# The General Hillier Years. The Merged Superthread



## bossi

I first laid eyes on this bio on Friday, at the parade in Petawawa - it's also on the DND/CF website.

"General Rick" certainly has an awesome sense of humour, eh?   And, at least he and the Lieutenant-Governor showed up for the parade, as did somebody's family who drove all the way from ALBERTA (but of course, the Minister of Defence and Papa Doc Crouton were no-shows ... and as a result CBC NewsWorld didn't even show the parade)

Here's the bio, and coverage of the parade:

(not only was this bio printed in the program for Friday's parade, but it's on the DND/CF website!)


Lieutenant-General Rick Hillier was born in Newfoundland and joined the army as soon as he could. After graduating from Memorial University of Newfoundland in 1975 with a Bachelor of Science Degree, and having completed armour officer classification training; he was posted to his first regiment, the 8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise?s) in Petawawa, Ontario, and subsequently, to the Royal Canadian Dragoons. He has served as a Dragoon since then. 

Throughout his career, LGen Hillier has had the privilege and pleasure of commanding troops from platoon to division and having worked as a staff officer in both Army headquarters in Montreal and National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa. He has served throughout Canada, twice in both Europe and the United States and has enough time with the United Nations and NATO forces in the former Yugoslavia to be eligible to vote there. 


In 1998 LGen Hillier was appointed as the Canadian Deputy Commanding General of III Armoured Corps, US Army in Fort Hood Texas and, following that, in 2000, as Commander, Multinational Division (Southwest) in Bosnia. On return to Canada, he assumed the duties of Assistant Chief of Land Staff and on 30 May 03 was appointed as the Chief of the Land Staff. 


LGen Hillier enjoys most recreational pursuits but, in particular, runs slowly, plays hockey poorly and golfs not well at all. 

++++

Army needs your support, General says
   
Chris Wattie   
National Post 


Saturday, June 28, 2003
The commander of Canada's army told more than 3,000 troops bound for overseas missions yesterday that the Canadian public will "walk with them" when they are deployed to far-off countries such as Afghanistan.

But Lieutenant-General Rick Hillier, the Canadian Forces chief of land staff, said the country needs to pay more attention to its land forces.

"I have a lot of sympathy for the vast majority of the 31 million Canadians who will never get to see you and just what great Canadians you are and how well you represent them," Lt.-Gen. Hillier told the soldiers of 2nd Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group, parading in CFB Petawawa. "And that is a sad thing."

"I call upon Canadians to really, actually start taking an interest in their army, because I'd like to underscore for them that when a single Canadian soldier walks on soil in a foreign, hostile land, every single Canadian walks with him or her. They need to pay attention to their army. They need to visibly support you, and they need to ensure that you are set up for success."

The troops of the brigade, whose members will begin shipping out for missions in Bosnia and Afghanistan in a few weeks, were holding their final parade before going overseas.

The parade included soldiers of the 3rd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment, deploying on Operation Athena to Kabul in August, and troopers of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, bound for Operation Palladium in Bosnia in September.

After reviewing the parade, Lt.-Gen. Hillier made an unusual break with military protocol and asked the soldiers standing at attention to break their ranks and gather around him.

"Now I've got to tell you I love formations, and this is one of the finest formations of soldiers I have ever seen," the general said, to applause and cheers from the ranks. "And I'm sorry, I'm going to break up your formation. I want the soldiers on the flanks and the soldiers in the centre out here to squeeze forward right up to me here.... I like to be able to see those soldiers' faces."

Lt.-Gen. Hillier acknowledged that the coming mission to Afghanistan will be dangerous, but pledged to give the battle group in Kabul "whatever they need."

Commanders have rated the threat to the Canadian contingent, part of the 5,000-strong, 29-nation International Security Assistance Force as high, and some military intelligence estimates have predicted a near certainty of Canadian fatalities on the 12-month mission.

Lt.-Gen. Hillier however, advised the soldiers yesterday to minimize the risks.

"Be vigilant. Use the training. Use the experience. Listen to your leadership, ears and eyes open and just go do the job. Do it as you professional Canadian soldiers can only do it. And come home safely. That's what we want you to do."

Major General Andrew Leslie, who will be the senior Canadian officer in Kabul, said that without the NATO-run force in Afghanistan, the country would quickly slide back into anarchy.

"It would devolve very quickly back down into all-out war, quite frankly. That's how potentially grim the situation is," he told reporters after the parade.

The force assembled for the missions in Bosnia and Afghanistan represents a third of the Canadian army's field soldiers, leaving the rest of the army stretched thin, critics say.

cwattie@nationalpost.com


++++
Afghanistan mission a test of mettle


By DANIEL LEBLANC
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

UPDATED AT 2:08 AM EDT   Saturday, Jun. 28, 2003 




   
   




CFB Petawawa ? A dozen wives nervously tended youngsters in strollers behind the bleachers while a mother cried in the stands.

Behind the stiffness of a military parade for 1,800 Canadian troops on their way to Afghanistan yesterday, the thoughts of family members and friends turned often to their greatest fear: suicide bombers pouncing on loved ones in the streets of Kabul.

Victoria Kirbyson drove from Alberta to see her son parade in this army base in eastern Ontario. Sergeant John Kirbyson will soon embark on his fifth foreign mission, and his mother said this one is the hardest for her. Emotional throughout the day, Ms. Kirbyson saw to it that her hands were never far from the tissues in her pockets.

"We're not too sure about this one," she said of her son's impending mission. "Here, we have such a strong desire for life, but they just don't seem to have that respect for life."

The Canadian Forces have made no attempt to hide the dangers of the mission from the soldiers and their families. Short of straight-out combat, this is the most dangerous of deployments.

Afghanistan is teetering on the edge of anarchy. Four German soldiers were killed on June 7 when a suicide bomber attacked a bus that was taking them to the airport for a flight home.

"My greatest fear, and arguably the greatest fear of the soldiers, is a suicide bomber," said Major-General Andrew Leslie, who will be the deputy commander of the multinational International Security Assistance Force in Kabul.

"Despite all the military training and the vigilance and the attention to detail, it's very, very tough . . . to defend yourself against someone who is willing to die to kill you," he said.

Soldiers say they have been trained to avoid the danger. They've been told to be attentive to details around them, to avoid using the same routes, always to know where they are, and never to take anything for granted.

Captain Jennifer Casey said the trick will be for Canadians to be "firm, friendly, fair and professional."

Captain Brian Healy, who will oversee the street patrols, is calling for constant vigilance. "There is no known enemy. Every time someone comes and takes a picture of Canadian soldiers, there is a concern for us. We have to see why they're taking that picture."

While clearly aware of the threat, the father of two is loath to talk about it with his family. "It's not something I bring up at the supper table," he said.

His wife, Kathy, acknowledged that these are stressful times. All the soldiers have been granted a month's leave before they head out to Afghanistan in August. The vacation is welcome, but too short, she said.

"It all seems surreal right now. Probably two or three days before he goes, it will hit me," Ms. Healy said of her husband's first foreign deployment. "He doesn't like to talk about it. He's upset about leaving the kids, particularly."

Sgt. Kirbyson's family hope that this is the last time he leaves the country for a six-month rotation. He jokes that he's bought a pool with the extra allowance he is getting for the mission, calling it a "guilt gift." 

But his wife, Heather, said that no amount of money or extra leave is worth it.

His 10-year-old daughter, Rebecca, said that spending July with her dad does not change the fact that "he is still going away."

On the other hand, the unmarried younger soldiers who will be patrolling the streets of Kabul seem to deal with the threat of suicide-bombers with a shrug or a laugh, pointing out that there's not much they can do after a bomb goes off.

"That's why we've just been given a month's leave," Corporal Glen Phillips said, eating a hamburger and joking with half-a-dozen colleagues after the morning procession.

For them, the partying that comes with one month's leave was just an hour away.

More than 3,000 soldiers had gathered on this windy morning in Petawawa for what is called an operational-readiness parade. It's the official signal that they are trained and ready to go.

Looking at his troops, Lieutenant-General Rick Hillier pointed out that fully one-third of Canada's field army was in front of him, about to leave the country.

In addition to 1,800 soldiers going to Afghanistan, another 1,300 are set to leave for Bosnia. The dual missions are a clear sign that the Canadian Forces are playing a significant role on the world stage these days ? and being spread thin.

"We're stretched," Lt.-Gen. Hillier said, while praising his soldiers' professionalism and dedication.

The Canadian Forces are coming off a rough decade, during they were hit by billions in cutbacks, scandal in Somalia, and high-profile failures such as an aborted mission to Zaire in 1996.

The Department of National Defence received an $800-million boost to its budget earlier this year, but the full effects have yet to trickle down and heal all the wounds that years of cuts created.

That is why Ottawa's plans for Afghanistan didn't get off to a smooth start. Senior officers said it would take too much of a toll on tired troops, but the government insisted it was within its rights to order their deployment.

"In a democracy, the army does not decide where to deploy the army. The elected government makes that decision," Defence Minister John McCallum said in February.

To avoid accusations that it has deliberately sent Canadian troops into harm's way, however, he added that the government would spare neither money or effort to ensure that those in Kabul have all the necessary equipment.

Army spokesman Captain Jay Jansen said soldiers have received new gear, such as lighter and cooler load-bearing vests and flak jackets. The soldiers also have new laser sights and night-vision equipment, and will have both green and desert-tan uniforms in Afghanistan.

"There's a lot of new stuff coming in the system," Capt. Janzen said.

Toward the end of the parade, Gen. Hillier called on his troops, who were lined up at the edges of a large public square, to gather into a tight, informal huddle close to him. He vowed that they would have all necessary equipment to "come home safely."

The message was well-received, but years of cutbacks have left their mark.

"Canada has probably one of the best trained armies in the world," Ms. Healy said. "Best equipped? That's debatable. But trained, yes."

- 30 -


----------



## Recce41

The parade was on CTV. I remember when Rick was a Capt. He was a great CO. Possible in Law to my Oldest? He will make a great CDS. One of the few with balls.

  :evil:    :tank:


----------



## rolandstrong

i was quite impressed with his approach at this speech. It felt like a close family thing...like we are in this together. Sometimes as a Canadian Forces member you can feel left out by the public. I get a feeling he is addressing that.


----------



## Jarnhamar

I was at that parade. It was quite an impressive speach to say the least, one of the best i‘ve been privy to recieving.  Him having us break ranks was pretty funny considering the work that went into sorting everything out. 
Eairlier in the week he came for a run with us and chatted up the troops. Great leader.


----------



## leopard11

> CP: Hillier to be new chief of defence staff
> Canadian Press
> 
> OTTAWA â â€ Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier to be named new chief of defence staff, The Canadian Press has learned.
> 
> Hillier, currently head of the army, will replace Gen. Ray Henault who is leaving in April to take over NATO's top military post in Brussels.
> 
> Hillier was chosen over two other main contenders -- the deputy chief of defence staff, Vice-Adm. Greg Maddison, and the vice-chief of defence staff, Vice-Adm. Ron Buck.
> 
> More to come


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1105558956485_100968156?hub=Canada


----------



## Bograt

Another great Newfoundlander-


----------



## leopard11

as promised by ctv.ca here is the "more to follow":


> Hillier, 49, commanded NATO's 36-country International Security Assistance Force in Kabul from February to August last year. He also commanded military operations during the ice storm of 1998.
> 
> Defence sources said he has more operational experience than any three-star general in the Canadian Forces.
> 
> Popular with the rank-and-file, Hillier was born in Newfoundland and joined the army as soon as he could.
> 
> He graduated from Memorial University of Newfoundland in 1975 with a Bachelor of Science degree, then completed armour officer classification training before he was posted to the 8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise's) in Petawawa, Ont., and subsequently, the Royal Canadian Dragoons.
> 
> He has also worked as a staff officer in both army headquarters in Montreal and National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa.
> 
> He has served throughout Canada, twice in Europe and the United States and, according to his biography, has enough time with the United Nations and NATO forces in the former Yugoslavia "to be eligible to vote there.''
> 
> In 1998, he was appointed the Canadian Deputy Commanding General of III Armoured Corps, U.S. Army in Fort Hood, Texas, and in 2000 as commander of the Multinational Division (Southwest) in Bosnia.
> 
> He was appointed chief of the army on May 30, 2003.
> 
> His biography on the National Defence website says Hillier enjoys most recreational pursuits "but, in particular, runs slowly, plays hockey poorly and golfs not well at all.''


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1105558956485_100968156/?hub=TopStories


----------



## MikeM

Good to see an army guy get the post!


----------



## 227Tech

> Defence sources said he has more operational experience than any _three-star_ general in the Canadian Forces



Interesting...................


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

MikeM said:
			
		

> Good to see an army guy get the post!



I was just going to post the same thing.

For those of you that know more about him, how do you think he will do in the position?

Many thanks,




Matthew.


----------



## RCA

Bit of a suprise because he just became CLS and theres still lots of work to do within the Army. We can't afford transformation to go off the rails, because a new CLS isn't on board. Hillier took over the vision from Jeffery, was moving it forward and would have pass the torch to the next CLS. The gov't probably picked him ( if this isn't a rumour) because he's high profile and clean. He'll do a good job, but what happens after. He's still a young guy (relatively speaking). 

In my opinion, his selection isn't a long term thought out process. Another knee jerk photo op. He still has a lot to do within the army, and no harm is done if he takes the CDS in three years down the road. It proves there is no strategic vision for the Forces. You would think there would be succession plan for such an important postion of CDS, but this isn't obviously so.

 If this comes true, who will be the next CLS - Leslie?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I dread having Rick Hillier as CDS as he already publically stated a couple of years ago IIRC that he would favour the army over the other elements, so I am not sure how well he wil be for the Navy and Air Force but I am betting dark days are coming for us.


----------



## Jarnhamar

I was really impressed when I met him. He seemed honest, sincere, smart and in touch with what was going on in the Canadian Forces. he also had a good sense of humor. 
I've found he speaks with people and not to them. When he chatted with the troops he asked interesting questions and seemed genuine in hearing what the guys were saying and not doing the standard "hi where are you from, how long have you been in, hows the food, see you later" type of automatic questions some visiting higher ups ask sometimes.    He reminds me of some of the officers we have on army.ca . Honest and speak whats on their mind and not whats PC or cater to whichever crowd they are adressing.   Often troops will bend over backwards trying to get out of speaking to which ever VIP visits. I found troops were going out of their way to chat with him.

As for what he'll do for the CF thats way beyond me, just stating my first impression of him.


----------



## Infanteer

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I dread having Rick Hillier as CDS as he already publically stated a couple of years ago IIRC that he would favour the army over the other elements,



I remember that interview, we have it somewhere on these forums....


----------



## Cloud Cover

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I dread having Rick Hillier as CDS as he already publically stated a couple of years ago IIRC that he would favour the army over the other elements, so I am not sure how well he wil be for the Navy and Air Force but I am betting dark days are coming for us.



No doubt Buck will "assist" if Hillier strays out of his "element."  Is it possible to paint the CPF's in CADPAT before the change in command?


----------



## KevinB

Well go figure he would favour the Army - look at the workload - in deployed personnel...


I saw him once and everyone I know who has worked for him  [ including a few Royals that I have the utmost respect for] speak volumes about him.


----------



## JasonH

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I dread having Rick Hillier as CDS as he already publically stated a couple of years ago IIRC that he would favour the army over the other elements, so I am not sure how well he wil be for the Navy and Air Force but I am betting dark days are coming for us.



Better you then soon to be me  :blotto:


----------



## spenco

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I dread having Rick Hillier as CDS as he already publically stated a couple of years ago IIRC that he would favour the army over the other elements, so I am not sure how well he wil be for the Navy and Air Force but I am betting dark days are coming for us.



This may be a dumb question but did Henault favour the Air Force over the other elements?  Or was he a lame duck all around?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

KevinB said:
			
		

> Well go figure he would favour the Army - look at the workload - in deployed personnel...
> I saw him once and everyone I know who has worked for him   [ including a few Royals that I have the utmost respect for] speak volumes about him.


I used to work for him as well as he was once my CO, but somewhere down the line he lost something. He wanted tanks back in Pet', now he is supporting the MGS?? Kind of a complete turn around if you ask me. 

Jay hunter said:


> Better you then soon to be me


Glad to see how you think I might not be able to do my is such   good thing!   :     

spenco said:


> This may be a dumb question but did Henault favour the Air Force over the other elements?  Or was he a lame duck all around?


No but thats not the point what I am talking about was what Lt General said about two years ago.


----------



## George Wallace

KevinB said:
			
		

> Well go figure he would favour the Army - look at the workload - in deployed personnel...
> 
> I saw him once and everyone I know who has worked for him [ including a few Royals that I have the utmost respect for] speak volumes about him.



Well, I had him as a CO, and he was only fair...He has the gift of gab.....I am greatly put off by him now after his full page letter in the Ottawa Citizen praising the MGS and stating that tanks are obsolete....He is now a politician and as such plays to the whims of the Liberals.   It is a shame to say he wore the Black Beret.

However, it does open up the job of CLS for another fine Dragoon, now in Iraq, MGen Walt Natynczyk, whom many were speculating recently as being a good nomination for CDS.   A much better choice in my opinion, but to low in the pecking order.   The next in line will be Navy, if the rotation continues per normal.

GW


----------



## Spartan

Can anyone clarify this- I always thought that it would go to the Vice or Deputy as a means of succession/grooming? and can anyone clarify the differences in positions between the Vice and the Deputy?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

The two articles below are mainly why I am unhappy anout the selection to Rick Hillier for CDS.

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/mspa_news/news_issues_e.asp?category=2&title=13
this is the statement:
*Lt Gen Rick Hillier, tried to persuade the senior decision-makers that the capital programme should focus on the army, and that Canada would have little need in the future for a 'blue water' navy or 'blue skies' air force. His angry colleagues rebutted his arguments. * 


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20031029/stryker_vehicles_army_031030/Canada?s_name=&no_ads=

If his view has changed then all the better but I am not expecting them to. I don't think there is anything wrong with the wanting of fair treatment.


----------



## George Wallace

Symchyshyn said:
			
		

> Can anyone clarify this- I always thought that it would go to the Vice or Deputy as a means of succession/grooming? and can anyone clarify the differences in positions between the Vice and the Deputy?



It has usually rotated between the three Services in a set order.   However, since Somalia, there has been some Political manipulation.

GW


----------



## Lance Wiebe

I know Rick reasonably well.  I had him as a troop leader when he first joined, and later as my CO.  A very driven man, much more driven than the relaxed air he has perfected in front of others.  And he does have a vision for our forces.  Unfortunately, his vision is not shared by many, actually, are most likely not supported by very many at all.

Rick's vision is not to have a stand-alone army, navy or air force.  It is his belief that we can never have an independant force go any where without coalition partners.  Therefore, it is up to us to develop niche roles to support coalition members, and keep budget costs down.  In this vision, we will never have a need to operate under our own command, we will operate as sub-units of other countries commands.  So, no to tanks and SP arty, no to any kind of hybrid carrier, and most likely no to any kind of new fighter aircraft.  Most likely no to any kind of area air defense as well, whether it be navy or army.

At least, this is how I see his vision.  Not great news for those that want Canada to operate freely, but it will be good news for the politicians, I think.


----------



## Arctic Acorn

I was recently able to attend a briefing on the Army transformation, and thats exactly the underlying concept, Mr. Wiebe. 

I did find it interesting that there is a plan to phase out our air defence assets, on the rationale that in coalition ops the first thing to happen is establishment of air supremacy. I heard a lot groaning when the Major presenting announced it, though...

 :dontpanic:
J.M.


----------



## Navalsnpr

Can anyone comment on why the it should have been a Navy CDS in the order of precession but the PM decided to pick an Army General for the CDS position instead?


----------



## Reccesoldier

Personally I have high hopes for General Hillier. I too know him personally from his days as the CO of the Dragoons.

Here is a guy who as the CLS turned up on very hot Saturday in June of 03 to be the reviewing officer for a corps of 30 Cadets.  

As for him being Army centric I say it's about time. Take a look at the majority of troops deployed in the CF and tell me what you see. There's a whole lot of Cadpat out there.

The Army has been cut to the bone in the last little while in spite of the fact that they do a majority of the heavy lifting when it comes to deployments. Sorry Navy types, I know that you too are hurting but numerically you are second and the air force barely even registers. Of the three services the Army has been neglected the most, cut the most and deployed the most.

George, I read that article that you refered to and I too was shocked by some of the things Rick said but I'm willing to bet that the decision to purchase the MGS was NOT militarily driven and  is being rammed down our throats by politicians who think the army should be relagated to the constabulary/peacekeeper role. In short I'd bet that he had no choice but to support that one myopic decision in order to be able to get other consessions. Even at his level (perhaps especially at his level) you have to choose your battles.

Only time will tell, but I remain hopefull.


----------



## George Wallace

Reccesoldier said:
			
		

> George, I read that article that you refered to and I too was shocked by some of the things Rick said but I'm willing to bet that the decision to purchase the MGS was NOT militarily driven and is being rammed down our throats by politicians who think the army should be relagated to the constabulary/peacekeeper role. In short I'd bet that he had no choice but to support that one myopic decision in order to be able to get other consessions. Even at his level (perhaps especially at his level) you have to choose your battles.
> 
> Only time will tell, but I remain hopefull.



Of course he had to tow the "Party Line" or he would have been gone long ago, like so many other fine officers.   He's a true politician now.

Sorry....If he couldn't fight for us before, I can't see him fighting much for us now.   He will tow the Liberal line and try to paint a rosy picture.   "Don't Worry-Be Happy" won't cut it.   It is a prestigious and high paying job, and he has attained it.

GW


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I hope I am wrong and I hope he is fair and does not gut the Navy and Air Force like I expect him to. Just remember the Navy and Air Force will be after Army as the CDS and I have no doubt payback will occur if Lt Gen Hillier goes Army centric at the price of the Navy and Air Force.


----------



## HItorMiss

I have hope that Gen Hillier will fight for all the forces (course if he is army centric then I am not going to complain either), He has always presented himself as a fine soldier and an officer that cared about his troops and their future.

I am though a little concerned with any officer when they reach the storied heights of CDS as becoming just another Liberal sock puppet that spouts the party line trying to get a nice fat diplomatic job when they leave the post of CDS, time I guess will tell if he stays true to his roots and fights for us or just gives in to the pressure.


----------



## Lance Wiebe

He was not towing any party line.  Rick honestly believes the army does not require tanks, SP arty, attack helicopters, or air defense.  Just as we will not require jet fighters or air defense destroyers.  Rick believes that we will ALWAYS deploy as part of a coalition, and we will do "niche" tasks to enable the major coalition partners to conduct the main battles.

What I do like is that we will finally be given some direction, instead of drifting aimlessly, blown around by political winds.

Like it or not, I think that the endstate will be an Armed Forces with no major, expensive equipment, and lots of good, minor equipment.  It should mean more aircraft (no fighters though!), more naval vessels and more boots on the ground.  What I do not like is the fact that we will no longer be an first, second or even third rate force.  We will simply be an "augmentation" force.

Hm.....something like the role the reserves have now, isn't it?


----------



## jmackenzie_15

I for the most part, agree and support alot of the things Hillier says, but I think attack helicopters and fighter aircraft are one of the best ways to support ground troops.Attack helicopters would be excellent cover for patrols in urban setting.They can see alot of things happening on the ground, and can assist with a heck of a lot of firepower if it is needed.Even if we didnt have tanks and the enemy did, the helicopters could still take them down, or even the fighter aircraft really.Air superiority is a must have if you're going to try and win a war, and id rather not just decide to 'leave it up to the americans' or something to that effect.

But then again, maybe Hilliers plan is to go this augmentation force route for now, because with the current budget and support, that would be far more effective than trying to maintain a larger more conventional force, and in the long run, we can slowly build upon our capabilities, rather than struggling to keep them all in check as we are today.Maybe he just wants to start from scratch again... reorg reorg reorg!


----------



## my love my life

I'd just like to add my opinion on LGen Hillier's appointment.  I firmly believe that he is the right man for the job at the right time.  Will he favour Army over Navy and Airforce?  Time will tell, but from the Army family standpoint - I"m feeling a lot more positive about proper Army support now that he's in the chair.

I agree with Reccesoldier's comments - it is about time..   Gen Hillier is a fine soldier - as down to earth as they come and I don't think for a minute that he will forget what's important to all of us.  You can dissect his comments until the cows come home but the bottom like is that none of us know what is going on behind the scenes and I have every confidence in him.

  Do I question that he will not look out for the troops' best interests in favor of advancing his career?  Not for a minute.  And before you say you are just a military wife so what do you know - I have met Gen Hillier many times and frquently came into contact with him during my working career at CFB Petawawa.    Cheers, Dianne


----------



## 2 Cdo

How he does his job is really a moot point. Being the CDS is strictly a POLITICAL promotion. If our liberal government thought he might be a "loose cannon" and start actually fighting for the things we need he would not be placed in that position! He will play ball with the government or he will find himself being forced out of that position.
If people don't think that's how it works in Canada I have some prime vacation real estate for sale in sunny Nunavut.


----------



## RCA

I again question whether this is good for the Army at this particular point in time. We are going through difficult process at this time and we require continuity.  Has long range consideration and succession planning gone into this decision, or when his term is up, is the next general officer that"looks good" be picked by the gov't?.

I have no doubt about his abilities or vision, but is this the best choice for the Army/CF today? or waiting three yrs for him to take CDS be a better decision. His moving ahead over senior LGen (and potentially just as qualified) could cause roadblocks and dissension further up the road.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

RCA said:
			
		

> I again question whether this is good for the Army at this particular point in time. We are going through difficult process at this time and we require continuity.   Has long range consideration and succession planning gone into this decision, or when his term is up, is the next general officer that"looks good" be picked by the gov't?.
> 
> I have no doubt about his abilities or vision, but is this the best choice for the Army/CF today? or waiting three yrs for him to take CDS be a better decision. His moving ahead over senior LGen (and potentially just as qualified) could cause roadblocks and dissension further up the road.



This depends on if he becomes just another yes man in the uniform or if he is able to carry out his vision of the land element, throughout the forces. 

Yes the Air Force and Navy may feel a bit of a pinch, but i have to agree with some of the others in this thread when they say the army needs the men and the equipment for their deployment schedule. 

When is the last time we sent  CF18's on a combat mission? KOSOVO  plus the JSF is what 20 yrs away from ever in our inventory. :dontpanic:

The navy just got its new choppers and new ships those new Multi role ships.  

The army needs the manpower and the new equipment...

I just hope he reshapes the top of this structure and cuts down on the Flags so that we can streamline the forces and save money.  Have people in command of just more then 3 freakin guys.  Not every postion in Ottawa requires heavy brass.

Only time will tell 

Unfortunatelywe will be the ones to carry the decisions good bad or ugly.


----------



## Brad Sallows

1) I have no respect for "whose turn is it" selection processes.

2) Did LGen Hillier state words to the effect of "If I were CDS, I would favour the army", or did he state from a position as the army's advocate that he believed the army should have primacy?

3) There will still be a VCDS, DCDS, and three service chiefs of staff at the "big table".

4) While I prefer to see the forces keep a hand in every warfighting capability, dropping into niche roles is a logical step in meeting the requirements-vs-resources shortfall - more of the capabilities we are repeatedly deploying; fewer of the capabilities we are not.  Getting entirely out of the business of tanks, big guns, and air defence (land or sea) may be premature, though.


----------



## Navalsnpr

Wizard of OZ said:
			
		

> The navy just got its new choppers and new ships those new Multi role ships.



The last I checked, the Air Force flew choppers, not the Navy... As for Multi Role ships, are you talking about the CPF's that are close to 15 years old.

At the end of the day, all 3 services require various equipment to be procured to replace older models of what ever. As for personnel, I do agree that the Combat Arms requires a lot of recruits, but so does the Navy.


----------



## Kirkhill

Sorry Guys, but from the tone of some of the comment here I am starting to think that Corporal Hellyer might have been right all along.

Cheers.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

This topic is getting a bit out of hand.   A number of you have put words into LGen Hillier's mouth as if you were part of his staff or spoke for him.   I'm also detecting a mean streak of "get your hands off of my element's toys" which I thought that we had been doing a pretty good job of beating down on this forum lately.

IMHO, by all means advocate for your branch, element or favourite piece of equipment, but can we not all agree that:

1) no one here has all the answers, so it pays to listen more than speak, especially on issues that you don't have personal experience with.   You might just learn something.
2) What is most important is the greater good of the Canadian Forces and by extension the defence of Canada.   There may be many other ways of organizing ourselves to do business other than what we are doing right now.   Ultimately, we are all on the same team.

At least give the General a chance to get into the job before sniping and counter-sniping...


----------



## George Wallace

2 Cdo said:
			
		

> How he does his job is really a moot point. Being the CDS is strictly a POLITICAL promotion. If our liberal government thought he might be a "loose cannon" and start actually fighting for the things we need he would not be placed in that position! He will play ball with the government or he will find himself being forced out of that position.
> If people don't think that's how it works in Canada I have some prime vacation real estate for sale in sunny Nunavut.




Some really honest points there.   How much clout does the CDS truly have?  Gen Hillier has a good gift of gab and is very personable.  Who, honestly, is better for the "Feel Good" role of CDS.  We have the Commander In Chief and the CDS both, more or less, functioning like Politicians shaking hands and kissing babies.  One, or the other, will almost always be available to send off or welcome back the Troops.

When I drove the Div Comd, I found that the Min. of National Defence had a say over what we did in Canada, but once we were outside the country, it was the Min. of Foreign Affairs who dictated what we could or could not do.  The CDS is only a middle man......a "Yes Man". if you wish.  He may be able to give the Gov't good advice, but whether or not they take it is another story.

GW


----------



## Kirkhill

> The CDS is only a middle man......a "Yes Man". if you wish.  He may be able to give the Gov't good advice, but whether or not they take it is another story.



Strange, I guess I was a "Yes Man" too.  I seem to remember coming to attention, saluting and saying Yes Sir when I was given my orders.  Maybe other folks don't do that.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Only deploy as part of a coalition?  Niche roles?  I don't like the sounds of this at all....



Matthew.   ???


----------



## MSE_OP18

Having met and worked for Lt-Gen Hillier on a few occasions. I do believe that he will do excellent as CDS. Probably one of the best we may have seen in quite a few years. One sided with army....perhaps. However, remember who he works for....His decisions will be greatly influenced by politicians of course. Never the less as a leader he has a job to do and regardless of the outcome we should not fault as we are not in that persons shoes...or boots!


Cheers


----------



## Meridian

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> 1) I have no respect for "whose turn is it" selection processes.
> 
> 2) Did LGen Hillier state words to the effect of "If I were CDS, I would favour the army", or did he state from a position as the army's advocate that he believed the army should have primacy?
> 
> 3) There will still be a VCDS, DCDS, and three service chiefs of staff at the "big table".



Not knowing the man, Brad's comments make the most sense out of all the others in here....  

Of course, I too question the "power" of the CDS... The CJCS (Im not even sure of the acronum, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs) has quite a bit of power to influence the Pentagon in the states.. but ultimately the military is a tool of the state, and should be controlled however the politicans want to control it.

I know that everyone is very anti-politician.. but the very legitimacy of the military revolves around the fact that you take your orders from the elected representatives...   (im talking high level political thought here).


----------



## tomahawk6

CDS might be able to force through a reorganization of NDHQ and the three Commands. These might then free up manpower for another brigade group. But the CDS canonly  recomend a budget but the PM will decide the who gets what. It most likely will take a change in government before the CF will see a serious budget increase. Otherwise triage will be instituted with one service getting more money than the other two.


----------



## Infanteer

I am going to agree with Brad Sallows as well - they're should be no griping over "spot jumping": seniority has historically been one of the crippling factors of a truly professional military.  May the best man win.

As for General Hillier's recent promotion, all I can really say is I'm sure glad we have a "somebody" rather than a "nobody" as the country's top soldier.  Being that the General has served as Deputy Cmr of III Corps and commanded a multinational Division headquarters overseas, I'm happy to see that someone with a good amount of operational experience is steering the boat.

Cheers,
Infanteer


----------



## S McKee

I think he's a good choice and like it or not we are a niche role military, so we better get use to it and forget all this multi-role, combat capable bafflegarb. We'll always deploy as a part of some larger force. Let's face it, as much as we'd like attack helicopters, MB Ts, new jets, ships etc, the fact is the public doesn't want us to have any-type of "offensive" war fighting equipment and the government doesn't want to pay for it   so that's that. I wish Gen Hillier the best of luck.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Jumper said:
			
		

> I think he's a good choice and like it or not we are a niche role military, so we better get use to it and forget all this multi-role, combat capable bafflegarb. We'll always deploy as a part of some larger force. Let's face it, as much as we'd like attack helicopters, MB Ts, new jets, ships etc, the fact is the public doesn't want us to have any-type of "offensive" war fighting equipment and the government doesn't want to pay for it   so that's that. I wish Gen Hillier the best of luck.



Jumper i could not agree with you more.....

The public does not want an aggressive fighting unit under the Canadian flag.  Hense we are no longer the Armed Forces.

Was seen as to aggressive for the Peace Keeping roles that the forces has become accustomed to assuming.

I think Gen Hillier will be facing an uphill battle if he attempts to Rebuild or Re-strenghen the forces.  If he even tries.

The puplic is very against us having the kit we need to do the job we have to do.  This is until somehting happens and we have to respond to it.  Then they ask "well what do we have an army for anyway".  Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

I wish him all the luck in the world.  I just hope he can keep his head up as the bull.... can get fairly deep at the Ivory Towers.


----------



## Franko

Rick is on the tube right now making his anoucement on CTV News Net......

"Best bang for Canada....demands are huge...."

Good day to be a Dragoon?  ???

Regards


----------



## Wizard of OZ

franko

do you think it could be a worse day?   ;D

sorry could not resist.

playing the political game already   

anybody expect different. :


----------



## Kirkhill

Just a point on the public and kit.

I am not convinced the public is against the Forces having the kit. The soft-power types (NDP, Axworthy, Ploughshares, Polaris and up until recently I would have included all the Canadian media) are certainly against it and very loud in saying so but I believe that the average Canadian believes that we have tanks, howitzers, helicopters, destroyers, subs and fighters and that we should have them.  The pity of it is they believe the stuff that you have on issue all works and that you could, under the necessary and commonly agreed circumstances, use them "alongside the best".

The problem the public has is two fold - failure to realize just how clapped out a lot of the kit is and sticker shock at the bill necessary to replace it, let alone upgrade it.  That is where the failure in political leadership occurs. And as long as PM can't make a decision on anything because he is trying to stay on side between the "softies" and the "others - realists?", a faction that I actually think he might be predisposed towards, then no leadership will occur and, as tomahawk6 suggests, triage will continue to be necessary.

On the other hand maybe we will all be shocked and awed and money will flow into the coffers.


----------



## Tpr.Orange

Did anyone read the email send out by the soon departing CDS? Ill post it tuesday when i get back to the office. He sent the email to everyone in the DND and CF.


----------



## Infanteer

Does that constitute SPAM?


----------



## Tpr.Orange

If it does...are you gonna put forth the charges?


----------



## Infanteer

LOL...Maybe we can do a Forces wide email

cc "Army.ca Crew"

 ;D


----------



## 291er

I'll throw my opinion into the ring.  I was at NDHQ on the Ex floor yesterday when the decision was put through.  Actually we were briefed a little beforehand by MGen Gauthier as to what was transpiring.  He stated simply that the changes, they are a comin'.  Whether this be good or bad, we'll see.  
I thought that VAdm Maddison (DCDS) would get it honestly, and as did a lot of my co-workers.   He has been DCDS for a few years now.  As far as the three element shuffle for CDS, that's done away with now, and it's purely a decision by the PM (apparently).  Not sure if anyone heard this yet, but VAdm Maddison is retiring this April now as of yesterday's decision (he would've stayed on had he been chosen).  That clears up the DCDS spot for someone, no indications who as of yet.  
I think the CLS spot will be reserved for MGen Leslie once he gets back from advanced trg.  I can confidently say that I would'nt be surprised to see Leslie as the CDS someday in the not too distant future either.  My 2 cents....


----------



## 2Lt_Burgie

Good Day:
From what I can tell, I've seen a lot of Generals come and go, and from what I can tell, this LGen appears to have what it takes to get the job done. What Canada's Forces needs is:

1. Better Operational Equipment
2. More Troops.
3. More Troops.
4. Training for the 'More Troops'.
(None of the above is really under debate)

He has the experience, and I am looking forward to working for him through my chain of command. (and of course he is a Maritimer, some of the best people in Canada as my wife would say).


----------



## ArmyRick

I personally think Hillier is the right man for the job and I also beleive because of where he is going, transformation will speed up.

Jumper, well said and right on the money. Its true, we are not and will not be (in the near future) a huge army with brigades of MBT, IFV, SP ARTY, MRLS, etc, etc.
We are a small army and I think transformation is necessary for us. When the US went into afghanastan in '01, they requested a squadron of coyotes, nothing else (the fact they got a light Inf bn was a bonus). 
I talked to a 29 year serving RCD WO (I will not mention his name without permission) who was an old tanker in germany and he openly admitted that the CF should bin Tanks and that Hillier is right on the money.
The days of us trying to play ful on combat team attacks versus the warsaw pact are over.


----------



## George Wallace

291er said:
			
		

> I'll throw my opinion into the ring. I was at NDHQ on the Ex floor yesterday when the decision was put through. Actually we were briefed a little beforehand by MGen Gauthier as to what was transpiring. He stated simply that the changes, they are a comin'. Whether this be good or bad, we'll see.
> I thought that VAdm Maddison (DCDS) would get it honestly, and as did a lot of my co-workers. He has been DCDS for a few years now. As far as the three element shuffle for CDS, that's done away with now, and it's purely a decision by the PM (apparently). Not sure if anyone heard this yet, but VAdm Maddison is retiring this April now as of yesterday's decision (he would've stayed on had he been chosen). That clears up the DCDS spot for someone, no indications who as of yet.
> I think the CLS spot will be reserved for MGen Leslie once he gets back from advanced trg. I can confidently say that I would'nt be surprised to see Leslie as the CDS someday in the not too distant future either. My 2 cents....



This makes the appointment sound like Political Patronage........which further erodes the CF.

I hate defeatist attitudes and can see it in many of the last few posts.  What is next on the chopping block?  Chop our Herc fleet and get rid of our Jump capabilities; after all when are we ever going to jump into anything anymore with the 101st and 82nd Airborne doing all that?  That makes our Jumpers a monumental waste of money.  As a Niche Armed Forces we won't need Jumpers, Tankers, Fighter Pilots, and such.  We might as well disband and put all our money into enlarging the RCMP and Red Cross....That should take care of all our requirements for PeaceKeeping and make all those Lefties happy.

Let's loose all our experience in Combat Fighting in the Army, Navy and Air Force.  Why not we are only going to be a Niche Force relying on the good ole US of A to do all the heavy stuff.  We'll continue to ride on their coattails and play the Philosopher Kings.  It is discusting to see this happen to our Armed Forces over the last fifteen year.  We are no longer a viable force and have basically rolled over and died.  What a crock.....


----------



## Infanteer

George Wallace said:
			
		

> This makes the appointment sound like Political Patronage........which further erodes the CF.



How else should the CDS be chosen?

Seniority is a bad thing.

An election is silly.

As much as we may not like the current leadership in Parliament doesn't mean that the Executive Branch (Cabinet and the PMO) shouldn't have and maintain important responsibilites that maintain a healthy level of civil-military relations (ie: promoting the most senior military officials).


----------



## 291er

Too true Infanteer.  I am sure that the PM takes the recommendations of the outgoing CDS and the MND very seriously when considering which candidate to choose.


----------



## Slim

Does anyone suppose that General Hillier may decide to quote extensively from the Canadian Army Forum (Army.ca) After all the media certainly seem to be...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050114.whillier0114/BNStory/Front/



> Picking Lieutenant-General Hillier signals that Mr. Martin is serious about reshaping Canada's overstretched military. The army officer has been outspoken about the need to make Canada's modest military capacity more mobile and modern, *a strong hint that the ongoing defence-policy review will focus on international expeditionary forces, likely by downgrading the navy and air force.*



That was an exert from an article in the Globe and Mail today!


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Hell, I'm crossing my fingers that more writers start reading this board.  There is a wealth of knowledge here that if they could desseminate to the general public would be very worthwhile.




Matthew.


----------



## Big Foot

My one question on this is, with Gen Henault going to NATO, are we going to have 2 four leaf generals?


----------



## Gobsmacked

Big Foot said:
			
		

> My one question on this is, with Gen Henault going to NATO, are we going to have 2 four leaf generals?



Unfortunately, Yes.
Canada, as the nation supplying the new Chairman of the NATO military committee, is Responsible for All Costs associated with the supplied representative.
Lets just hope that the Libs pony up the additional funding required? :-\
Although, personally, in view of their past actions, they will likely make the CF provide the requisite funding out of DND's own hide - as seen with prior overseas deployments.


----------



## Infanteer

I can't see how focusing on international expeditionary forces means downgrading Naval and Air assets.  Is the Army just going to paddle a canoe to the threat area?


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I can't see how focusing on international expeditionary forces means downgrading Naval and Air assets.   Is the Army just going to paddle a canoe to the threat area?



