portuguese-Canadian cousin is in the 48th Highlanders, for example.  I agree with your contention that a unit (especially a unit Mess) should feel like a "home" and not just a "job", but I think we might want to stress the "family"  rather than the "tribe" aspect. Cheers.



Actually, it was only after the World War 2 that religious affiliation wasn't a consideration in Scottish Regiments.  Lowland Regiments were almost uniformly Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) while some of the Highland Regiments were predominantly RC.  And those distinctions mattered.  The still matter - just ask the Celtic (RC) and Rangers (Presbyterian) fans.  In fact the Cameronians, (not to be confused with the Cameron Highlanders) were raised during Scotland's religious wars specifically to defend the oppressed Presbyterians in the Southwest . They were oppressed by "Bonnie Dundee" of pipe tune fame.  In my neck of the woods he was known as "Bloody Claverhouse"

I agree that Regiments need to be open and that we should stress family over tribe.  My point was that Regiments were a method of managing tribalism until the rough edges could be smoothed off and the Regiment started thinking of themselves as being related to the people in another Regiment with whom they had been feuding for centuries.  In some cases that smoothing process has taken centuries and fighting together in a number of wars against others - non Brits..  Despite that I am sure the Black Watch (raised by the Campbell's) could still find a reason for a punch up with the Highlanders or the Dukes.

The Regiments are, or were, individual entities that still feel discrete despite the fact that they are all Army and all Brits and quite willing to support each other when fighting together.

IMHO.

Waters thoroughly muddied now...?

Cheers pbi.


----------



## pbi

Kirkhill: OK, seen. Cheers.


----------



## WAFFEN_SS

Indian or Chiness? are you INSANE?????????????????????????????????????????????

There is no way I would serve in a Chinesse or Indian Regiment. This topic should be locked and Deleted.  :skull:
We have Irish and Scotish regiments, because they are part of the UK, and as you know the Queen rules over Scotland, and N Ireland. So unless Tony Blair takes over China or Inida, we will not have Indian or Chinesse regiments............


GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:


----------



## G .Dundas

WEAPON said:
			
		

> Indian or Chiness? are you INSANE?????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> There is no way I would serve in a Chinesse or Indian Regiment. This topic should be locked and Deleted.   :skull:
> We have Irish and Scotish regiments, because they are part of the UK, and as you know the Queen rules over Scotland, and N Ireland. So unless Tony Blair takes over China or Inida, we will not have Indian or Chinesse regiments............
> 
> 
> GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:


 then of course we'd be left without your engaging repartee


----------



## Michael Dorosh

G .Dundas said:
			
		

> then of course we'd be left without your engaging repartee



Touche!!!

WEAPON got off to a bad start here by posting a love letter to the Waffen SS and apparently now is a super-monarchist to boot.   I wonder if white supremacy might not be somewhere in his makeup as well.   Time will tell.


----------



## pbi

WEAPON said:
			
		

> Indian or Chiness? are you INSANE?????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> There is no way I would serve in a Chinesse or Indian Regiment. This topic should be locked and Deleted.   :skull:
> We have Irish and Scotish regiments, because they are part of the UK, and as you know the Queen rules over Scotland, and N Ireland. So unless Tony Blair takes over China or Inida, we will not have Indian or Chinesse regiments............
> 
> 
> GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:



Do you   ever, _ever_, think before hitting the keyboard? Just look at your silly post. It is a mess of spelling mistakes, disjointed sentence structure and meaningless rubbish. This kind of post adds absolutely nothing to the board, amd merely serves to expose you to ridicule by everybody here. And, worse, this is not the first time you have cluttered this board with your inane ramblings: you are getting to be quite well known as a shyte peddler. Smarten up or go elsewhere. No cheers for you.