Yes.   However, we're not anticipating those canoes for 10 years as we have to ensure that production is spread equally amongst the provinces in Liberal ridings with an appropriate native Canadian contribution.   At that point the Liberal Government (still in power) will deploy them only with a formal invitation.



Matthew.      ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

_Quote
Picking Lieutenant-General Hillier signals that Mr. Martin is serious about reshaping Canada's overstretched military. The army officer has been outspoken about the need to make Canada's modest military capacity more mobile and modern, a strong hint that the ongoing defence-policy review will focus on international expeditionary forces, likely by downgrading the navy and air force._

And is it any wonder the Air Force and Navy are dreading Lt Gen Hillier getting the position of CDS? I can see a lot of friction between the 3 elements now.


----------



## KevinB

Life is a bitch boys.

And IIRC we will have 3 four leafs now - the LO in Washington has traditionally been a ful Gen.


 In todays day and age we don thave hte budget for blue water Navy nor High Speed Air - look at what those elements have been able to provide recently - AirForce - a useless transport fleet and a insignificant Air Superiority Fighter.  Navy - interdiction missions of questionable value - a uselss submarine that cannot patrol our Arctic.

 While I woudl love to have a robust Force constint of cruisers, nuke boats and a Tarawa type assault ship - we dont have the budget.

I'd much rather have well equipped soliders with great individual skill sets that can go and do with the best of them.

We have to be a niche army - if not we will just simply suck at everything, do to budget and equiptment shortfalls.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I wonder how supportive you would be of an Air Force General CDS or an Naval Admiral CDS if the army was seen as "questionable value".


----------



## KevinB

Dude - we've been there for the last few years...

 Ask the LCMM Small Arms why the fleet is "rusting out" - not enough money for maitenance - as such we have dangerously unserviceable weapons going on tour...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

It is premature to speculate what he will do. I hope he wil look after the entire CF and not just the Army. (although I admit I am not optimistic about that)

Going for a niche role military IMO won't work as we will always have to rely on someone else to do something we should be doing for ourselves.


----------



## FredDaHead

As someone trying to get into the Navy, I'm getting worried by Lt-Gen Hillier's views on the Air and Maritime Commands.

We need a complete fighting force, in my opinion. By that I mean a highly deployable Land element, with well-trained soldiers with good equipment (basically, the soldiers we have now, with better equipment), an Air element that can transport troops and/or equipment, and enough fighters to protect the transports if they have to go in an hostile environment, and finally a Naval element that can ferry troops, interdict areas (as we have been doing around Iraq), provide defense for friendly battlegroups (like we've been doing with US BGs).

Basically, we need to be a small, highly capable force. Think USMC but smaller, and with boats. Actually, I think the Marines are probably the best model we'd have. They have an air force, a land force (duh) and have the Navy to depend on.

Of course, I agree that most of what we've been doing lately is focused on land warfare (oops, non-PC slip here) but we've also been keeping a naval presence around the world.

Another problem that will arise in the next few years (decades, at max) is keeping our sovereignty in the Arctic. There have been reports of foreign war vessels in our territorial waters, and even foreign operatives near our land. If we don't do something we'll lose one of the things that make us such a great country: our massive land up north. We need at least a few ships to send up there to prevent other nations from violating our sovereignty.

Anyways, here's to hoping Hillier won't mess everything up worse than it already is...


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> In todays day and age we don thave hte budget for blue water Navy nor High Speed Air - look at what those elements have been able to provide recently - AirForce - a useless transport fleet and a insignificant Air Superiority Fighter.   Navy - interdiction missions of questionable value - a uselss submarine that cannot patrol our Arctic



KevinB-

Thank-you for the insightful Defence of Canada analysis.   I do respect your opinion on infantry and army matters, but the statement you made above really leads me to believe that you need to do a bit of research before you go wading into the Navy and Air Force arenas.

Feel free to PM me if you wish to know what the real issues with our Navy and Air Force are.   I am familiar with the subject matter...


----------



## x-grunt

KevinB said:
			
		

> ...interdiction missions of questionable value




Don't think of what we do, but why we do it. Thank bigger then just the military, remember at the end of the day we are a just a diplomatic tool. (Let's hope they use us well.)

Many of our missions may be of questionable *military* value. I will not offer an opinion on this. But they can be really valuable politically. The CF provides a way for the govt of the day to build up political currency by going on missions alongside allies and the UN. Even if we think it's stupid, we may be earning brownie points we can cash in as a country.

That's my .02, out.


----------



## KevinB

SeaKingTacco,

 I think you misunderstood me.  I would love to have a fleet and credible airforce.

However at this point in time the ARMY's small arms are gettign worn out - we have had several dangerous failure s from guns that are above their service life - in one case while I was in Afghan a soldier was shot as a result - thankfully in the foot.  Our "brandNew" LAVIII fleet is 50% N/S due to parts - some of these are not working right when they come off the train from GM.

 IF we cannot have a credible army equipped and trained properly, then we dont need the Herc to fly us anywhere, nor a Naval RORO ship for our equiptment.

Secondly while I know that Navy has a high rate of deployment (and that is a given as part of a blue water Navy) what have the Airforce done?
 Griffon - sorry it sucks unless you want to move one or two troops
 CC130 - If we get the one or two workable ones airborne...
 CC150 Polaris - Airbus's are not exactly STOL that you can launch an assault out of.
 CF18 Hornet - now rusting out with not clear replacment.



The Forces is in dire shape - but IMHO the boots on the ground are the ones in the greatest need of kit.

And I'd rather work as part of a US/UK coaltion than any of our rental army NATO partners


----------



## Tpr.Orange

AS promised here is the message sent to all DND/CF MEMBERS from the old CDS Gen. Ray Henault



> NRâ â€œ05.005 - January 14, 2005
> 
> 
> 
> OTTAWA â â€œ As you are aware, my time remaining as CDS is very short. As announced today by the Prime Minister, LGen (Gen) Rick Hillier will assume the responsibilities of CDS effective 4 Feb, as I leave to initiate my transition to the position of Chairman of NATO's Military Committee.
> It has been my distinct honour to serve as the CDS for nearly four years, with the unwavering support of my wife, Loraine, and all the other members of my family. In fact, this has been the greatest privilege of my career.
> 
> The Canadian Forces has accomplished much during those years â â€œ largely due to the tremendous dedication and effort of all CF members. My three CDS Annual Reports are aptly titled to capture the essence of those accomplishments: for 2001-2002, â Å“A t a Crossroadsâ ? ; for 2002-2003, â Å“A Time for Transformationâ ? ; and for 2003-2004, â Å“ Making Choicesâ ? .
> 
> We have already begun the transformation process, made great advances on quality of life issues, enhanced our medical, educational and professional development processes, broken the back of a 12-year CF grievance backlog and developed a streamlined grievance process which will reduce turnaround times to one year by December 2005.
> 
> We've also led the Government's 3D approach, particularly in Afghanistan, procured new or updated equipment including: Cormorant search and rescue helicopters; Victoria class submarines; G-wagons; and the tactical uninhabited aerial vehicles. We're also continuing with significant upgrades to the CF-18, the Aurora, and a wide range of land force and naval equipments, and we have initiated the process to procure the new Maritime Helicopter, the Mobile Gun System and later, the Joint Support Ship.
> 
> We've met, and continue to meet, the security challenges presented to us since sep 11, 2001, all the while managing a high operational tempo with multiple operations including OPS PALLADIUM, HALO, APOLLO and ATHENA, and most recently, OP STRUCTURE in Sri Lanka.
> 
> This has led to new and enhanced partnerships with other Government departments and security agencies here at home and abroad, and important contributions with domestic and coalition partners to the ongoing Campaign Against Terrorism. And as part of that, we have deployed our joint air, land, and naval forces into operations across the full spectrum of conflict, including our deployment into combat in Afghanistan in 2002 â â€œ the first time Canadian land forces were deployed for combat since Korea and where JTF-2, our special operations forces, went into combat for the first time.
> 
> I wish to offer my heartfelt appreciation and gratitude to all members of the Canadian Forces, the Department of National Defence, and our associated agencies for all that we have achieved during my time as CDS. I never cease to be amazed by your dedication, motivation, innovation and professionalism. Time and time again you have risen to the challenges of the demands placed on you and have done so in a manner that reflects superbly on our nation, the Canadian Forces, the Department of National Defence, and on you as individuals.
> 
> I know that your determination to ensure mission success and to do so in superb fashion is precisely what LGen (Gen) Hillier can count on from all members as he assumes leadership of this truly outstanding organization.
> 
> I look forward to continuing to work with many of you in my upcoming capacity as Chairman of the NATO Military Committee .
> 
> Again, many thanks to you and your families for your unconditional support to me throughout my time as CDS, and continued best success as the Canadian Forces enters another dynamic period in its history. The future is indeed bright.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Infanteer said:
			
		

> How else should the CDS be chosen?
> 
> Seniority is a bad thing.
> 
> An election is silly.
> 
> As much as we may not like the current leadership in Parliament doesn't mean that the Executive Branch (Cabinet and the PMO) shouldn't have and maintain important responsibilites that maintain a healthy level of civil-military relations (ie: promoting the most senior military officials).



In the election did the PM not promise that all appointments would go in front of a bard to make sure that they would be the best person for the job?

I think that may have been a factor in the selection.   You take someone who may do a good job and is respected by the forces and make him their boss as opposed to someone whose turn it is at the desert table.   This is not to say the VCDS may not have been a good choice just it may not have looked as good going through the board. Tougher this way for the Conservatives and NDP to say it was Patronage instead of trying to fix the problem.

Not that i am defending the government, but is it not a possibility.

I know they are years late on almost all their promises for new kit new personal and the list goes on and on.

As for reduciton of the Navy and Air Force to strenghten the army don't know if i agree with that.   

Kevinb

I think it would be a mistake to reduce the ranks of the Navy and Air Force it is not their fault the equipment is bad.   The previous governments did not want to buy good stuff so they bought stuff that would make due.   

thats my two cents.


----------



## S McKee

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Just a point on the public and kit.
> 
> I am not convinced the public is against the Forces having the kit. The soft-power types (NDP, Axworthy, Ploughshares, Polaris and up until recently I would have included all the Canadian media) are certainly against it and very loud in saying so but I believe that the average Canadian believes that we have tanks, howitzers, helicopters, destroyers, subs and fighters and that we should have them.   The pity of it is they believe the stuff that you have on issue all works and that you could, under the necessary and commonly agreed circumstances, use them "alongside the best".
> 
> The problem the public has is two fold - failure to realize just how clapped out a lot of the kit is and sticker shock at the bill necessary to replace it, let alone upgrade it.   That is where the failure in political leadership occurs. And as long as PM can't make a decision on anything because he is trying to stay on side between the "softies" and the "others - realists?", a faction that I actually think he might be predisposed towards, then no leadership will occur and, as tomahawk6 suggests, triage will continue to be necessary.
> 
> Good Point!
> 
> On the other hand maybe we will all be shocked and awed and money will flow into the coffers.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

KevinB-



> Secondly while I know that Navy has a high rate of deployment (and that is a given as part of a blue water Navy) what have the Airforce done?
> Griffon - sorry it sucks unless you want to move one or two troops
> CC130 - If we get the one or two workable ones airborne...
> CC150 Polaris - Airbus's are not exactly STOL that you can launch an assault out of.
> CF18 Hornet - now rusting out with not clear replacment.



Griffon- directed buy on orders of a former Defence Minister.   No military input accepted.
CC130- have been attempting to replace for several years.   Every C-17 and C-130J offer put in front of MND until last year- denied.
CC150- Air Force directed to buy these from nearly insolvent airline in order to keep it afloat.   No one claims they are tactical transports.
CF-18 upgrade progamme put in place because trying to get replacements from govt would have been a waste of staff effort.

You see the common thread emerging here?

Just because some of the equipment is crap, does not invalidate the MISSION that is being performed.   

Take fighters- if no fighters in CF, who exactly becomes responsible for the sovereignty of Canadian airspace?   Think carefully about your answer.   If you can't control something, it is difficult to argue sovereignty over it.

If we don't have subs or a blue water navy, I can virtually guarantee you that we will soon have someone else's subs or blue water Navy in our waters shortly.   How does that help us maintain sovereignty?

As for Op Apollo- you guys on the ground were kicking in the front door in Afghanistan while we closed the back door with the Canadian Navy in the Arabian Sea.   We all did good together.

Look my point here- the missions we do aren't all that wrong- the resources assigned are.   Not disagreeing with you on the small arms front.   If you say there is a problem, there probably is.   But, I'm in no hurry to lose anymore capability for the CF.   When is the last time anyone could honestly say that "Hey, you know, since we got rid of system X, we have just been rolling in the bucks to improve system Y"? I cannot think of single concrete example.

Anyway, let's see what the new CDS can make of this mess.

Cheers.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Very well said  and bang on from our view point as well Taco. 

I also want to add that those that advocate the CF to become a niche role military are just like have the civilians on the street who expect the US to do all of the hard work in defending us. What should they or our allies pick up the slack for us? We don't have carriers or bomber aircraft but I think we can do for us and our allies is maintain the basics and if possible regain what we have lost or should have i.e Strategic airlift comes to mind.


----------



## bossi

Once upon a time ... (when LGen Belzile was just arriving as Comd FMC ...).
I heard the CDS of the day speak to the staff at FMC - he mentioned his "job interview" ...
(as a naive, young 2Lt I turned to my neighbour and asked "WTF" ...?)

Yes - there are also political considerations to this appointment (and, no - I'm not suggesting they picked a Newf in an attempt to settle the flag-lowering squabble ... however, as mentioned elsewhere - the Armed Forces of Newfoundland are mentioned, even enshrined via "grandfather clause" in the Constitution ... !)

At the end of the day, perhaps all we can hope for is that General Rick's heart is still in the same, right place as when I first met him at Staff College, when I met him again as Comd 2 CMBG during the Ice Storm, speaking to CFLCSC on his expriences as Comd MND(SW) ... and the employment/effect of Caribinieri on a rioting mob ... and lastly in Petawawa  (i.e. that's what really counts, eh?)

Besides - We've already suffered under decades of "Truth, Duty, Valour, Don't Get Caught" ...
It's particularly appropriate today, to give "_Provehito in Altum_"  a fair shake ...
(and, as also already mentioned:   This CDS deserves a vote of confidence if only for his bio - as Stirling said, "a sense of humour, a sense of humility ...").
_Altissima quaeque flumina minimo sono labi _


----------



## ArmyRick

I hear alot of people saying how we should maintain an all out war fighting capability, etc, etc.
Lets go over this one more time. Where are we going to get the money?
The Canadian majority (as much as I didn't agree with them) voted liberal. That means we get the lovely liberal defence attitude. We will not get hoards of money for defence. Period.
I would love to see an army with 3 divisions in place of three brigades (each division would have Heavy, medium and light brigade) with a very credible navy and air force. Yes it would be nice to see Leopard 2A5 with a maple leaf painted on the side.

However our defence budget is not 25 Billion dollars a year ( I can't remember the exact amount, something like 12 billion?).

Our government is coming out of a liberal party that was blatantly agaisnt defence spending (Chretein time) because of his "principles". We now have a new PM who on the front, seems to care more for defence than his predecessor. Hopefully thats true.

Also we have been told no tanks and aircraft carriers (That was used as an election promise).

So basically we have to get on with it using what gear we get.
We can all moan and groan about MGS, not having tanks, not having decent modern air fighter fleet, etc.

With General Hillier in charge, I have faith that we are heading in the right direction with what we have.

The present is soon to be the past. Lets get on with the mission.

Oh yeah, remember the past at election time and convert as many friends and relatives as you can...


----------



## PPCLI Guy

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> So basically we have to get on with it using what gear we get.
> We can all moan and groan about MGS, not having tanks, not having decent modern air fighter fleet, etc.
> 
> With General Hillier in charge, I have faith that we are heading in the right direction with what we have.
> 
> The present is soon to be the past. Lets get on with the mission.



I agree with you wholeheartedly Armyrick.  While it is appropriate for us to make a case for more funding, and to plan and plot how we would spend that money if we ever got it, in the mean time we just have to get on with it, and ensure that the people get 13.5B worth of defence - and right now they aren't.

Dave


----------



## Kirkhill

I can only think that Armyrick and PPCLIguy have got it right.  Especially the line about remembering the next election - that is particularly true for us non-serving types.

Cheers.


----------



## Love793

The couple of times that I've met him, he seemed like a down to earth guy.  He was interested in the troops and our welfare,he actually wanted to hear the "No Sh*tter" answers, not the scripted ones.  Can't tell how he'll do as CDS.  After a couple of years of sensory deprivation in Ottawa he might change a bit. Only time will tell.


----------



## STONEY

Greetings to all you defeatests & nay- sayers.

To all those in uniform you should all fall on your swords if all you can aspire to is a 3rd rate military.

To all those Liberal bashers you have very short memories, when the Conservatives were  in power they too promised 
a lot but delivered nada. The problem is not so much the parties themselves but the people in power running them. A u.s.  senator once said he was having problems getting military appropiations passed because only 40% of the house had military experience. A Canadian MP looked at him in amazement and replied , how do you think i feel , with .025% of Parliament with any military experience and a Defence Minister with 4 months in Boy Scouts and he quit because of harsh
conditions in the field.  Neither party seems to be able to push much through the ridiculously long military procurement process .  You can go through three different Governments during the process of getting a major piece of kit.

Lt.-Gen Hillier despite all his operational experience , is an amateur when it comes to dealing with the likes of Bob Fowler (the civie that really runs NDHQ) and his bureaucratic mafia. There have been many promising officers who headed to Ottawa with plans to change things and left broken men having  accomplished little of what they set out to do. I wish him luck.

To those wine that we can't afford this and can't afford that, bull. There is a country you know that is smaller than Canada, has a smaller population , has a smaller Armed Forces & smaller defence budget yet has managed to order new LAV'S, update old LAV'S, new Bushranger 4 X 4   APC's, new MBT'S, new Helicopter Gunships, new troop lift helo's, new anti tank missles & new rifles for the Army.  New Frigates, new Submarines, new helo's, 2 second hand rebuilt troop lift ships to tide them over until they can get newbuild flatop helo/amphibious assualt ships (planned). 3 new large Air-Defence Destroyers( in process of procurement), new coastal patrol vessels( under construction) , new Minesweepers, modernizing older Frigates, new fleet tanker (in progress)  , for the Navy.  New C-130J's , new AEW planes , upgrading MP aircraft, mordernizing F-18's (which were already a newer model than our CF-18's) , upgraded F-111 long range fighter/bombers, new HAWK lead in fighter trainers (similar to the ones Bombardier ownes & used to train CF pilots), new aerial tankers (planned) for the Air Force . This is probably not a complete list but you can see a trend here . Yes gents Australia , hardly known as a warmongering nation has managed to do this not in the last 30 years . but  the last 15 years or so. This leads one to question the efficiency of our leadership.  

Transformation indeed !!!   Transformation = Bull****.

Toodles  Stoney


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Bob Fowler is still in DND???


----------



## 291er

Stoney,
FYI Bob Fowler is'nt with DND anymore and has'nt been for some years.   Ward Elcock is the DM now.....


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> FYI Bob Fowler is'nt with DND anymore and has'nt been for some years.   Ward Elcock is the DM now.....



Whew...   I had flashbacks for a second.


----------



## KevinB

SeaKing - and Ex-Dragoon,

 I am not saying the Navy and AirForce are has been trades - what I am saying is that the Griffon (thought it sucks) still flies and the Navy still floats - the Army is about to rust apart.

 Or are the other elements just as badly off?


----------



## FredDaHead

KevinB said:
			
		

> SeaKing - and Ex-Dragoon,
> 
> I am not saying the Navy and AirForce are has been trades - what I am saying is that the Griffon (thought it sucks) still flies and the Navy still floats - the Army is about to rust apart.
> 
> Or are the other elements just as badly off?



Everyone's in the poo-poo. Of course, the armycentrist doctrine is prevalent so they'll get all the money, but I guess that's the way things are..

The Sea Kings are falling apart, and are barely flyable. Our warships were designed (and built) for the Cold War. We have early-generation fighters and in general our birds are way past their "best before" date. If our armed forces were milk, it'd have turned five shades of green by now and would classify as an alien lifeform.

The problem is, although the Army's equipment sucks, the only difference between them and the other elements is that they get the high profile. What I mean is, the media show troops on the ground doing stuff, but they barely (if ever) show the other elements doing important stuff. (Say, interdiction in the middle east)

Anyways, just my (currently) civvie 2 cents


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Well Kevin look at it this way when we have to get parts from other ships to make ours deployable and put our working parts, crew, stores etc back on the ships coming on station getting ready to relieve us, I don't see how you feel the navy is much better off then the army.


----------



## Slim

A former commanding officer of mine (and still good friend) said not too long ago that the Liberals have turned the CF into a hood ornament for the Govt vehicle of state. Pointed out when required but not supposed to really do more than look nice and flash in the sun once in a while...

Truer words were never spoken!

Gen Hillier will probably head to the puzzle palace with visions of greatness...right up until he is forced to *NEGOTIATE* for his salary! Then he'll be brought into line with the current "policies"... Or be dismissed.

Its the Liberal way.

Slim


----------



## Edward Campbell

You're right, Slim.

Notwithstanding believing that Bob Fowler is still redecorating the Executive floor of _Disneyland sur Rideau_, STONEY, too, makes a valid point: governments provide the armed forces the nation demands.   Australia may not have the biggest or the best but they have managed to *think* about their national defence and to make some (mostly) smart decisions â â€œ not always the decisions the uniformed, military component wanted but decisions that worked.

It is important to remember (and I apologize if I am restating the obvious) that the Deputy Minister has a unique position in Ottawa.   Ward Elcock is *not* Bill Graham's _assistant_, he is *Paul Martin's* man in DND â â€œ he is Graham's _alter ego_ but he reports to, is responsible to the Prime Minister â â€œ directly, just like all Deputy Ministers.   Sometimes (usually?) the DM is selected, by the PM, to _balance_ the Minister â â€œ the two should not have the same weaknesses, etc.*   The DM, not the minister, deals with the _centre_ (the Privy Council Office, Finance and, to a lesser but still important degree, Treasury Board) who _manage_ the government's priorities on behalf of the PM.

Bob Fowler was a good DM.   People in and around DND, including Ministers and CDSs etc didn't like him â â€œ some actively hated him â â€œ but that didn't matter because neither the Minister of National Defence nor the Chief of the Defence Staff _runs_ DND.   Fowler assembled a strong team which did the PM's bidding â â€œ serving both Tory and Liberal governments with equal ruthlessness.

----------

* Chrétien did well at this when he picked Himmelfarb to be his _Deputy_ â â€œ the Clerk of the Privy Council: Chrétien was (is) an instinctive, _gut feel_ politician, Himmelfarb is an airy-fairy policy wonk â â€œ good fit.   Martin screwed up by keeping Himmelfarb in place: they are both airy-fairy policy wonks: decisions are slow in coming and are overly _nuanced_ â â€œ bad fit.   Graham (airy-fairy to the extreme and artsy-farsty to boot) and Elcock (bloody minded, bureaucratic tough guy who cares nothing for politicians, or soldiers, for that matter) might be a good fit, too.


----------



## PPCLI Guy

STONEY said:
			
		

> Greetings to all you defeatests & nay- sayers.
> 
> To all those in uniform you should all fall on your swords if all you can aspire to is a 3rd rate military.



Or tighten my sword belt, take a deep breath, and do my job - which is to defend Canada and her interests in accordance with the direction from the government.


----------



## ArmyRick

Stoney, from what I see, its been awhile since you were in the service?
Its not being defeatist or naysaying, etc, etc. Alot of has to do with the will of the Politicians.
Also comparing us to australia?
They have 6 infantry battalions Regular, we have nine
They have 1 tank regt and 2 Recce regts, we have three armoured regts
They have two artillery regts (reg), we have three plus air defence assets
They have two engineer regts (Reg), we have three CER plus an ESR
They 250 some odd ASLAV ? We have 650 LAVIII.

What I am getting at, is Aussies spend their defence dollars differently. You can go and on but what they have done, but so can the CF..
They also have their politicians they answer to as well.

Maybe if the CF reduced down to 2 brigades we could find all kinds of $$$ for extra kit.

But NDHQ, doesn't want 2 brigades, they want 3 and possibly our 4th in 5-20 years....


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Army rick 

I think Stoney was saying that with a smaller budget they just spend it better not that their forces are better or bigger.  Just that they are better equiped with more modern equipment. 

That is just how i read it though, i could be wrong it has happned before just ask Rusty. ;D


----------



## Infanteer

Rusty Old Joint said:
			
		

> Bob Fowler was a good DM.   People in and around DND, including Ministers and CDSs etc didn't like him â â€œ some actively hated him â â€œ but that didn't matter because neither the Minister of National Defence nor the Chief of the Defence Staff _runs_ DND.   Fowler assembled a strong team which did the PM's bidding â â€œ serving both Tory and Liberal governments with equal ruthlessness.



WHAT!!! But Scott Taylor's books said he's Doctor Evil!


----------



## Edward Campbell

Infanteer said:
			
		

> WHAT!!! But Scott Taylor's books said he's Doctor Evil!



Yup


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> SeaKing - and Ex-Dragoon,
> 
> I am not saying the Navy and AirForce are has been trades - what I am saying is that the Griffon (thought it sucks) still flies and the Navy still floats - the Army is about to rust apart.
> 
> Or are the other elements just as badly off?



KevinB-

Things are not great in the Air Force and Navy.   

The Air Force is having some pretty serious issues with C-130, CP-140 and Sea King availability.   IMHO, alot of it comes down to a shortage of national procurement funds to buy spare parts.   In some cases, spare parts just don't exist anymore.   The Aurora is undergoing a very complicated, multi-phase upgrade that keeps taking aircraft off of the flight line. The Cormorant has tail rotor issues that were discovered by the RN. This puts pressure on the Sea King fleet to pick up SAR standby when there aren't enough Cormorants.   The Yearly Flying Rate for most fleets has continually been cut, which impacts both force generation and force employment. A few years ago, I was told by some 408 Sqn pilots that they were only getting enough flying hours a year to stay current, which meant next to no support was available for the Army.   There are not enough qualified technicians Air Force-wide, as the effects of FRP from the mid-90s are now being fully felt. 

As for the Navy, again, there does not appear to be enough spare parts as ships in refit get robbed continually to provide for ships at sea.   Sea days are down (fuel budget...).   The tankers are really old and in bad shape.   The 280s are not much better.   The effect of cutting the fleet maintenance facilities in the 1990s (to save money) means that maintenance is backlogged.   Some Sea trades are very short of personnel and jump constantly from ship to ship.

It is the usual "too many taskings for the budget assigned story"...

In an earlier post you lamented that you (and by extension the entire Army) did not feel well supported by the Air Force both in terms of helo lift and Hercs.   I could not agree more- BUT, it is not because we don't want to provide support.   Most often, it comes down to a complete lack of resources...   sorry.


----------



## Slim

Things are really that bad...?

Slim


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Why do you think the Air Force and Navy get so defensive when this issue comes up?


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> Things are really that bad...?
> 
> Slim



It is not the end of the world, but things are not all sunshine and happiness in the Navy and Air Force (at least the parts of both that I am regularily exposed to...)


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Things are that bad.....


Put we should not try and pin all our hopes on one man.  He may bring the prospect of change for the better but that is yet to be proven.  Only time and a bigger budget will tell.


----------



## KevinB

I am willing to admit lack of knowledge in the AirForce and Navy spectrum.

 I guess you guys just suck it up better than us  ;D


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Room service does help ease the pain of old aircraft ;D


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> I am willing to admit lack of knowledge in the AirForce and Navy spectrum.
> 
> I guess you guys just suck it up better than us



Not really.   This is "Army.ca", not "my life in the Navy/Air Force sucks.ca"

I do most of my complaining elsewhere...


----------



## 735_winnipeg

There's always the easy way to increase CF size and budget, conscription and compulsory military service to bolster our personnel size and turnover problems.  Also the government could try to create a coalition of CANADIAN companies whose purpose is to do R&D, manufacturing (shipyard facilities, ammunition factories, aircraft manufacturers), financing, etc. largely for the military but also involved with civilians, as to provide the needed services for the CF and provide the needed jobs for both military and civilian personnels, just like with the US military and companies like Northrop Grumman who have already provided them with nice "toys".

That's my 2 pennies.  What do you guys think?  Is this a possibility for our country?  If not, what did I miss?

P.S.  Anyone know where I can get a map of Canada with current CF bases?  The reason I'm asking is that a few people in my unit, myself included, are trying to "restructure" Canada to have as few bases as possible but still able to provide defense for our border.  it's a game for us in my unit.


----------



## pbi

> conscription and compulsory military service



Two political non-starters in this country, unless we are in the last ditch of WWIII. 



> P.S.  Anyone know where I can get a map of Canada with current CF bases?  The reason I'm asking is that a few people in my unit, myself included, are trying to "restructure" Canada to have as few bases as possible but still able to provide defense for our border.  it's a game for us in my unit.



Actually, the CF doesn't defend our "border" since it is with the US and is undefended by treaty. That is the job of Customs and the Coast Guard. Since our country is so huge and our military is so tiny, it's really difficult to establish where bases should be located: you could start by analyzing the likely axes of approach into Canada, but what about forces projected in by air? Cheers.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

I have to agree with PBI

No conscription that would be a bad thing.  But what about Regulated Reserves.  Where If you are unemployed or ages 18-30 you could be placed in to the reserve forces.  No Welfare and they would be working and being paid.  That way u have a job but can still look for a different one.  Plus you get the benefits of training.  Something along the way of the Israelis methods of doing things.


----------



## Meridian

> No Welfare and they would be working and being paid.   That way u have a job but can still look for a different one.   Plus you get the benefits of training.   Something along the way of the Israelis methods of doing things.





Would never fly in Canada. Workfare in Ontario almost caused riots in the streets. Canada is too left-wing/middle of the road for this... we'd have Charter challenges up the bum.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Meridian said:
			
		

> Would never fly in Canada. Workfare in Ontario almost caused riots in the streets. Canada is too left-wing/middle of the road for this... we'd have Charter challenges up the bum.



Imagine that, providing taxpayers with a service while collecting taxpayer handouts.



Matthew.      :


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Heaven forbid you would have to work for your money.  Shame on you.

back on topic

Budget should be comming out soon so i hope our man in charge is stirring the pot with a big spoon.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> No conscription that would be a bad thing.   But what about Regulated Reserves.   Where If you are unemployed or ages 18-30 you could be placed in to the reserve forces.   No Welfare and they would be working and being paid.   That way u have a job but can still look for a different one.   Plus you get the benefits of training.   Something along the way of the Israelis methods of doing things.



I have no desire to lead or work with a group of people who are not in the military by choice.   It is just not a good idea, particularily in our rights based society and is far more trouble than it is worth.

I suspect that compulsory service works (sort of) for the Israelis because their threat is pretty evident.   What, exactly, would we hold up to the Canadian public as the equivalent threat to our society?

My view is, that it is actually immoral to compel someone to take up arms.   If a society cannot convince enough of it's citzens to voluntarily put themselves under arms to defend itself, either the argument was weak to begin with or the society in question has just run it's course...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Well put.  Not to mention that there are enough CF members who have no idea what they signed up for as it is and are questionable when the need arises and the shit is about to hit the fan.


----------



## George Wallace

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> My view is, that it is actually immoral to compel someone to take up arms.   If a society cannot convince enough of it's citzens to voluntarily put themselves under arms to defend itself, either the argument was weak to begin with or the society in question has just run it's course...



Now with our Present Liberal Governments of the last two decades.....this doesn't paint to very rosy a picture of Canadian society......have we run our course like Ancient Rome, but without the glory, and are now in a state of collapse?

GW


----------



## 735_winnipeg

i hope not.  i feel that Canada still has a part to play in the world stage.  ok, so the conscription/compulsory service is not a good idea in peace but what about my second idea of the govt forming a group of canadian companies largely dedicated to providing the wants and needs of the CF?  What are your thoughts on that one?


----------



## George Wallace

Actually, on that subject; does the US not use a "quasi civilian" company, MATS, to fly a lot of its troops and equipment around the world?

GW


----------



## Kirkhill

> what about my second idea of the govt forming a group of canadian companies largely dedicated to providing the wants and needs of the CF?  What are your thoughts on that one?



735 Winnipeg

It's a good idea.  There is a long, ancient and honourable tradition of just that.  In fact all logistics lines start in the Civilian world.  The closer they get to the battle front the more likely the personnel are to be in uniform.  The only real point of debate, and that is defined by contract, is how close to the battlefield a given entity will operate and can the entity ensure that its employees will fulfill their obligations under the contract.

Many contractors in the past, in many armies, have offered to basically supply logistic support right up to the firing line only to discover that their personnel were less than thrilled to be there.  In defence of the employees many armies have found the same with their uniformed personnel.

What is critical is sorting out the details of the contract and ensuring that everybody can live with, and does live with, those obligations.


----------



## 735_winnipeg

dunno, i've always assumed that since they have those big transport planes that they do their own lifting.   but seriously canada should implement a group of companies to help the CF.   think about it, less dependency on other countries and private contractors to lift our troops and equipments, being able to build, upgrade, fix, etc our own equipments and vehicles, more jobs for civilians and military personnels, more missions that Canada can accept without overburdening our troops and equipments.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Have to agree would definetly be worth looking into.  As long as it does not civilianes the CF any more then it is.  We still need the troops.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Don't you guys think there is enough patronage and gov't helping of companies that would have died (or restructured)along time ago


----------



## Kirkhill

There is enough of that CFL. And if that was the only reason to keep a company in business then the company should go out of business.  But companies are just institutions that supply services and things for money.  The CF will always need services and things.  They will always cost money.   Somebody will supply them a some price.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I just worry that a company gets a contract based on political maneuvering (as seen in the past) and that having more companies thrown into the mix is not necessarily a good thing if said company gets its contract because of geographical location.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Could not agree with you more CFL


----------



## Kirkhill

I also agree.   The sole criterion should be "value-for-money".  And here I mean value to the CF for CF dollars.  Not value to the Government or a particular party or a particular individual for CF dollars.


----------



## STONEY

Hey guys i accept the 100 lashes i should have proofread my post more carefully.

I meant to say Lt-Gen Hillier would run up against someone the likes of Bob Fowler, i realise he's not still there.
The point i was trying to make was that he might not always be able to get his way because the 20,000 odd civilians including 120 some odd people of equivalent rank of General & are permanent civil servants that seem to have much more power than uniformed personnel.  As for Bob Fowler himself i don't have any opinion since i don't know the man except by reputation that he ran a tight ship for his political masters at several Government Departments and was not necessarily a friend of the Military itself as are any DM's. 

The point of my rambling on about the Australian Military was simply that they seemed to be able to aquire a lot of shiny new kit on a budget less than Canada's. Are we spending our budget wisely ? couldn't we do better. Look at other countries Defence Budgets & what they get for their bucks.

I stir the pot only to stimulate discussion.


----------



## Kirkhill

> Are we spending our budget wisely ? couldn't we do better. Look at other countries Defence Budgets & what they get for their bucks.



Stoney, I suspect a lot of people here on this site agree with that.  And while I do believe that DND/NDHQ has its problems, as Rusty Old Joint and others keep arguing eloquently I believe the problem is much larger than just DND.

The Gomery enquiry, the Challenger jets, the SeaKing replacement project, the CPF project, the Bristol CF-18 project.................all go to prove that.

The spending decisions have to get past:

Public Works and Government Services - home to Alfonso Gagliano and Chuck Guite amongst others
Various Regional and Aboriginal Affairs Agencies
Treasury Board - or finance
Privy Council Office - the final word from the Civil Service bureaucrats advising the Prime Minister
The Cabinet - the sum total of political considerations
The Prime Ministers Office - the Party-Political office supporting the Prime Minister
The Prime Minister himself.

A WHOLE lot of axes to grind and an awful lot of them Political representing an awful lot of favours and markers.


----------



## Slim

> The spending decisions have to get past:
> 
> Public Works and Government Services - home to Alfonso Gagliano and Chuck Guite amongst others
> Various Regional and Aboriginal Affairs Agencies
> Treasury Board - or finance
> Privy Council Office - the final word from the Civil Service bureaucrats advising the Prime Minister
> The Cabinet - the sum total of political considerations
> The Prime Ministers Office - the Party-Political office supporting the Prime Minister
> The Prime Minister himself.



Good God

Its a wonder we have anything at all!

Slim


----------



## Spartan

Doesn't DND also have to fight foreign affairs influence (it being the superior/more senior deptartment)?


----------



## Kirkhill

Sorry Symchyshyn,

You're probably right. I had forgotten about them.  Weapons purchases often seem to say a lot about future alliances.

Anybody else out there need to get their oar in?????????


----------



## Wizard of OZ

"I stir the pot only to stimulate discussion"

As do i my friend you should read the Iran post.

DND faces an up hill battle everytime we want to do something. The CF is to Military for the Military.  Ahh maybe things will change.  It can only get better right?


----------



## Meridian

I know you said "or finance" and Cabinet up there.. but the Finance Minister really deserves his own spot in the "limelight".

Good Ole Paul sure had a hand in canada's military demise...  his political future reste on his budget, and basically Finance Ministers are tested on their ability to get a budget past all the other ministers.

So any DND minister has to convince a) the Finance minister and his cronies to put the money in the budget, b) Cabinet to leave it there   and c) the Prime Minister not to veto it for his own programs.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Just when I thought I couldn't get fed up any more you guys post the Chain of Command for aquistions.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

You know the old saying " IF you wake up and find yourself in a hole, then you should stop digging."  

I wonder if the PM is aware of this. :


----------



## Kirkhill

Dead right Meridian, and sorry CFL....

Cheers.


----------



## RCA

In case it hasn't been posted yet:

MGen Caron (ACLS) promted to LGen -next CLS
BGen Lessard (LFCA) - next ACLS.


----------



## George Wallace

Dept of Foreign Affairs has a lot of say in DND when troops are deployed outside of Canada.

Dept of Finance and Dept of Customs and Excise ? (Revenue) both fall under Treasury Board.

GW


----------



## Meridian

But TB is an administrative group. They do not set budget policy - Finance does that.  Plus the Finance Minister usually co-chairs the Treasury Board.




And as if I forgot the final step, once the PM doesnt veto it, the budget has to be accepted in the House.


----------



## Kirkhill

> And as if I forgot the final step, once the PM doesnt veto it, the budget has to be accepted in the House.



Little wonder we forgot it.  The PM and the PMO and the PCO and everybody else also forget it.  Or is that assume it?


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Minority government= more money for the CF?

This would be the Conservatives chance to show they were serious about beefing up the CF and to hold the Liberals to their promises.


----------



## canuck101

Just read this article in the Winnipeg Free Press very interesting.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/2517726p-2917067c.html


----------



## Meridian

No, for a minority government, there are much more politically-charged items to push for (same sex marraige is the current one, the Gomery inquiry).

The Conservatives arent interested in pushing an agenda right now save for them gaining points for the next election. it is the NDP that wants to push their own agenda, but they dont give a --- about the CF.


Also, a friend of mine is a PR person for a minister here in ottawa, was saying the other day that the Conservative caucus is quite split right now...   it never has really been unified, and many people disagree with the leadership, but have nowhere else to go but independant....  

I fear that Conservative comments to up the forces are simply a pandering to a 100 thousand or so voters (Regf+Res+familites)


----------



## Wizard of OZ

101
It would be nice if it all comes true.  I think we are a long way from that happening though.


----------



## Kirkhill

Actually I don't like the shopping list.

The Theatre Support Vessel is trying to be to the US Navy what the C-130 is to the Airforce.  A local runabout for delivering small bodies (units and subunits) rapidly to unprepared locations.

RoRos might work but they would need to be modified if they were to supply maintenance and support as well as CC facilities. RoRos >20,000 tonnes would nicely supplement the planned joint capabilities of the JSS.  

JSS would work well, as a concept combining ice capability, AOR replacement, Joint CC and support to helo ops as well as a disembarkable coy tm with kit.  Great for Arctic Sovereignty, fleet support at sea and Joint support in theatre... Lousy transport concept.  Still splitting JSS into two or even three configurations is not a bad idea.

Aircraft?   C17 or nothing.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

the JSS the way it is would be a real attractive target and would be a huge loss if one was destroyed or damaged because it is to valuable to an operation.  Splitting it up would make way more sense.  So expect to see the original JSS soon.


----------



## Big Foot

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1107545134164_102954334/?hub=TopStories#
Well, its finally official. Always nice to see a man in green with 4 maple leaves on his shoulder.


----------



## Kirkhill

Here's another take on Hillier's inaugural speech
http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=canada_home&articleID=1836755

canada news  
Friday, Feb 04, 2005 

New defence chief calls for more money for military 


OTTAWA (CP) - Canada's new top soldier used his inaugural speech Friday to criticize the Liberal government for not spending enough on the military. 
"In this country, we could probably not give enough resources to the men and women to do all the things that we ask them to do," Gen. Rick Hillier said at a full military ceremony, as the prime minister and the defence minister looked on. "But we can give them too little, and that is what we are now doing," the new chief of defence staff said. "Remember them in your budgets." 

The federal budget is to be handed down Feb. 23. 

Defence Minister Bill Graham cancelled a scheduled news conference with Hillier that was follow the speech. A spokesperson for Graham denied that it had anything to do with comments made by Hillier, saying the minister had to catch a plane. 

Hillier, 49, was born in Newfoundland and Labrador, and has spent years overseas on peacekeeping missions. He also led the NATO mission in Afghanistan last year. 

In Canada, he commanded the military contingent sent to help in the aftermath of the 1998 ice storms in Ontario and Quebec. 

Hillier replaced Gen. Ray Henault, who has been named to NATO's top military post in Brussels



Graham's disappearance is interesting.  Was it a scheduling oversight and he and the PM were fully informed of the content of the speech?

Or does Hillier just know when to pick a fight?

The timing is brilliant if so, with the budget coming up and it being his first day on the job.  After having been praised to high heaven by the Minister and the PM can they turn around and fire him his first day on the job.

This is getting more and more fascinating.


----------



## Good2Golf

"shot, over..."


----------



## tomahawk6

No doubt the politician's were a tad unhappy with the speech and are plotting Hillier's retirement. Of course they may have approved the speech as a trial balloon to see what the public thinks.


----------



## Big Foot

Wow, that didn't take long at all. No sooner than he is promoted to General and appointed CDS, Gen. Hillier made a public call for more funding.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1107545134164_102954334?hub=Canada

Hillier calls for more money for the military

CTV.ca News Staff

In his inaugural speech as Canada's new chief of defence staff, Gen. Rick Hillier urged the Liberal government to remember the military when it brings down the federal budget.

With Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham looking on, Hillier said the government gives men and women in the military "too little" when it comes to resources.

"In this country, we could probably not give enough resources to the men and women to do all the things that we ask them to do," Hillier said.

"But we can give them too little, and that is what we are now doing," the new chief of defence staff said.

"Remember them in your budgets," he said at a full military ceremony Friday attended by Governor-General Adrienne Clarkson and Gen. Ray Henault, the departing chief of defence staff.

The federal budget comes down on Feb. 23.

In addition to boosting resources, Hillier has made expanding the Canadian Forces a priority.

"Based on success in those two things, we've got to transform the force to be more relevant, more responsive and more valuable to Canada and Canadians," he said.

At a news conference following the military ceremony marking his change to chief of the defence staff, Hillier said he's "simply articulating what the government needs to understand."

When his promotion was announced in January, Hillier was described by Graham as taking over "at a very important time for the Canadian Forces."

Henault, who has been named NATO's top commander, said he has "complete confidence" in Hillier's ability to get the job done.

"I congratulate him on his appointment and will hand over to him with the full knowledge that he will lead the Canadian Forces through the transformation process required to maintain its relevance, responsiveness and effectiveness well into the future."

Hillier, who is 49, is a native Newfoundlander, who was chosen over two other serious contenders: Vice-Adm. Greg Maddison, the deputy chief of defence staff, and Vice-Adm. Ron Buck, the vice-chief of defence staff.

Hillier graduated from Memorial University in Newfoundland in 1975 with a Bachelor of Science degree.

He went through armour officer classification training before being posted to the 8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise's) in Petawawa, Ont.

Besides having a wealth of operational experience, Hillier has also worked as a staff officer in both army headquarters in Montreal and at National Defence headquarters in Ottawa.

In 1998, he served as Canadian Deputy Commanding General of III Armoured Corps, U.S. Army, in Fort Hood, Texas.

He was commander of the Multinational Division (southwest) in Bosnia.

An ability to make fun of himself is evident in Hillier's Web-based biography, where he says he "runs slowly, plays hockey poorly and golfs not well at all."

With files from The Canadian Press


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I'm not holding my breath on him not turning politician anytime soon.


----------



## Big Foot

Politician or not, at least he speaks his mind. He said something that needed to be said.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

True and we'll see how long until he gets out or tows the party line.  All though he's pushing for the MGS and helped to get rid of Pioneers and Mortars I give him props for speaking the obvious in a public forum.


----------



## winchable

As simple as it sounds it's nice to hear someone with some actual weight (as opposed to us lot ;D ) say the obvious words, and that's a start compared to the usual rhetoric of anyone who's first concern is career, I'd say it's somewhat refreshing, but...don't hold your lungs tight for it might turn out in a ditch.


----------



## JasonH

Che said:
			
		

> As simple as it sounds it's nice to hear someone with some actual weight (as opposed to us lot ;D ) say the obvious words, and that's a start compared to the usual rhetoric of anyone who's first concern is career, I'd say it's somewhat refreshing, but...don't hold your lungs tight for it might turn out in a ditch.



No doubt about it!


----------



## Slim

He probably hasn't negotiated for his salary yet...When he does they will make sure that he never makes a speech asking for more money and fully understands the consequenses of what happens to him if he does.

The Liberals are a rather spitefull bunch with long memory.

Slim


----------



## Infanteer

CFL said:
			
		

> True and we'll see how long until he gets out or tows the party line. All though he's pushing for the MGS and helped to get rid of Pioneers and Mortars I give him props for speaking the obvious in a public forum.





			
				Slim said:
			
		

> He probably hasn't negotiated for his salary yet...When he does they will make sure that he never makes a speech asking for more money and fully understands the consequenses of what happens to him if he does.
> 
> The Liberals are a rather spitefull bunch with long memory.
> 
> Slim



I don't know if I'd be too cynical yet.   Why would he "tow the party line" or "butter up for a better contract"?   

General Hillier doesn't need to butter up to anyone - he is the CDS, he has reached the highest professional role that a military officer can fulfill.   What does he have to butter up for - a cushy Senate seat?   Sure the government can choose to relieve him of command if they wanted a political hack and didn't get one (I don't think this was what they were looking for), but that would be a big political boo-boo for the government to relieve its top military officer right after his appointment because he spoke a well-known truth.

As for the pay negotiations, why would he need to kow-tow the political line in order to negotiate a plum deal?   As a Lt. General, he's was already earning a good salary - I certainly can't see them dropping him below what he was making at a junior rank.   As well, with 30 years in, he has earned a very good pension - I don't think that a cranky government can hold his financial stability for ransom.   Again, I am going to give General Hillier the benefit of the doubt and assume that his professionalism will put him above trying to squeeze an extra 10 or 20 thousand bucks out of the Treasury Board.

Bottom line is, he has started out on the right foot by doing what he should and telling it straight.   To me, it appears that the CF has the fortune to have a very capable and determined CDS in command right now, someone with similar talents to Jadex (General Dextraze, arguably our best CDS who in the mid-70's single handedly sustained our Armoured capability despite Trudeau's opposition in a period of organizational chaos following civilianization of NDHQ).   Like Jadex, General Hillier seems to be able to work with the politicians - do you think the government would have appointed him over the head of others if they didn't want what he had to offer as CDS?   

I think that the true challenge for him will be to represent us all in an effort to change the attitudes and outlooks of the established bureaucracy and civil service - both in the DND and the other Departments.   As Rusty Old Joint has pointed out before, the rest of Ottawa has a serious lack of appreciation for the military, and tackling relations with this segment of the government is vital if the military is to gain any clout as a essential professional organization in the eyes of the Rideau elite.

Give 'em hell sir.


----------



## bossi

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Give 'em heck sir.



I second the motion.

Frankly, even though I've done more than my fair share of whining lately ... I'm more than willing to do an about face and join Gen Hillier on the offensive.

And, also - he's fighting an uphill battle, trying to coax the Liberals into adequately funding our military.
One of my favouite CO's taught me a pet phrase:   "Reculer pour mieux sauter" (God, I hope I spelled that correctly ... and didn't type a swear word by mistake ... chuckle ...)

Even during an offensive, sometimes it's necessary to give ground (temporarily) ... in order to gain more ground (permanently) ...

So, friends - if Gen Hillier says "Follow me" ... I'm going to be at his six - he deserves no less. 
COVERING FIRE!!!   

P.S.  I just found another media item - it's a subliminal message in the photo, but ... IMHO Gen Hillier gets full marks for his choice of headdress. 

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1107558613061&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154



> Show us the money, general pleads
> Hillier takes over as Canada's top soldier Remember troops in next budget, he tells politicians
> Bruce Campion-Smith, Ottawa Bureau
> 
> OTTAWAâ â€Gen. Rick Hillier took over as head of Canada's military yesterday and wasted no time in poking the federal government for shortchanging the country's fighting forces.
> 
> With Prime Minister Paul Martin, Defence Minister Bill Graham and dignitaries looking on, Hillier used his inaugural speech as chief of defence staff to implore the government to remember the military in the Feb. 23 budget.
> 
> "In this country, we could probably not give enough resources to the men and women (of the Canadian Forces) to do all the things that we ask them to do," Hillier said.
> 
> "But we can give them too little and that it is what we are now doing."
> 
> Later, Hiller made no apologies for his blunt talk.
> 
> "I'm simply articulating what the government needs to understand so they can make those reasoned and intelligent decisions and decide how they allocate resources," said Hillier.
> 
> Hillier, a 49-year-old army veteran whose only career goal "was to be a soldier," assumed command of the Armed Forces in an afternoon marked by pomp and ceremony.
> 
> "I never dreamt of becoming the chief of defence staff," said Hillier, who replaces Gen. Ray Henault, who is going to Brussels to take up the top military job with NATO.
> 
> In a change-of-command ceremony attended by civilian and military representatives of more than a dozen countries, Martin, Graham, Henault and Hillier all spoke of the heroic work undertaken by military personnel.
> 
> "As we look ahead to the great role the Canadian Forces are going to play in the years ahead, we understand what a great tradition they come from and how proud you make us to be Canadians," Martin said.
> 
> Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, said the tragic losses suffered by soldiers "have reminded us the peace and order we cherish are neither accidental nor inexpensive."
> 
> But she cautioned that the government might be asking too much of its military.
> 
> "I am concerned, as I know everyone here is, by the demands that are being placed upon Canadian Forces personnel and resources," Clarkson said.
> 
> In a speech that was self-deprecating, funny and plainspoken, Hillier showed his tenure as chief of defence staff would be different from that of the reserved Henault.
> 
> In a nod to the now-settled dispute between Ottawa and Newfoundland over offshore oil revenues, Hillier quipped that he thought his first task as chief might be a peacekeeping mission in his home province.
> 
> Hillier, a 30-year veteran, showed why he's popular with the rank-and-file when he singled out individual soldiers in the audience for praise and asked the crowd to give the guard of honour a round of applause.
> 
> But the changes Hillier brings to the top job go beyond style. Both Hillier and Martin hinted dramatic changes are to come, a transformation to make the forces more nimble and more responsive.
> 
> While the government talks of "institution building" and helping countries fight AIDS and improve health care and education, "none of that will be possible in conflict-ridden states unless security is first established," Martin said.
> 
> "The defence of Canada is limited not only to North America but it must be extended around the world."
> 
> Speaking to reporters later, Hillier said he wants to give the Canadian Forces "higher profile and therefore greater credibility and ... greater chance to influence regions and countries with our interests and our values."
> 
> He said the forces have to be expanded and transformed "to be more relevant and more responsive and more valuable to Canada.
> 
> "We know we've been short the necessary resources to do the job here and that has provided some challenges and some difficulties," Hiller said.
> 
> "We need to be much more effective at responding when our government and when Canadians need us."
> 
> And he said that starts with boosting the military's presence at home, including the Arctic, even if it means that long-standing international military alliances such as NATO have to take a back seat.
> 
> Graham said Hillier's experience, including time in Bosnia and Afghanistan, will be "invaluable" as the government reviews its defence policy.


----------



## bossi

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Graham's disappearance is interesting.   Was it a scheduling oversight and he and the PM were fully informed of the content of the speech?
> 
> Or does Hillier just know when to pick a fight?
> 
> The timing is brilliant if so, with the budget coming up and it being his first day on the job.   After having been praised to high heaven by the Minister and the PM can they turn around and fire him his first day on the job.



re:  MND - I'm no political whiz, but I wonder if it wasn't simply "smart politics" - i.e. letting the new CDS enjoy his promotion (and the spotlight) for at least one day ... ?  Time will tell ...


----------



## Slim

They're gonna get him! mark my words...!

Shame though...the man seems to genuinely care about the CF.

Slim


----------



## bossi

Slim said:
			
		

> They're gonna get him! mark my words...!
> 
> Shame though...the man seems to genuinely care about the CF.



All the more reason why all of us should loyally fight harder to support him.



> An army cannot be administered. It must be led.
> - Franz-Joseph Strauss, 1957


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Defence Minister Bill Graham cancelled a scheduled news conference with Hillier that was follow the speech. A spokesperson for Graham denied that it had anything to do with comments made by Hillier, saying the minister had to catch a plane. 

....or a train, car, anything.....just get me outta here, now!

Wouldn't this be nice if the seemingly "safe" appointment started to bite them on the ass right away?


----------



## Kirkhill

> Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, said the tragic losses suffered by soldiers "have reminded us the peace and order we cherish are neither accidental nor inexpensive."
> 
> But she cautioned that the government might be asking too much of its military.
> 
> "I am concerned, as I know everyone here is, by the demands that are being placed upon Canadian Forces personnel and resources," Clarkson said.



Interesting that the CDS, Hillier, was apparently backed in his pronouncement by his Commander-in-Chief, the GG.  She is not supposed to make political statements, all her statements are supposed to be non-political and/or approved by the government of the day.

This statement strikes me as treading about as close to the line as she could reasonably go.   A concern that Resources don't meet Tasks.  That is getting perilously close to involvement in the Budget process.

I like this GG.  And I like what I have seen of Hillier.

Isn't reading tea-leaves fun? ;D


----------



## Infanteer

Slim said:
			
		

> They're gonna get him! mark my words...!



Get him how Slim?  As I said before, they can't hold any career related issues over his head as some sort of "ransom".


----------



## Slim

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Get him how Slim?   As I said before, they can't hold any career related issues over his head as some sort of "ransom".



I hope they don't...But the Liberals have demonstaighted time and time again that they can play dirty pool when political careers are on the line.

Like I said...Shame as he really seems to care.

Slim  

P.S. I have always liked this GG as she has always supported the troops...I didn't see Steven Staples spending Christmas with the CF in Kabul!


----------



## Love793

Slim said:
			
		

> I hope they don't...But the Liberals have demonstaighted time and time again that they can play dirty pool when political careers are on the line.
> 
> Like I said...Shame as he really seems to care.
> 
> Slim
> 
> P.S. I have always liked this GG as she has always supported the troops...I didn't see Steven Staples spending Christmas with the CF in Kabul!



   I don't think the media would let it slide if the Liberals tried spanking him over this.   They probably don't want to a risk a scandal or something that would cause risk to an already shaky House of Commons.

   It also wouldn't be in the PMs best intrest to offend the GG on this either, especially seeing a major vote in commons (on a touchy issue)is probably going to be very soon, and could lead to a vote of no confidence.


----------



## 2 Cdo

For all of our sake, I sincerely hope that you are wrong Slim. But I tend to agree, Lt Gen Hillier might have come out a little too strong for the " lieberals" and if he doesn't change his tune soonest might just find himself "retired"!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Well, looks like more toes are getting bruised,....  
   
Mon, February 7, 2005 

Brass knuckles

New forces boss KO's 'dreadful' defence plan 
By STEPHANIE RUBEC, OTTAWA BUREAU

CANADA'S NEWLY minted chief of defence staff took an axe to the Liberal government's top-secret blueprint detailing future military missions and purchases only days after his appointment, sources say. A senior defence department official said Gen. Rick Hillier took one look at the much-ballyhooed defence policy review shortly after his promotion Jan. 14 and scrapped it. 

"It was boring, dry and dreadful," an official close to Hillier told Sun Media of the report, which would have had the blessing of outgoing CDS Gen. Ray Henault. 

REWRITING REVIEW 

"People have been just madly rewriting the thing." 

Prime Minister Paul Martin ordered a blueprint outlining the future of the military and Canada's role abroad after the federal election. 

But the Liberal government has repeatedly put off releasing the review, which will lay out priority military missions and dictate hardware purchases. 

Defence Minister Bill Graham, who has been forced to repeatedly revise the release date, pushed hard to have Hillier appointed to the top military job in Canada. 

And Graham was completely behind Hillier's decision to overhaul the defence blueprint with fresh ideas, says an official in his office. 

NEW DIRECTION 

"It was a 180-degree turn," a defence department source said. "(Hillier) started from scratch." 

An official close to Graham said he worked hand-in-glove with Hillier developing the new direction for the military. 

Sources shot down reports that say the new policy will reduce the air force and navy to support roles, and focus entirely on boosting the army. 

The overhaul of Canada's military will be accompanied by a new vision statement for Canada's aid, trade and foreign affairs. CIDA has said it will cut down the number of countries getting aid, and foreign affairs wants more diplomats working abroad.


----------



## Guardian

No wasting any time, is he?   ;D

If these changes turn out to be more than just a fast start, then perhaps some positive change is really on the way. For the first time in a long time.

Time will tell... I'll actually allow myself to be an optimist on this one!

I just hope that revamping the plan doesn't slow things down too much...


----------



## Slim

> "It was boring, dry and dreadful,"



Not sure I would have phrazed things in quite that way, but whatever works I guess...

I hope the govt lets him implement it though.  

Slim


----------



## George Wallace

New Broom Sweeps Clean.

GW


----------



## Yeoman

apparently he's going to be at work today. maybe I'll run into him, I'm sure he'll have a talk with dukes coy pers that are left, I see it coming.
good to hear that he's got the ball rolling though, I've heard more press releases with him already then I've ever heard of from General Henault.
Greg


----------



## Franko

I'm going to cross my fingers on this one.......   

I'm sure he'll change something....if the damn Liberals allow it.

Regards


----------



## GGboy

IMHO this is exactly what the CF needed: a public shot in the arm (if not a kick in another part of the government's anatomy) from its chief. It's not that what he said is particularly new, it's the timing and the venue. 
As for the Liberals disciplining him somehow, with the government in minority mode at the moment, the last thing in the world they want is a public dust-up over spanking a soldier for telling the simple truth. There are enough reporters covering the military these days that they just know they'd take a shit-kicking if they tried anything against Gen. Hillier ... 
Plus, I hear via the grapevine that PMPM has taken a personal shine to Gen. Hillier, so maybe he really is bulletproof. Good on him for taking advantage of it.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

The question is will it be just one element that gets that shot in the arm like many of us suspect or will it be Forces wide.  :-\


----------



## GGboy

Different question ex-Dragoon: the shot in the arm the new CDS gave last week was an instant morale boost for the whole Canadian Forces.
The budgetary shot in the arm is a whole other issue. One hopes that Gen. Hillier realizes he's now chief of all the services, not just the one that wears green ... but this is still a promising start.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I hope he realizes that as well GGBoy but honestly I will believe that when I see it. Until then I am not too optimisitc.


----------



## silentbutdeadly

well shouldn't the army get more of the shot in the arm , we are the most deployed then the air force and the well the navy gets deployed but we are the guys on the ground! but really doesn't every CDS kinda lean towards the element they came from.


----------



## Infanteer

I'll spare Ex-Dragoon the effort of replying, but you obviously don't have a clue on what the Navy's operational cycle is like.  The fact that we have boats tied up for lack of sailors should be indicative that the Navy needs as much help as the other two services.

GGboy is right.  If the new CDS has a agenda of service-based loyalty instead of a cohesive and joint approach to National Defence, then he isn't doing his job as the CDS.  Time should tell.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Thanks Infanteer could not have said it any better and would have probably been a lot more rude.


----------



## Good2Golf

GGboy said:
			
		

> Different question ex-Dragoon: the shot in the arm the new CDS gave last week was an instant morale boost for the whole Canadian Forces.
> The budgetary shot in the arm is a whole other issue. One hopes that Gen. Hillier realizes he's now chief of all the services, not just the one that wears green ... but this is still a promising start.



Guys, I'm not particularly worried about this...last time Hillier came down to Kingston to talk to his "Southern half of the Land Staff" he was pretty inclusive of all arms, particularly with the view that environmnetalism has more to do with Force Generation...once boots, ships and aircraft go out the door, we're all purple.  Then again, I'm more comfortable in CADPAT than I am in that poofter blue stuff, so maybe I'm not quite objective enough! ;D

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## silentbutdeadly

then don't you think we should have something like the joint chiefs?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

silentbutdeadly said:
			
		

> then don't you think we should have something like the joint chiefs?



Could not the current format be considered as such? I know I always viewed it in that manner.


----------



## Edward Campbell

silentbutdeadly said:
			
		

> then don't you think we should have something like the joint chiefs?



No, in a properly constituted _joint_ force the staff responsible for planning and conducting operations is a _*joint staff*_ at national, command and even formation level â â€œ most formations being _joint task forces_ of some sort.

The _professional heads of service_ (the individual single-service chiefs of staff in the US, who, together constitute the Joint Chiefs of Staff) should be separate the national _joint_ staff and should have specific responsibilities for _special to service_ matters including personnel, doctrine, equipment requirement and individual training.

The JCS, as constituted in the US, is the best Eisenhower could get in the bruising _unification_ debates of the late 1950s.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

All a JCS would do is to have more chefs and less cooks in the kitchen.  It is bad enough as it is don't you think?

If anything it should be restructured so that it represents the way the forces are today shaving some from the top to balance out the bottom.

My thoughts.


----------



## GGboy

Interesting perspective in the article below, if it's true. I'm presuming the "defence sources" quoted below work in close proximity to the MND, if in fact they aren't Mr. Graham himself:



By Stephen Thorne
OTTAWA (CP) _ Defence Minister Bill Graham has tossed out initial drafts of the department's comprehensive policy review, calling it ``dreadful dreck'' and demanding a clear bold vision.
Graham's frustration shows how difficult it can be to propel conservative generals and defence bureaucrats in a radically new direction, particularly in a minority government.
Policy-makers at National Defence had been labouring on a blueprint for the future of Canada's military for almost a year when Graham arrived there in July.
In December, Graham suddenly dismissed what senior officials described as ``dreadful dreck that would not be acceptable in the public domain.''
The draft that had been promised by Christmas would have been pilloried had it gone beyond the grey walls of defence headquarters in downtown Ottawa, defence officials told The Canadian Press.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, officials said the document relied on the status quo set by the 1994 White Paper on defence, ``minus the slash-and-burn'' of the 1990s and adding a demand for more money.
``You want me to go out and demand more money for the status quo?'' Graham told his officials. ``It's not going to work.''
The document was peppered with references to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, said the officials.
The theory was: ``If you throw in 18 references to 9-11, people will think it's an innovative defence policy.''
``It was a train wreck waiting to happen.''
Graham was aghast. He told his officials: ``We've got to get a new chief (of defence staff) in here now.''
The old document retained a traditional, three-service view of the military. The new one, still being drafted, embraces a smaller, more integrated, mission-ready approach with a large boost in profile for the elite Joint Task Force 2 commando squad.
``It has three themes,'' said a senior leader. ``First of all, we have to fix the Canadian Forces right now, we have to grow it and then we have to transform it.
``It's complicated, hard stuff with some people supportive and others passively fighting tooth and nail.''
Ideas now being discussed include making more troops available for overseas duty _ the government has already announced a 5,000-member expansion _ as well as a streamlined, more effective command-and-control structure.
``We have too many headquarters,'' the senior officer said.
The new approach was born last summer after a bruised Graham lost his coveted Foreign Affairs job and landed in Defence in the post-election round of cabinet appointments.
Initially disappointed at losing what he thought was his dream job, Graham soon realized he was heading a department on the rise that was about to get a large cash infusion after years of being slashed.
Graham was in some ways qualified for the job _ at Foreign Affairs, he had come to know many of the issues and key players in the military world. He had developed a personal rapport with U.S. State Secretary Colin Powell, the Pentagon's former chief of defence staff.
But it was only after spending a transatlantic plane ride reading papers given to him by British Defence Minister Jeffrey Hoon outlining ideas for an integrated defence policy that Graham's own thoughts began to crystallize.
Graham realized he was not seeing in the drafts and redrafts coming across his desk the kind of revolutionary change he felt Canada's new defence policy would require.
``Now all of a sudden he's starting to drive the bus instead of the bureaucrats driving him,'' said an official. ``It was about that point in time where you started to see the frustration.''
The minister already had a new deputy. Former CSIS head Ward Elcock had arrived a few weeks after Graham.
His chief of defence staff, Gen. Ray Henault, was on the way out. He had won the chairmanship of NATO's military council in Brussels, but he wasn't scheduled to vacate the defence chief post until April.
Lobbying had begun for Henault's replacement. Among the dark horses _ far off Prime Minister Paul Martin's radar screen _ was the army chief, Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier, a veteran of several overseas missions who had just returned from heading the 34-nation NATO contingent in Kabul.
Graham asked him what he would do if given the opportunity to redesign the Canadian Forces from scratch. His plan was bold while other candidates offered bland.
``Gen. Hillier, evidently, had at that point given some more considerable thought to what the vision of the Canadian Forces would look like than perhaps more parochial, service-specific visions would look like.''
During meetings with Graham, Hillier _ a gregarious Newfoundlander _ outlined his ideas in multi-coloured ink on large sheets of paper mounted on a stand. Graham liked what he saw and heard.
On Nov. 30, Graham bounced some of Hillier's ideas off Powell during the visit of U.S. President George W. Bush to Ottawa.
By mid-December, Graham was telling the prime minister he should at least have a coffee with Hillier to listen to his sweeping ideas.
At the meeting at 24 Sussex Drive on the Saturday before Christmas, Hillier didn't have his rainbow array of pens or large sheets of paper he favours, so he got down on the floor and drew his charts and diagrams on foolscap.
Martin, who was also tiring of the innocuous plans he had seen, signed on that afternoon.
Hillier was already working on drafts in early January, a week before news leaked that he was to be appointed the next chief of defence staff.
Henault's exit was moved up. The change-of-command ceremony took place Feb. 4. Hillier has been buried in the policy review process ever since.
Senior military leadership will be discussing the plan next week, when the appointment of Maj.-Gen. Andrew Leslie to the critical post of director-general of strategic planning will be announced.
The youthful Leslie, who was deputy head of Kabul's NATO force before Hillier went over, will be in charge of long-range planning, formulating strategies to implement the new ideas and crunching the numbers.


----------



## Armymedic

Woo here a sec, am I reading this right?

A LIBERAL cabinet minister seeing the light and endorsing change by disregarding safe old ideas, bringing in new and enlightened experts who will work on revolutionary concepts and ideas toward a goal of a new revitalized CF which will actually be effective in the future....

I might be wrong, but Bill Graham may just be displaying....(oh no    ) *LEADERSHIP*.


----------



## mdh

very interesting, wish there was more detail about what Hillier's vision is....maybe we are going to see a CF focused on the Army...


----------



## tomahawk6

Maybe Graham is positioning himself to be PM.


----------



## Infanteer

If I'm reading this article right, then there is much to be excited about in the next few years.   Hopefully, Defence will be taken seriously.

I am personally happy to see the "drek" that looked at Three Service Empires (Army, Navy, Airforce) playing to their own tune got scrapped - this is what Unification was intended to eliminate and if Hillier can do that by focusing on true and effective Joint Forces capability (and be backed by his political boss) then the Office of the Chief of Defence Staff is being utilized properly (as Hellyer envisioned).


----------



## Armymedic

mdh said:
			
		

> very interesting, wish there was more detail about what Hillier's vision is....maybe we are going to see a CF focused on the Army...



Had to go there, did you...

He is the Chief Of Defence Staff, therefor in charge of the CF....As an effective leader of Canadian service personnel, he will ensure he has experts from all areas of expertise assisting him in developing the MINISTER's plan for the entire CF.

If they took the old report and shredded it, then don't expect the new one out any time real soon. After all, the CF has been without high level direction for a while, and the 6-12 months to develop and effective policy direction may well be worth the wait.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Always the optimist eh Infanteer?


----------



## Infanteer

Why would I willingly dedicate myself to a career if I hated the job and felt everything sucked ass?  ;D


----------



## mdh

Quote from: mdh on Today at 17:51:37
very interesting, wish there was more detail about what Hillier's vision is....maybe we are going to see a CF focused on the Army...


Had to go there, did you...

He is the Chief Of Defence Staff, therefor in charge of the CF....As an effective leader of Canadian service personnel, he will ensure he has experts from all areas of expertise assisting him in developing the MINISTER's plan for the entire CF.

If they took the old report and shredded it, then don't expect the new one out any time real soon. After all, the CF has been without high level direction for a while, and the 6-12 months to develop and effective policy direction may well be worth the wait.


I'm speculating on the article, not taking sides - for the record I support a balanced joint forces operational capabililty, not that anyone really cares what I think    cheers


----------



## Zipper

Good article. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Gads, the wait...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Infanteer glutton for punishment?


----------



## GGboy

What's his vision indeed! From Gen. Hillier's previous public musings on this topic I can make some educated guesses (ie: a light, mobile USMC-type expeditionary capability incorporating all three elements of the CF) but knowing the general, I don't think we'll have to wait long to hear EXACTLY what his vision is -- he hasn't exactly been shy and retiring, has he? 
What's interesting about the rewrite of the DPR described in this article (if accurate) is that it could signal the much anticipated end of the sway held by ADM Pol over successive ministers and indeed the entire department. Bill Graham may turn out to be the best MND we've had in decades ... who knew?


----------



## Infanteer

CFL said:
			
		

> Infanteer glutton for punishment?



Only cause I know you're going to be there to share it with me.... ;D


----------



## mo-litia

Graham taking his job seriously AND Paul Martin supporting him?!?

Pinch me, I'm dreaming! ;D


----------



## George Wallace

I don't want to be pessimistic, but my read of the article also makes me have fears that our new Minister may spell the downfall of the CF.  The article doesn't really say what new developments he is keen on following.  As we all know, the UK and US have larger militaries than ours and are able to have the luxuries of downsizing and building Bdes based on "Lighter" equipment.  They also are keeping their "Heavies".  We don't have those luxuries, as we have cut to the bone already.  If Bill Graham keeps the same attitudes towards the World Situation, that he had in External Affairs, I can see some very poor developments occurring for the CF.  Chretien's "Kinder, Gentler Army" may in fact become a "Kinder, Gentler Constabulary".  If we didn't have the US as a buffer, I am sure that Mexico could have invaded and conquered us in the last decade.   

Wait and Shoot.

GW


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"Only cause I know you're going to be there to share it with me.... "

Your right about that.


----------



## STONEY

VERY INTERESTING !!! TIMES INDEED.

Is Bill Graham a leader and the best MND in a decade or is he someone who will reject and have all policy papers rewritten until they conform with what he wants , not necessarily whats best. A former MND named Paul H.  led also, but not necessarily where everyone wanted to go.

As Lance said , the new CDS definitely appears to have a vision and one that appears to be  agreement with MR. Graham so we may see feathers fly and new young turks take over at NDHQ .  Remember one persons vision is anothers cockamamie idea but at least we appear to be seeing some action only time will tell. Then again we might have a no confidence vote over the budget , the GOV. falls and a new GOV. comes in with a totally new VISION.  Don't you just love that word ,"VISION", has a nice ring to it and just like "assh****" everybody has one.
I have a VISION , that this board will have many interesting threads in the months ahead.

Cheers


----------



## Lance Wiebe

You guys read <a href=http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1108163415215&call_pageid=970599119419>this?</a>

Looks like the vision closely follows the Marine Corps model....


----------



## MJP

I liked this quote.....



> "The sacred cows had better take cover ... You're going to see a lot less talking about it and a very early move to implement," the official said.



I can already hear people justifying their load station in life.  ;D



> Looks like the vision closely follows the Marine Corps model....



Which many of people including a few around here have been advocating for!  Interesting times ahead me thinks.


----------



## ArmyRick

I read the article lance provided the link for.

I say 
(1) Its about time...
(2) Change is good, don't fear it embrace it and
(3) Lets get on with it.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Now Bob MacDonald says the appointment is all part of a reason to do nothing for a while using the "New Paper" as an excuse.....hmmmm
   
Sun, February 13, 2005 



Grits a study in dithering

ARMED FORCES EQUIPMENT IS OLDER THAN THE PEOPLE USING IT, BOB MACDONALD LAMENTS 
By BOB MACDONALD

CANADA'S DEFENCE policy under the Liberals is clear-cut: When pressure builds to spend more money to modernize our sadly neglected armed forces, announce yet another government study. That way, Prime Minister Paul Martin and his defence minister -- "Fighting Bill" Graham from Toronto's plush Rosedale riding -- can back off from doing anything meaningful. 

Back in 1994, the government announced a study to re-organize and modernize the forces. While most of its recommendations were never implemented, the Martin-led Liberals announced another study last summer. 

Oh, and when the opposition Conservatives ripped into the government's do-nothing defence policy during the election campaign, Martin suddenly announced he'd add 5,000 troops to the forces. Not surprisingly, top dogs in the forces wondered where they'd get the money. Ah yes, the Liberals won the election -- and the 5,000 have still not been added. 

So it should have been no surprise this past week when word came from Ottawa that Graham had called that latest study "dreadful dreck" -- and ordered yet another one. 

This time, the dithering Martin's selling point is that he has appointed a new military whiz -- Gen. Rick Hillier -- to be chief of the defence staff. Hillier, 41, was quoted as describing the existing study as "boring, dry and dreadful." 

HELICOPTER FIASCO 

The study-piled-on-study policy means most of Canada's forces use equipment-planes, tanks, armoured vehicles and ships that are older than those forced to use them. 

Take the notorious, 41-year-old Sea King helicopter that was scheduled for replacement more than a decade ago when Jean Chretien came to power. He promptly scuttled a contract for its replacement awarded by the previous Conservative government -- at a cost of $500 million to Canada's taxpayers as a cancellation penalty. 

Finally, just months ago, Martin's regime awarded a contract to a rival firm--whose chopper is still on the drawing board -- rather than give the job to the one that won the contract 10 years ago. Many experts say the losing chopper was a superior aircraft, and a version of it was recently purchased by the U.S. to be the presidential helicopter. 

Meanwhile, the air force is trying to keep its Hercules transport planes flying -- and they're older than the Sea Kings. And recently the forces had to shell out millions of dollars to rent Russian-made transport planes to fly its DART emergency force to Sri Lanka to help the tsunami victims. 

Canada's Leopard tanks are being phased out in favour of a light armoured wheeled vehicle with a 105-mm cannon. Critics say they're too lightly armoured to survive long on a battlefield. 

COYOTE TOP-NOTCH 

Oh sure, some acquisitions, such as the Coyote armoured vehicle, are considered top-notch, but the army is still trying to operate with a fleet of trucks that is rusting out. 

"Every officer and man in the Canadian Forces can put his hand on his heart and say that he's served at some time or another in a vehicle that was older than him," Col. Bob Gunn, the army's director of equipment needs, was quoted as saying. 

A much-reduced number of the forces' aging CF-18 fighter jets are being modernized and the navy's destroyers may have to be mothballed. 

No matter. The Martin/Graham-led Liberal team has the answers -- the same old ones. When in doubt, announce a new pie-in-the-sky study. And when criticism builds, say nothing can be done until the study is completed. 

It's the same dithering strategy Martin has adopted in stalling on a decision on whether to join the U.S. anti-nuclear missile system to protect our two countries. It will cost Canada nothing and no anti-missile sites will be on Canadian soil. Yet Martin is afraid of political static from within his own party. 

He's a leader who apparently has no beliefs of his own. And the same goes for his overall defence policy.


----------



## George Wallace

Lance Wiebe said:
			
		

> You guys read <a href=http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1108163415215&call_pageid=970599119419>this?</a>
> 
> Looks like the vision closely follows the Marine Corps model....



Actually, it looks like "Old" is "New" again.  Graham has got Hillier implementing what Paul Hellier hoped for when he brought about "Unification" so many years ago.

GW


----------



## ArmyRick

Except I like the part about reducing HQ....


----------



## Jungle

Maybe it would be a good time to go one service dress uniform... you know, to reduce inter-service rivalry !!!  :blotto: After all, we're all on the same team !?!   ;D


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Maybe I was the only one, but the download of the page hung my computer twice so I'm just copying and pasting it.


Matthew.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TORONTO STAR

Forces set for a major overhaul
Shake-up involves integrating army, navy, air force

Aims to enable military to react faster to disaster


BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWAâ â€A dramatic shake-up of the armed forces is in the works to enable the military to respond faster and more effectively to a major disaster or terror attack in Canada, the Toronto Star has learned.

But the change, which involves integrating the air force, navy, army and special forces into combined commands, would also allow the armed forces to respond more quickly when dispatched abroad, defence officials say.

Gen. Rick Hillier hinted at the looming change when he took over as chief of defence staff a week ago and said the forces would soon be treating Canada "as an operational theatre for probably the first time in our history.

"I have my very precise view on the way ahead â â€ this army, navy and air force working as one team in the Canadian Forces," Hillier said.

"We need to be much more effective at responding when our government and Canadians need us," he said.

This week, defence officials said the changes afoot at defence headquarters are an attempt to put a "Canada Command" focus on the armed forces.

Right now there are nine operational headquarters across the country â â€ two for the navy, four for the army, one for the air force, a northern command in Yellowknife and a joint command in Kingston.

The goal is to combine the air force, navy and army in the same commands to speed decision making and in the end, free up personnel for other duties. Under one possible scenario, the commands would be established based on geography, with a single joint headquarters for each region.

"The bottom line is we've got too many ... We're going to look to reduce them and integrate them," said one defence department official, describing the change as the biggest shake-up to hit the forces in years.

In talking about how Canadian troops responded to the Red River floods in 1997 and the ice storm that hit Eastern Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes in 1998, defence officials described a "Byzantine" structure of decision-making as requests for gear and personnel bounced from one headquarters to another.

"You say, `I need this aircraft'. That person probably has to check up through his air force chain of command ... it happens quickly but it's not decisive and immediate," the official said. "In an integrated headquarters, it's all right there so you more quickly (generate forces) and deploy your assets."

The military's Joint Task Force 2 commando team will have a high profile in the coming changes "because of the ongoing security environment," the official said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`I have my very precise view on the way ahead.'

Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of defence staff

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hillier will outline the thrust of the plan when he meets with top officers next week. Officials admit the changes will be "disconcerting for some.

"The sacred cows had better take cover ... You're going to see a lot less talking about it and a very early move to implement," the official said.

The move to a leaner command structure is one example of the kind of changes coming with Hillier's leadership and the long-awaited review of Canada's defence policy.

Defence Minister Bill Graham, frustrated by the timid review proposed by senior brass last fall, has asked Hillier to deliver "something different and creative and bold," the official said.

Officials said the review will confirm the "bread-and-butter" roles for the armed forces â â€ the defence of Canada, co-operation with the United States in defending North America and a role for Canada in bringing stability to failing states around the world.

But it's in how those goals are achieved that the review will make its mark. It's expected to propose a more nimble force, bolstered by 5,000 new recruits, which can have a greater impact in global hotspots as well as at home. 

"How do we get to where it is we need to go faster, deliver more capability and make it more focussed?" one official asked. 

Long-time defence staff say a "perfect storm" of change is poised to hit the defence department, an institution known more around Ottawa for being stuck in its ways.

The shift started last summer with Graham's appointment as defence minister. Graham, the former foreign affairs minister, had a clear idea for the role of Canada's armed forces in the world. Ward Elcock, the former head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, was named deputy minister in the fall.

Further changes atop the military will be announced within the week. Sources say that Maj.-Gen. Marc Dumais, now assistant chief of the air staff, will be named Hillier's number two, as vice-chief of the defence staff.

Maj.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, an army officer who served as deputy commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, will be placed in charge of strategic planning.

Hand-in-hand with that vision is the need for more money for the military, officials say. Both Prime Minister Paul Martin and Graham have vowed more cash for the military in the Feb. 23 budget. Defence officials are confident the financial commitment will go beyond funding the 5,000 additional troops promised by the Liberals during last year's election. 

"There will be the expansion of the troops, there will be the strong words of commitment and the importance of defence and there will be an initial investment beyond the expansion and could even be a significant one," one official said.


----------



## George Wallace

(The above article is what Lance had Linked.)


----------



## Zipper

Interesting times indeed.

One thing though...               ...the idea that the JTF have a "higher profile"? Isn't that the last thing you want your Special Forces to have? Or is it just a metaphor for them getting more money?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

To me it sounds like they will get there hands in more pies with more and stronger support coming from the other 3 elements not necessarily seeing them on the 6 o'clock news.