----------



## Matt_Fisher

WEAPON said:
			
		

> Indian or Chiness? are you INSANE?????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> There is no way I would serve in a Chinesse or Indian Regiment. This topic should be locked and Deleted.   :skull:
> We have Irish and Scotish regiments, because they are part of the UK, and as you know the Queen rules over Scotland, and N Ireland. So unless Tony Blair takes over China or Inida, we will not have Indian or Chinesse regiments............
> 
> 
> GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:



I think you forget that India and Pakistan are both commonwealth countries and until the takeover by the Chinese, Hong Kong was also a British Territory.  If you look at the historical record there were many ethnically raised units within the British Empire and Commonwealth that served proudly in the line.

I don't understand your reference to Tony Blair?  The Queen reigns as the sovereign in Canada through a separate leadership chain that doesn't include the British parliament.

Just out of curiosity, what regiment do you currently serve with?  What experience and knowledge do you bring to the table?  

I find it hard to take you seriously when you launch into a rant like this without knowing your background.


----------



## pbi

WEAPON



> "There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity."



Sound familiar?


----------



## Danjanou

WEAPON said:
			
		

> Indian or Chiness? are you INSANE?????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> There is no way I would serve in a Chinesse or Indian Regiment. This topic should be locked and Deleted.   :skull:
> We have Irish and Scotish regiments, because they are part of the UK, and as you know the Queen rules over Scotland, and N Ireland. So unless Tony Blair takes over China or Inida, we will not have Indian or Chinesse regiments............
> 
> 
> GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:



Fortunately based on what we've seen here I doubt you'll ever get the chance, not that they'd want you.


----------



## Michael OLeary

WEAPON said:
			
		

> GOD I wish ppl would think before posting crap up. :rage:



Perhaps you would care to demonstate, since your personal brand of invective certainly fails to set an example of good forum conduct or worthy contribution to the threads being discussed.


----------



## Edward Campbell

You might wish to consider that the _raison d'être_ of the regimental system â â€œ which an overwhelming majority of Canadian Army officers and senior NCOs still cherish and believe must be retained â â€œ was to _*exploit*_ the ethnic, linguistic and regional _*differences*_ and tensions which existed â â€œ especially amongst the Scots and the English in the 18th century and amongst all of the Indians.

The need for distinct, ethnically defined regiments in the Indian Army (both British Indian Army and the East India Company's army) was obvious â â€œ many groups of Indians hated one another worse than any outsiders.   Even British regiments, like the Cameronian guard (formed in about 1700) (later the _Cameronians_ (Scottish Rifles)) were created to avoid murderous religious disputes in the ranks â â€œ as between the _covenanters_ and the hated C&E and Roman folks.

It is highly unlikely, given the _French fact_ that we Canadian have any practical alternative to some form of the regimental system â â€œ the Australian model is, probably, not for us.

While I, personally and generally, oppose Canadian regiments which are formed on any ethnic base other than (official) language I wonder about allowing (a) (some) regiment(s) to adopt some aboriginal customs and traditions, for example.   The _Kiwis_ have gone some way towards making Maori customs part of the Army's and Navy's customs.

Suppose that in an area where many, many _minority_ groups live members of one such group joined one local militia regiment in great number.   Would in be somehow _offensive_ if that group added some 'spice' to our customs and traditions â â€œ maybe with some 'new' dining in night customs or a different regimental band?


----------



## Kirkhill

Couldn't agree with you more ROJ.  

You know a Canadian Arab Legion would look pretty smart in a Green and White head cloth.   I wonder what the Regimental Quick  March would be?

Cheers.   

Come away the Cameronians!


----------



## PARAMEDIC

I dont want to get sucked into this but ......

WEAPON 

 STFU  :rage: and think before you speak. Go back to school, if you get the chance take world history.

Please dont grace us with your ignorance again.   :threat:


----------



## Michael Dorosh

PARAMEDIC said:
			
		

> I dont want to get sucked into this but ......
> 
> WEAPON
> 
> STFU  :rage: and think before you speak. Go back to school, if you get the chance take world history.
> 
> Please dont grace us with your ignorance again.   :threat:



WEAPON (aka WAFFEN_SS) has been banned.


----------



## PARAMEDIC

sorry to fly off the the handle and 

Thankyou


----------



## Spr.Earl

Hey we have enough trouble with Multi Cult on Civie street with out bringing it into the Military.


----------