----------



## Edward Campbell

This, from today's _Globe and Mail_ is also interesting.   (See:   http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050213.whillly0213/BNStory/Front/ )



> Hillier leads Forces revamp
> 
> By STEPHEN THORNE
> 
> Sunday, February 13, 2005 Updated at 3:55 PM EST
> 
> Canadian Press
> 
> Toronto â â€ Canada will need to buy heavy-lift helicopters to transport troops and equipment around war zones and other theatres of operation as part of a comprehensive plan to revamp the Canadian Forces, says the new chief of defence staff.
> 
> The man engineering an overhaul of the Canadian military says the new policy review will not favour one service over another. In fact, despite reports to the contrary, the air force will be more important than ever.
> 
> â Å“You have to assure yourself that you've to all the necessary bits and pieces in place to be able to respond,â ? General Rick Hillier said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
> 
> The military needs to replace the Chinook helicopters it sold to the Dutch years ago. Canada's experience during the 2002 war on terror, when it relied on U.S. transport choppers during combat operations in Afghanistan, proved that, Gen. Hillier said.
> 
> The military must also replace the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft it uses on short haul flights in Canada and overseas.
> 
> But the general said National Defence will have to assess what works best for longer haul flights, like the ones that transported Canada's Disaster Assistance Response Team to Sri Lanka in early January.
> 
> â Å“We've got to sort out the helicopter piece because we've got to be able to move around these environments,â ? Gen. Hillier said.
> 
> â Å“We've got to fix the C-130 piece because a lot of them are very old. And we've got to assure ourselves of strategic lift.â ?
> 
> Gen. Hillier said long range flights may be still be handled by aircraft rented from other countries, shared with NATO, or purchased.
> 
> But Gen. Hillier suggested Canada would not likely buy larger aircraft, like the Russian Antonov or the American C-17.
> 
> Whatever the outcome, Gen. Hillier said the military is in for a major rethinking but the aim is to expand, modernize and integrate the services â â€ not trade one off for another.
> 
> Sources say Gen. Hillier, an armoured officer from Newfoundland, was the only candidate for the chief's job to come up with the kind of innovative thinking Defence Minister Bill Graham was looking for in the year-old defence review process.
> 
> It is Gen. Hillier who reinforced Graham's decision to throw out the first drafts of the government's defence policy review. Now Gen. Hillier is driving the thrust of the new document at Defence Headquarters in Ottawa.
> 
> But the general said he won't do it alone.
> 
> The document will be very much a product of thinking that has been circulating in military circles for some time, said Gen. Hillier. Many of his own ideas came out of a meeting of senior officers a year ago.
> 
> On Tuesday, he will kick off a 2 ½-day conference of general and flag officers by assuring them the navy and air force won't take a back seat to the army in the overhaul, as some have feared.
> 
> â Å“People have to be assured that there's a role for the maritime, air and land forces in the future of Canada that is powerful and valuable and relevant and exactly what the country needs,â ? Gen. Hillier said.
> 
> â Å“We find our balances based on the jobs that we have to do.â ?
> 
> Gen. Hillier will then brief his senior officers on the status of the policy review, ask them for their input and warn off any who aren't on board.
> 
> He doesn't think there will be too many of those.
> 
> â Å“We've got an entire generation of young men and women who have cut their teeth on operations,â ? said Gen. Hillier. â Å“We are in a position now that we have not been in since the end of World War II.
> 
> â Å“Every one of those folks knows what has to be done.â ?
> 
> And what needs to be done? Gen. Hillier, who has commanded more overseas operations than many of his predecessors, said there will be some added expense involved but acknowledged he has to be realistic:
> 
> â â€ No more independent deployment of services, with ad hoc planning of large-scale operations by hastily assembled command elements drawn from the army, navy and air force. The new force will be jointly commanded and able to deploy battle groups or task forces quickly and efficiently.
> 
> â â€ Overseas operations will be less spread out, with larger forces focused on and deployed to fewer places, he said.
> 
> â â€ Canada's fleet of CF-18 fighter-bombers must be equipped with precision munitions for overseas operations but they will also likely take on a greater role in domestic security and defence. â Å“It doesn't have to be either-or,â ? said the general.
> 
> â â€ The air force is already taking on a bigger role in surveillance, which may require upgrades or replacement of the Aurora aircraft fleet and the purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles.
> 
> â â€ The navy's controversial submarine fleet, still reeling from October's fatal fire, must be brought up to scratch and employed in coastal security and defence, either off Canada's coasts or elsewhere, said Gen. Hillier.
> 
> â Å“We need to set priorities,â ? he said of the Forces in general. â Å“We need to walk through the various options that are available.â ?
> 
> Fundamental to the process will be recruitment of 5,000 new members and 3,000 reservists, and some much-needed attention to the foundation â â€ training, weapons, ammunition and infrastructure such as runways and jetties.



Hope springs eternal ... even when one is as old as I and has been disappointed as often as I ...


----------



## Kirkhill

Beat me to it ROJ.  Keeping my fingers crossed here.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

And the Liberals get defeated in the next election and the new part fires the CDS or the Liberal party reneges on any promises made and fires the CDS.

But your right.   If we hadn't heard it before and so often this might actually seem promising.


----------



## Jungle

Well, at least it is permitted to hope... something that was out of reach just a year ago !!! 
Realistically, it has been a very long time since there was that much political support for the Military; at least 22 years!!  
BUT, I am also aware that politics are a dirty game, and things can change overnight.


----------



## George Wallace

It makes you think that he may be reading some of the running commentary on some of the threads here.

GW


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I think you give us to much credit.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Oh my God whats that wierd tingling feeling....wow maybe some optimism for the Navy from RH that I was not feeling before.


----------



## ArmyRick

I am on board with the CDS because 
(a) This idea and thinking sounds new and "out of the box";
(b) It might actually sort out some dead weight in the CF; and
(c) He has the same first name I do (most important factor of all).


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I like everything he's done except for pushing for the MGS and dismantling of the pioneers and mortars.


----------



## Zipper

> And what needs to be done? Gen. Hillier, who has commanded more overseas operations than many of his predecessors, said there will be some added expense involved but acknowledged he has to be realistic:
> 
> â â€ No more independent deployment of services, with ad hoc planning of large-scale operations by hastily assembled command elements drawn from the army, navy and air force. The new force will be jointly commanded and able to deploy battle groups or task forces quickly and efficiently.
> 
> â â€ Overseas operations will be less spread out, with larger forces focused on and deployed to fewer places, he said.
> 
> â â€ Canada's fleet of CF-18 fighter-bombers must be equipped with precision munitions for overseas operations but they will also likely take on a greater role in domestic security and defence. â Å“It doesn't have to be either-or,â ? said the general.
> 
> â â€ The air force is already taking on a bigger role in surveillance, which may require upgrades or replacement of the Aurora aircraft fleet and the purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles.
> 
> â â€ The navy's controversial submarine fleet, still reeling from October's fatal fire, must be brought up to scratch and employed in coastal security and defence, either off Canada's coasts or elsewhere, said Gen. Hillier.
> 
> â Å“We need to set priorities,â ? he said of the Forces in general. â Å“We need to walk through the various options that are available.â ?
> 
> Fundamental to the process will be recruitment of 5,000 new members and 3,000 reservists, and some much-needed attention to the foundation â â€ training, weapons, ammunition and infrastructure such as runways and jetties.



Oh my GOD!! Is there a light at the end of the tunnel? Lets wait and see.



			
				CFL said:
			
		

> I like everything he's done except for pushing for the MGS and dismantling of the pioneers and mortars.



I'm with you there CFL. All those in favour of beards in the Army!? Say Aye!   AYE!!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

AYE.


----------



## Lance Wiebe

One thing we all can agree on is the plan to reduce the size and number of headquarters.

Far too much of our resources and manpower is given to all of the various headquarters, that can be better used elsewhere.  

I'm backing Gen Rick all the way on this one!


----------



## Slim

Could it be...Could it really be...That, at last, we have hope again? 

Andy


----------



## Spr.Earl

Lance Wiebe said:
			
		

> One thing we all can agree on is the plan to reduce the size and number of headquarters.
> 
> Far too much of our resources and manpower is given to all of the various headquarters, that can be better used elsewhere.
> 
> I'm backing Gen Rick all the way on this one!



He has my 110% support just from the interview on the Tube were he stated the Army needs money and he will push for it and at the same time cut the bureaucracy we have.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"I would also like to see is that Genaral Officers don't have to swear allegaince to the serving Governmant and stay with our Official Oath of Allegiance."

What do you mean?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Ah I see.  Maybe if they say it with their fingers crossed it doesn't count.


----------



## Spr.Earl

To all I deleted some of what I posted and gett back with the proof as CFL can vouch with out the proof it can cause a maelstrom which I do not wish to cause.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Roger.


----------



## George Wallace

I'm hearing on the morning news that Gen Hillier has said that the CF has to be capable of full intensity combat if it wants to continue to do Peacekeeping.  If what the radio news is saying is true, are there overtones in the background to changing our direction from "Lighter" to "Medium" or even "Heavy" capabilities, or are we going to stay "Light" and pretend that we are a capable Combat Force?


I'll wait and see.  The pace of the news seems to be picking up.


GW


----------



## GGboy

What a busy boy our new CDS has been! I see his smiling face all over the papers this morning, including both national newspapers, the Toronto Star (gasp!), the Ottawa Citizen, Vka Times-Colonist, Edmonchuk Journal and assorted TV and radio hits. Apologies in advance for the length, but I've compiled some of Gen. Hillier's "greatest hits" below for reading over your morning coffee.
Here he is in Canadian Press ...

By STEPHEN THORNE
Sunday, February 13, 2005 Updated at 3:55 PM EST
Canadian Press
Toronto â â€ Canada will need to buy heavy-lift helicopters to transport troops and equipment around war zones and other theatres of operation as part of a comprehensive plan to revamp the Canadian Forces, says the new chief of defence staff.
The man engineering an overhaul of the Canadian military says the new policy review will not favour one service over another. In fact, despite reports to the contrary, the air force will be more important than ever.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050213.whillly0213/BNStory/Front/

In the Toronto Star...

Top general plots bold new mission
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU
OTTAWAâ â€Go big and hit hard.
As Canada considers how to tackle "failed and failing states," that's the advice from the country's new top general.
Gen. Rick Hillier has his own vision of how it should happen â â€ Canadian soldiers hitting the beach at some global hot spot from new troop-carrying vessels while helicopters and fighter jets keep vigil overhead.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1108336208444&call_pageid=970599119419

The Globe & Mail ... 
Combat role of troops is vital, Hillier says
By  PAUL KORING
Monday, February 14, 2005 - Page A7 
General Rick Hillier, Canada's new top soldier, has a sweeping vision of a dramatically transformed military, as capable of full-blown combat in foreign fields as purifying water in the wake of tsunamis.
"We've got to be able to do the entire spectrum of operations, from the humanitarian assistance like the DART in the tsunami disaster, through to nation-building and stabilization operations . . . through to being able to fight and win in combat operations," Gen. Hiller said yesterday in an interview.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050214/HILLIER14/TPNational/TopStories

And last, but not least, the National Post (I've reproduced this in its entirety because the site's password protected):

Top general wants huge warship for new task force: Major overhaul
National Post 
Monday, February 14, 2005 
Page: A6 
Section: Canada 
Byline: Chris Wattie 
Canada's top general says he needs a big amphibious expeditionary warship to realize his plans for a Canadian task force to take our navy, army and air force anywhere in the world for everything from humanitarian missions to all-out wars.
General Rick Hillier outlined his ambitious plan for the Canadian Forces in an interview with the National Post yesterday, a plan that will require a top-to-bottom reorganization of all three services and an infusion of new soldiers and equipment.
"We're talking about taking army task forces, navy task groups and air capability ... and have it ready to deploy either in Canada or around the world as an entity that says 'Canadian' on it -- a Task Force Maple Leaf if you will," Gen. Hillier said, adding with a smile: "I like that name."
Gen. Hillier, who was sworn in as Chief of Defence Staff less than two weeks ago, said he will need a big, new vessel to carry up to 1,500 troops, heavy equipment and new air force heavy lift helicopters to international hot spots, and he will need it soon.
"What we're going to clearly need is the ability to project our men and women and the capabilities that they bring with them around the world," said Gen. Hillier. "We'll have to find something different that allows us to do that. We're still looking, all the options are out there."
The General said his staff is considering expanding the navy's Joint Support Ship program to fill that role, but is also looking at larger and more expensive vessels to become the flagships of a future Canadian expeditionary force.
"What we need is something that is going to allow us to project power across the shore, from here to our next theatre of operations, whether that's in the north part of Canada or on the coast of Canada or around the world," he said.
"Whether our Joint Support Ships can be shaped to give us that capability is the first question we will ask."
The Joint Support Ship program, a $2.1-billion plan to build three or more vessels by 2011, will combine the roles of a tanker for refuelling other warships at sea, a transport for ground troops and their equipment and an offshore command post or hospital.
But each of the vessels, which are still on the drawing board, will be able to carry only 200 soldiers and a limited amount of equipment. Their flight decks would be able to accommodate only four medium-sized helicopters.
So Gen. Hillier said Canada may have to acquire a ship like the Royal Navy's HMS Albion, an 18,500-tonne, 176-metre-long amphibious assault ship that can carry up to 700 Royal Marines and their equipment and armoured vehicles.
Another possibility is the U.S. Navy's San Antonio class, an even larger troopship and helicopter carrier, but the General said those vessels might be out of Canada's price range.
"Those U.S. ships are enormously powerful, capable ships without question," he said. "They're also enormously expensive."
Gen. Hillier said his envisioned task force will also need new heavy transport helicopters to replace the air force's Chinook helicopters that were sold to the Netherlands in the 1990s. "We'll need that medium or heavy lift to move around that theatre of operations," he said.
Gen. Hillier would not say how much money his over-burdened troops will need from this month's federal budget to begin making his planned expeditionary force a reality, but in his first speech as head of the Canadian Forces last week he was pointedly critical of military underfunding.
Gen. Hillier acknowledged his plans are "a little bit pre-emptive" of the government's defence policy review, expected to be unveiled this spring to outline the future direction of the military.
But he does not want to wait before acting and intends to start putting his proposed task force together almost immediately. "We'll build one task force as soon as we possibly can," he said. "I want to get there sooner rather than later, I'll tell you that."
Gen. Hillier, a 30-year career army officer and veteran of missions in Bosnia and Afghanistan, stepped into the limelight within minutes of being sworn in as the head of the Canadian Forces.
The General, whose reputation for bluntness has made him a favourite among the rank-and-file members of the military, said yesterday he has no plans to tone down his language or lower his public profile.
"Canadians realize that the armed forces have a fundamental and valuable role to play -- sometimes they just need to have that articulated a little bit more clearly for them," he said. "As Chief of Defence Staff, part of that role is mine."
Gen. Hillier denied published reports last month suggesting the army would become the pre-eminent service under his leadership, at the expense of the air force and navy.
"There are three legs to the stool. You pull one of them away and the stool will tumble: It doesn't work," he said. "There is a role for air force; there is a role for the navy; there is a role for the army, but the best role is when all three are working together and the three-legged stool sits upright nicely."
And he dismissed concerns in naval circles that Canada's trouble-prone new submarines, including HMCS Chicoutimi, damaged in a fire last year that killed one crew member, could be scrapped.
"We've got those submarines, they're enormously capable ... and there is an incredible use that we can make of them. So I would say simply, let's get on with it."
Gen. Hillier admitted that the Canadian Forces' top generals have "a lot of work to do" before his expeditionary force becomes a reality and said the details of his plan have yet to be fleshed out.
"I have a vision of where we need to go here, but to be able to describe it in specific detail, I'm not quite ready to do that yet," he said.
But he said he is optimistic that there is more public and political support for the military now than at any time in the past two decades. "I think there's opportunity here, I really do ... I think Canadians have been much better informed and educated about their Canadian Forces; I think our own government committees have laid out very clearly the investment required for the Canadian Forces; [and] I think there's enormous support across our country.
"We're at the point right now where we can make significant change."


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"or are we going to stay "Light" and pretend that we are a capable Combat Force"

thats got my vote.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

His go big and hit hard comments seemed to go against his support for the MGS.


----------



## bossi

GGboy said:
			
		

> ... Canada's top general says he needs a big amphibious expeditionary warship to realize his plans for a Canadian task force to take our navy, army and air force anywhere in the world for everything from humanitarian missions to all-out wars. ...



Hopefully somebody can fill in the details ... I remember reading that the USN had ordered some ships, but then due to budget cuts ...
(i.e. sorry for not being able to remember the names of class of these ships, but I seem to recall they were either helicopter carriers, landing assault ships, or ... something that would be "good enough" and available much more quickly than if we designed them from the keel up ... and then had them built by Liberal party cronies ...)


----------



## GGboy

I think you mean the San Antonio class LPDs (Landing Platform Dock):

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lpd-17.htm


----------



## Kirkhill

I think you are right GGBoy

And bossi the Americans are currently building them but have cut back on their order.   There might be an opportunity to make a deal there.   Maybe we could eliminate some of their bells and whistles.

There is already a discussion about this going on on these threads.

http://army.ca/forums/threads/23675.0.html   Canadian Marines
http://army.ca/forums/threads/18459.0.html JSS project

This also going to impact discussions about Hercs, A400s, C17s and Il76s as well as the Cormorant/Cyclone debate - which helicopter do we buy for the army that trains on land and operates from the sea? - gonna get interestin' ;D

http://army.ca/forums/threads/22082.60.html - Cyclone/Cormorant
http://army.ca/forums/threads/22920.0.html - Herc Replacement - Tactical
http://army.ca/forums/threads/26360.0.html - Herc Replacement - Strategic
http://army.ca/forums/threads/23889.0.html - Herc Replacement - SAR(fixed wing)


----------



## ArmyRick

I like hearing some one in charge who is telling the public what we need.

Can't be a peacekeeper if you are not ready for war.

Also, nothing in what he said goes agaisnt the MGS. He wants a rapid deployable force that can project power. A tank weighs 30-60 tonnes. The MGS weighs 20 tonnes or so. How many more do you think you cram into a JSS type ship? Besides the CDS said as CLS that tanks are not needed any more.

I tried telling some one during PT today that their is going to be big changes in the CF in the next few years and they simply replied "every CDS says the same thing" 
Really? Who was the last CDS to mention such noticable changes? 

Wait for it. In five years there will be some big changes in the CF.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Tanks have protection MGS' don't but thats for another thread.


----------



## ArmyRick

Tanks are going, wether we like it or not, thats also been stated on other threads.


----------



## Slim

Well after reading the newspaper articles above, all I can say is...Wow...!

I hope it happens...The CDS certainly has my vote   

Slim


----------



## silentbutdeadly

damn he is going to be a very busy general in the near future, kinda makes you get all warm and fuzzy , until the budget comes out!


----------



## Korus

There's some exciting things proposed, but being the pesimist that I am, I'm having trouble getting my hopes up.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"Tanks are going, wether we like it or not, thats also been stated on other threads."

NOTHING in the military is in stone.


----------



## ArmyRick

I wouldn't count on seeing tanks because Hillier himself has made it clear he doesn't want them.


----------



## Zipper

CFL said:
			
		

> "Tanks are going, wether we like it or not, thats also been stated on other threads."
> 
> NOTHING in the military is in stone.





			
				ArmyRick said:
			
		

> I wouldn't count on seeing tanks because Hillier himself has made it clear he doesn't want them.



I'm surprised at that, being Armoured himself. However, he'll quickly realize how much their needed. Maybe not right away, but down the line...



			
				~RoKo~ said:
			
		

> There's some exciting things proposed, but being the pessimist that I am, I'm having trouble getting my hopes up.



I agree. I'm actually surprised he's given this much detail. Until the budget comes out and is approved, nothing in what he says is actually going to happen. Not to mention that policy review (that he is writting) will have to be passed by the government.

Otherwise, I'm impressed at what he has in mind. Making the Canadian Forces over into a more Marine (US or Brit) style org. makes some sense.


----------



## Slim

> Otherwise, I'm impressed at what he has in mind. Making the Canadian Forces over into a more Marine (US or Brit) style org. makes some sense.



I agree. It should have been done years ago.

Cheers

Slim


----------



## Wizard of OZ

The MGS may be a political pill he is swallowing in order to get the other things off of the wish list needed to better the forces. Tanks can be bought at any time and little training would be needed the helos and aircraft and ships would years away from completion and have to be pushed through when the iron is hot.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Just to follow on what the Wizard of Oz said, the following thought process makes sense:
1)   Say what is necessary to get the job
2)   Say what is necessary to get the support of the politicians who sign the cheques
3)   Obtain buy-in for an expeditionary force structure
4)   Obtain funding based on new relationship to fix the rot (spare parts and emergency maintenance)
5)   Use political leverage to reform and downsize NDHQ
6)   Recruit and train to fit new structure
7)   Procure all expeditionary support equipment (LPD, Tactical Lift Helicopters, AOR, New Air Lift, etc.)
8 )   Prove model is capable
9)   Propose addition of Armoured Add-on Units as the final piece of the land forces puzzle....perhaps with a different political party in power who would be more amenable to such an addition.

Well, we can always hope....



Matthew.


----------



## Zipper

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Just to follow on what the Wizard of Oz said, the following thought process makes sense:
> 1)   Say what is necessary to get the job
> 2)   Say what is necessary to get the support of the politicians who sign the cheques
> 3)   Obtain buy-in for an expeditionary force structure
> 4)   Obtain funding based on new relationship to fix the rot (spare parts and emergency maintenance)
> 5)   Use political leverage to reform and downsize NDHQ
> 6)   Recruit and train to fit new structure
> 7)   Procure all expeditionary support equipment (LPD, Tactical Lift Helicopters, AOR, New Air Lift, etc.)
> 8 )   Prove model is capable
> 9)   Propose addition of Armoured Add-on Units as the final piece of the land forces puzzle....perhaps with a different political party in power who would be more amenable to such an addition.



Not a bad way to look at it. I especially like number 5. Stream line HQ's into fewer, and "hopefully" downsize NDHQ while he's at it. Maybe even militarize to a greater extent again.

After thinking more on his ideas. I wonder why he said that the heavy lift (C-17, etc) would probably not be an option? I'm surprised he wants to go into large scale troop transports for the Navy, but not also take into the mix our own ability to get large quantities of troops and equipment into hot spots away from water (like AfganistaAfghanistan can continue to "rent/beg" these things from the US and Russia, but it doesn't make sense in a sort of way.

As well. These ideas are seemingly to form us into a more "Marine like" (US or Brit) structure, but not turn us into Marines themselves. Which I hope I am interrupting correctly? 

Now last point for now. Where does the Airforce fall into all of this tactically? I would assume that air support has been thought about, but no word of it has happened yet. Any thoughts?


----------



## George Wallace

I've got a feeling that we won't see everything that we require all at once, but brought in over a lengthy period of time.  Don't rule anything out.  At the same time don't rule anything in  ;D as it may be too soon to tell how or even what the new plans will be.

GW


----------



## Zipper

True.

The whole budget could flop and we'll be back into an election again. Groan...


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Don't think it will be the budget that brings this government down think the same sex marriage stuff and kyoto accord may play into it soon.  I think it may actually give the liberals a majority if it happens.  Scary i know but then we may be screwed over even worse.  Only time will tell.


----------



## Slim

I still won't vote for them...In fact I would be surprised if any here do...But that's just me.

As for the current CDS, I say God bless the man and every success to him...  

Slim

P.S. It would not surprise me in the least to find that he is registered here...Perhaps under a less-attention grabbing name...?! You never know...


----------



## pbi

I recently read a truly excellent magazine interview done with Gen Hillier when he was the CLS. I'll try and find it later today and post extracts, but he says some things that IMHO really needed to be said. Now-you can accuse him of just blowing hot air, and you can demand to see the money, but the point for me is that I can never recall a CLS who spoke out as clearly as Gen Hillier has, and that has to count for something.

Cheers


----------



## tomahawk6

The CF is not into the rapid deployment business so being able to deploy forces with a robust sealift capability would be a good trade off for C-17's. If there was a need to get troops and equipment to a theater quickly airlift can be hired.


----------



## ArmyRick

I agree with pbi, the new CDS has made some promises we have not actually heard every 3-4 years.


----------



## pbi

> The CF is not into the rapid deployment business so being able to deploy forces with a robust sealift capability would be a good trade off for C-17's. If there was a need to get troops and equipment to a theater quickly airlift can be hired.



Says who? I wonder if you are familiar with our past and present NATO rapid reaction committments such as ACE, NCF and NRF, our SHIRBRIG committment, our own NEO comittment, or our ongoing support for UN ops? All of these have required us, or require us now, to be capable of rapid deployment. Our problem is not that we are not in the rapid deployment business: we are, and we have been for years. The problem is that we are in the business without owning the means to do it, so we are playing a false game with ourselves and our allies if we cannot borrow the airlift in a hurry. Sea-lift is already on the cards and has been for a while ($$$) but it doesn't replace airmobility: it augments it and sustains it.

Cheers.


----------



## pbi

OK-I found the article. It appeared in the Jan/Feb 2005 issue of "_Frontline_" magazine, a Canadian defence and security issues publication. The article is on pp 6-12 and is based on an interview with Gen Hillier when he was still CLS. A few choice quotes:

"It all comes down to the Three Block War...the important part is that you are doing all three simultaneously..."

" When you are doing just the fighting portion of command, it is easy to show a friendly force as an arrow on a map moving to the middle of an enemy concentration painted in red. You can see it clearly taking place and it helps you get an understanding of the situation so that you can make accurate decisions that will help ensure success. But when you are in the middle of that centre of population, and you are living among friendly people, but you are also living among people who are trying to kill you and trying to ensure that you are not successful in bringing stability, it is much more difficult that in a digitized command format that can help you understand the situation and make those intelligent decisions"

"Priority number one for me-crystallized after Afghanistan-is tactical airlift...We know we have a challenge with our C-130 fleet...there is clearly an overwhelming requirement for heavy lift in theatre...what we need truly is a heavy lift aviation capability to project power inside the theatre and move it around...you cannot always depend on your allies or coalition partners to bring that capability-or for it to be available when you need it...light helicopters don't meet the requirement..."

"We have to be prepared to face down, deter and deal with whomever we encounter when we arrive-from militia forces to terrorist groups or sucide bombers."

"Canada's contributions (to international ops) are not always focused geographically or functionally, and as a result, our contributions do not always get the _profile_ we deserve, and as a result of that, the _credibility_, and as a result of that, the opportunity to _influence_ those missions the way we should"


and, finally (and IMHO the most to the point):

"Our committment is to be relevant to what Canadians want,and we are going to be capable on the ground   and have what our soldiers need when a condition is set for them. There's a connection here that   Canadians have gotten away with ignoring far too long. And that is the fact that these are not my soldiers, they are Canadian soldiers, and they are the sons and daughters of Canadians, the husbands and wives, mothers and fathers in fact, the're neighbours, they're friends or just someone they met down the street. Canadians have to start taking a direct interest in those soldiers who become their credentials around the world. We ask them to do a lot, and we ask them to do it in very dangerous situations. And those young men and women, who are representing us while walking those dirty, dangerous streets, have to be certain that every single Canadian is walking with them.

Figuratively, that has not been occurring, the soldiers don't feel valued, don't feel they are being perceived as a national resource, a national treasure, and in my opinion that's exactly what they are, and they've proven it time and again.

Canadians need to take ownership, these are your soldiers, they are tremendous credentials and the rest of the population of Canada needs to recognize that"

I've spent much of my career being pretty skeptical about alot of things, especially some of our most senior types. However, IMHO the words of the CLS/CDS should be on the front page of every newspaper in Canada. True that they are only words: but words that I don't recall hearing before, and certainly not from anyone who got to be CDS.

Good luck Gen Hillier. Give 'em hell.

Cheers


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"...you cannot always depend on your allies or coalition partners to bring that capability-or for it to be available when you need it"

I agree with this statement but would like to think it would include armour as well.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

I am sure it would, but i also don't see that happening for a while especially if we go to the MGS system.  But like i said earlier in the thread armour could be bought at a later date, as there is not all that much to it.  (Yes i know that is not really true but when you consider it would armour already made as opposed to helicopters and planes and ships that will take years to come into service) As we would prob buy something our allies are using already such as the M1A2 or something the Brits have or even (god help me) the Leclerc.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Wizard of OZ said:
			
		

> I am sure it would, but i also don't see that happening for a while especially if we go to the MGS system.   But like i said earlier in the thread armour could be bought at a later date, as there is not all that much to it.   (Yes i know that is not really true but when you consider it would armour already made as opposed to helicopters and planes and ships that will take years to come into service) As we would prob buy something our allies are using already such as the M1A2 or something the Brits have or even (god help me) the Leclerc.



I know it would be politically tough after the difficulty with the Victorias, but I don't know how we couldn't get in line for the Challenger 2's the British are taking out of service.   It would add, I think it makes sense to buy onto larger scale programs and commit to the upgrade programs of the major players.   That would then take all the procurement studies non-sense off the table and ensure a commitment to up-to-date kit, interoperability and a long-term availablility of cheaper parts.



Matthew.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

But then you would be taking jobs away from hard working bureaucrats who would have nothing to do.  By doing that the forces would see much more production from dollar value instead of studying a topic to death.

ahh the bitches and gripes never stop.

The Challenger 2 would be nice but the M1A2 would be easier to maintain and deploy especially if we had to lease our equipment movers from the Americans.


----------



## Slim

How many times have we been offered the M1 by the U.S. for next to nothing...?! The cost would come from the maintenance of the things..not buying them.

Good tank though...

Slim


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I was under the impression we didn't take them because we weren't allowed to make the replacement parts?


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Naaa prob cause they are seen as to aggressive as they actually have a gun on them.  And we may be associated with the nasty Americans.


----------



## Slim

CFL said:
			
		

> I was under the impression we didn't take them because we weren't allowed to make the replacement parts?



Half the damn tank is made in Canada to begin with.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

so the other half we would have to have made in Quebec.    ;D


----------



## Slim

Wizard of OZ said:
			
		

> so the other half we would have to have made in Quebec.      ;D


 ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Zipper

Wizard of OZ said:
			
		

> The Challenger 2 would be nice but the M1A2 would be easier to maintain and deploy especially if we had to lease our equipment movers from the Americans.



Just my 2 cents. (worth about a half penny)

The Challenger II, while being a very nice vehicle is VERY heavy, thus not being very friendly to our rapid deployment ideas, nor to our forces idea of balance. And the political fall out about Britain and its subs don't go over very well.

The M1 is also a very nice piece of kit, but yes it is American and identified as such around the world. But is also powered I believe by a turbine engine? Which requires a whole new set of support mechanisms that would cost even more money.

I still believe the Leo II (or the IIA6) would be the ideal. Its similar enough to the C2 to transfer quickly, and is diesel and thus we have the support already set up. Also, enough countries are upgrading their Leo II's to the A6 variant (even Greece for crying out loud!?) that we should be able to get the older model for cheap.

Not that we'll ever see it, but oh well.


----------



## silentbutdeadly

i think with the new system coming in , it works with his CEF idea, not that i agree with getting rid of tanks , but thats the only reason i can see him stick with it and plus he got stuck with it. The system was only bought because the americans cancelled there orders and GM out of london, ont. was stuck with them , so of course the great liberal gov. had to help another canadian coy not lose money.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

I still believe the Leo II (or the IIA6) would be the ideal. Its similar enough to the C2 to transfer quickly, and is diesel and thus we have the support already set up. Also, enough countries are upgrading their Leo II's to the A6 variant (even Greece for crying out loud!?) that we should be able to get the older model for cheap.

Don't say that to loud or we may just get some old piece of junk no one wants anymore.  

Hey anybody know how to read Russian?   ;D


----------



## Slim

Zipper said:
			
		

> The M1 is also a very nice piece of kit, but yes it is American and identified as such around the world. But is also powered I believe by a turbine engine? Which requires a whole new set of support mechanisms that would cost even more money.



The Abrams is nbow (I believe) configured for a deisil engine...Much cheaper and the parts (mostly Canadian) are readily available right here in Canada, instead of going to Germany for them.



> I still believe the Leo II (or the IIA6) would be the ideal. Its similar enough to the C2 to transfer quickly, and is diesel and thus we have the support already set up. Also, enough countries are upgrading their Leo II's to the A6 variant (even Greece for crying out loud!?) that we should be able to get the older model for cheap.


Many times since the invention of the Abrams, the U.S. has offered the tank to us at prices so low that if several of us on the forum got together to buy one we probably could. I believe that the M1 would be the best and *CHEAPEST* choice for us here in Canada...If we want a tank, that is...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I have heard this before as well (on the cheapness of them) however that said do you have anything official.  I ask because I'm looking to get myself in shit (ie sending off a few emails) and something official would really help.


----------



## Slim

CFL said:
			
		

> I have heard this before as well (on the cheapness of them) however that said do you have anything official.   I ask because I'm looking to get myself in shit (ie sending off a few emails) and something official would really help.



The guy to talk to is probably George Wallace or, possibly, Franko. these guys are far better connected in the Armoured circle now than I am...I have, in the past, seen stuff like you mention from the U.S. and the German's (Leo 2's in Shilo)

I remember one presentation back in the day where the Armoured School RSM was speaking to the troopies in the base theatre and mentioned the various offers I believe they were probably still being considered at the time...Who knows though... 

Hope that helps

Slim


----------



## Korus

> Many times since the invention of the Abrams, the U.S. has offered the tank to us at prices so low that if several of us on the forum got together to buy one we probably could.



I'm in.


----------



## Zipper

Ah, may we dare to dream.

However to keep this current.

Today I read and saw on CBC (GASP!!) the fact that the military is getting a raise (un-officially) in the next budget and that we are upgrading the CF-18's to a "state of the art" combat suite (official).

I do believe the minority government thing is working in our favour. And about bloody time too!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Oh yee if too much faith.  Don't you know the gov't will be forced to call election because their gay marriage bill won't pass.  We will get the NDP as a majority gov't and the military will be regulated to acts of kindness and snow shoveling.


----------



## Zipper

???

Me have to much faith?

If there is one person around here that can be accused of that, it sure as hell ain't me.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

"I do believe the minority government thing is working in our favour. And about bloody time too!"


----------



## Slim

Zipper said:
			
		

> Today I read and saw on CBC (GASP!!) the fact that the military is getting a raise (un-officially) in the next budget and that we are upgrading the CF-18's to a "state of the art" combat suite (official).



Don't tease us!! 

Slim


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

CF 18 topic is in the airforce section I believe.


----------



## Pencil Tech

The raise would have happened anyway and the CF-18 upgrade was already in progress.


----------



## Zipper

Pencil Tech said:
			
		

> The raise would have happened anyway and the CF-18 upgrade was already in progress.



HA, I knew it was to good to be true. It was already DONE!! Argh!


----------



## Wizard of OZ

It is all part of the new recycling strategy.  If you see a headline that was good news three yrs ago you can use it as long as the piece of kit is one that people want to see fixed.  Cf-18 good Seaking-bad

 ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Too Poor

I had the Opportunity to serve with him in Germany as my Battle captain and then again as my Squadron Commander a few years later he was my Commanding officer He was the one who sent me off to Saudi Arabia during Desert shield and Desert Storm. He was always looking out for the â Å“Menâ ? his belief was that the Non-Commissioned members of the regiment were there for the â Å“long haulâ ? while the officers were there for 2-4 years. He set the standard for other Commanding Officers, Brigade Commanders to follow. I know for a fact that he would never ask any one to do something that he would not be willing to do himself.
I had to opportunity to ask him what he thought about being promoted to Full Bird Col. He saidâ ? I stop being a soldier and become a politicianâ ? This is one of the necessary evils of getting up in rank.
I know that he will do an outstanding job as CDS.......... Watch and shoot!

As for the MGS welcome to the new way of war fighting!!!!!!


Too Poor


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

As for the MGS welcome to the new way of war fighting!!!!!!

I think you meant to say the new way of peace keeping.


----------



## Too Poor

Prepare for War in order to Keep the Peace


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Agreed and the MGS is a poor decision for a rich country.


----------



## Todd614

I have heard some rumours about Gen Hillier's vision of the 5,000 man brigade that the liberals promised. I heard that he wants to start moving on it right away and that he wants it in Gagetown. I know that there is a current thread on the 5,000 man issue but there are no references to what Hillier has to say in it. Could anyone do some rumour busting for me, or direct me to the applicable links?


----------



## Slim

CANADA'S NEWLY minted chief of defence staff has cancelled his debut on the international scene in Brussels. Gen. Rick Hillier, who was sworn in as the military's top soldier earlier this month, decided against attending the NATO leaders' summit tomorrow. 

Hillier was expected to be at Prime Minister Paul Martin's side during the day-long summit in Brussels that will focus strongly on Afghanistan -- the location of Canada's most important military commitment. 

"I don't know why he cancelled," said an official in the PM's office. 

Chiefs of defence staff traditionally accompany their country's leaders to NATO summits. 

But defence department spokesman Lt.-Cmdr. Nathalie Garcia said, "Since Canada was so well represented at this meeting and the fact that he's just started this new job, he felt that he might be better off staying here and becoming more familiar with the files -- the files that are going to need immediate attention." 

An official close to Defence Minister Bill Graham pointed out that Hillier joined him at a NATO meeting earlier this month. 

"And he was told that the other chiefs of defence staff are not going (to Brussels)," the official said. 

Martin will meet privately with a half-dozen heads of state during the NATO summit, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair. 

Martin has been left off U.S. President George W. Bush's dance card, but Canadian officials brushed off the snub, insisting the PM and Bush speak frequently on the phone. 

Published reports indicated Bush would use the NATO meeting to press Canada to send troops to Iraq, either to patrol or instruct local soldiers. 

Senior federal officials say Martin will only commit to sending 30 Canadian military instructors to Jordan. 


http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/02/21/937623-sun.html


----------



## GENOMS Soilder

Slim said:
			
		

> CANADA'S NEWLY minted chief of defence staff has cancelled his debut on the international scene in Brussels. Gen. Rick Hillier, who was sworn in as the military's top soldier earlier this month, decided against attending the NATO leaders' summit tomorrow.
> 
> Hillier was expected to be at Prime Minister Paul Martin's side during the day-long summit in Brussels that will focus strongly on Afghanistan -- the location of Canada's most important military commitment.
> 
> "I don't know why he cancelled," said an official in the PM's office.
> 
> Chiefs of defence staff traditionally accompany their country's leaders to NATO summits.
> 
> But defence department spokesman Lt.-Cmdr. Nathalie Garcia said, "Since Canada was so well represented at this meeting and the fact that he's just started this new job, he felt that he might be better off staying here and becoming more familiar with the files -- the files that are going to need immediate attention."
> 
> An official close to Defence Minister Bill Graham pointed out that Hillier joined him at a NATO meeting earlier this month.
> 
> "And he was told that the other chiefs of defence staff are not going (to Brussels)," the official said.
> 
> Martin will meet privately with a half-dozen heads of state during the NATO summit, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
> 
> Martin has been left off U.S. President George W. Bush's dance card, but Canadian officials brushed off the snub, insisting the PM and Bush speak frequently on the phone.
> 
> Published reports indicated Bush would use the NATO meeting to press Canada to send troops to Iraq, either to patrol or instruct local soldiers.
> 
> Senior federal officials say Martin will only commit to sending 30 Canadian military instructors to Jordan.
> 
> 
> http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/02/21/937623-sun.html



Thanks Slim.
Is this something to ask about?
A punishment for his 'lashing' out?


----------



## Slim

GENOMS Soldier said:
			
		

> Thanks Slim.
> Is this something to ask about?
> A punishment for his 'lashing' out?



I kind of wondered that myself...


----------



## JasonH

The lashing needed to be herd, I hope this doesn't phase him.


----------



## Kirkhill

Here's a thought - PMs about to make a keynote speech (for him) at NATO, apparently saying we're going to pony up, within 24-48 hours of his Finance Minister bringing in a budget, at the same time Hillier is writing a new defence policy and Rachel Welch is writing a new foreign policy.

Any bets this is being done on the "fly" as we speak.  In which case CDS may be better back here where he can talk to many in his department and call the PM for one-on-ones. 

Just a thought.

I am not yet ready to get overly concerned.

I think the PM has got some motivation to appear a little stronger on the international scene and right now the stars are in awful close proximiity.

I am decidedly curious as to what things are going to look like by Friday.


----------



## Spr.Earl

Well he has spoken,now lets see him put his balls were his mouth is.
If not then I will hang up my uniform in shame as we have had many espouse the same rhetoric but if he wins I will stay till I'm 60 and kiss his Zipper Head Arse.


----------



## Storm

Makes sense to me for him to stay here. We're useless to any allies until the home front is sorted out, and we already have some heavy brass sitting around NATO. What would he do over there that other brass can't? Time's better spent doing real work than taking photo ops with the PM as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## DAA

With General Henault being the NATO Military Adviser and Vice-Admiral Davidson being the CANMILREP, how many Generals do you think we really need in attendance?  Besides it most likely would have placed Gen Hillier in an awkward position being the newly appointed CDS.  Who would the PM's delegation have really been consulting with on military matters, the newly appointed CDS or the former CDS.

Either way you look at it is newsworthy.  Imagine the headlines "Canada Sends 3 Generals to NATO Summit"    ;D


----------



## PPCLI Guy

There is nothing sinister here:



> "And he was told that the other chiefs of defence staff are not going (to Brussels)," the official said.



Plans change all the time.

Dave


----------



## Pencil Tech

I believe his 'lashing out' was a staged event with the cooperation of the PMO.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Don't hold your breath for a big influce of cash just yet.  The defence policy has to be written before any major monies will be granted.  It was in the paper today.  I can't find the link right now, when i do i will post it here.  I think this may turn out to be a vicious circle again, budget no policy no budget no new election no budget no policy..................


----------



## RatCatcher

The fact that Henault actually commented in front of media after budget increased my opinion of him... as of my recollection nobody except DeChastelain ever did that. And the fact that he said that it was a start and that the decline over the past ten years can't be rectified in one means to me that he has a future vision of how he sees the CF in the next decade. A reminder too that I beleive he sent the defence/foreign policy back to the people writing it because he didn't like it.  

I think he will fight for ALL of our best interests, Air Force, Navy and of course the Army, not to mention ADM-HR(Mil) since it seems those of us that fall under that group are appart somehow..... but I digress.

Anyway IMHO Bravo Zulu to the CDS!


----------



## Kirkhill

> The fact that Henault actually commented in front of media after budget increased...



Good post RatCatcher but perhaps you mean Hillier?


----------



## RatCatcher

ooooops...sorry 'bout that...sometimes fingers move before brain...hence why my curling shot has been off lately!! lol :blotto:


----------



## buzgo

Did anyone attend the event at the Congress Centre where General Hillier addressed everyone yesterday? I am on leave and couldn't make it, but I'm interested in what was said.


----------



## 54/102 CEF

Points I remember from yesterday at 1100 Ottawa Congress Centre

1.        15 years after fall of Berlin Wall our doctrine and posture still reflect give all Canada has to NATO vs. the Russian Bear
2.        The bear is still there but more of a partner / competitor than opponent.
3.         Failed and failing states are the threat to the west or stable nations of the world - we are a part of that and we have to contribute - to show them the way of the west / or combat their surrogates if persuasion fails. He talked about shooting the enemy!
4.         There will be a re-alignment of how troops and ships / ac deploy - he spoke of a Joint package meaning a Naval Air and Land component being assigned to what we now know as Tours / Theatre deployments to Afghanistan / Iraq / Bosnia - ac could be CF18 / Herc / or smaller
5.         Does not mean tanks are required. Tanks were never deployed by us since Bosnia etc got the full attention of the world. *AMDT 1901 Teus Fort Fumble time ---- he really talked up the perfoirmance of the LAV 25 basic model USMC used on the right flank of the advance to Bagdad and North of there -- then he spoke briefly of Coyote - the surveillance vehicle? and the latest troops carrier LAV - sorry I am a just an ex sapper roaming the halls of the freshly pressed CF greens at the Fort - unsupervised I might add   :.*
6.         There is a need to cast off high cost old eqpt for newer more capable kit.
7.         We have to invest in the eqpt to get there and support our selves. He danced around the topic of C17 but he did not shy away from JSS ship. 
8.         The 8000 new troops will be trained by the army. 1 pipeline, which sends out basic trainees - 3000 of these being reserves.
9.         There will be a littoral focus â â€œ most of the areas we go to are well within ship platforms range including surveillance eqpt to see and then be capable of hitting things or ensuring the area is shaped the way the alliances want it to be.
10.      He spoke openly of the need to clarify the future of certain units, which do not exist, and the formation of something called the Special Operations Group.
11.      He targeted internal Cold Warriors and Cold War solutions based staffs that things are about to change.
12.      Spoke of Canada Command and that we have to be able to cooperate internal to Canada and external in North America with US Military.
13.     He said the Minister is well aware of the need and the implications of not equipping the forces to the best possible state.
14.     Foreign deployments will be a more blended approach from other govt depts and businesses participating - get some action going in beat up areas of the world.
15.     He noted that internal or external to Canada people don't ask if you are Air - Army - Navy - Reg or Reserve- all they know is Canadian Servicemen and women are there to assist and that Cdn Tps reputation precedes them and it is universally positive wherever he has served.
16.     He said the operational experience that currently exists is a great asset at all levels and he is going to focus the CF to support the operators.
17.     Then he said it won't be easy but he will give it his best - he feels he has strong support from the Government and they understand what CF can do for them.

Warm and Fuzzy feeling? Very - he is an excellent speaker and sprinkles his talk with anecdotes of life in Nfld, which show he is very approachable. He gave a small vignette of how the world is changing - while he was on duty in Kabul he told of a fire call at the Cdn Embassy - a Bosnian Fire Crew attended the blaze and security was provided by a Croatian Company.

Can it work? Yes - but I say public hangings are nec to encourage the troops - I would have thought after 15 years the staffs would have come up with a few more nimble ideas ----- what are we paying them for?

Hopefully those brain tidbits will help others who may have been there do a memory extraction.


----------



## ArmyRick

Putting the cold war mentality behind us is the first step in the right direction. Alot oserving people won't like this...

As Rafiki (the monkey in the movie the Lion King) says "Change is good"


----------



## Sandbag

Sounds like EBO (effects based operations) are finally on the horizon.  I agree it will challenge staff and decision makers alike.  It will be interesting to see what changes he proposes and how they are implemented and how we will fit that into continental defence.


----------



## Rfn

The CDS came to CFB Winnipeg to give a presentation on his ideas on Friday.(And he made clear they were only_ideas_until a policy review was completed.) I was very impressed. He gave a good one.

Some points I remember:

-- A Special Operations group to be set up

--He explained a snake and bear analogy: that we are capable of fighting both, but currently we train to fight the "bear" (enemy conventional forces) by default, and train to fight the "snakes" (asymmetrical forces from failed states) only when we have to. This he wants to change, to set the default on "snake" and equip/train/organize accordingly while retaining some conventional capability.

--As was covered already on this thread, he reiterated the Air Force & Navy's major role was to support the Army. He mentioned his priority for aviation: TRANSPORT. He was impressed with the German's helicopters in Afghanistan, and their heavy lift high altitude performance.

-- Foreign missions are now to take a "Team Canada" approach. That is, govt orgs such as the Red Cross and CIDA would be involved.

There wasn't a lot of good news for that crowd (most of them were Air Force) but they gave him a standing ovation when he was finished! I think everyone appreciated his forthright tell-it-like- it-is attitude. For once I have a clear idea what is going on and why it is going on. And I believe anyone that has painted him as a "politition" has done him a disservice.

The only weakness in the plan is if Prime Minister Dithers gets cold feet and scuttles it after the CDS starts tinkering with sacred cows...

There was a lot more but I can't remember it all... I hope someone else that was there will post the stuff I missed.


----------



## PPCLI Guy

In todays Toronto Star...



> Top soldier's weapon: Charm
> Chief of defence urges support for Canadian soldiers
> 
> Command structure shakeup a priority, he says
> 
> 
> BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
> OTTAWA BUREAU
> 
> Hidden deep in a crowd of 5,000 rioters, the gunman likely thought he was anonymous and invisible. But Rick Hillier was watching.
> 
> It was May, 2001, and Hillier, the Canadian in charge of 2,000 coalition troops in the Bosnian town of Banja Luka, nervously watched as the rioters closed in on diplomats and ambassadors who had taken refuge in a house.
> 
> The sharp-eyed cameras of a U.S. Aurora patrol aircraft flying 23,000 feet overhead had spotted the gunman, with a rifle slung over his shoulder, and relayed the video feed to Hillier's vehicle on the front line below.
> 
> "Now clearly he's there with a weapon ... he's there to do some business with it," Hillier recalled yesterday. "Our challenge was to talk our sniper detachments which were around the city `on to' that individual," he told a Toronto audience.
> 
> The sniper, he said, was "effectively neutralized."
> 
> "Here's a little clue. If you go out into a riot and if you're intent on doing something seriously wrong there, do not wear a bright red shirt," Hillier said.
> 
> Hillier, now Canada's top general, used the story as one example of the different conflicts that now confront Canadian troops on missions abroad.
> 
> In this case, Hillier said the lesson was the need for Canada to improve its own surveillance capabilities, including upgrading the country's fleet of Aurora patrol aircraft.
> 
> And it was just one "war" story the new chief of defence staff told yesterday in a luncheon speech to the Canadian Institute of International Affairs at the King Edward Hotel.
> 
> Hillier used charm and humour to urge support for "your men and women in uniform" as he launched on a sales pitch to build backing for the military.
> 
> Canada's armed forces are at a "turning point," he said, thanks to a defence minister, Bill Graham, who has an international perspective, top officers who have more operational experience than anytime in recent memory, and a recent budget that promised more than $12 billion in new spending over five years.
> 
> With the long-awaited defence and international policy reviews expected within weeks, Hillier wasn't spilling secrets yesterday to the crowd of academics, journalists and former politicians.
> 
> But he dropped some hints. He said the threat facing Canada has changed "from the Bear" to a "ball of snakes" â â€ terrorists and organized crime â â€ and suggested that the country's military has been slow to react.
> 
> "We've got to be relevant to those threats that are real around the world," Hillier said.
> 
> He related how a former Afghan finance minister told an Ottawa conference recently that the Canadian troops serving in his country were a "powerful nation-building tool."
> 
> "I thought you'd like to know that since they are your soldiers and since we are demanding a lot of money from you to make ... sure those soldiers and sailors and air men and women are well-equipped to do their job," Hillier said.
> 
> "I think it's a reflection of the broad abilities that the Canadian Forces and the men and women who wear the uniform bring to the operations internationally," he said.
> 
> That tale also provides a telling glimpse of the role expected to be laid out for Canada's fighting forces in the policy reviews.
> 
> But Hillier made it clear yesterday that the priority for the military will be here at home, starting with a shakeup of its command structure that for the first time will treat the country as an "operational theatre."
> 
> Defence officials have previously said that includes more sovereignty patrols of the Arctic and closer co-operation with the United States on maritime surveillance.
> 
> With the new money in the budget, Hillier said his priorities are moving ahead with recruiting 8,000 new troops, mostly for the army, and fixing up shortcomings in the forces, such as a shortage of spare parts for vehicles and aircraft and even boosting the stockpile of ammunition.
> 
> He reiterated the need for "lift" to be able to move troops and equipment around the globe by sea and air.
> 
> But he sidestepped the debate over whether there should be expensive long-range transport planes, saying he doesn't care whether the government leases, rents or buys the aircraft, as long as it's available.
> 
> Hillier said he has experienced no fallout from the United States over Canada's decision to opt out of further participation in the missile defence program.
> 
> But he said that Canada has to say "no" on these issues from a position of strength.
> 
> "Developing our own forces and focusing them on Canada first, defending Canadians and making sure we can handle any event that occurs at home here is fundamental to a strong relationship on the continent."


----------



## PPCLI Guy

And some more on the MND:



> More military money helps overcome `demotion'
> Bill Graham says he loved being foreign affairs minister
> 
> But now he's relishing his role in crucial defence portfolio
> 
> 
> BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
> OTTAWA BUREAU
> 
> OTTAWAâ â€At the time, it was called a slap in the face, a demotion.
> 
> Despite a strong showing as minister of foreign affairs, Bill Graham found himself bumped last summer from the globe-spanning world of diplomacy to defence, a department with big ambitions but hobbled by chronic underfunding.
> 
> "I certainly didn't seek to leave foreign affairs. I loved being minister of foreign affairs," Graham says.
> 
> But he adds that he was consoled by Prime Minister Paul Martin's pledge of more cash for the armed forces.
> 
> "He did say it to me ... that the fundamental thing that we're going to have to do here is reinvest in the military. That is a huge and important task. It is the primary tool of our foreign policy," he says.
> 
> "He wanted me to be the defence minister to help achieve that. Perhaps that softened the blow somewhat."
> 
> Within days of taking the helm, Graham announced action on an issue that had become an embarrassment: a replacement for the aging Sea King helicopters. The groundwork had been long laid for the announcement but in light of what was to come, the move was symbolic. After years of budget cuts and political inattention, new days were coming for the armed forces.
> 
> Eight months later, Graham's "demotion" is looking pretty good.
> 
> With a new top general promising big changes, a budget that promised big bucks and a pending defence review that will lay out higher-profile roles for the military at home and abroad, Graham is riding what some are calling the renaissance of the armed forces.
> 
> Along the way, he's had to stickhandle the day-to-day challenges that go with defence.
> 
> The fatal fire onboard the submarine HMCS Chicoutimi in October renewed questions about military underfunding.
> 
> Over the holidays, Graham was Ottawa's front man during the tsunami crisis, covering for cabinet colleagues away on vacation. Ironically, one of them, Pierre Pettigrew, who replaced Graham in the foreign affairs portfolio, has been left in the shadow of a globe-trotting Prime Minister who sees himself as Canada's representative on the world stage.
> 
> Even Graham, the 66-year-old MP for Toronto Centre, seems a little surprised at how the new job has turned out.
> 
> "Whatever disappointment I might have had back then has been totally overshadowed by the experience I've had by being defence minister. It's a remarkably interesting job," he says in an interview in his Parliament Hill office.
> 
> "Getting the new money in the budget helped because I think we're on the cusp of doing something really important with the military."
> 
> In Graham, the defence department got a minister well-schooled in global issues â â€ a former professor of international law, former chair of the Commons' foreign affairs committee and minister of foreign affairs for 2 1/2 years.
> 
> Ottawa sources say that's exactly the perspective that Martin, who envisages the military as the cornerstone of an activist foreign agenda, wanted to bring to defence when he shuffled his cabinet.
> 
> Knowing that the long-awaited international policy review would include a significant defence component, "we wanted that matched with political leadership that was equally adept and equally knowledgeable," one senior government source says.
> 
> "The logic behind the change was not that we didn't need him in foreign affairs but that we most certainly needed him in defence."
> 
> But just as important for the department, Graham was well-versed in the politics of Parliament Hill â â€ and the art of arm-twisting for money.
> 
> Graham says it was no accident that the Feb. 23 budget contained the biggest funding hike for defence in 20 years â â€ $12.8 billion in new spending over five years, although critics complain that just $500 million of that money will be spent this year.
> 
> The defence minister says the new cash was a result of a concerted campaign that began in November to reach decision-makers in the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council and finance department, a strategy that included "who we're going to have dinner with, who we're going to talk to.
> 
> "We made sure we got all those players and we worked with them to make our case. You've got to do that. You don't get it by just sitting there and saying you're worthy," Graham says.
> 
> Step one was getting the money. Step two, he says, is transforming the defence department, starting with the defence review expected within the coming weeks. Graham, unhappy with the tepid vision of the initial drafts, ordered it rewritten.
> 
> The revised review is now complete but Graham refuses to talk specifics. But he says the new vision will spell out a greater role for the military at home, especially to exercise Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, and new roles for the air force, navy and reserves. One key priority will be closer co-operation with the United States to keep tabs on the hundreds of ships plying the waters off both coasts.
> 
> "It is clear that since 9/11, we are going to have to put a greater focus on Canada and North America," he says. "Our armed forces in Canada today are here to protect Canada."
> 
> On the international stage, the focus is preparing the military for the so-called "three-block war" â â€ fighting a battle in one part of a city, performing peacekeeping operations in another neighbourhood and providing humanitarian assistance in yet another.
> 
> "The object in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti has been to defeat whomever is there to destroy stability ... but it's not defeating an enemy in a traditional sense. And you have to do it a way that creates civil society," Graham says.
> 
> And Canadian troops in Afghanistan, he says, have proven themselves as an effective way to deliver development aid.
> 
> "There are those who would say that's not the warrior ethic. But I think that's exactly what the modern world needs. That's what these operations require and Canadians are damned good at these."
> 
> To lead the transformation, Graham set his sights on a plain-spoken army general, Rick Hillier, to take over as chief of the defence staff.
> 
> Martin reportedly had another candidate in mind for the top military job. But one Saturday before Christmas, Graham took Hillier to 24 Sussex Dr. so Martin could hear the general's ideas for reshaping Canada's fighting forces.
> 
> "He was able to explain to the Prime Minister what he wanted to do, how he would transform the forces," Graham says.
> 
> The sales pitch worked â â€ Hillier got the job and has quietly begun to lay the groundwork for the changes to come.
> 
> "If the forces are to be changed, it must be done by the forces themselves. A defence minister can't wander in and say `I've got a nice theory about how to run your shop,'" Graham says.
> 
> "The navy, the air force and the army are all really different cultures and Gen. Hillier is talking about them working together in ways they haven't done before."
> 
> Hillier is quick to return the praise and jokingly refers to Graham as a "PGM" â â€ a precision-guided minister.
> 
> "When you're on the receiving end of that precision-guided minister, there is an effect that does take place," Hillier told an Ottawa audience recently.
> 
> "We have a minister that is involved, that is energetic, that is focused and that understands, and is trying to move the Canadian Forces and the Department of Defence to be more effective, to be exactly what Canada will need in the future," Hillier said.
> 
> But Graham, who had won his department billions of dollars, wasn't so lucky at convincing his cabinet colleagues to sign on to the controversial U.S.-led missile defence scheme, despite his arguments that Canada should join to avoid upsetting relations with Washington.
> 
> He took that decision in stride.
> 
> "I lost the war. What the heck, you can't win them all," he said at the recent Liberal party convention.
> 
> Graham denies that the extra military funding in the budget was meant to take the sting out of the missile defence decision that followed the next day.
> 
> "The work to get this money in this budget was done and was already on its way down the pipe before any decision had been made about ballistic missile defence," Graham says.
> 
> "While I don't think it's linked to (missile defence), I do think reinvesting in the forces is intimately linked to having a more credible posture with the United States."
> 
> Graham's performance hasn't won over all his critics.
> 
> "Still no fan," military historian Jack Granatstein says bluntly. He says the forces have made little progress in tackling systemic problems.
> 
> "What I look at is the inability to deploy anyone on short notice for tsunami relief, the fact we are ... less relevant in the world today than we were when he took over as defence minister," Granatstein says.
> 
> And he says Canadians should be "more than a bit wary" about the extra cash pledged to fund the revamp of the forces.
> 
> "I suppose I should be grateful for the budget but I'm not. Barely 10 per cent of the money will be delivered over the next two years. Does anybody really believe that a commitment for 2010 is going to stay intact?
> 
> "This is, to my mind, the continuation of the ruination of the armed forces," he says, adding that if the Liberals were serious about their commitment to the forces, "they would have put more money in now."
> 
> With files from Graham Fraser


----------



## Infanteer

Only in Canada is defence and effective responsibility for the state's military considered "a demotion".  Other places, it gets you into the highest councils of the Nation (ie: the National Security Council).

Ba-aa-aa-aa.....


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Only in Canada is defence and effective responsibility for the state's military considered "a demotion".   Other places, it gets you into the highest councils of the Nation (ie: the National Security Council).



Where you sit next to the Sec State, right?


----------



## Infanteer

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Where you sit next to the Sec State, right?



Who do you think got a bigger chair, Colin Powell or Donald Rumsfeld?   

In a country with it priorities in the right order, both "State" and "Military" departments are recognized as strong and important Cabinet positions addressing the requirements of a solid Foreign and Defence Policy.   In Canada we've been sloughing it off onto a bunch of wieners for quite some time now - this is where I gathered the idea of "demotion" came from.


----------



## Zipper

> But he dropped some hints. He said the threat facing Canada has changed "from the Bear" to a "ball of snakes" â â€ terrorists and organized crime â â€ and suggested that the country's military has been slow to react.
> 
> "We've got to be relevant to those threats that are real around the world," Hillier said.
> 
> He related how a former Afghan finance minister told an Ottawa conference recently that the Canadian troops serving in his country were a "powerful nation-building tool."



Since when is a military a "nation building" tool?



> Defence officials have previously said that includes more sovereignty patrols of the Arctic and closer co-operation with the United States on maritime surveillance.



Sounds good. But what of the Coast Guard? New Ice breakers, etc?



> The revised review is now complete but Graham refuses to talk specifics. But he says the new vision will spell out a greater role for the military at home, especially to exercise Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, and new roles for the air force, navy and reserves. One key priority will be closer co-operation with the United States to keep tabs on the hundreds of ships plying the waters off both coasts.
> 
> "It is clear that since 9/11, we are going to have to put a greater focus on Canada and North America," he says. "Our armed forces in Canada today are here to protect Canada."



Isn't all of these things the jobs of the Coast Guard, Police, and Intelligence agencies? As per the threat addressed in the first quote. Terrorist and organized crime fall under those agencies more so then the military.



> On the international stage, the focus is preparing the military for the so-called "three-block war" â â€ fighting a battle in one part of a city, performing peacekeeping operations in another neighbourhood and providing humanitarian assistance in yet another.
> 
> "The object in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti has been to defeat whomever is there to destroy stability ... but it's not defeating an enemy in a traditional sense. And you have to do it a way that creates civil society," Graham says.
> 
> And Canadian troops in Afghanistan, he says, have proven themselves as an effective way to deliver development aid.
> 
> "There are those who would say that's not the warrior ethic. But I think that's exactly what the modern world needs. That's what these operations require and Canadians are damned good at these."



So we're not to defeat an "enemy" in the traditional sense? Does this mean in their minds, there will never be another war? Just small police actions?

I guess it sums up to say...                        ...Welcome to the CAF. The worlds first constabulary.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is the _Globe and Mail’s_ Lawrence Martin again, reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060810.wxcomartin10/BNStory/specialComment/home 


> The perilous charms of Rick Hillier
> 
> LAWRENCE MARTIN
> 
> From Thursday's Globe and Mail
> 
> Unstoppable. Immensely persuasive. Steeped in Newfoundland charm. Magnetic leader. More impressive than any politician in Ottawa.
> 
> Ask about a soldier named Rick Hillier and the superlatives never cease. General Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff and author of our role in Afghanistan, has the facts at the ready -- and can make them dance. He is too good to be true. And, maybe, too good for our own good.
> 
> Gen. Hillier has owned Ottawa since taking over as Canada's top soldier 18 months ago. Everything falls in his wake, including half a century of more moderate military tradition. Paul Martin couldn't resist his convictions, and neither could Stephen Harper and the editorial boards of newspapers across the country.
> 
> Eugene Lang, the chief of staff to Liberal defence ministers John McCallum and Bill Graham, watched as Gen. Hillier bent the nation's capital to his will. "He's remarkable," said Mr. Lang. "The problem is, there isn't anyone who can take him on with a counter world view. He blows them away."
> 
> "Kind of like of Robert McNamara, you mean?"
> 
> Pause.
> 
> "Well, maybe."
> 
> Mr. McNamara, the secretary of defence under John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson and the principal architect of the Vietnam War, had a similar kind of silver-tongued magnetism. Commandingly articulate, he cast a spell. Regrettably, Mr. Kennedy and, to a greater degree, Mr. Johnson fell under it.
> 
> Paul Martin may be having second thoughts about coming under Mr. Hillier's sway. The last time I talked to him, the former prime minister recalled how he had received assurances from Gen. Hillier that our Afghan role would be limited enough so as to leave sufficient military resources for a peacekeeping mission in Darfur, or Haiti or the Middle East. "That was what we agreed on," Mr. Martin emphatically noted. So much for the agreement. The Department of National Defence now says there isn't the capability.
> 
> Another commitment was made in 2005: The combat part of the Afghan mission was to last only a year. Gen. Hillier was okay with that Liberal cabinet decision. But this pledge, too, would be discarded. The good general became gung-ho about making the mission a long-term one. Mr. Harper got quickly on board and rushed a motion through Parliament for an extension.
> 
> Gen. Hillier hasn't been pressed to explain the changes in his position. The casualties mount, meanwhile, and the Taliban gain strength. And Canadians start turning against this mini-war.
> 
> Appearing undaunted, he invokes the great wartime cliché: "We must support our troops." But who doesn't support our troops? It's a given that we back them. It's also true that a noble form of support might be in brandishing truths that will lead to their returning home -- alive.
> 
> Some of our soldiers might appreciate that kind of support. In the face of the daily horrors of Iraq, many Americans are now displaying that kind of support. They wished they had done so earlier.
> 
> It is not to say we should pack up and leave Afghanistan. Our democratically elected Parliament has made a commitment. The mission's goals are admirable. It is not to say that any mini-Vietnam is in the making or that Gen. Hillier will be blinded to the realities on the ground like a Robert McNamara -- or like the Bush administration in Iraq.
> 
> Canadians would do well, however, to hear from Gen. Hillier and Mr. Harper and those analysts who supported the Iraq war. What lessons might they have learned? Undeterred, unembarrassed, they continue to avidly support the war option in other places.
> 
> Like the more than 100,000 soldiers in Iraq, Canadian troops in Afghanistan are fighting a terror insurgency. The seeming futility of the U.S. effort raises questions as to whether traditional methods of warfare work when the nature of the enemy, no longer a nation-state, has changed so much.
> 
> A lesson of the quagmire of the 1960s and of Iraq is to beware the word of the military. Be skeptical of the black and white pictures they draw. As Gen. Hillier continues to cast his spell, we should hope that he and his political overseers have taken note.
> 
> We're on the treadmill now. When the military starts to gain control of the terms of the debate, when the clichés of war start pounding the psyche, an inevitability sets in.
> 
> lawrencemartin9@yahoo.ca



Martin is wrong.

He is not wrong about Robert McNamara.  He and Paul Martin may not be wrong about what General Hillier did or did not _promise_ under one specific set of circumstances – although Paul Martin strikes me, as a result of this tale, as being a terribly naive ditherer.

What he is wrong about is: _*” Canadians would do well, however, to hear from Gen. Hillier …”*_  Rubbish!  Arrant nonsense!  Crap, from a so-called _political_ specialist.  Our admirals and generals are supposed to be _apolitical_ – that is one of the foundation stones of a modern, liberal, Westminster style democracy; General Hillier (like all admirals and generals) needs to be silent.  He needs to give his best military advice to the government of the day – in private.  He may talk, off the record, to his sailors, soldiers and aviators.  He may not defend himself when attacked from the cheap seats – the ones occupied by stupid journalists.

This is worse that rubbish, it is propaganda: _*” We're on the treadmill now. When the military starts to gain control of the terms of the debate, when the clichés of war start pounding the psyche, an inevitability sets in.”*_

I don’t know what Martin’s agenda is but I do know it stinks – to high heaven.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

> We're on the treadmill now. When the military starts to gain control of the terms of the debate, when the clichés of war start pounding the psyche, an inevitability sets in.



Is Martin trying to imply we are on some sort of road to a military coup in Canada?

As I see it, the Canadian Forces and the Dept of National Defence have been so limp in the advice that they have given to Government over the past 30 years that many politicos and fellow travellers are not used to advice with an edge.  Which is what they are getting.  And by the way Lawrence Martin, it is only advice.  The Government of the day makes the final decisions on what we, the military do, or don't do.  

Don't blame us for laying out how uncomfortably threadbare the equipment and manpower situation has become- which directly affects how many operations we can carry out at the same time.  The Liberals (by virtue of time in Government over the last 30 years) bear much of that responsibility.

Don't blame us for briefing the Government on just how bad the world situation has become...and how few independent options we have.  Lying to your political masters never works over the long haul.

Of course, IVMHO.


----------



## probum non poenitet

Comparing General Hillier to Robert MacNamara is a bit desparate.

Hmmmm. A charismatic individual who weilded great influence in times of conflict - they must be cut of the same cloth.

You mean General Hillier is this generation's Mahatma Gandhi!!!???


----------



## 2 Cdo

The last time I checked it was the government, not the military, who decided where to send us, for how long, for what mission/ROE's, when to bring us home and provided the people of canada with the "Why we are there" speech. If Paul Martin actually believes that Gen Hillier stepped over his boundaries as CDS then would he not have relieved him of command? If, and it's a big if, Gen Hillier did overstep then thank God that Martin is no longer PM as it would only prove that the man had zero backbone!

Lawerence Martin, isn't he that brutal American comedian?  ??? ;D And why is he writing about Canadian politics? ;D


----------



## Weinie

Martin is indulging himself in the cheapest of journalistic ploys; attempting to provoke a response. (as opposed to generating a debate). He is not the first journalist to attempt this type of smear campaign, and he will find some backers in both the lib left socialist camp and within government (including DND) itself. Expect more of this, as the whisper campaigns, which are all about getting federal dollars into the right hands, (generally the whisperer) ebb and flow. 
   Fortunately, the good general, though cognizant of what is said, stays above this, and worries about the state of the CF and its future. Mr. Martin could only wish for such focus, and such acclaim for doing his job.


----------



## rmacqueen

> "Kind of like of Robert McNamara, you mean?"



In journalistic terms, that is known as a leading question.  Lawrence Martin has his own agenda and by asking that question he is able to bring up the spectre of Vietnam and tie it to Afghanistan.  It is a blatant attempt at manipulating the public and yet another sign of the pathetic state of our media.  I am starting to think the National Enquirer is more balanced and truthful than the main stream media


----------



## civmick

McNamara was a pol.  Did he mean MacArthur?  :


----------



## OnTrack

"General Hillier (like all admirals and generals) needs to be silent.  He needs to give his best military advice to the government of the day – in private.  He may talk, off the record, to his sailors, soldiers and aviators.  He may not defend himself when attacked from the cheap seats – the ones occupied by stupid journalists."

Fact of the matter is that General Hillier has not been at all silent.  While he may give advice to the government in private he has been exceptionally public, talking and dispensing advice, on the record.  As such, I'm surprised that it has taken this long for such an article to appear.


----------



## rmacqueen

OnTrack said:
			
		

> As such, I'm surprised that it has taken this long for such an article to appear.



General Hillier is quite popular with a large portion of the public so it may have just taken awhile for someone to find the "hook" to be able to write disparaging things about him...and this is the best they can do.


----------



## paracowboy

I have never considered Martin to be even a muck-raking journalist (whom I think we all know I despise on principle), but rather that more detestable creature: a polemicist. I believe anything he has written even less than I do Anne Coulter or Michael Moore. At least Coulter can be reasonably attractive after a couple beers, and Moore is a skilled story-teller.


----------



## 2 Cdo

OnTrack said:
			
		

> General Hillier (like all admirals and generals) needs to be silent.  He needs to give his best military advice to the government of the day – in private.  He may talk, off the record, to his sailors, soldiers and aviators.  He may not defend himself when attacked from the cheap seats – the ones occupied by stupid journalists.
> 
> Fact of the matter is that General Hillier has not been at all silent.  While he may give advice to the government in private he has been exceptionally public, talking and dispensing advice, on the record.  As such, I'm surprised that it has taken this long for such an article to appear.



Yes by all means the highest ranking man in the CF shouldn't answer any questions given to him by the press. : As an ex-officer I expected a little more support from his own kind but I already gather you aren't a big fan.


----------



## North Star

I too was weirded out by Mr. Martin's comparison (or rather biased leading question) of McNamara to Gen Hillier. If memory serves, McNamara was a politician and as such was responsible to make poltical judgments about what to do with the military, solicit options from military officers, and then pick and choose what was to be done. Last I heard, Gen Hillier wasn't MND, nor did he decide to commit Canada to any combat missions. He runs them, but never had the political luxury of choice...

Certainly, Gen Hillier needs to be apolitical. But that does not mean that he relinquishes his responsibility as a professional to explain publicly the consequences of political decisions. For example, if tomorrow the government were to cut the defence budget by 50% (the dream of the Polaris Institute), Gen Hillier is well within his right to stand up in public and explain that this means Canada will have to cut overseas commitments (including precious peacekeeping), close bases, etc. Yes, this has political reprecussions, but that's for the government to explain. I certainly hope that if Canada decides to shamefully withdraw from Kandahar, that he explains the humanitarian disaster the Taliban and HIG will impose upon the civilian populace.

Canadian journalists and members of the public have become so used to CDSs without balls that even Gen Hillier's apolitical/professional comments on doctrine and tactics (including emphasis on Defence before the ther Ds) frighten them. Mr. Martin falls within this group. Perhaps he should visit the UK, where serving officers are more blunt with the public on the consequences of restructure and funding changes. Then again, perhaps not - a military coup and general militarization of British society is just around the corner!


----------



## OnTrack

2 Cdo said:
			
		

> As an ex-officer I expected a little more support from his own kind but I already gather you aren't a big fan.



In fact, I am a huge fan and wish that we had Chiefs with the gusto, cajones and personality that he has when I was in.  My post was only to infer that when you become as public a figure at the General is you have to expect these rubbish type of articles.


----------



## 2 Cdo

And my point is by addressing them, and not ignoring them, he can help educate the Canadian public. Ignoring, or being silent, is never right when dealing with obvious disinformation and lies.


----------



## sleeman

A little off topic, but since the article mentioned Robert McNamara it has some relevance.

Maybe Mr. Martin should watch the following documentary.  I recommend it to anyone with interest in military matters.
The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara

It's a great documentary, mostly an interview with Mr. McNamara and footage of the events he is talking about.  

Watching this gives great insight as to how the US got involved and escalated it's involvement in the Vietnam war.  
If I got the facts right, Mr. McNamara wanted out before it even got started.  Had Kennedy not been assassinated, the Vietnam war might not have ever happened.  Very interesting.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Lawrence Martin writes that Robert McNamara "...had a similar kind of silver-tongued magnetism. Commandingly articulate, he cast a spell."  That shows that Mr Martin has not a clue.  McNamara was a  studious technocrat with a brilliant mind but was not known for either a silver-tongue or charisma when SecDef.

He was known as a "whiz kid" who helped turn Ford around after WW II and ended up as president of the company before he was appointed SecDef.  He never was a politician.
http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/secdef_histories/bios/mcnamara.htm
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go1459/is_200306/ai_n8989162

Comparing Gen. Hillier with McNamara is as silly as David ********'s writing that "critics" compare the General with Douglas MacArthur.  Though the latter makes slightly more sense.
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/05/hillier-youth.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## probum non poenitet

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> That shows that Mr Martin has not a clue.  McNamara was a  studious technocrat with a brilliant mind but was not known for either a silver-tongue or charisma when SecDef.



Further to that, McNamara was one of the godfathers, if not THE godfather of "run the Army like a business and you will succeed."

Gen Hillier made huge waves by stating the obvious (to me anyway) "we are not just another department of the civil service ... we kill people" (forgive the paraphrase)

McNamara was huge on numbers on statistical returns, pie charts, and thank the stars he retired before Power Point was invented.
Gen Hillier is popular because he doesn't have time for over-bureaucratization. "Give me one lever to pull, and one throat to choke." Classic stuff.

What's Martin's next column, comparing Stephen Harper to Rick James?


----------



## Weinie

I too saw the Fog of War, and only wished that McNamara had agreed to do something like that earlier in his life. It certainly would have been interesting to have that kind of commentary in the public debate at the time.


----------



## PPCLI Guy

North Star said:
			
		

> If memory serves, McNamara was a politician and as such was responsible to make poltical judgments about what to do with the military, solicit options from military officers, and then pick and choose what was to be done. Last I heard, Gen Hillier wasn't MND, nor did he decide to commit Canada to any combat missions. He runs them, but never had the political luxury of choice...



Not to split hairs, but McNamara was a political appointee to an essentially bureaucratic position:

According to: http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/secdef_histories/bios/mcnamara.htm



> McNamara was born on 9 June 1916 in San Francisco, where his father was sales manager of a wholesale shoe firm. He graduated in 1937 from the University of California (Berkeley) with a degree in economics and philosophy, earned a master's degree from the Harvard Graduate School of Business Admin-istration in 1939, worked a year for the accounting firm of Price, Waterhouse in San Francisco, and then in August 1940 returned to Harvard to teach in the business school. He entered the Army Air Forces as a captain in early 1943 and left active duty three years later with the rank of lieutenant colonel.
> 
> In 1946 McNamara joined Ford Motor Company as manager of planning and financial analysis. He advanced rapidly through a series of top-level management positions to the presidency of Ford on 9 November 1960one day after Kennedy's election. The first company head selected outside the Ford family, McNamara received substantial credit for Ford's expansion and success in the postwar period. Less than five weeks after becoming president at Ford, he accepted Kennedy's invitation to join his cabinet.


----------



## Brad Sallows

Eugene Lang, the chief of staff to Liberal defence ministers John McCallum and Bill Graham, watched as Gen. Hillier bent the nation's capital to his will. "He's remarkable," said Mr. Lang. "The problem is, there isn't anyone who can take him on with a counter world view. He blows them away."

"Kind of like of Robert McNamara, you mean?"

Pause.

"Well, maybe."

Mr. McNamara, the secretary of defence under John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson and the principal architect of the Vietnam War, had a similar kind of silver-tongued magnetism. Commandingly articulate, he cast a spell. Regrettably, Mr. Kennedy and, to a greater degree, Mr. Johnson fell under it.

The only point Martin has tried to make (and bolstered only with Lang's opinion) with respect to comparing Hillier to McNamara is that they are both persuasive.  Big deal.  Many people are persuasive.  Martin has a lot more work ahead if he wants to expand the comparison to other facets.  Since Martin isn't here to explain whether he intended a reader to draw any unwarranted conclusions about Hillier and McNamara, I'll assume he wasn't trying to lead a sloppy reader to infer anything else.  Martin has even more work ahead if he wants to challenge Hillier's ideas by discussing the merits of the ideas rather than the character of the man, the latter being irrelevant to the merits of the ideas.


----------



## rmacqueen

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> The only point Martin has tried to make (and bolstered only with Lang's opinion) with respect to comparing Hillier to McNamara is that they are both persuasive.  Big deal.



And, at the same time, made a connection between Hillier and Vietnam, a fear than many Canadians have


----------



## paracowboy

there are comparisons to be made: the South Vietnamese gov't was corrupt, many of the South Vietnamese soldiers were incompetent, and the media at home was doing everything possible to turn the public against a Rightful fight versus a despicable foe.


----------



## McG

Globe and Mail's Lawrence Martin said:
			
		

> Paul Martin may be having second thoughts about coming under Mr. Hillier's sway. The last time I talked to him, the former prime minister recalled how he had received assurances from Gen. Hillier that our Afghan role would be limited enough so as to leave sufficient military resources for a peacekeeping mission in Darfur, or Haiti or the Middle East. "That was what we agreed on," Mr. Martin emphatically noted. So much for the agreement. The Department of National Defence now says there isn't the capability.



Well this is pure BS.  Under Paul Martin's government, the CF could do Afghanistan and one of those other (smaller) missions.  Then we had this thing called an election.  Steven Harper's government wanted to continue with Afghanistan and initiate a massive force expansion.  The new government's priority replaced the previous government's priority.


----------



## pbi

Martin doesn't like us much, does he?. This must be the third bit of his shabby mudslinging I have read . He appears to have a very deep-seated dislike (if "hatred" is too strong a word...) for us in the military. From what I have seen of his writings, he never hesitates to resort to exaggeration, sensationalism, false analogies and all the other tricks of poison journalism.

Like a number of Canadians of his apparent political bent, Martin is disturbed by seeing a decisive, outspoken, intelligent, well-informed and forceful character leading the CF. They doubtless prefer the forgettable quiet grey bureaucrats who were traditionally neither seen nor heard (while too often providing little real leadership to the CF). The CF (and especially the Army) are geting attention and prominence (and prehaps even respect...) in Canada to a level unheard of since WWII. At the same time, Hillier and other leaders (and even junior soldiers) are speaking up and speaking out in all kinds of fora, from media interviews to conferences to schools and universities, telling our story much better and more clearly than ever before. All of this makes it difficult for Martin, Staples and others to peddle their views unopposed.  Thus it is only natural that they do all they can to discredit him.

Cheers


----------



## big bad john

pbi said:
			
		

> Martin doesn't like us much, does he?. This must be the third bit of his shabby mudslinging I have read . He appears to have a very deep-seated dislike (if "hatred" is too strong a word...) for us in the military. From what I have seen of his writings, he never hesitates to resort to exaggeration, sensationalism, false analogies and all the other tricks of poison journalism.
> 
> Like a number of Canadians of his apparent political bent, Martin is disturbed by seeing a decisive, outspoken, intelligent, well-informed and forceful character leading the CF. They doubtless prefer the forgettable quiet grey bureaucrats who were traditionally neither seen nor heard (while too often providing little real leadership to the CF). The CF (and especially the Army) are getting attention and prominence (and perhaps even respect...) in Canada to a level unheard of since WWII. At the same time, Hillier and other leaders (and even junior soldiers) are speaking up and speaking out in all kinds of fora, from media interviews to conferences to schools and universities, telling our story much better and more clearly than ever before. All of this makes it difficult for Martin, Staples and others to peddle their views unopposed.  Thus it is only natural that they do all they can to discredit him.
> 
> Cheers



I take it to mean that he is a prat and shoots from the lip.


----------



## pbi

big bad john said:
			
		

> I take it to mean that he is a prat and shoots from the lip.



Yes...that's it.

Cheers


----------



## RangerRay

I have no time to read Lawrence Martin's drivel.  And not only because he's Jean Chretien's biographer!

One lazy Sunday last month, I was watching Question Period, and they had Lawrence Martin on, and the topic as Afghanistan.  Well, Martin got into this conspriracy theory tirade about how we are "taking part in George Bush's war for oil to make nice with the Americans" or some such rot.  It too Craig Oliver and Jane Taber a full three seconds to recover from their shock of hearing such a simple, sophomoric response, and continue the discussion on a different tangent.

Since his pal Cretch got booted out of office, Martin has lost it.


----------



## McG

> Israel considers asking Canada to help stem flow of arms to Hezbollah
> Kelly Patrick, CanWest News Service; National Post
> Published: Wednesday, August 16, 2006
> http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/index.html
> 
> ...
> 
> Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier, speaking to reporters following a speech in St. John's Tuesday, would not commit on whether Canada has the capability to contribute troops to peacekeeping efforts in southern Lebanon.
> 
> ''Whether we have the capability to contribute there would be entirely dependent on the kind of mission, the kind of mandate and the kind of job that a force would have to do,'' he said. ''Whether we should go there or not is entirely the prime minister's and the government of Canada's decision. I could offer military advice, but I would do that privately.''
> 
> ...


----------



## Haggis

Seems like the CDS is "staying in his lane".  Unlike Mr. Martin.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Gen (Ret’d) Paul Manson (Air Force – fighter pilot), who was CDS about 20 years ago, penned an interesting piece in today’s _Globe and Mail_ which is reproduced here in accordance with the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060825.wxcohillier25/BNStory/specialComment/home   


> He's our man
> *Rick Hillier tells it like it is, and that's what we want in our top soldier, says former chief of the defence staff PAUL MANSON*
> 
> PAUL MANSON
> 
> From Friday's Globe and Mail
> 
> In General Rick Hillier, Canada has a Chief of the Defence Staff whose unique style has garnered a lot of attention, while generating a degree of controversy. He has been criticized in particular for his outspokenness and directness. But Canadians should consider themselves fortunate to have our top military officer tell it like it is.
> 
> Not only has Gen. Hillier's straight shooting done wonders for the morale of the troops he commands, but it has allowed him to catch the attention of the government and the general public about the issues at stake in a way no previous chief, myself included, was able to. As a result, we are all the better for it.
> 
> Past chiefs of the defence staff, with few exceptions, have been low-profile generals or admirals with virtually no name recognition, in keeping with the long-standing tradition in this country that senior military persons not intrude on the domain of the politicians or enter the limelight unless absolutely necessary. Today, by contrast, scarcely a day goes by without a media story in which Gen. Hillier is not highlighted.
> 
> Times have changed, and the reasons are evident. The transition began with the end of the Cold War, and it accelerated with the sad Somalia episode in the early 1990s, the replacement of classical peacekeeping by near-war operations of the kind encountered in Bosnia and Kosovo, and now Canada's involvement in a real shooting war in Afghanistan, with its unaccustomed level of casualties and controversy.
> 
> In this changed environment, Gen. Hillier has been criticized from time to time for his frank language, using terms such as "scumbags" and "a bag of snakes" in describing Canada's Taliban enemies in Afghanistan. Due allowance is made, however, for the fact that he is a colourful Newfoundlander, given to refreshing directness in public pronouncements about the armed forces. Canadians seem to like it, and the media, always ready for a good story, play up the Hillier angle with glee.
> 
> But there are critics who believe that his outgoing style transcends the bounds of good governance and that his silver-tongued persuasiveness led -- or misled -- the Liberals into what might become an Iraq-type quagmire in Afghanistan. There have been rumours that he is at odds with Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor, or that the Harper government is uncomfortable about his past closeness to the Martin Liberals, who appointed him Chief of the Defence Staff in 2004.
> 
> These criticisms are largely a matter of opinion, there being no serious suggestion that Gen. Hillier has exceeded the legal authority of his office. What really matters, then, is whether he is providing the kind of leadership that Canada needs for its armed forces at this critical time in its history.
> 
> On balance, it appears that he is. From the moment he put the fourth Maple Leaf on his epaulettes, he took a top-down, activist approach. He made radical changes to the organizational structure of the Canadian Forces, eliminating some organizations and creating a range of new operational commands. He has advised the Harper government, with considerable success, on the need to re-equip the military and to streamline the dysfunctional procurement system. He has begun to increase the size of the armed forces through improvements to the recruiting system. And, just as important, he has done much to bring the military back into prominence after years of obscurity.
> 
> Historians will ultimately judge his performance on what happens in Afghanistan. As a former commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, he probably knows as much as any Canadian about the military situation in that country. There can be no doubt that this command experience in Afghanistan, together with a similar tour of duty as commander of a NATO multinational division in Bosnia six years ago, gives him a level of operational credibility rarely seen in the Canadian military since the Second World War.
> 
> To be sure, there is some uneasiness amongst the navy and air force communities about Gen. Hillier's intense emphasis on the army, and what is seen by some as a subjugation of the sea and air elements, with possible long-term detriment to the concept of balanced forces. In response, he would probably point to recent government announcements about plans to purchase major new equipment for the navy and air force. The real test will come when the new command structure matures and shows its worth, and when the new equipment finds its way into the hands of those in uniform.
> 
> But the best measure of Gen. Hillier's effectiveness is the extent to which he is revered by the rank and file of the Canadian Forces. He tells it like it is without bureaucratic embellishment. He talks to the troops at every opportunity, directly and without notes, and he does it exceedingly well. Despite the casualties, morale is higher than it has been in a long time, and it shows in the military's performance, not just on the ground in Afghanistan but in all environments. For this alone, he deserves full credit.
> 
> He is still relatively new in the job, and there will be tough times ahead. There will continue to be sniping by those who do not like or appreciate his style. To this point, however, Rick Hillier has shown Canadians that he is the right man to be Chief of the Defence Staff at a time when the demands of the position are very high, indeed. For this, Canadians can be thankful.
> 
> _Paul Manson, chief of the defence staff from 1986 to 1989, is president of the Ottawa-based Conference of Defence Associations Institute._



Those who follow my ramblings on Army.ca will know that I am old and old fashioned, too: I believe that, by and large, generals ought to be quiet.  I mentioned elsewhere in army.ca - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/40460/post-344006.html#msg344006 - that while 





> Traditionally and constitutionally public servants … are all expected to be loyal to and to work in pursuit of the policies and priorities of the elected government of the day.  Thus a manager … and a policy analyst … and a branch head … are all obliged to get behind the government’s priorities – even when that involves e.g. cuts to their own programmes, perhaps to their own jobs.  Equally traditionally it was understood that this applied only to the civil service; the armed services had, it was acknowledged, slightly different loyalties and responsibilities.  The late, lamented Mr. Berry is the exception which proves the rule: civil servants are not, in the normal course of events, expected to stand in harm’s way and lay down their lives for their country; sailors and soldiers are and their leaders, in the capitals of the world, were understood to have obligations to defend their fighting men and women against e.g. the budget cuts necessitated by political or bureaucratic mismanagement.
> 
> That all changed in the ‘60s and ‘70s when, led by Washington, there was more and more integration of civil and military staffs in defence ministries/HQs and increased influence exerted by senior military officers in the ongoing national policy (and budget) debates.  The military has been politicized, not just in Canada, either.  Senior officers, especially the most senior officers, like Gen. Hillier have a voice in the bureaucratic corridors of power: they should have.  It, politicization, brings rewards and risks.  The risk is that the bureaucratic centre might neither respect nor trust the defence staff.  That is, I believe the case in Canada; I believe it has been the case since, at least, the mid 1990s when I got a chance to observe it close up.



I have been especially critical of Gen (Ret’d) Maurice Baril who, *I believe* – actually I’m convinced, lied and denigrated his own soldiers when he decided to become totally political and support then Prime Minister Chrétien in his *lie* which he told to cover up the fact that he did not want to break a family holiday to attend the funeral of King Hussein of Jordan.  I believe Gen (Ret’d) Baril crossed an important, albeit invisible line and in so doing disgraced himself and dangerously weakened the trust which must exist between the _centre_ (especially the most senior bureaucrats in the Privy Council Office) and the defence staff.

I was also critical of Gen (Ret’d) Henault who, I suggested, was engaging in _cheerleading_ for the policies of the government-of-the-day.  That is also wrong.

I was sceptical about the _lock-step_ in which General Hillier and (then) Minster Graham appeared to be marching.  I believe General Hillier is well within his _lane_ when he calls the enemy – *and they are the enemy* – _scumbags_ and compares them to a _ball of snakes_.  I also believe it is right and proper for him to remind military personnel and, indeed, all of us that the Canadian Forces is not the public service: you kill people and put your lives at risk for the likes of me.  I am equally convinced that General Hillier must continue to stay away from saying what our _defence policy_ should be – unless, of course, he’s running for office.  It is his duty to _advise_ his minister (and his deputy) and the _centre_ on the resources he thinks he needs to implement the government’s policies, as he understand them.  There is a line there – it may not be straight and bright but it is clear enough.

I agree with Gen (Ret’d) Manson that General Hillier has not crossed the line.

I remain sceptical about admirals and generals at press conferences.  I understand that they are necessary, that we, too, have to win the propaganda part of 4GW.  I don’t have to like it.


----------



## rmacqueen

For too long the CF was riddled with careerism and morale suffered for it.  When a senior officer had the guts to speak out they were quickly shuffled out the door.  Finally, we have a leader who is more concerned with his men and his duty than kissing political butt.  That is what true leadership is.  Of course, I couldn't be prouder that he is also a zipperhead.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Edward Campbell:  Well said.  But in a country where the people have been almost unaware of the militay, and of senior military persons (unlike the UK and US), a bit of the "silver-tongued devil" is all to the good unless the line into government (as opposed to strictly military) policy is crossed.
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/04/silver-tongued-devil.html

As to press, tell it to the Marines.

United against not nice people,

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## josh

A rather scathing article at Macleans, but it certainly puts things in a historical perspective:  http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/canada/article.jsp?content=20060828_132392_132392

Anyone know any true poll numbers for public support currently for the Afghan mission???


----------



## rmacqueen

josh said:
			
		

> Anyone know any true poll numbers for public support currently for the Afghan mission???



Unfortunately, I have been unable to uncover the methodology used in the Strategic Counsel poll but they *all* have to be taken with a grain of salt as so often it is the question that is asked that determines the answer.


----------



## MarkOttawa

josh: I actually did not find it "scathing" (given the usual biases)  but remarkably well-researched compared to almost anything I've seen in our media.
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2006/03/afstan-update-about-four-months-late.html

Mark 
Ottawa


----------



## josh

Boy, if we start to believe blogs we're really in trouble. ;D


----------



## 2 Cdo

I have had the pleasure to have had one on one discusions with Gen Hillier on 2 separate occasions and find him a breathe of fresh air compared to the martinets before him who wouldn't give an NCO the time of day, let alone talk to him!

Very straight forward and honest, without the political double-speak that seems all too common within NDHQ. I realise for his detractors that they would much prefer a talking head who merely parrots what they want to hear and provide zero confidence in the troops, like several of our previous "leaders".


----------



## eliminator

So, General Hillier was born in 1955. If he retires after a 5 year term as CDS, he will still have a few years before mandatory retirement.... Will he be forced to retire, or could he just take another position, maybe something in Washington or NATO?

thanx


----------



## George Wallace

I doubt anyone here would have the honest answer.  You would be best to ask him what he 'foresees' in the future.  Retired Generals, like unemployed Politicians, usually have no problem finding a high profile job.  I am sure he has nothing to worry about.


----------



## TN2IC

*jokingly* I heard the local Wal Mart is hiring door greeters again.


But seriously I think he would have to take retirement as a CF member.


George is pretty will bang on with his statement. He can find some sort of employment.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

eliminator said:
			
		

> So, General Hillier was born in 1955. If he retires after a 5 year term as CDS, he will still have a few years before mandatory retirement.... Will he be forced to retire, or could he just take another position, maybe something in Washington or NATO?
> 
> thanx



I don't think CDS is a fixed term. Although the longest serving one appears to have been good old J Dex (Dextraxe 72-77). 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_of_the_Defence_Staff_%28Canada%29


----------



## Loachman

TN2IC said:
			
		

> But seriously I think he would have to take retirement as a CF member.


Why? The last one didn't.


----------



## TN2IC

True...you win.


----------



## Thompson_JM

I say keep him around for a bit longer, or prep leslie to take over after him......  No offence to the navy or airforce guys, but we need a couple Gung-Ho Types in charge for the next few years and shake out those cobwebs...

but thats just my opinion...


----------



## Haggis

TN2IC said:
			
		

> *jokingly* I heard the local Wal Mart is hiring door greeters again.



I doubt he'd be a greeter.  Maybe more like housewares, working alongside Ash from "Army of Darkness".


----------



## Jaydub

Cpl Thompson said:
			
		

> I say keep him around for a bit longer, or prep leslie to take over after him......  No offence to the navy or airforce guys, but we need a couple Gung-Ho Types in charge for the next few years and shake out those cobwebs...
> 
> but thats just my opinion...



As a Navy guy, I agree with you.  General Hillier tells it like it is, and speaks for the Military.

I think the next best choice would be RAdm Girouard, the JTF(P) commander, once he gets a couple more leafs.  The new command structure puts all the Sea, Land, and Air assets, in the Pacific, under his command.

I see him every week at my current posting.  He really is an outstanding flag officer.


----------



## 043

Cpl Thompson said:
			
		

> I say keep him around for a bit longer, or *prep leslie to take over after him*......  No offence to the navy or airforce guys, but we need a couple Gung-Ho Types in charge for the next few years and shake out those cobwebs...
> 
> but thats just my opinion...



Leslie would probably be a good choice as soon he stops making political statements at Memorial Services.


----------



## Haggis

Cpl Thompson said:
			
		

> I say keep him around for a bit longer, or prep leslie to take over after him......  No offence to the navy or airforce guys, but we need a couple Gung-Ho Types in charge for the next few years and shake out those cobwebs...
> 
> but thats just my opinion...



At this point in time the government has several able and gung ho choices for the new CDS from all three  elements.  The choice of CDS is that of the government, not the CF.  Although I agree with you, if the Liberals win the next election look for a much meeker CDS than Gen Hillier, which definitey takes LGen Leslie out of the running.

and that's my opinion.


----------



## Journeyman

2023 said:
			
		

> or prep Leslie to take over after him
> 
> 
> 
> Leslie would probably be a good choice as soon he stops making political statements at Memorial Services.
Click to expand...

No worries there, Leslie has been prepping and promoting himself for quite some time.


----------



## dapaterson

Back on topic, all General officers serve at pleasure (to my understanding) and can thus be retired rather easily.  They can also be retained if required; and there have been a variety of interesting administrative tricks used to keep some in service beyond retirement (anyone else recall the CIC CDS?)


----------



## a78jumper

They brought back deChastelain in the mid 90s after the Anderson and Boyle embaressments when he was 56 or 57 as I recall-the retirement age then was 55. Mind you Chretch had to offer him something after putting his nephew into the Ambassador job in DC.

"No worries there, Leslie has been prepping and promoting himself for quite some time."-Agreed. He was an operator at LFWA HQ in the early 90s.


----------



## Garry

If all the stars are aligned, Walt Natynchuck (SP?) is the next CDS.

Personally, I hope Hillier stays a loooong time....and I hope Walt takes his place.

And since Christmas is just around the corner (somebody had to say it) I wish that we bring back the Guards and the Watch,  and that we buy three Sqn's of M-1's per Regiment.

Merry Christmas!


----------



## Hopkins

I sure as hell hope not...He's the new life of the CF for all trades and has his life and his heart with the Arms of Canada...


----------



## geo

Haggis said:
			
		

> if the Liberals win the next election look for a much meeker CDS than Gen Hillier, which definitey takes LGen Leslie out of the running.
> and that's my opinion.


Why?
Teh current CDS was appointed during a Liberal term in office & was approved by the Liberals.  Gen Hillier & Bill Graham got along famously.


----------



## karl28

I think he should run for PM after his time in the military .  When was the last time we had a PM with actual military experience ? In the Dangerous state of the world today .  I think having some one  with Hiller's experience as PM would be beneficial to our Gov .


----------



## Edward Campbell

karl28 said:
			
		

> I think he should run for PM after his time in the military .  When was the last time we had a PM with actual military experience ? In the Dangerous state of the world today .  I think having some one  with Hiller's experience as PM would be beneficial to our Gov .



Lester B. Pearson served in World War I.  That's right: the last time a Canadian PM was on *active* military service was 90 years ago!

Trueau's service - a bit of COTC (reserve officer training) but he ran away and hid in Harvard when the shooting started.  He was a poltroon.
Clark - zip
Turner - zip
Mulroney - zip
Campbell - zip
Chretien - zip


----------



## karl28

Edward Campbell   thanks for the info . I knew it was a long time but didn't realise how long it had been . I think it's time for a change but that's just my two cents worth


----------



## boondocksaint

If we're talking wishlists, Lewis Mackenzie for PM, Don Cherry... foreign affairs


----------



## dapaterson

boondocksaint said:
			
		

> If we're talking wishlists, Lewis Mackenzie for PM, Don Cherry... foreign affairs



... and Mike Bobbit for Minister of National Defence...


----------



## cplcaldwell

Do I sense another poll coming here?

Now that we've named the tank let's name the cabinet!


----------



## tlg

a78jumper said:
			
		

> They brought back deChastelain in the mid 90s after the Anderson and Boyle embaressments when he was 56 or 57 as I recall-the retirement age then was 55. Mind you Chretch had to offer him something after putting his nephew into the Ambassador job in DC.
> 
> "No worries there, Leslie has been prepping and promoting himself for quite some time."-Agreed. He was an operator at LFWA HQ in the early 90s.



John de Chastelain came back from retirement AFTER Anderson AND before Boyle.

Just to clarify.


----------



## geo

tlg said:
			
		

> John de Chastelain came back from retirement AFTER Anderson AND before Boyle.
> Just to clarify.


Gen DeChastelaine transfered to the Cadets.


----------



## PViddy

This initial post caught my interest.  So Gen. DeChastelaine was recalled back to fill the post of CDS and they transfered him to the CIC to get him past the retirement age ? thanks for the info and clarification.

cheers,

PV


----------



## geo

That't the funny thing about CICs... there are really no medical (or weight) standards nor are there any age standards to tie up the paperwork.


----------



## dapaterson

CIC retire at 65 vice 60; at the time, the CDS was over 55 (then CRA).

Better still, by being a CIC officer he could double dip; draw his pension and work 330 days per year.  Regulations at the time precluded Primary Res folks with an annuity from doing that - they were limited to 180 days (or had to be re-enrolled in the pension plan, meaning your benefits grow, but you stop geting paid your annuity).

At the time, between his annuity, his pay, and his pension from his brief foray to the US as Canadian ambassador he was likely the highest paid person in the mploy of the government of Canada.


----------



## geo

Think he's still being paid for his service to the people of Northern Ireland


----------



## Neill McKay

geo said:
			
		

> That't the funny thing about CICs... there are really no medical (or weight) standards nor are there any age standards to tie up the paperwork.



That's not correct; however, the medical category required for CIC officers is similar to, if not identical to, that required for flag and general officers.  There is a CRA for CIC officers; last time I checked it was the same as for the Supp. Res.

All of that aside, though, I believe the notion that the good sir was enrolled as a CIC officer has been debunked either here or in another forum, but I'll be damned if I can find it now.  I could be mistaken.


----------



## vonGarvin

Haggis said:
			
		

> I doubt he'd be a greeter.  Maybe more like housewares, working alongside Ash from "Army of Darkness".


"If you're going to shop, shop smart: shop S-Mart!"
"I'm the bad Ash, you're the Good Ash" "Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun!"
"Groovy!"
"Let's dance, She-B*tch!"


----------



## Wookilar

We can all picture Hillier,

"This, is my BOOMSTICK."


----------



## Pikache

geo said:
			
		

> Why?
> Teh current CDS was appointed during a Liberal term in office & was approved by the Liberals.  Gen Hillier & Bill Graham got along famously.


That was the Martin Liberals.

If Bob Rae or even Ignatieff with all the weird comment he is making come to power, I doubt they want a... robust CDS.


----------



## Edward Campbell

As a general rule, dynamic organizations like the CF do not do well if the leadership, however good, is left in place too long.

Many of us would have dearly loved to have stayed in a command position for years and years.  I suspect General Hillier is thoroughly enjoying himself, as I think he did every time he commanded anything: troop, squadron, regiment, brigade, the army, and ISAF.  I also suspect that he knows that the CF will benefit from a change of command: new ideas and new methods will come with a new CDS, just as they did when he took over.

A generation ago some smart, forward looking officers identified some excellent people like Findley, Hillier, Natynczyk and Robertson and ‘streamed’ them through the system.  They are, I am sure, doing the same for some bright, aggressive commanders and colonels today.

General Hillier will, I hope, retire while he is still ‘at the top of his game’ and he will, I also hope, be replaced by a solid, skilled professional.


----------



## GUNS

There is the rub, will the next CDS be a political soldier or a soldier's soldier.


----------



## geo

Technicaly, the Navy has next kick at the cat...... followed by Air - unless someone jumps off or jumps the queue.......


----------



## Neill McKay

geo said:
			
		

> Technicaly, the Navy has next kick at the cat...... followed by Air - unless someone jumps off or jumps the queue.......



Anybody remember when we last had a naval CDS (and not just an acting one)?


----------



## geo

(might as well ask when we had our last good CDS)


----------



## a78jumper

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Anybody remember when we last had a naval CDS (and not just an acting one)?



Was it not JR Anderson?? He was CO of the Naval Officers' Training Centre in the early 1980s, and was called "JR" by his own instructor officers(in front of students) given the popularity of "Dallas" at the time and some personality quirks. As CDS he was out of his element and in over his head. It was not a pretty sight; my boss used to come back from the Daily Executive Meeting scratching his head at "JRisms".


----------



## Gunner

Anderson was CDS for a short time and "resigned" over the cancellation of the MHP.  VAdm Larry Murray was the A/CDS after Boyle was punted.  I didn't know him well but he was a fine gentleman the few times I dealt with him and he was well regarded by others I've spoken to.


----------



## Infanteer

geo said:
			
		

> Technicaly, the Navy has next kick at the cat...... followed by Air - unless someone jumps off or jumps the queue.......



Technically?  Is there any written rule over the way a CDS is selected?  Reading the NDA, I think not - we are at war and we do need dynamic leadership.  General Hillier's accession should demonstrate that we aren't about to follow some silly idea of apportionment in the unified CF.  I don't care if it's 5 Generals in a row or 5 Admirals - as long as we continue to recieve the quality of guys at the top that all our soldiers on the pointy-end deserve.


----------



## Gunner

A short list will be forwarded to cabinet to make a decision.  There is alot of talent out there right now (Leslie, Natynczyk, etc) that would carry on Gen Hillier's reforms as well as style.


----------



## a78jumper

Gunner said:
			
		

> VAdm Larry Murray was the A/CDS after Boyle was punted.  I didn't know him well but he was a fine gentleman the few times I dealt with him and he was well regarded by others I've spoken to.



Agree 100%. I am not quite sure why he was not promoted and left in the job, but guess it was the Army's turn.


----------



## Gunner

Murray was tainted by the Somalia inquiry and the government wanted to start afresh.  He retired and went to work with an aerospace firm (Boeing?) and worked alot less, less responsibility and made more money.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Just for info: VAdm Larry Murray, who, I agree, was an outstanding officer and leader and a great boss, is back for a second tour as Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada where, by the way, he also rates his own 'flag'.  He was, until a couple of years ago, DM of Veterans Affairs - a department which, I believe, he found quite frustrating to manage, lead, direct or whatever.

As a remembrance: the day he really _blotted his copybook_ by telling Judge Létourneau that he (Murray) would not be abused the way Létourneau and Desberats had abused many junior officers and NCOs who had previously appeared he returned, at end of day to the 13th floor of The Puzzle Palace.  The hallways were lined by CDS and VCDS staff officers, all applauding.  He merely smiled at us, told us to get on with our work and have a nice evening, but I think he was touched.

---------
Edit: added remembrance


----------



## Gunner

Thanks Edward, I guess it was Boyle who went to work for an aerospace firm...


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> Just for info: VAdm Larry Murray, who, I agree, was an outstanding officer and leader and a great boss, is back for a second tour as Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada where, by the way, he also rates his own 'flag'.  He was, until a couple of years ago, DM of Veterans Affairs - a department which, I believe, he found quite frustrating to manage, lead, direct or whatever.
> 
> As a remembrance: the day he really _blotted his copybook_ by telling Judge Létourneau that he (Murray) would not be abused the way Létourneau and Desberats had abused many junior officers and NCOs who had previously appeared he returned, at end of day to the 13th floor of The Puzzle Palace.  The hallways were lined by CDS and VCDS staff officers, all applauding.  He merely smiled at us, told us to get on with our work and have a nice evening, but I think he was touched.
> 
> ---------
> Edit: added remembrance



Indeed he is a fine gentleman. Until June of this year he was also the Honorary Colonel for the Chaplain Branch, so highly is he regarded for his ethical and moral standpoint. We loved him as our Colonel and he was also at Veteran's Affairs for a while before he went to Fisheries and Oceans. A great guy.


----------



## The Bread Guy

A little tid-bit, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act - http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33409

*Hillier just wants to run free*
Julie Smyth, National Post, 21 Oct 06

General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, has been spotted jogging through the busy streets of downtown Ottawa, seemingly without any security. His staff declined to comment on his security provisions (surely someone is keeping an eye on him?) and said he runs to keep in shape, as is necessary in the military. His choice of location -- we won't disclose the timing or route for obvious reasons -- is interesting as he has in no way tried to be secretive about his regular jogs.

"It is difficult to escape the public eye here," said Gen. Hillier's spokesman, Lieutenant-Commander Hubert Genest, adding Gen. Hillier "needs to be able to run freely, too." He has chosen downtown streets as it's "fun" and he likes to see "what the city has to offer," said his spokesman.

While his job is to inspire others, he is not running in public to make a statement. "He takes time in his very busy day to clear his mind," said Lt.-Cmdr Genest, and the running also helps reduce the effects of his cigar smoking.

Gen. Hillier's official biography on the Internet reads: "General Hillier enjoys most recreational pursuits but, in particular, runs slowly, plays hockey poorly and golfs not well at all." ....


----------



## Inspir

> seemingly without any security



I doubt that.


----------



## GO!!!

Good!

A general who takes PT seriously and "makes time" in his schedule to do it. 

A case fo leading by example. 

Now, I wonder whose PT kit he wears? Do they have the tri-force symbol on sweats for him?


----------



## gaspasser

"General Hillier enjoys most recreational pursuits but, in particular, runs slowly, plays hockey poorly and golfs not well at all." ....

I think this was written by him in true Newfoundlander style, it was meant as fun.  
He probably has a Newfie shirt or something inconspicuous.  I can just see the peaceniks now, "there's the CDS lets jump him"  And Ricky will either run harder or jump on them!!!! Maybe slide off and tell 'em a good newfie joke...
Gotta love this guy!


----------



## 3rd Horseman

Security?  The only CDS I ever saw with security was Baril.....and he needed it from his own troops.


----------



## gaspasser

+1
 ;D


----------



## Haggis

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Now, I wonder whose PT kit he wears? Do they have the tri-force symbol on sweats for him?



www.logistikunicorp.com


----------



## armyvern

Haggis said:
			
		

> www.logistikunicorp.com



Hmmm I seem to only have 240 points left...hubby must have ordered me something for Christmas... :


----------



## GAP

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Hmmm I seem to only have 240 points left...hubby must have ordered me something for Christmas... :



Why do I get the feeling that he had better have ordered something for you.....


----------



## armyvern

GAP said:
			
		

> Why do I get the feeling that he had better have ordered something for you.....


Well Gap, if he did order me something for Christmas...He'd better hope like heck that he didn't order it from Logistic!!


----------



## Haggis

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Hmmm I seem to only have 240 points left...hubby must have ordered me something for Christmas... :



Maybe CDS style Gucci PT kit?  Grey goes with everything.


----------



## gaspasser

Maybe he's run out of his own points and is using yours to get new shirts and stuff.  Can't see opening a xmas pressie and getting a brand new DEU shirt, or socks.  
 ;D


----------



## GO!!!

Haggis said:
			
		

> www.logistikunicorp.com



I see. So you say Gen. Hillier runs through the streets of ottawa in his St.Jean issue PT ensemble, complete with grey wool socks?

There is a single tear of joy running down a Sergeant Major's face right now, somewhere; "look at that troops, what a fine leader, nothing but issued kit!"

How come I can't order any of those fantastic mesh topped grey runners anymore? Vern?


----------



## armyvern

Gaspasser said:
			
		

> Maybe he's run out of his own points and is using yours to get new shirts and stuff.  Can't see opening a xmas pressie and getting a brand new DEU shirt, or socks.
> ;D


Now that I'd believe...but I hope he looks good in the girls shirt, skirt and pants!! Tell you all what...I'll post a pic if it happens!!!  >

I want something in a bag...a Robin's Egg Blue bag....


----------



## armyvern

GO!!! said:
			
		

> There is a single tear of joy running down a Sergeant Major's face right now, somewhere; "look at that troops, what a fine leader, nothing but issued kit!"


Bet you he's an RCR Sgt Maj.

About the running shoes GO!!! I dunno why you can't get them anymore...you want perhaps I speak to them for you??  

I have been outted!!

Vern


----------



## career_radio-checker

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Well Gap, if he did order me something for Christmas...He'd better hope like heck that he didn't order it from Logistic!!



What a good idea! 
Thanks librarian... and to think I was actually going to spend money this year.


----------



## gaspasser

CRC, if your 9er opens a new combat bra or cammied undies at Christams, you'll be in the doghouse for days...
 ;D


----------



## armyvern

Gaspasser said:
			
		

> CRC, if your 9er opens a new combat bra or cammied undies at Christams, you'll be in the doghouse for days...
> ;D


That's better than opening up a new vacuum


----------



## GAP

The Librarian said:
			
		

> That's better than opening up a new vacuum



Hey...what's wrong with a new vacuum?....and maybe a blender too!  ;D


----------



## gaspasser

Oh, ouch!  Or a new stove.
Ouch....does logistek sell diamonds and gold yet?


----------



## armyvern

Gaspasser said:
			
		

> Oh, ouch!  Or a new stove.
> Ouch....does logistek sell diamonds and gold yet?



Gentlemen please,

PM me in December and I shall impart great knowledge to you. I shall tell you what to buy your respective 9er Domestics for Christmas.

Now...about General Hillier and his PT gear...

I'd wager that next week *somewhere* near you...there will be a picture of him plastered on the front page of a paper with the headline "CDS Runs Without Bodyguards" and then we shall truly know what he wears for PT!!


----------



## a_majoor

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Gentlemen please,
> 
> PM me in December and I shall impart great knowledge to you. I shall tell you what to buy your respective 9er Domestics for Christmas.



How is Logistikunicorp going to deliver it in time?  ;D ;D ;D



> Now...about General Hillier and his PT gear...
> 
> I'd wager that next week *somewhere* near you...there will be a picture of him plastered on the front page of a paper with the headline "CDS Runs Without Bodyguards" and then we shall truly know what he wears for PT!!



Too bad the photographer was hip checked by a burly guy jogging in the same direction wearing Oakley sunglasses and a Carleton University sweatshirt. That was some weird looking iPOD the guy had too.........


----------



## armyvern

a_majoor said:
			
		

> Too bad the photographer was hip checked by a burly guy jogging in the same direction wearing Oakley sunglasses and a Carleton University sweatshirt. That was some weird looking iPOD the guy had too.........


Ooops and there he goes...
OK...I can't make it work!!


----------



## captjtq

If nothing else, then this should be good fodder for those folks who have trouble getting time off from work to do their PT every day. It was a real eye opener to see the differences between the Army and the Navy during my PDT in Pet this Spring. The CDS setting another great example for his troops.


----------



## rmacqueen

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Now, I wonder whose PT kit he wears? Do they have the tri-force symbol on sweats for him?


He, of course, would only wear the best in PT kit...RCD gear!  Gives everyone else in the CF something to aspire to ;D


----------



## vonGarvin

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Hmmm I seem to only have 240 points left...hubby must have ordered me something for Christmas... :



Do they have Paint Brushes and Rock Identifying Kits at Logistikunicorps (or whatever the heck it's called)?  If so, I think "Santa" thinks you've been good this year


----------



## Link

A while back I was riding a bus in downtown Ottawa and saw Gen. Hillier run by, I almost came to attention on the bus, but then realised where I was and that I was off duty.  And he wears the grey issued PT kit.


----------



## armyvern

Link said:
			
		

> And he wears the grey issued PT kit.


Well then I highly recommend that all Units in Canada forward him a set of their Unit PT strip...for his wear and rotation...just think of the laundry bills he'll save. It'd be good for morale too...each Unit could put up a pic of him wearing their gear.

Perhaps Mike could even send him some army.ca swag to wear on a run!!


----------



## Haggis

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I see. So you say Gen. Hillier runs through the streets of ottawa in his St.Jean issue PT ensemble, complete with grey wool socks?



Yep!



			
				Link said:
			
		

> A while back I was riding a bus in downtown Ottawa and saw Gen. Hillier run by.....  *And he wears the grey issued PT kit*.





			
				Link said:
			
		

> There is a single tear of joy running down a Sergeant Major's face right now, somewhere; "look at that troops, what a fine leader, nothing but issued kit!"



*sniff*    What a leader indeed!


----------



## GO!!!

Haggis said:
			
		

> *sniff*    What a leader indeed!



+1 !


----------



## gaspasser

Link said:
			
		

> A while back I was riding a bus in downtown Ottawa and saw Gen. Hillier run by, I almost came to attention on the bus, but then realised where I was and that I was off duty.  And he wears the grey issued PT kit.


That's what I call a well disciplined soldier!
 ;D


----------



## buzgo

I see him in the gym from time to time and I almost don't recognize him. He's actually pretty low key and says hi to who ever is around him. I don't recall that he wears any issue crap PT gear...


----------



## Haggis

signalsguy said:
			
		

> I don't recall that he wears any issue crap PT gear...



 :threat:

HERETIC!!!  Non believer!!!  Don't tarnish my dream!

 :crybaby:


----------



## niner domestic

Haggis: There, there, it's ok, the Boss has been known to stray on occasion and been found wearing a t-shirt from Memorial U, but for the majority of the time, he's in grey issued PT strip.  Your dreams are safe for now.


----------



## geo

Hmmm....
1.  Just cause i stated that it is, in theory, the Navy's turn at the CDS role.... I would be inclined to think that it would be theirs to lose..... 

2.  What do our troops being in the fight of their lives have to do with the selection of the CDS?
There have been many capable Generals who have been passed over / encouraged to retire / buried for little or no reason.... Including the last LFC, LGen Caron.

IMHO


----------



## GO!!!

signalsguy said:
			
		

> I see him in the gym from time to time and I almost don't recognize him. He's actually pretty low key and says hi to who ever is around him. I don't recall that he wears any issue crap PT gear...



AH HAH!!!

So the CDS does'nt wear issue kit, the standard has been set, time to break out the gucci kit!! WOO HOO!!

http://www.arktisltd.co.uk/specialforces/vestsmilitary.htm

Sigma vest and black touque - here I come!  ;D


----------



## Link

That's what I call a well disciplined soldier!

Thanks BYT Driver
 ;D


----------



## dapaterson

Geo:

Canada promotes a lot of nice folks to General or Flag ranks.  That doesn't mean that they are the right people for the job.  Senior leaders need to maintain a focus on the future of the institution they lead.  Not next week, but a decade or two out.

For too long, we've had leaders in place who might be able to find next week if an EA pointed to in on their desk planner, but the concept of looking to a 5, 10 or 20 year horizon was foreign to them.  I've seen "strategic thinkers" focussing on day-to-day admin issues.

We need a series of leaders who can address today's issues (mostly through their staff) while maintianing the aim of modernization and transformation.

Really ,what's needed for the CDS is a good Maoist - someone who embraces a process of continual revolution.


----------



## geo

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Geo:
> Canada promotes a lot of nice folks to General or Flag ranks.  That doesn't mean that they are the right people for the job.  Senior leaders need to maintain a focus on the future of the institution they lead.  Not next week, but a decade or two out.
> 
> For too long, we've had leaders in place who might be able to find next week if an EA pointed to in on their desk planner, but the concept of looking to a 5, 10 or 20 year horizon was foreign to them.  I've seen "strategic thinkers" focussing on day-to-day admin issues.
> 
> We need a series of leaders who can address today's issues (mostly through their staff) while maintianing the aim of modernization and transformation.
> 
> Really ,what's needed for the CDS is a good Maoist - someone who embraces a process of continual revolution.



No arguments from ever here..........


----------



## Haggis

What the CDS could do is rotate through the gyms in the NCR.  It would be good for folks who use a gym other than 101 to see "Da Boss" during PT.  (Maybe they wouldn't slouch over the machines  ;D.)


----------



## career_radio-checker

the scene:

>Everyone is walking on the treadmills at a leasurely pace.
>
>In walks Hillier with sweat towel in hand 
>
>Everyone's subconscience response. "Uh oh. There's my supervisor."
>
>All the treadmills start to speed up in unison for no particular reason.  ;D


----------



## gaspasser

Seeing as HE is everyone's supervisor...that would be funny.
Just so long as they did it together...1-2-3--1


----------



## Patrolman

Today I had the privilege participating in a circuit training exercise with General Rick Hillier. Being in Gagetown for the Red Friday gathering he decided to do Pt with the PLQ(L) course I am currently teaching on. He was not the fastest, nor the slowest, but he gave his all from start to finish. Once finished he gave a short talk on the importance of physical fitness and leadership training in the CF. He stated he did not care if you were a mechanic,cook, or infanteer everyone would meet the same fitness standards. There you have it straight from the horses mouth.

 The funny thing about it all was when he walked in it was like a celebrity had entered the building. When was the last time you felt that way about the CDS. He is the epitome of leadership and I hope is around for a long time to come. Keep up the good work sir!


----------



## Franko

Patrolman said:
			
		

> The funny thing about it all was when he walked in it was like a celebrity had entered the building.



As it is when any good Dragoon enters a building....        ;D

Regards


----------



## Michael OLeary

So, I guess that means there's only one "good" Dragoon?     ;D


----------



## George Wallace

If I am that one, then you shouldn't be calling down the CDS.    ;D


----------



## geo

Ahhh...... it"s because it was a Newfoundlander who entered the room
The fact he was a Dragoon to boot is just "icing" on his cake.....


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> So, I guess that means there's only one "good" Dragoon?     ;D



Sorry George. That would be me ;D


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geo said:
			
		

> Ahhh...... it"s because it was a Newfoundlander who entered the room
> The fact he was a Dragoon to boot is just "icing" on his cake.....



 :cheers:


----------



## geo

(Having lived in Labrador City, I am part of the mainlander side of the Newfoundlander family )


----------



## Mike Baker

geo said:
			
		

> Ahhh...... it"s because it was a Newfoundlander who entered the room
> The fact he was a Dragoon to boot is just "icing" on his cake.....


 ;D


----------



## MarkOttawa

A major CanWest article assessing the General. Seems fairly reasonable to me.

Judging the general: Blunt, folksy and savvy, Gen. Rick Hillier has succeeded in leading the Armed Forces back into the centre of Canadian life. But after two years in charge, has he gained ground in his mission to remake the military?
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/insight/story.html?id=33fe728f-ea3b-4078-96c6-b690265aa147&p=1

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## JesseWZ

"Hillier has many challenges, but he's the right guy in the right position at the right time."

+1 Indeed.


----------



## kratz

It's great to hear the CDS is getting glowing reviews in the papers. The caption with the story though has incorrectly labeled him as the commander-in-chief .


----------



## simysmom99

He is one of my favorite people.  Good man, great leader, just what we need.


----------



## xo31@711ret

Ater 24 + years, for the best CDS:  he's got my vote; McKenze  second


----------



## GUNS

Being from "The Rock", the man could do no wrong.

From a military POV, I agree with a prior post, " the right person, in the right position, at the right time"

The next CDS will have his/her work cutout for them.


----------



## NCRCrow

He was at our NATO Change of Command on Friday, ( I did not get to meet him as he was gone in a flash back to Ottawa)

I think he is doing an outstanding job.  Even the recruiting commercials (which I like also) are realistic and I think are waking up the Canadian people. When I joined if was "Ask us about you" LOL 

Huge plus one from me.


----------



## gaspasser

It will be very difficult to fill his shoes   combat boots when he departs the military.  I think he has done more; equipment wise, morale wise, and publically, for us since...since...I can't remember the last-good CDS.
Kudos to Uncle Rick.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

Gen Hilliar is #1 for the job, we haven't seen this level of command in decades, past CDS's were to busy ass kissing to the politicians and forgetting why they were there in the first place. 

 "*Hilliar for Primeminister*"!!


----------



## CrazyCanuck

retiredgrunt45 said:
			
		

> "*Hilliar for Primeminister*"!!



Does that come as a bumper sticker


----------



## armyvern

Boater said:
			
		

> Does that come as a bumper sticker



Only if it gets spelled properly!!


----------



## gaspasser

I'd put one on my car!!
Uncle Rick for PM!!


----------



## geo

The fun part is to figure out if we're gonna go onto the old merry go round and give the navy a turn at the wheel.

While the CDS is green, he has looked after requirements within the air force.  Have the recent demos of lack of cash within the navy anything to do with the CDS or Piss poor management by the navy?

Will the next CDS be looking after all the branches of the service the same way?


----------



## CrazyCanuck

Wasn't a sailor supposed to be the current CDS? I remember hearing something about Martin breaking tradition and going with another soldier, in the end it was probably the best thing he did as PM.

Quick question for the knowledgeable here: How long is Hillier going to be CDS? is it a set term or just until he decides to quit?


----------



## geo

...or until such time as the boss decides it's time for him to go.............


----------



## midget-boyd91

And that boss isn't going to be sending Hillier away anytime soon.

One more post geo and youve hit 4000!!! wow, army.ca addict maybe???


----------



## geo

Addiction?... nope, not one minute, I can quit anytime, really,......


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

geo said:
			
		

> ...or until such time as the boss decides it's time for him to go.............



This has been discussed before in another thread but that is basically the answer if I remember rightly...he serves at the discretion of the Government.

Geo at first I was loathe to reply to your statement about the Air Force being looked after and the possibility of piss poor management within the Navy but you've got my dander up.
I think the CDS is a great guy and he's doing a heck of job....however the feeling of a lot of Senior Officers in the Navy and the Air Force is that this is a very Army-centric administration.
The Air Force is getting C17 heavy lifters and medium lift helicopters...it can be argued that all of this stuff benefits the movement of troops...i.e. the Army. what about fast air...are we moving ahead with any plans for that....or is it still very long term? What about replacements for the Auroras??
The Navy is being asked to look at the BHS...again a system for moving troops and equipment that belongs to the Army....what is being done to replace the DDH 280? a command and control ship that is old and needs replacement soon? When will we begin to think about the replacements for the Frigates which are now 10-15 years old?
How much of the expensive equipment purchases being made now are mission specific to this Afghanistan mission and what will happen when we're done there? Will we have geared ourselves in the other two services to keep up the sovereignty patrols that the Maritime Aircraft (Auroras) maintain and the ships maintain? Will we be able to play with our NORAD partners in the interceptor role? Or will we be left with big planes and big ships that are specifically geared to facilitate Army missions on the other side of the Globe?
Don't get me wrong I'm a big fan of the CDS. I think we've got more credibility than we've ever had since I've been in the outfit but let's not be saying that we've got piss poor management in the Navy and that everything is hunky dory in the Air Force.


----------



## CrazyCanuck

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> This has been discussed before in another thread but that is basically the answer if I remember rightly...he serves at the discretion of the Government.
> 
> Geo at first I was loathe to reply to your statement about the Air Force being looked after and the possibility of piss poor management within the Navy but you've got my dander up.
> I think the CDS is a great guy and he's doing a heck of job....however the feeling of a lot of Senior Officers in the Navy and the Air Force is that this is a very Army-centric administration.
> The Air Force is getting C17 heavy lifters and medium lift helicopters...it can be argued that all of this stuff benefits the movement of troops...i.e. the Army. what about fast air...are we moving ahead with any plans for that....or is it still very long term? What about replacements for the Auroras??
> The Navy is being asked to look at the BHS...again a system for moving troops and equipment that belongs to the Army....what is being done to replace the DDH 280? a command and control ship that is old and needs replacement soon? When will we begin to think about the replacements for the Frigates which are now 10-15 years old?
> How much of the expensive equipment purchases being made now are mission specific to this Afghanistan mission and what will happen when we're done there? Will we have geared ourselves in the other two services to keep up the sovereignty patrols that the Maritime Aircraft (Auroras) maintain and the ships maintain? Will we be able to play with our NORAD partners in the interceptor role? Or will we be left with big planes and big ships that are specifically geared to facilitate Army missions on the other side of the Globe?
> Don't get me wrong I'm a big fan of the CDS. I think we've got more credibility than we've ever had since I've been in the outfit but let's not be saying that we've got piss poor management in the Navy and that everything is hunky dory in the Air Force.




+1


----------



## aesop081

+2


----------



## retiredgrunt45

In a perfect world all 3 branches would get an equal share of the pie, but with the war in afghanistan and the state of our army before our people shipped out, how would you have our troops fight, maybe throw rocks at the enemy, because thats about all the army had up until these past few years.  yes most of the budget is being spent on the army with good reason and no its not because the navy or airforce has bad leadership, its because we don't have and american type military budget to rebuild all 3 branches at once from years and years of neglect by Ottawa. 

But at the moment the focus is on Afghanistan and keeping our troops safe and alive with the best kit possible and that takes money and plenty of it to rekit and entire army. 

I'm sure Hilliar would like nothing better than be given a blank check to rebuild the whole of the military, but until we leave Afghanistan it's going to be a slow process.


----------



## Shamrock

In Hog Signo, are you insinuating the world doesn't revolve around the army?


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Shamrock said:
			
		

> In Hog Signo, are you insinuating the world doesn't revolve around the army?



I know it's quite a thought isn't it?

Retired Grunt I agree with what you are saying. 40 years of cutbacks and neglect is hard to reverse overnight and I fully agree that we are in the middle of a fight that requires our best resources...no argument there. 
The Navy and Air force are behind the CDS too IMHO but there is concern that we not lose sight of other tasks that we have to be equipped to perform. For e.g. the amphibious assault capability is one we have not possessed for a long time and will be tremendously expensive to acquire. In addition we will have to assign a significant number of pers to that task and the recruiting targets for naval trades do not point toward us doing this with anything other than our present manning level. Do we then tie up ships like the 280s which are multi purpose Command and Control vessals or other assets? Do we lose expertise in ASW warfare etc because we need deck hands on an Army ferry? 
The number one priority of DND is still to protect Canada and her sovereignty...as a three ocean/coast nation we have to rely air and sea patrols to meet that goal.


----------



## geo

IN HOC & Aviator....
To be honest, I agree with you that, for the most part, the CF has pushed forward projects that persue the acquisition of gear that picks up and delivers the troops that are expected to take the fight to the enemy,  close with same, defeat same and hold the terrain we have liberated.

In a perfect world (oxymoron No 1) navy ships would be refurbished & built on an ongoing basis,  aircraft would be refurbished & purchased on an ongoing basis, Ground troops would have all the equipment resources they need to train and deploy..... but we are not in a perfect world and we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.  The ability of Canada to defend itself adequately has been mortgaged to the hilt by successive governments (BOTH conservative & liberals) and we are where we are.

The current CDS has made being a member of the Cdn military socially acceptable again... something that many green, blue & black CDS' have been unable to do.

The CDS has so many things to fix that he had to start somewhere - and he started where he HAD to.  The Gov't sent us to Kandahar - so the green guys are priority No 1 right now...


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

geo said:
			
		

> IN HOC & Aviator....
> To be honest, I agree with you that, for the most part, the CF has pushed forward projects that persue the acquisition of gear that picks up and delivers the troops that are expected to take the fight to the enemy,  close with same, defeat same and hold the terrain we have liberated.
> 
> In a perfect world (oxymoron No 1) navy ships would be refurbished & built on an ongoing basis,  aircraft would be refurbished & purchased on an ongoing basis, Ground troops would have all the equipment resources they need to train and deploy..... but we are not in a perfect world and we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.  The ability of Canada to defend itself adequately has been mortgaged to the hilt by successive governments (BOTH conservative & liberals) and we are where we are.
> 
> The current CDS has made being a member of the Cdn military socially acceptable again... something that many green, blue & black CDS' have been unable to do.
> 
> The CDS has so many things to fix that he had to start somewhere - and he started where he HAD to.  The Gov't sent us to Kandahar - so the green guys are priority No 1 right now...



I agree GEO. It is, however, still the responsibility of the grown ups in the other elements to stand up and remind the senior leadership of the other things we have to do and have plans to do them. Let's not blame them when the cash isn't there to do it.
When the big boss holds his O Group and gives the orders then everyone gets their heels together and gets on with it. 
I agree that our standing in Canadian society and the importance of our role in that society has been enhanced enormously by the brilliant leadership of our CDS. His ability to get the Government's attention and hold it is amazing. He is truly a gifted leader.


----------



## geo

The thing that baffles me the most is "how is it possible" that previously planned ops & exercises, with our allies & in our own home waters.... how do you come about emptying out the bank account and not have enough cash for a full tank of gas?... and how is it that theses same said activities are cancelled at the last minute?  Surely someone in the Controllers shop shoulda seen this coming... no?


----------



## MarkOttawa

I think there is a simple reason why Army-focused expenditures are the priority.  The Canadian government (Liberal or Conservative) has ever since Bosnia/Croatia used the Army abroad in profligate fashion as a centre-piece of its foreign policy.  There is no reason I can see to suppose that will change.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Rifleman62

Long ago, when I joined up, I was taught that the whole purpose of the Army was to support one person, the Infantryman, they who close with the enemy and engage with deadly force, one on one. Arty, tanks, engineers, Int, logistics, mechanics, cooks, clerks, etc,  role is to support the Infantryman to assure success. I was also taught that the Air Force and the Navy support the Army in its role of supporting the Infantryman. If you do not have an Infantryman to support, you don't need an Army, Air Force or Navy. Lets stop this silly scrapping. I have been fortunate on several occasions to deal with the the current CDS, as well as two others. Gen Hillier is an absolute stand out. He needs all in the CF to do their job to the best of their abilities, to be loyal up, down, and sideways. We are one, the CF.


----------



## Gunplumber

Rifleman 62,
 Very, very well put. We should remeber this more often.


----------



## x-grunt

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> If you do not have an Infantryman to support, you don't need an Army, Air Force or Navy. Lets stop this silly scrapping.



Not to get too far from the CDS topic - who btw I think is a stupendous leader, and much overdue in the CF world. Hillier has proven he is the right guy for this job.

But I have to disagree with the quoted statement. The idea that all services _only_ support the grunt is just not right. All Army ultimately supports the infantry, and Air and Sea can and do indeed support Land ops. But it's not the only thing they do. Until infantry can take and secure the EEZ (as one example) then I submit the Navy (and Air) have other priority jobs that have little Army about them. 

And I completely agree, let's stop the bickering and agree that all services have an important place, and each deserves support in turn. Right now, the Army has priority, which seems right for now. Maybe another service will lead in engaging an enemy in the future, but today it's an Army show.


----------



## Kirkhill

I am starting to understand the fondness in American circles for using made up names, acronyms and paragraph long descriptions instead of names that evolved when the Romans rode horses, the Queen of Spain thought that her young pikemen that were "seen and not heard" looked like infants and ships were sailed by sailors under sail.

There are those that meet people face to face, either on land or on the deck of a boat (haven't quite figured how to arrange an air to air transfer yet)
There are those that specialize in patrolling air, seas and land (cities and open spaces)
There are those that specialize in blowing things up from a distance
There are those that specialize in blowing things up by getting "up close and personal"
There are those that specialize in moving all the other specialists around and making sure they have what they need to get their jobs done
There are those that specialize in Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence
There are those that specialize in patching all the others up.

Damfino anymore which job is an Army, Navy or Air Force job and which ones should be riding horses.

PS:  I agree.  General Hillier is doing a good job.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Nobodies bickering....we're having a discussion. It is not  the main role of the Navy and Air Force to support the Infantry...sorry. The Navy's main job is to secure the seas for those who pass upon them on their lawful occasions.....The Air Force's main job is to secure the airways of North American and Canada (NORAD)...last I checked those weren't Army jobs or priorities. Yes we have to work together and yes the Joint Task Forces is a good idea and is helping us to work together better but there is still lots of stuff on a day to day basis that we do because we go to sea in ships that has nothing to do with the Army world and is not very well understood by that world either.


----------



## OnTrack

"JArmy"  Joint with an Army flavour.


----------



## aesop081

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Long ago, when I joined up, I was taught that the whole purpose of the Army was to support one person, the Infantryman, they who close with the enemy and engage with deadly force, one on one. Arty, tanks, engineers, Int, logistics, mechanics, cooks, clerks, etc,  role is to support the Infantryman to assure success. I was also taught that the Air Force and the Navy support the Army in its role of supporting the Infantryman. If you do not have an Infantryman to support, you don't need an Army, Air Force or Navy. Lets stop this silly scrapping. I have been fortunate on several occasions to deal with the the current CDS, as well as two others. Gen Hillier is an absolute stand out. He needs all in the CF to do their job to the best of their abilities, to be loyal up, down, and sideways. We are one, the CF.



Although i agree with the sentiment, this is looking at things in a rather simplistic fashion.  Both the Navy and AF have missions which support the national objectice but have no relation to the army.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

IN HOC SIGNO, i also agree totally with your setiment, we are losing our air and sea capability and i can see were a sailer would be fustrated with the present state of affairs. Our frigates as advanced as they are are aging and probably need repairs of refits, the sea kings are from a by-gone era and need replacing pronto and the air force needs new fighters and transport planes.

 I would like nothing better than to see "big honkin" new fighter planes provide air support for our troops or brand new helicopters transport our troops or new war ships with some teeth, patrolling our coast line keeping the unwanted out of our waters, believe me i can understand your fustration. On the army side i've been there, working with equipment that was broken or unservicable most of the time, were our best piece of kit was a roll of trusty gun tape. It took a mission like Afghanistan for the government to see what a sad state our military was in and they were forced to do something about, piecemeal at the moment, but its a start nevertheless.

I just hope for Canada's sake that the money being spent at present on the army, will continue to be spent on the navy and airforce in the future. I think some eyes have been opened in Ottawa and it will happen.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

retiredgrunt45 said:
			
		

> IN HOC SIGNO, i also agree totally with your setiment, we are losing our air and sea capability and i can see were a sailer would be fustrated with the present state of affairs. Our frigates as advanced as they are are aging and probably need repairs of refits, the sea kings are from a by-gone era and need replacing pronto and the air force needs new fighters and transport planes.
> 
> I would like nothing better than to see "big honkin" new fighter planes provide air support for our troops or brand new helicopters transport our troops or new war ships with some teeth, patrolling our coast line keeping the unwanted out of our waters, believe me i can understand your fustration. On the army side i've been there, working with equipment that was broken or unservicable most of the time, were our best piece of kit was a roll of trusty gun tape. It took a mission like Afghanistan for the government to see what a sad state our military was in and they were forced to do something about, piecemeal at the moment, but its a start nevertheless.
> 
> I just hope for Canada's sake that the money being spent at present on the army, will continue to be spent on the navy and airforce in the future. I think some eyes have been opened in Ottawa and it will happen.



+1


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

retiredgrunt45 said:
			
		

> IN HOC SIGNO, i also agree totally with your setiment, we are losing our air and sea capability and i can see were a sailer would be fustrated with the present state of affairs. Our frigates as advanced as they are are aging and probably need repairs of refits, the sea kings are from a by-gone era and need replacing pronto and the air force needs new fighters and transport planes.
> 
> I would like nothing better than to see "big honkin" new fighter planes provide air support for our troops or brand new helicopters transport our troops or new war ships with some teeth, patrolling our coast line keeping the unwanted out of our waters, believe me i can understand your fustration. On the army side i've been there, working with equipment that was broken or unservicable most of the time, were our best piece of kit was a roll of trusty gun tape. It took a mission like Afghanistan for the government to see what a sad state our military was in and they were forced to do something about, piecemeal at the moment, but its a start nevertheless.
> 
> I just hope for Canada's sake that the money being spent at present on the army, will continue to be spent on the navy and airforce in the future. I think some eyes have been opened in Ottawa and it will happen.



Just to clarify..the CPFs do have teeth...those 8 Harpoon SSMs are not just for show..... :


----------



## PhilB

I agree that each of the three services has their own independent role, and I also agree that Canadian sovereignty is a major priority for the Navy and Air force in particular. The comments to follow are not intended to start a fight or be disrespectful. Being in the infantry I know very little about either of the other services. All of that being said here it goes,

My question is one of viability. Both the navy and the air force are, from my understanding, geared mainly at fighting conventional warfare (one country against another). I understand that each service is used for other things (policing our waters and airs against smugglers, illegals etc) but it seems that the proposed equipment purchases from each service are geared towards increasing conventional combat capability. With that in mind do the naval and air capabilities we currently have measure up to likely opponents we might have to face in a traditional, conventional war? I am not talking about level of training or debating the merits of one piece of equipment over another. All things considered in conventional war numbers matter, do we have even close to enough resources to compete in a war? Secondly if the answer to the above question is no, then as a country, can we even afford to equip these services to measure up to our opponents? The army can be equipped to a higher level than the air force or navy 
(rifles and artilelry pieces are MUCH cheaper than new fighters, bombers, or ships) for much less. All of that being said, where should our priorities lay? If we cannot, on an economic level bring these services to needed conventional levels should we shift the focus of these services? Should the Navy focus solely on maritime coastal defense and troop movement? Should the Air force shift to strategic and tactical airlift and rotory wing ground support? These are just thoughts, lets discuss, hopefully, in an objective manner.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

So when you do sail an amphib group to some trouble spot are you going to hope that our allies will be able to send ships the have an AAD/AWW and an ASuW capability or are you going to cross your fingers and hope that coastal defence force with OPVs and maybe corvettes will be able to prevent the bad guys from sinking those HVUs with troops and materiel onboard?  Not to mention how will you resupply these ships when they are sailing?


----------



## MarkOttawa

To repeat a comment on the Ruxted Group article:

A New World View
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/56768.0.html



> "a properly unified military force"--as in the US Marine Corps?   With of course due recognition of the need for distinct naval and air force capabilities for territorial surveillance and sovereignty protection (and other assigned missions such as aerial SAR).



Ex-Dragoon: I think it most unlikely that we will be engaged in amphibious operations on our own.  If we can provide the BHS (with JSSs for resupply) *plus the troops* and some helos, I would think our allies would be happy to provide almost all the other naval and air support needed in combined ops.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## PhilB

Who mentioned anything about amphibious landing? The army, at this time, does not even have the training and equipment to conduct amphibious landings on a large scale. If we are going to get into the what if arguments, are we going to rely on our allies for carrier support so that our floating TF has aircover? Same deal on landing on hostile shores, our experience in Afghanistan has proven that close air support is essential, are we going to rely on our allies for that as well? If we are ordering up replenishment ships we may as well order up some carriers while we are at it.

I am asking whether as a military we need to narrow our focus. We are not the U.S., we are not the U.K. we do not have a national focus on our military and as such spending isn't there, more so than just the spending, the will to spend doesn't seem to be there. Do we continue to try and be a military that can accomplish every possible task, and does so with mediocre equipment and trg as a result, or do we focus on more specific tasks?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Maybe but can you predict the future....our allies like the fact that we can contribute ships that shoot. It makes them able to put their assets where they want them, no nursemaiding a country that relies on others to protect its ships and troops...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

So Phil do we give the US control of our sealanes..."sorry boys we rather spend our money on the army then the navy so you guys gotta watch our backd for us"...I will never understand why you boys in green don't get the need for the other services while we do. You do not see the big picture like the air force and the navy does. At this rate you never will...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

To lose air force and naval capabilities is like the army losing the tank all over again. Totally a stupid and irresponsible decision. Whats wrong with balanced forces, it can be attained. Look at Germany


----------



## PhilB

This is what I hoped to avoid, everyone getting angry. It seems that when topics like this are broached people tend to think of it as a personal attack. I did not insinuate that we give control over to the U.S. but explain to me how our navy protects our shipping lanes, and if, *objectively* in a war, they would be able to do so successfully. This is not meant in a sarcastic tone or anything, I am legitimately asking because I do not know, and as such cannot form an opinion if, in war they could or not. What I mean is that if, with current levels of funding and equipment they cant, how much will it cost to ensure that they can? If we are not willing to pay that price then re focus. In the above posts I mentioned that maybe our navy should focus solely, more or less, on protecting our territorial waters. Wouldn't a move like this free up more budget for the navy to have better equipment to operate within that context?

I am not suggesting losing our air force or navy capabilities. What I mean is, for example, what is the purpose of spending millions of dollars on fighter jets, but still not having enough to compete with an enemy? Are we spending this money in a futile effort? Is the choice spend billions more to equip us with enough high tech fighters to compete against a potential enemy or re focus the air force, spend the money on other things and rely on our allies, with an already in place capability to fill this role for us?


----------



## aesop081

gents........the army being the operational focus at this time, the need was pressing for new gear...i can't debate that.  The new kit that both the Navy and AF are getting is designed for one thing : support the army's operations.

But further to that, the AF and the Navy have missions independent of the army. Those missions cannot be ignored.  Unless we are willing to let the US decide who comes in and out of our airspace and tritorial waters, these missions cannot be neglected.  Wether you army folks like it or not, we are a maritime nation and must behave as such.  The army does not patrol the North, does not patrol canadian teritorial waters and does not patrol canada's EEZ.  The army cannot enforce canada's imigration laws at sea, cannot conduct SAR operations, Cannot do environmental monitoring and does not assist the RCMP in anti-drug operations.

Overseas, the army cannot conduct embargos, participate in Multi-national naval operations (whatever they may be). Another aspect is that, in a world of alliances, we must be able to demostrate that canada will play its part in collective defence.  For that we require not only land forces but also capabale Naval and air forces.



			
				PhilB said:
			
		

> This is what I hoped to avoid, everyone getting angry.



Don't worry, i'm not angry.  I just dont understand why you cannot look beyond the army.



> I did not insinuate that we give control over to the U.S. but explain to me how our navy protects our shipping lanes,



Every country in the world has a navy in their waters : theirs or someone elses.  if we dont put a Navy in our waters, the US will....and then they get to decide who and what happens in them...simple enough ?



> I am not suggesting losing our air force or navy capabilities. What I mean is, what is the purpose of spending millions of dollars on fighter jets, but still not having enough to compete with an enemy? Are we spending this money in a futile effort? Is the choice spend billions more to equip us with enough high tech fighters to compete against a potential enemy or re focus the air force, spend the money on other things and rely on our allies, with an already in place capability to fill this role for us?



Rely on our allies ?  Do you recal the fiasco that was going on when Turkey wanted NATO to deploy there as a security measure during OIF ?  Alliances are about politics and we can NEVER assusme that our allies will be there.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Very well put


----------



## George Wallace

PhilB

Although this is a bit of a hijack on your part, I will try to make a simple comparison following your logic.

The RCMP are responsible for the patroling of the highways.  Following your logic, you want them to only consider patrolling around the major centers of Alberta.  To patrol the Provincial highways, they require "Chase Cars".  Following your logic, now that they are no longer patroling the Provincial highways, but only those around the major centers, they no longer need "Chase Cars".  

Is that what you are trying to say we do with the Navy?

Our Navy would still need Deep Water ships to patrol our coasts, the same as the ships that they would require to do duties outside of our waters.  What savings are you talking about?


----------



## PhilB

You are only using some of my quotes. > I specifically asked if instead of buying things like submarines, and ships that can project our naval force abroad we focus on solely protecting our territorial waters. As I see it there are two ways a military, in general, can be. You can have a military that is designed for protecting your own country or you can have a military that is designed to project your military power abroad. Arguably a military that projects its power also protects itself domestically but I wont go there. Obviously maintaining a large, well equipped, well balanced force is expensive and is what is needed to project military force.

 It seems that our military wants to be option number two on the cheap. Yes we have a naval force, but in todays modern naval warfare how effective is it without effective aircraft carriers, submarines, ASW aircraft and vessels, and replenishment ships? Yes we have an air force but have effective is it without larger numbers of fighter aircraft, the ability to refuel aerially, widespread bases to stage from, AWACS and other aerial control planes,  and strategic bombers? Even our army, how effective are we at projecting our force without the ability to deploy our troops and their heavy equipment, without our own integral air support, without the ability to resupply ourselves on a large scale? My question is should we focus on ourselves domestically, as opposed to our ability to project our force (whether of our own volition or as part of coalitions or international organizations)? I am further pointing out that in order to equip our forces for the ability of military projection the navy and airforce are much more expensive than the army. Buying large ships and aircraft is expensive. Should, and I am not suggesting that we do this, focus our army to play an international role while keeping our airforce and navy focused on protecting our domestic sovereignty? Hopefully this helps clarify.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

PhilB said:
			
		

> Who mentioned anything about amphibious landing? The army, at this time, does not even have the training and equipment to conduct amphibious landings on a large scale.



Where have you been Phil?
this is part of the plan. The CDS wants a big honking ship or two to conduct amphib ops. We have stood up the SCF here on the East Coast under a Commodore with a staff of 200 to trial this concept. We had a major exercise here last month (the ITEE) with beefed up company of Vandoos on board an American ship which we borrowed...the USS Gunstan Hall.,...we refitted Sea King helicopters to take our troops ashore and had them onboard the ship with an air det. We practised a landing at Camp Lejeune in NC.
The answer to your question is....the CDS wants this capability and we're steaming full speed ahead!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Not to derail the topic but I remember awhile ago someone was complaining that the CF did not have cool things to show for recruiting. If some of the individuals here got their wish and had an army centric military, how would you get people interested in your glorified aerial and seaborne taxi services? After all thats hardly glamourous nor interesting.


----------



## Globesmasher

I have enjoyed Gen Hillier's leadership and his style since he has been in the position of CDS.
Even as a guy who wears blue, I appreciate his operational focus and emphasis on "joint" ops.
It has been a refreshing change to have someone focus on "important" issues.

He will be a hard man to replace ....


----------



## midget-boyd91

The only problem with Hillier doing such a good job, is that he became an image to the public eye when things in the Sandbox turned rougher than they were previously. And with some people (Hippies and Jack) not liking the idea of soldiers using their guns could easily "comingle" the two (Hillier and the mission being violent), and turn him into a replaceable officer in the case of another election, and a turnover to the Libs or NDP.


----------



## a78jumper

Replaceable in a heartbeat, look what happened to Anderson and Boyle.

Gen Hillier has done an excellent job, the best since since 1968 with the possible exception of JDex.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

We can sit here and speculate, argue and banter forever on the issues of who needs what, what we should have and how much of it we should get. The bottom line is this, the final say on who gets what and whom it goes to is made in Ottawa, by a small select group of elected officials, who hold the purse strings. If it was up to us, Canada would have the absolute best-equipped navy, air force and army in the world, but it isn’t and for good reason, it would probably bankrupt the country. So as in every democracy we get what we get and try to do our very best with what we got, because we hope it is more than what we had yesterday. Then after four years or so, average jane/joe goes to the polls elects another few select officials (hopefully the same officials who were going to loosen the purse strings for ships and planes) in Ottawa and the process starts all over again.

 I finally came to realize how the Canadian public actually thought when I entered civilian life and experienced I guess one would say normal life. They have a number of expectations that they expect to have as average Canadians. These are listed in order of priority 1. _Jobs & job security _ 2. _Healthcare_ 3. _Lower taxes _ 4. _Safe place to live for their family _ 5. _Home ownership _ 6. _National security, military etc_.

There are probably some exceptions to this as there are in every facet of life, but the majority of Canadians are focused on these *6 items*, I placed national security as last, because most people are so focused on the first *5 items*, that they don’t even give a second thought to the military.

Now back to our elected officials, who for the most part must keep average Jane/Joe happy so they’ll get re-elected. Promises are made promises are broken and average Joe gets angry and elects someone else. Seeing that we are on a teeter-totter government right now “minority” Mr. Harper will have to decide who he wants to keep happy first, average Jane/Joe, who will decide if he remains in power or the military who he already holds the purse strings for anyway. The only reason he has spent the money that he has so far, is he had no choice once he deployed our troops to Afghanistan. He couldn’t send them over with substandard equipment, so he suddenly finds a few billion greenbacks and makes it happen. Will this continue? It will be up to the average Jane and Joe to decide, whether or not Mr. Harper keeps them happy until an election is called, still remains to be seen...

Now that I’m also an “average Joe” my prospective is much the same as every other civilian trying to make ends meet and hang on to a job. I make my decision at the polls. 

 It’s nice to dream, but at some point, we all wake up and realize, it was just a dream...


----------



## 2 Cdo

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> So Phil do we give the US control of our sealanes..."sorry boys we rather spend our money on the army then the navy so you guys gotta watch our backd for us"..*.I will never understand why you boys in green don't get the need for the other services while we do*. You do not see the big picture like the air force and the navy does. At this rate you never will...



My bold modification, nice blanket statement. Isn't there another thread about respect.

As others have said the army "seems" to be the focus right now after years of neglect. The improvements for the army, while seeming to be expensive, are a drop in the bucket when compared to costs in improving or updating both air and naval equipment.
It will take some time but I'm sure the navy and air force will get some of the monies they need. 

Also in reference to the navy having no money for the upcoming NATO ex, just when exactly did they notice they would run short. Sounds almost like a bit of a political stunt to get some quick cash, or incompetent financial management.


----------



## Kirkhill

Who funded "The BHS" experiment off N. Carolina last year?  And how quickly was that organized?  Did IT have an impact on this budget problem?


----------



## Just a Guy

Well despite all this side talk about funding, surely the issue isn't the Chief's brillance nor opinions on army centric or not...the real question is...will any of Government of Canada want another "Rick Hillier" as CDS.  I worry that the very reasons so many of us admire him will doom us to a pale shadow of a replacement.  A brillant leader, commander (two different things) and professional it can't be easy for the Government to have to factor him / his responses into their plans...... Let's hope he stays

Just a Guy


----------



## Rifleman62

Agreed, but whoever his replacement is, when that happens, cannot that person continue on with the same personal characteristics? Or, is there an ambitious general out there who will do anything, say anything, to be the next CDS for their own career? It has happened before.


----------



## Echo9

another Hillier as next CDS...If you ask me, the next guy who's going to get the nod will be the second McNaughton to be CDS (Leslie).  Yes, that's another army guy, and yes, that's unprecedented, and yes, the other branches are going to howl.  He'll be a good CDS, although he'll have a much more patrician approach to the job.

Not sure if they've got reason to howl, however.  One of the things that I predicted 10 years ago was that starting around now, there would be a generation where the Army becomes dominant within NDHQ.  Reason being is that the Army has basically been at war for the last 15 years, while the Air Force and Navy, while they have been busy, it hasn't been to the same extent, and their Majors and Colonels (Commanders and Captains) haven't been exposed to the pressures that the army guys have.

What did it used to take to get ahead?  Mastery of the internal politics.  Think about the dynamics that used to exist: guy, fresh out of RMC would be tagged with the label that he's going to be a general.  And, there were few surprises.  Insert operations into the mix, and it removes the bureaucratic operators who are perhaps not great war leaders.  Col L'abbe would be a great example of one of the chosen children, whose career came to a stop because of his operational experiences.  I'm not sure that there's enough of those similar experiences for Naval and Air Force officers to get the "herd immunity" in the way that the Army has.


Oh, and my review of the current CDS?  Great on the operations side, great as the voice of the force, great on modernization.  If there's a negative side perhaps he's taken too much from his experiences with the Americans.  We have different military traditions (our history is not to provide badges for combat- the tour medal says that for us), and we don't have the mass to be able to do things the way that they do, even on a reduced scale (overlaying joint commands on top of environmental commands).


last- for you guys who want fast air, you're going to have to wait for the F35 (JSF).  Based on the amount of money we've already sunk into it, that's going to be the replacement for the CF18


----------



## Rifleman62

Maybe not the next CDS, but the current CLS will eventually become the CDS. Both the CDS and the CLS lead from the front. Reminds me of the motto of the US Infantry "Follow Me". Agree with the argument re operational experience, although the Navy and Air Force senior leaders cannot in their role close with the enemy on a intimate basis. A ship captain can take his ship into harms way, but still will be a long distance from the enemy (excepting boarding parties), and the Air Force even in a close support role, is above the battlefield and does not experience the gore. I am sure there will be arguments to this.
Do not agree with the comments re the Americans. We do have different traditions. One of the most prized "badges" is the US Combat Infantryman award. The Purple Heart is awarded for giving ones blood for the USA in combat.  These awards have been discussed elsewhere. I personally favour these awards and the concept. The overlaying joint commands on top of environmental commands  simplifies the defence of North America in conjunction with our number one trading partner. I agree with it.
P.S . Bomber Command itself lost 50,000 KIA, let alone WIA, POW, missing, etc in WWII. A very high casualty rate that is not well known. That figure does not count Fighter, Tactical, Transport, Coastal Commands.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Rifleman62:



> A total of 9,919 RCAF airmen died while serving with Bomber Command, whether in 6 Group or in some other unit. This figure represents three-quarters of the RCAF’s 13,498 WWII casualties [sic].


http://www.junobeach.org/e/4/can-tac-air-bom-e.htm

Almost a quarter of all Canadian fatalities (this source gives higher total RCAF dead):



> 42,042 men and women of Canada's armed forces died during the war : 22,917 in the Canadian Army, 17,101 in the RCAF and 2,024 in the RCN. 54,414 were wounded and 8,995 taken prisoner.


http://www.civilization.ca/cwm/newspapers/canadawar/casualties_e.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Rifleman62

Bomber Command included the RCAF, as well as members from all Commonwealth countries. Plus some US personnel who joined the RAF/RCAF. One of the highly decorated original Dambusters, 617 Sqn, was an American who stayed in the RAF after 7 Dec 41. The figure quoted was KIA for Bomber Command, no matter what the country of origin. 

A good book to read is "A Thousand Will Fall" by a Mr Pellen (?). He describes his initial training in Manitoba, and his Ops Tour. 

My wife's' Uncle was a Nav in WWII. He was in an Bomber Command OTU, when he was posted to RCAF 435 Sqn,  Burma, flying Dakotas. He was the only survivor from his class. All KIA in Bomber Command.


----------



## x-grunt

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Agree with the argument re operational experience, although the Navy and Air Force senior leaders cannot in their role close with the enemy on a intimate basis. A ship captain can take his ship into harms way, but still will be a long distance from the enemy (excepting boarding parties), and the Air Force even in a close support role, is above the battlefield and does not experience the gore. I am sure there will be arguments to this.



I won't argue the operational experience lies mostly in the hands of the Army right now. I will argue that operational experience is more then closing with the enemy infantry style. 

Unless, of course, you mean that experience in closing with the enemy "intimately" is a useful skill set for a CDS involved in political combat. ;D


----------



## Rifleman62

> I will argue that operational experience is more then closing with the enemy infantry style.


Agree


----------



## MarkOttawa

Rifleman62: My sister's father-in-law flew Beaufighters with the RAF in the Burma theatre:

Silently into the Midst of Things
177 Squadron Royal Air Force in Burma, 1943-1945 : History and Personal Narratives
http://www.burmabeaufighters.com/

Fortunately, casualties were not too bad.  After the war he transferred to the RCAF.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## geo

Not sure but, think that the current CDS is the 1st CDS in a long time who has been able to get a grip on the Politician's attention AND managed to retain it.

His "down home" style dissarms, his strong personality goes for the Jugglar...

Regardless of who the next CDS is, it`s gonna be one really gigantic pair of boots to fill.
Will Gen Leslie be the one?... beats me!


----------



## Teflon

> Regardless of who the next CDS is, it`s gonna be one really gigantic pair of boots to fill.



+1 fully agree here!


----------



## observor 69

Echo9 said:
			
		

> What did it used to take to get ahead?  Mastery of the internal politics.  Think about the dynamics that used to exist: guy, fresh out of RMC would be tagged with the label that he's going to be a general.  And, there were few surprises.  Insert operations into the mix, and it removes the bureaucratic operators who are perhaps not great war leaders.  Col L'abbe would be a great example of one of the chosen children, whose career came to a stop because of his operational experiences.  I'm not sure that there's enough of those similar experiences for Naval and Air Force officers to get the "herd immunity" in the way that the Army has.



I was posted in Baden in the 80's when I ran into a "Golden Boy." This guy was in the fast stream until at an air show his plane fell out of the sky and killed a family in their car driving down the autobahn.  I haven't heard of him since.


----------



## tomahawk6

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> I was posted in Baden in the 80's when I ran into a "Golden Boy." This guy was in the fast stream until at an air show his plane fell out of the sky and killed a family in their car driving down the autobahn.  I haven't heard of him since.



Your point Baden ?


----------



## geo

T6...
Imagine he's just pointing out that other elemental fast moovers have been shot out of the sky / run aground and had their careers clipped in the bud.


----------



## observor 69

geo said:
			
		

> T6...
> Imagine he's just pointing out that other elemental fast moovers have been shot out of the sky / run aground and had their careers clipped in the bud.



Thanks for making my point Geo.  
 I was so busy trying to keep my example vanilla that I probably lost the point I was trying to make.


----------



## rmacqueen

Gen Hillier is to be interviewed on the CBC Radio show "The Current" tomorrow, Wed Feb 7.  The show starts at 0837 Eastern time if anyone wants to listen.

[for Mods, did a search and couldn't find this posted anywhere]


----------



## Roy Harding

rmacqueen said:
			
		

> Gen Hillier is to be interviewed on the CBC Radio show "The Current" tomorrow, Wed Feb 7.  The show starts at 0837 Eastern time if anyone wants to listen.
> 
> [for Mods, did a search and couldn't find this posted anywhere]



The show starts at 0837 in ALL time zones (delay broadcast across the country).  

I am aware of how the CBC is viewed by many on this board - as a longtime CBC listener (sometimes just to see how high I can push my blood pressure), I am of the opinion that this particular current affairs show - The Current - is usually objective and fair in it's treatment of guests and their positions.  This may not be readily apparent to all, as at times they give so much time to one side of the issue that they have to wait until the next day to finish their treatment of the issue.

Anyway - the show can be found on your local CBC One station every weekday at 0837, in all time zones.  (If you're REALLY curious, you can go to the internet  (www.cbc.ca) and listen to it as it is broadcast in Newfoundland!!)

Roy


----------



## McG

http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2007/200702/20070207.html


----------



## retiredgrunt45

Baden guy, how about the Baden base commanders 104 taking out a house just outside of Buhl in 83, with the old woman still sleeping upstairs. We spent 3 days cleaning up the debree, all there was left of the plane was a wing and the cockpit. He dissapeared very quickly also, rumours had it, he was sent somewhere very isolated as a liason officer.

I do remember the 104 crashing on the autobahn, quite a mess with many people killed.


----------



## Cloud Cover

Just a Guy said:
			
		

> ...the real question is...will any of Government of Canada want another "Rick Hillier" as CDS.  I worry that the very reasons so many of us admire him will doom us to a pale shadow of a replacement.  A brillant leader, commander (two different things) and professional  it can't be easy for the Government to have to factor him / his responses into their plans...... Let's hope he stays




Well, you have listed the three things any responsible government should require of any of CDS.  You omitted politically astute, which the current CDS obviously is. As a person on the outside, it seems to me that he somehow managed to have Bill Graham, of all people, get behind him and his plans. I wonder if he will stay- perhaps if he feels his influence is waning he may leave.


----------



## geo

One thing.... CDS' musn't stay around forever.  Like anything else, the man on top is preventing the career progression of the others climbing their carrer ladders.  Staying around beyond your time is not a good thing either


----------



## hank011

GUNS said:
			
		

> Being from "The Rock", the man could do no wrong.
> 
> From a military POV, I agree with a prior post, " the right person, in the right position, at the right time"
> 
> The next CDS will have his/her work cutout for them.



I think he is brilliant despite being from the rock...any smart or employable noofie left the rock years ago. Thank god he left.  :-\


----------



## geo

I think many people on the rock (or from the rock) might resent that particular assertion Hank.

I for one find it offensive!


----------



## hank011

I agree...but try a posting there...20 years behind the caveman. Unbelievable until youve actually lived it since the oil boom. Hillier is still brilliant tho.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

From IN HOC SIGNO


> Geo at first I was loathe to reply to your statement about the Air Force being looked after and the possibility of piss poor management within the Navy but you've got my dander up.
> I think the CDS is a great guy and he's doing a heck of job....however the feeling of a lot of Senior Officers in the Navy and the Air Force is that this is a very Army-centric administration.
> The Air Force is getting C17 heavy lifters and medium lift helicopters...it can be argued that all of this stuff benefits the movement of troops...i.e. the Army. what about fast air...are we moving ahead with any plans for that....or is it still very long term? What about replacements for the Auroras??
> The Navy is being asked to look at the BHS...again a system for moving troops and equipment that belongs to the Army....what is being done to replace the DDH 280? a command and control ship that is old and needs replacement soon? When will we begin to think about the replacements for the Frigates which are now 10-15 years old?
> How much of the expensive equipment purchases being made now are mission specific to this Afghanistan mission and what will happen when we're done there? Will we have geared ourselves in the other two services to keep up the sovereignty patrols that the Maritime Aircraft (Auroras) maintain and the ships maintain? Will we be able to play with our NORAD partners in the interceptor role? Or will we be left with big planes and big ships that are specifically geared to facilitate Army missions on the other side of the Globe?
> Don't get me wrong I'm a big fan of the CDS. I think we've got more credibility than we've ever had since I've been in the outfit but let's not be saying that we've got piss poor management in the Navy and that everything is hunky dory in the Air Force.



Just my $0.02, but I think the government is looking at what it wants to be able to do in a foreign policy role, and prioritizing accordingly.

In the discussion, I think looking at inland 'Failed States' is a key driver.

Rwanda.
Darfur.
Afghanistan.

Who's next?  Who knows....but in those circumstances Germany may step up with Eurofighters, and France with some Rafales, but no one with the exception of the Commonwealth and Eastern Europe appear to have any interest in putting boots on the ground.

So if you want to stop that next genocide, and you know what your softer allies will and won't bring to the table, then you plan and procure properly ensuring you can enable a combined mission where otherwise there wouldn't be one.



Matthew.   

P.S.  Quote added for clarification as to source of my comments.  Was kind of late to the party on this thread and read it all at once....sorry for any confusion.


----------



## geo

Matthew....
Uhhh.... and your last post has what to do with Gen Hillier?

Hank.... I lived in Labrador City and travelled the rock for about 12 yrs - 20 yrs wouldn't be that much of a hardship


----------



## hank011

Although Matthew's point isn't well connected, what I got from it is that we are improving the Army's capability at the expense of the Navy and the Air Force despite the fact that they are the ones getting the equipment. This would be as a result of the CDS being such a strong leader and the other two elements having weak leaders.
The result of this is going to be good for the CF but the result seems to be turning towards an "Army Air Force" and "Marines" instead of traditional WW2 based elements. I still think Hillier is spot on in reexamining our roles. 15000 Air force who dont deploy(or are not of any operational use overseas) is a waste of personnel. A Navy that does the job of the Coast Guard, a Coast Guard that is a ferry service for DFO and an Air Force that does SAR and Fisheries patrol for the Coast Guard is also a waste.
Problem is that Hillier will be replaced by a weak Air Force or Navy General who will try to take the CF back to a cold war stance(shades of Boyle(shudder)). The Army will ignore them and the other two services will be put in survival mode. I hope they keep Hillier longer, we will be stronger for it.


----------



## Franko

Hank011,

You had better make your point clear in regards to this



> 15000 Air force who dont deploy(or are not of any operational use overseas) is a waste of personnel.
> 
> A Navy that does the job of the Coast Guard, a Coast Guard that is a ferry service for DFO and an Air Force that does SAR and Fisheries patrol for the Coast Guard is also a waste.
> 
> Problem is that Hillier will be replaced by a weak Air Force or Navy General who will try to take the CF back to a cold war stance(shades of Boyle(shudder)). The Army will ignore them and the other two services will be put in survival mode.



This post is inflamitory at best.....I'm giving you a chance to explain your POV.


*The Army.ca Staff*


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

hank011 said:
			
		

> Although Matthew's point isn't well connected, what I got from it is that we are improving the Army's capability at the expense of the Navy and the Air Force despite the fact that they are the ones getting the equipment. This would be as a result of the CDS being such a strong leader and the other two elements having weak leaders.
> The result of this is going to be good for the CF but the result seems to be turning towards an "Army Air Force" and "Marines" instead of traditional WW2 based elements. I still think Hillier is spot on in reexamining our roles. 15000 Air force who dont deploy(or are not of any operational use overseas) is a waste of personnel. A Navy that does the job of the Coast Guard, a Coast Guard that is a ferry service for DFO and an Air Force that does SAR and Fisheries patrol for the Coast Guard is also a waste.
> Problem is that Hillier will be replaced by a weak Air Force or Navy General who will try to take the CF back to a cold war stance(shades of Boyle(shudder)). The Army will ignore them and the other two services will be put in survival mode. I hope they keep Hillier longer, we will be stronger for it.



Where do I start!!!! I know, prayer...that always calms me down...GOD GIVE ME STRENGTH!!!

First of all there are no Generals in Navy there Hank, they are called Admirals.
Second the CDS is supposed to be the leader of the whole Armed Forces not just the Army.
Your disrepect for the leadership in the Air Force and the Navy is disgusting. There are plenty of strong leaders...my big boss RAdm Dean McFadden (JTFA Commander) is an excellent leader who is extremely focussed on supporting our Task Force...0107 in Kandahar.
Do you actually know what the Air Force does and the vital roles they play not only in transporting the Army around but in Maritime Surveillance, SAR, NORAD etc.
As for the Navy we presently have a frigate in the Arabian Gulf with the American task force enforcing maritime blockade of suspicious ships (which may have illegal arms headed for Iraq or Afghanistan)...hardly un-operational and we have a lot of other roles that you would do well to acquiant yourself with.
Please refrain from posting garbage of an uninformed nature.
If the present CDS is replaced by any of the current top brass in the Navy the whole of the CF will be well served...they are dedicated and strong leaders.


----------



## hank011

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> Hank011,
> You had better make your point clear in regards to this
> This post is inflamitory at best.....I'm giving you a chance to explain your POV.
> *The Army.ca Staff*


15000 air force and we deploy 487 per 6 month period...those are stats from the CF web site.
The Coast Guard does Scientific research and relies on Auroras to do the Fisheries patrols...Fisheries officers actually do stints on Auroras BTW! Not much of a Coast Guard if the navy ends up doing fisheries patrols.
The CDS rotates if you havent noticed...Army, Navy, Air Force. No progress was made when Hillier was not CDS, budgets slashed, bases closing, tighten your belt was the official catch phrase. CANFORGEN's were issued regularly urging fiscal restraint and speeches were made regularly with...we will do this if we have are way...but they were never able to get their way. Hillier is clear with his direction and the direction is always chosen by the CDS...the Army is its own entity tho....


----------



## George Wallace

OK......Everyone calm down.

Hank011 has just stuck his foot in his mouth with his obvious lack of knowledge of so many things he is trying to address.  He has just shown us he has no idea at all of what the CDS's job is.  Nor does he show any knowledge of what the rest of the CF do for a living and their contributions to the defence of this Nation.


----------



## vonGarvin

OK, back on track (from me).
Gen Hillier is indeed a "new style" of leader, compared to previous persons in that job.  Few have been so widely recognised outside of the CF.  

Take it from there....


----------



## hank011

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Where do I start!!!! I know, prayer...that always calms me down...GOD GIVE ME STRENGTH!!!
> 
> First of all there are no Generals in Navy there Hank, they are called Admirals.
> Second the CDS is supposed to be the leader of the whole Armed Forces not just the Army.
> Your disrepect for the leadership in the Air Force and the Navy is disgusting. There are plenty of strong leaders...my big boss RAdm Dean McFadden (JTFA Commander) is an excellent leader who is extremely focussed on supporting our Task Force...0107 in Kandahar.
> Do you actually know what the Air Force does and the vital roles they play not only in transporting the Army around but in Maritime Surveillance, SAR, NORAD etc.
> As for the Navy we presently have a frigate in the Arabian Gulf with the American task force enforcing maritime blockade of suspicious ships (which may have illegal arms headed for Iraq or Afghanistan)...hardly un-operational and we have a lot of other roles that you would do well to acquiant yourself with.
> Please refrain from posting garbage of an uninformed nature.
> If the present CDS is replaced by any of the current top brass in the Navy the whole of the CF will be well served...they are dedicated and strong leaders.


OMG really an Admiral...well that changes everything(shaking his head).  Uh my comments were about the fisheries patrols...not the gulf. I have no idea what the Air Force does...thanks for enlightening me. History does not seem to support an effective non-army CDS.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

hank011 said:
			
		

> OMG really an Admiral...well that changes everything(shaking his head).  Uh my comments were about the fisheries patrols...not the gulf. I have no idea what the Air Force does...thanks for enlightening me. History does not seem to support an effective non-army CDS.



I think you might be well advised to suck back and reload. You are not impressing anyone here with your posts.
This isn't a forum where you get to disrespect your fellow service men and women in a different element.


----------



## Franko

*Back on topic troops.*

Gen Hillier is indeed a "new style" of leader, compared to previous persons in that job.  Few have been so widely recognised outside of the CF. 
*
The Army.ca Staff*


----------



## GAP

> History does not seem to support an effective non-army CDS



Other than trying to support his basic statement above in a poorly worded, undiplomatic way, is he that far out?


----------



## Edward Campbell

There are several factors which make a CDS more or less ‘effective’ in the ever present task of securing the necessary resources for the CF.  The main one is: government reliance on the CF.  Put simply: if they need us they will give us resources (money for people, kit and O&M); if they don’t they won’t.

Gen. Hillier is fortunate in serving when the governments needs us and ‘feeds’ us.  Other excellent people - VAdm Larry Murray comes to mind as my personal favourite - were every bit as able as Gen. Hillier in every possible respect, they ere excellent commanders and leaders (and I agree with a previous poster who said these are not quite the same thing) and skilled workers in Ottawa’s bureaucratic vineyards too boot, but they did not _bring home the bacon_ for the simple reason that there was none - the government had turned off the taps.  Absent a real battle to be fought with real bullets there was no way - *none at all* - to turn the taps on.  In the same circumstances, Gen. Hillier, I am 100% confident, would have fared no better than e.g. Gen. Dextraze or VAdm Murray.

Gen. Hillier is an exceptional CDS and he has had the support of the government and he has been able to secure some of the resources we need.  Mind you, most of the plans and projects which Gen. Hillier is seeing through to fruition were initiated, nurtured and supported by his predecessors and I am also sure that he would be last person to bad mouth them for their foresight and perseverance.


----------



## kratz

GAP said:
			
		

> Other than trying to support his basic statement above in a poorly worded, undiplomatic way, is he that far out?



I'll bite at the question GAP.

I've known many senior Naval leaders who would have been considered as a great CDS but were never appointed for various reasons. When considering the process of sharing the post of CDS between the elements and political timing are considered, those Naval leaders who have held the helm as CDS have had a tough course to steer. 

I have great respect for the current CDS as he is getting the job done, has earned and keeps the troops' respect and is an overall leader who we should be following now.


----------



## GAP

+1

I, also think Edward's post clearly explained the why's and why nots


----------



## Just a Guy

I have worked for the last three CDS's at some point of my career. Huge differences between each, one thing that has stuck with me was hearing General Hillier say (btw has a brillance the depth of which most are not given the chance to see) he could not presently accomplish his job if General Henault had not steadied the organization during a time of great Governmental unrest. I would argue, and the Chief would doubtless agree, that he could not have done what General Henault did, neither could Henault have done what Hillier is doing. The great thing about history is that it tends to demonstrate that different challenges need different leaders. 

Just a Guy


----------



## Cloud Cover

Hillier also appears to have brought a visible plan and a warrior centric vision that was at least initially bought into by all levels. If nothing else, he has an ability to motivate and appears to instill confidence in those he leads provided they share his visions. He scares the shit out of a fair number of people as well. Without commenting on the fairness of the following, it seems to me the stabilizing effect of Henault mentioned by JAG was cloaked by his fairly significant reputation of being seen by the ranks as being too politically acceptable to the Libs- in other words creating the impression he was a completely neutered military man.  I accept he was a bit of a fence mender, however his behind the scenes work did little in terms of building motivation, and he did not seem to be able to counter the element of distrust  within the army and Navy, although I believe the air force and purple types were somewhat more likely to give him some slack.


----------



## Cloud Cover

Interesting- this is the same guy who pretty much appeared to have crapped his pants in a press briefing when a reporter started asking questions about a clip shown by the US of a CF-18 attacking a target in Kosovo.


----------



## GAP

Different preceptions and POV....people, most people expect Military Officials, especially those wearing the uniform and being in charge, to be clear, concise, and straightforward. If the image does not come across that way, they are then pigeonholed as something else.


----------



## Good2Golf

Just a Guy and others had the opportunity to see Henault head off much of Chretien's distaste for the military.  He will be someone that will likely not receive acknowledgement of his efforts commensurate with the degree to which I believe they kept the CF going during difficult time (governmentally and socially.)  If anything, Henault conducted shaping operations (including not getting fired by Chretien) that many would argue set the conditions for Hillier to operate within with such success today.  Both are different people, but I have a great amount of respect for both.  Gen Hillier is fantastic motivationally in a way that I would never expect from Henault.  Both have great military and political acumen, then Gen Hillier happens to camouflage for the most part...make no mistake, however, the "simple" soldier from the Rock is anything but!  Hopefully he continues to provide his operationally-focused leadership to the CF for a long time to come...lord knows, there are days he looks very tired.  I wish him the best!

G2G


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Just a Guy and others had the opportunity to see Henault head off much of Chretien's distaste for the military.  He will be someone that will likely not receive acknowledgement of his efforts commensurate with the degree to which I believe they kept the CF going during difficult time (governmentally and socially.)  If anything, Henault conducted shaping operations (including not getting fired by Chretien) that many would argue set the conditions for Hillier to operate within with such success today.  Both are different people, but I have a great amount of respect for both.  Gen Hillier is fantastic motivationally in a way that I would never expect from Henault.  Both have great military and political acumen, then Gen Hillier happens to camouflage for the most part...make no mistake, however, the "simple" soldier from the Rock is anything but!  Hopefully he continues to provide his operationally-focused leadership to the CF for a long time to come...lord knows, there are days he looks very tired.  I wish him the best!
> 
> G2G



Agreed and if he were not a good leader I doubt that he would have been selected for the NATO post he holds today. And just for that bloke that was accusing the Navy and AF of having poor leaders the last Canadian guy to hold the NATO post was Admiral Robert Falls....an excellent CDS who had the misfortune to serve during the Trudeau years of desolation (Oh yeah he was a decorated WW2 Naval aviator who commanded the Bonaventure and the East Coast Fleet)...not such a shabby leader.


----------



## dynaglide

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070216/hillier_prop_070216/20070216?hub=Canada

Comments?


----------



## Edward Campbell

This, reproduced under the Fair Dealing (§29) provisions of the Copyright Act is from today’s _Globe And Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070216.whillier0216/BNStory/National/home 


> Hillier laments military's 'decade of darkness' under Grits
> 
> Canadian Press
> 
> OTTAWA — A Liberal MP accused the country's top soldier Friday of being “a prop” for the Conservative party after he described the 1990s as “a decade of darkness” for the military.
> 
> General Rick Hillier, the chief of the defence staff, said in a speech to a defence group earlier in the day that the Canadian Forces faced troubled times after 1994 in a period when the Liberals worked to balance the federal budget with heavy spending cuts.
> 
> Liberal MP Denis Coderre said he is disappointed that Gen. Hillier would describe the Liberal era in such terms, and he called the general's highly political and inappropriate.
> 
> Mr. Coderre said the Liberals under Paul Martin proposed adding billions to the defence budget.
> 
> Gen. Hillier says he is not a politician and he describes things as accurately and bluntly as he can.



While I think the description is both apt and accurate, Gen. Hillier’s comment was bound to create some controversy – I’m sure he knew that going in.  I’m fairly sure his staff had the courtesy to pass the speech by the Minister’s office – DND’s ‘voice’ at the Conference of Defence Association’s annual meeting used to be fairly well coordinated in order to ensure that the MND, DM and CDS did not contradict one another in public.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Wooops ... I didn't see this when I posted the _Globe and Mail_'s version and my comments in the General Hillier thread.

Perhaps the Mods can merge them ...


----------



## career_radio-checker

> Liberal MP Denis Coderre says he is disappointed that Hillier would describe the Liberal era in such terms.



Ohhhhh to be Hillier for this comback  

"Well Mr. honerable member sir, *gets big black DND 'expediture cut/operational increase book from podium* I'm sure you'd like to have some proof. Don't mind the target circles around Chreatien and Matin's pictures that's part of DND's interdepartmental stamping system." 

Sadly, I feel that Hillier's statement would put him in his own coffin if the liberals ever got back in power. Pray the day never comes, pray I tell you!


----------



## Cardstonkid

According to Coderre the Lieberals (gee, can you see my political bias) "proposed" Billions of dollars for defense spending; of course that is the problem. The Lieberals "propose" to do many things, but they often do little. Kyoto, and the military come to mind. 

It is being argued here that the military has no right to speak up for its own interests.That is a rediculous idea. The military needs to be more politicaly active. Soldiers, especially senior soldiers need to have blunt assesments of the CF made public. No political parties need be mentioned, just tell it like it is. Gen. Hillier is doing what needs to be done.  Good on him!


----------



## Roy Harding

dynaglide said:
			
		

> http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070216/hillier_prop_070216/20070216?hub=Canada
> 
> Comments?



I worked daily with Gen Hillier in Banja Luka, in 2000/2001 - when he was the Div Comd of MND(SW) in Bosnia.

The man certainly is "blunt" and not afraid to ruffle feathers - should he perceive that as being necessary.  He is also a "soldier's soldier", who inspires his troops with blunt and direct talk and actions.  I admire him for this ability - American commanders that I've worked for in the past seem to possess these qualities more frequently than our own senior leadership - I don't know why, and I've never attempted to analyze it - just an observation on my part.

What the liberals (and all the OTHER politicians) want to be wary of is his brilliance.  Gen Hillier's demeanour and straight-talking mask an intellect of prodigious proportions.  At times I think that his public persona is a deliberate construct - meant to keep his opponents unwary and off-balance.  At other times I think he's just a great guy who didn't let his brilliance overshadow his basic nature.

Either way - I'm not surprised that the Liberals are making such claims - of course they conveniently forget to mention that Gen Hillier was appointed CDS on THEIR watch!


Roy


----------



## Colin Parkinson

sent to CTV


The liberals bled the forces dry and then expected miracles from them when needed. Now they are upset that the top soldier tells them the truth about how they bungled it? 

You will reap what you sow and now that the Liberals are no longer in power the people that had to serve them and suffer under them are finally speaking out. The Canadian Forces was a victim of Liberal malicie and bungling. Good riddance I say and I hope they get to spend the next decade paying penance for their sins.

The Conservatives have breathed new life into the Forces and when you speak to a soldier you can feel the new energy that they have. Don’t forget the forces are our sons, daughters, fathers and mothers. They deserve the best that we can afford.


----------



## Cardstonkid

The Lieberals must be nashing at their teeth that 1. THEY chose Hillier 2. THEY sent the troops to Afghanistan 

I am sure they are kicking themselves for keping the military at all. They are probably wishing the CF had been converted to a peace police that handed out flowers whilst leaping in the air. If only they had listend to Peirre Truedea and Alan Rock. IF only Svend Robinson would run as a Lieberal and lead them back to ther "roots". After all these are the "Canadian Values" that only REAL Canadians value. :rage:


----------



## Bane

Where did all this budget surplus that we see today come from again? And who put the in country into the biggest deficits in our nations history? Perhaps the blame is falling one primeminster to late?
I don't like any of the parties over any other, Harper is doing a fine job, proven himself an adaptable guy. But let's not forget basic fiscal managment, and the long term picture.


----------



## BernDawg

I caught part of the speech this AM and all he did was tell it like it is/was.  The CDS was not liberal bashing (openly anyway).  He said it had been a dark decades for us and it has been.  We have to improve the recruiting process and we are.  We've had to assimilate the lessons we've learned faster than we used to and we will. These are just a few points I picked up on (hard to see the captioning when you're bouncing up and down on the elliptical!)  Once again The Boss gave it to them with both barrels and just told the truth but that has been shown to be something that the Libs are incapable of anyway.

Remember, for the love of God, vote PC!


----------



## GAP

I don't see anything untoward with Hiller's comments. He just stated facts as they were, in context as to how far the CF has come and has to go. Excellent speech!!


----------



## Edward Campbell

Bane said:
			
		

> Where did all this budget surplus that we see today come from again?  Radical, necessary but too often misdirected cuts to spending plus over-taxation.  The surplus came from our pockets; no other source.
> 
> And who put the in country into the biggest deficits in our nations history?  Pierre Trudeau who initiated a series of unaffordable social programmes and the _culture of entitlement_ which made them a 'sacred trust.'  The deficits started in Trudeau's term; Mulroney failed to cut deeply enough to stop the interest on Trudeau's debt from compounding the problem.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Bane said:
			
		

> Where did all this budget surplus that we see today come from again? And who put the in country into the biggest deficits in our nations history? Perhaps the blame is falling one primeminster to late?
> I don't like any of the parties over any other, Harper is doing a fine job, proven himself an adaptable guy. But let's not forget basic fiscal managment, and the long term picture.



Yeah, let's forget:
1)  It was Trudeau who initiated the spending programs that eventually would run us into deficit without also creating the requisite revenue sources to fund those programs.
2)  It was Muldoon who implemented the GST which generated $35+ billion per annum, the existence of which the Liberals campaigned on removing (which they lied about).  It has since its inception being the only thing keeping Canada 'in the black'.
3)  The other savings that put the Federal Government into surpluses was by slashing and burning the provincial transfers by Paul Martin which in turn required the provinces to increase their own taxes, or increase tuitions, and otherwise cut and pare back most primary services.

Let's not forget indeed....


Matthew.    :


----------



## Bane

I agree with all of what was just said except about the GST and muldoon, the GST was created in 91 by the tory's. Yes it replaced the MST, but it was a very different creature so that analysis doesn't follow.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

Found this on the news today, I guess the Liberals are getting on the defensive after 20+ years of letting the military slide in oblivion. Ha looks good on them. The CDS is right on the money!



> *The country's top soldier was branded as being a "prop" for the reigning Conservatives after he depicted the 1990s as a "decade of darkness" for the military.*
> 
> In a speech to a defence group on Friday, Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier said the Canadian Forces dealt with troubled times from 1994 onwards when the Liberals worked to balance the federal budget with heavy budget cuts.
> 
> The Canadian Forces had only now begun to "fully realize the negative impact of the defense expenditure reduction from 1994 and the lasting, most negative, legacy that they brought into effect which has to be put right," the outspoken general told the annual meeting of the Conference of Defence Associations.
> 
> The military was deprived of money it needed for education, training, postings, equipment, fleets as the same time as it increased the number of operations, he said.
> 
> "Those actions, dollar deprived, have now led to some deep wounds in ... the Canadian Forces over this past, what I would call, a decade of darkness," Hillier said Friday.
> 
> Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre blasted Hillier's speech, saying it was inappropriate that he described the Liberal era in such a way.
> 
> Coderre defended the party's legacy, saying that the Liberals under Paul Martin proposed adding $13 million to the defence budget.
> 
> "We also have to understand that, when we came to power in 1993, we inherited a deficit of $40 billion and we had also to take care of some of the priorities including the quality of life of the people. So, talking today about 10 years of darkness, I don't think it's appropriate, I think it's highly political and I am very disappointed at it," Coderre told reporters.
> 
> "To get involved in politics, there is one way: You should run."
> 
> But Hillier defended his comments.
> 
> "I think there would be many people who would line up to say I'm not a politician. I don't tread in those waters," he said after his speech.
> 
> "My job as Chief of Defence staff is described clearly. And hopefully I paint a picture for Canadians, for our government, on what the state of the Armed Forces is. I have described it about three, or three-and-a-half years ago as we were in a decade of darkness with respect to what we needed to do versus we were being asked to do. And, as I said this morning, we've gone through a decades of darkness and we are starting to come out of it and like it or not that's the description of the Canadian Forces."
> 
> During his speech on Friday, Hillier also underscored the importance of bidding farewell to the troops as they head out on their missions and welcoming them back when they return.
> 
> He recounted that the first time he left for a mission, he received phone calls from friends, and his wife and two sons took him to the airport and bid him a tearful farewell.
> 
> The second time he left, however, he never heard from his friends and his sons stayed behind.
> 
> The third time he left, his wife took him to the airport and left him at the curb outside, Hillier recounted, drawing laughs.
> 
> "We've gotten a lot better since those times," he said.
> 
> Hillier cited a patriotic pep rally he attended at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in January that celebrated the military and its mission in Afghanistan before the troops departed for six months.
> 
> "We had 5,000 people out there in the worst weather that Gagetown can offer up in late January and the folks were out there, the emotion was high, premiers were out, lieutenant governors were out, the media was out and it was one of those events that was just cemented into the minds of those soldiers," Hillier said.
> 
> The message to the troops, he said, is that "you are important. We need you to do this mission and we're going to ensure that you are supported



 Source:http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20070216%2fhillier_prop_070216&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True


----------



## BernDawg

If any one finds a link to the transcript of todays speech please let me know via here or PM.  I would like a copy for the OPME I'm working on.
Thanks


----------



## enfield

This seems to getting a lot of play in the media, unfortunately.

This is hardly the first time the CDS has describe the post-'94 period as a "decade of darkness", and I believe similar statements have been made by other analysts and commentators. It is up to the Liberal Defence critic, if he truly sees this as a "political" and incorrect statement, to prove otherwise - to prove it was _not_ a decade of cuts, loss of capability, disrespect, and problems stemming from lack of support from the Government. The disbanding of the Airborne and the the Sea King fiasco stand out as two of many blunders made by the Government in this period.

By *any* objective measurement it was a bad decade for the military, and its easy to show how the cuts of the 90's have led to some of today's problems - lack of experienced techs and NCOs, aging equipment, etc. Many of the investments being made today are simply catching up to where we were ten years ago, buying things that should have been bought years ago and filling funding gaps that were opened a decade ago.

However, I don't see the "decade of darkness" as a Liberal-centric problem. I don't see how - with the deficit, the post-Cold War attitude, and the priorities of the Canadian public - a Conservative government could or would have done any different. (Personally, I also feel that the recent spending increases would have been done by either party if they were in power, because that is what the public demands at this time. But maybe I'm just an optimist)

The Honourabe Denis Coderre needs to step back into his lane. The Chief of Defence Staff was giving a valid professional opinion at a gathering of interested professionals and colleagues. And, unfortunately, the CDS is right and The Liberal critic will have a tough time proving otherwise.


----------



## observor 69

"Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre blasted Hillier's speech, saying it was inappropriate that he described the Liberal era in such a way."

Quebec Liberals Trudeau, Chretien, Martin and Coderre, anyone see a pattern.  

Sarcasm on. Nice to see the politician Coderre doesn't let common sense get in the way of slagging Hillier. /sarcasm
I'm getting real tired of the new Liberal defence critic shooting his mouth off on defence matters he either doesn't understand or more likely doesn't have any idea of the importance of.

Dion should rein this amateur in but that's unlikely from a Liberal academic.

Is there no one in the Liberal party who could provide informed criticism of the CPC defence policies ?


----------



## cplcaldwell

> Is there no one in the Liberal party who could provide informed criticism of the CPC defence policies ?



Not from what I've seen in the last year.

And it's a pity. It would be nice to have a dialogue in this country on important issues, maybe just once in a while. With his political rant M Coderre has managed to completely derail what could have been the beginning of a decent discussion on defence.

Whither the CF?

Now we will get three or four days of ranting from both sides instead of someone, who has the ear of the press saying "Well, General, I hear what you're saying, the milk is spilt, so how would you have us proceed??"

Someone once told me that Canada could have had it all, with our founding nations and our close proximity to the Americans we could have had British politics, French culture, and American know-how. Alas, he went on, we ended up with British know-how, French politics and American culture.

French politics indeed.


----------



## FSTO

Bane said:
			
		

> Where did all this budget surplus that we see today come from again? And who put the in country into the biggest deficits in our nations history? Perhaps the blame is falling one primeminster to late?
> I don't like any of the parties over any other, Harper is doing a fine job, proven himself an adaptable guy. But let's not forget basic fiscal management, and the long term picture.


The budget deficits were brought in by Trudeau and his party, the chicken finally came to roost during the Mulroney years. While he could have done more to fight the debt and deficit, the liberals fought him tooth and nail on every initiative to get spending under control. The best thing Mulroney did was bring in GST which has become the cash cow that it is today. The only reason that the liberals can claim to be the ones to get us out of debt was because they reneged on their plan to axe the GST and Paul Martin was given free hand to get spending under control (also the oil boom in Western Canada and the Atlantic coast helped alot)


----------



## Mud

Look I'm no big fan of Liberal defence policy in the 90's, that was the decade I did my brief stint in the army and considered a full time career, but let's be honest, our nation could not have cared less about defence at that time.  The liberals could have continued with their part-financially, part-ideologically driven draw-down of the military but very few people would have cared.  I was actively involved in Reform at the time and their pledge of a stronger defence policy got very little traction .  Let me say it again - nobody in this country cared about defence.  

And let's remember that it was the Tories that promised so much on this issue in '87 and delivered instead continued neglet and cuts.  I'm amazed how many times I run into people who don't realize it was the Tories that axed the Chinooks.  Let's try not to look at our political history through such darkly tinted ideological lenses, politicians will always act in self interest, not in the interest of the fighting men and women.

And kudos to the CDS for telling it as it is.

And blaming the Liberals for the Tory majority's inability to cut deficits?...please....


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Mud said:
			
		

> Look I'm no big fan of Liberal defence policy in the 90's, that was the decade I did my brief stint in the army and considered a full time career, but let's be honest, our nation could not have cared less about defence at that time.  The liberals could have continued with their part-financially, part-ideologically driven draw-down of the military but very few people would have cared.  I was actively involved in Reform at the time and their pledge of a stronger defence policy got very little traction .  Let me say it again - nobody in this country cared about defence.
> 
> And let's remember that it was the Tories that promised so much on this issue in '87 and delivered instead continued neglet and cuts.  I'm amazed how many times I run into people who don't realize it was the Tories that axed the Chinooks.  Let's try not to look at our political history through such darkly tinted ideological lenses, politicians will always act in self interest, not in the interest of the fighting men and women.
> 
> And kudos to the CDS for telling it as it is.
> 
> And blaming the Liberals for the Tory majority's inability to cut deficits?...please....



I agree Mud. Me thinks Coderre protests too much. The decade of darkness included almost four years of Tory rule under Brian Mulroney also. I was on exercise in Pet with 427 Tac Hel (TACK HELL!!) in 91 (Brian's watch) when we received the message about the demise of the Chinooks and the draw down of CFE. There were a lot of long faces on the flight line that morning. Coderre being all defensive about the CDS' comments just goes to show that the Liberals have lots to feel guilty about too.

Let's face it the collapse of the Soviet Bloc convinced the Politicians that they could stop spending money on us and they did...whatever political stripe they happened to be.

We've got some traction right now and people are listening. Who really gave a Monkey's about what people said at the Defense Association's talks in the past? The fact that this is gaining National coverage and reaction is proof that the Military has a new importance in our country. Our CDS has helped to make that so at an opportune time when the Nation needs to look to the security of us all.


----------



## observor 69

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> I agree Mud. Me thinks Coderre protests too much. The decade of darkness included almost four years of Tory rule under Brian Mulroney also. I was on exercise in Pet with 427 Tac Hel (TACK HELL!!) in 91 (Brian's watch) when we received the message about the demise of the Chinooks and the draw down of CFE. There were a lot of long faces on the flight line that morning. Coderre being all defensive about the CDS' comments just goes to show that the Liberals have lots to feel guilty about too.
> 
> Let's face it the collapse of the Soviet Bloc convinced the Politicians that they could stop spending money on us and they did...whatever political stripe they happened to be.
> 
> We've got some traction right now and people are listening. Who really gave a Monkey's about what people said at the Defense Association's talks in the past? The fact that this is gaining National coverage and reaction is proof that the Military has a new importance in our country. Our CDS has helped to make that so at an opportune time when the Nation needs to look to the security or us all.



Good post but I remain sightly puzzled. Was the speech just a CDS telling it like it is, as some say is the duty of a CDS, or was it straying into the political?


----------



## HDE

I'd imagine an objective look at the numbers, personnel, budgets, etc would quickly make it clear how accurate Hillier's comments were.  If the numbers show a significant drawdown in personnel and considerable shrinkage in funding that'd provide considerable reason to think that it'd have a very negative impact on the state of the CF, particularly if how many of the "proposed" things Coderre refers to actually came to pass is tossed in.  Looks like a good topic for a CBC "Reality Check" piece.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

My personal opinion (which combined with 1.46 will get you a large double double) is that the CDS was being brutally frank, as is his custom. He did not specifically say the Liberals done us wrong. Coderre, who is a former Chretien Cabinet Minister, decided to take it as a political attack. I heard him on the World at Six tonight on CBC saying "I am offended." Hey...the truth always hurts and if the shoe fits wear it man! :


----------



## GUNS

As much as I respect our present CDS for his "soldiers" approach to putting backbone back into the CF. He should not forget , " never bite the hand that feed you". I have to admit I was taken back by his public statement of " decade of darkness", even though I totally agree with the statement.

A 'loose cannon" is not needed, no matter what ship( political party) it is on.


----------



## Recon_Guardsman

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/16/coderre-hillier.html

This makes me incredibly angry. The Liberals spend 10 years destroying the military, and when Hiller points it out, they bash him for being a conservative? 

Read the part where the MP says 'he's offended'. He's offended because Hillier gave a good description of whats happened to the CF. Who the hell does he think he is to be offended? How about all of us and how the government has hurt us for so long? The ignorance of these people just amazes me. I used to be moderately supporting the Liberals, but when they pull this stuff (especially this incident and the 'soldiers in our cities' attack ad), I just want to snap.


----------



## Edward Campbell

I’m pretty old fashioned, which goes with just being pretty old, so I have some pretty old fashioned ideas.  One of them, which I have previously shared with Army.ca readers, is that military officers ought to be quiet unless speaking about the conduct of operations or the business of leading and managing the forces in being.  Policy is the proper domain of elected politicians and a small cadre of senior civil servants.

That being said, these are not the ‘good old days’ and my ideas may well be out of date.

All over the Western World politicians and bureaucrats are failing in their duties and passing the burdens to military officers.  Defence Chiefs are, routinely, called to parliamentary committees to comment on and even justify decisions which are, properly and constitutionally none of their business.  This happens because ministers (former US Defence Secretary Rumsfeld being the exception who proved the rule) are either ignorant of the nuts, guts and feathers of their portfolios or afraid to say anything lest they same something wrong or, worse, stupid – most likely a combination of ignorance, irresponsibility and cowardice on the part of ministers.

Admirals and generals have been co-opted into the political sphere.  The CDS, being appointed by the PM, has always had a foot in both camps but I observe – not just in Canada – that more and more senior officers are in the public eye more and more often.  That, being in the public eye, was _”not done”_ just a few years ago – well 10 or 15 is a _few_ for me.

So, is Hillier being political?  Yes.  Is that wrong?  No, but he may pay a price for it.  Adm John Anderson did, back in ’93 when Jean Chrétien summarily fired him for saying, in public, that the CF (Navy) needed new helicopters to replace the aging (_waaaaay_ back then!) Sea Kings.  Is he a "loose cannon"?  No.  I'm sure, as I said earlier, that his remarks were considered - as were the potential consequences, good and bad.  He may be a cannon but, if so, he's carefully aimed.


----------



## Flip

Particularly ironic - Hillier was appointed to his job under the liberals.
I'm not making this up!

If the management of any other arm of the government said anything similar
they'd get zero noise over it.

With Kyoto accord, the liberals sign and do nothing for years, 
then it's Harpers' problem that the job can't be done.

What seems most dismall of all, I think they actually believe their own spin.

You could say I'm so angry I'm blue - like the little card in my wallet. ;D


----------



## retiredgrunt45

Ah yes, Cold war is over, lets forget about the military, we don't need them anymore. The soviet empire is bankrupt we don't have enemies anymore, isn't life great!

 9/11 comes along. 

 Phone rings...

 George Bush. "Hey John, we res your army? 

 Chretien "Geese George the cold war is over, didn't you get the memo?

 Bush. Geese John , haven't you heard of Osama Bin Laden?

 Chretien. "Whats that George a new restaurant? 

 Bush. No John its the b@#$%$# who just blew up 2 of my buildings in New York City!!

 Chretien. A George, no need to worry we can help. Let me talk to my defense minister and I'll get back to you. click...

 Next day

 Phone rings...

Chretien. " Hallo George, how are you"? 

Bush. "OK John, what can your give me"?

Chretien. "Well George it seems that we have a problem". "We just disbanded the army and Paul put the money into welfare and social programs?" Sorry bud, but it looks like Osamo's all yours" Oh if you need some heavy lift helicopters, we sold ours to the Netherlands, they can probably help if your in a pinch, sorry again pal. click"

Bush. "%%$$#%%$$#@#$$^^%%$


----------



## a_majoor

Just on naming which decade was darkest......

ttp://www.bloggingtories.ca/btFrameset.php?URL=http://www.civitatensis.ca/archives/2007/02/16/1959&title=General%20Hillier%20is%20Wrong



> *General Hillier is Wrong*
> 
> The head of Canada’s armed forces [General Rick Hillier] was accused of playing partisan politics today after he told a meeting of defence experts that the military was coming out of the “decade of darkness” that began with the Liberal government in 1994.
> 
> I think the spirit of what the General is saying is correct but he is somewhat wrong. The Canadian military has been under attack from the federal government and in an age of darkness since the 1960s. That’s not a partisan statement because Brian Mulroney was no friend of the troops either.
> 
> Perhaps what General Hillier means to say is that the last decade was the darkest in the last four.


----------



## Cloud Cover

Political. He fucked up. They'll get over it. He'll move on. Every doggie has his day. End of story.


----------



## kilekaldar

All I can say is: WTF is Coderre on?? Does he honestly believe what he's saying? In any case I take this as a sign that if the Liberals regain power they'll toss out the best CDS we've had in a long time for the sake of party politics.


Liberal MP slams Hillier as Conservative 'prop'
Last Updated: Friday, February 16, 2007 | 4:47 PM ET 
CBC News 
Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre accused Canada's top soldier of being a "prop" for the Tories after Gen. Rick Hillier described the period of budget cuts to the military that began in 1994 as the "decade of darkness."

"I'm offended today," the Quebec MP said following the speech Hillier gave Friday to a defence group in Ottawa.

"We have a chief of defence staff who spoke about 10 years of darkness. I never thought that he would become a prop to the Conservative party."

Although Hillier didn't name the Liberals specifically, he spoke of the challenges the Canadian forces still face because of budget cuts that began in 1994, when the Liberals were in power.

"Over this past one to two years, we have begun to fully realize the immense, the negative impact of the … defence expenditure reductions from 1994 and the lasting most negative legacy that they brought into effect which has to be put right."

Hillier said those cuts to resources, combined with the increase in operations conducted by the Canadian forces around the world, have led to a military that is "fragile," with some parts "on a life support system."

Liberal MP slams Hillier as Conservative 'prop'
Last Updated: Friday, February 16, 2007 | 4:47 PM ET 
CBC News 
Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre accused Canada's top soldier of being a "prop" for the Tories after Gen. Rick Hillier described the period of budget cuts to the military that began in 1994 as the "decade of darkness."

"I'm offended today," the Quebec MP said following the speech Hillier gave Friday to a defence group in Ottawa.

"We have a chief of defence staff who spoke about 10 years of darkness. I never thought that he would become a prop to the Conservative party."

Although Hillier didn't name the Liberals specifically, he spoke of the challenges the Canadian forces still face because of budget cuts that began in 1994, when the Liberals were in power.

"Over this past one to two years, we have begun to fully realize the immense, the negative impact of the … defence expenditure reductions from 1994 and the lasting most negative legacy that they brought into effect which has to be put right."

Hillier said those cuts to resources, combined with the increase in operations conducted by the Canadian forces around the world, have led to a military that is "fragile," with some parts "on a life support system."


----------



## midget-boyd91

kilekaldar said:
			
		

> I take this as a sign that if the Liberals regain power they'll toss out the best CDS we've had in a long time for the sake of party politics.


Welcome to the carribbean wonderful world of Canadian politics mate.  
  The military and its head members have always been things to chew up during periods of elections/threats of an impending election.

BTW: this topic is being discussed in another thread.


----------



## GUNS

There is not a soldier (former,present or future) in Canada who does not support the CDS. He has done more for the CF than most and I hope he gets to do even more. We all must realize that the CF has always been the first to suffer when money is short, it was going on when I joined in 67. Every word the CDS spoke are true but the timing of those words is what is in question. As a former soldier I find no fault in the CDS telling the facts as they are, we as soldiers know them to be true. Politicians by rule will not give you a straight answer. There only concern is not to piss-off the PM and stay elected long enough to draw a pension. 
If the CDS is not a true blue Tory then his remarks should be received as a CDS just looking after his soldiers, nothing more. His presentation of facts is not in question, its his timing that is causing the Liberals to sweat.
I am sure the CDS will weather this and I agree with what was mentioned in a earlier post. He maybe a "loose cannon" but he plans his shots well.

The Liberals now know the meaning of " the truth hurts "


----------



## RangerRay

Vote on this online poll at the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/



> Did Gen. Rick Hillier overstep by saying the Canadian Forces suffered a 'decade of darkness' under the former Liberal government.
> 
> Yes
> (43%) 2061 votes
> 
> No
> (57%) 2684 votes
> 
> Total votes: 4745


----------



## observor 69

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> So, is Hillier being political?  Yes.  Is that wrong?  No, but he may pay a price for it.  Adm John Anderson did, back in ’93 when Jean Chrétien summarily fired him for saying, in public, that the CF (Navy) needed new helicopters to replace the aging (_waaaaay_ back then!) Sea Kings.  Is he a "loose cannon"?  No.  I'm sure, as I said earlier, that his remarks were considered - as were the potential consequences, good and bad.  He may be a cannon but, if so, he's carefully aimed.



Couple of thoughts from overnight.  The CDS also said that the military still has a number of areas "on life support", the message here to the present government being that the damage from the 90's has yet to be rectified. Second ref the partisan uninformed comments from Denis Coderre, Hillier is a Tory "prop", the Liberal opposition 2IC Michael Ignatief smiled and said something along the lines of well Denis does get carried away sometimes.


----------



## The Bread Guy

A bit more grist for the "how's Hillier doing?" mill already grinding away pretty well here, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*Showdown over military's direction rankles top general* 
Don Martin, CanWest News Service, 17 Feb 07
Article Link

A debilitating bout of double vision hit Canada's top soldier when he was handed new marching orders after last January's cabinet shuffle.

Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier looked down a long list of fresh government priorities on the revamped "mandate letter," costed out the demands in his head and told his political master it couldn't be done without a helluva lot more troops, or billions more dollars.

Hillier, you see, won't accept assignments he cannot deliver. But equally headstrong Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor won't take no for an answer. And that's why some sources insist there's a cold war raging atop Canada's military.

It's fair to say the two men don't get along personally. Big brass egos rarely do, particularly when there's history in their relationship.

Retired general O'Connor used to be Hillier's boss, but fell just short in his dream of reaching the top spot in the military's command. And there's understandable jealousy breaking out as the media-savvy Hillier attracts rock-star billing and his troops' adoration while crusty O'Connor delivers the equipment and gets written up as a belligerent blowhard.

Besides, Hillier is toying with a post-military career in politics, perhaps in his native Newfoundland and Labrador, where there's already giddy speculation swirling he'll eventually become the Rock's premier.

But Canada's at a critical point in balancing its defence obligations domestically and internationally that demands a clear and focused vision as a re-emerging military middle power. The last thing it needs is a five-star battle raging internally while a strategic plan is lacking.

So, how serious is the bad blood?

Well, sources say O'Connor has prohibited Hillier from talking to the Prime Minister's Office without his permission, something Liberals insist is a new way of doing business between supreme leaders.

By most accounts, there was a very acrimonious showdown last month when O'Connor rolled out a six-page attachment to the mandate letter that diverted soldiers to protect Arctic sovereignty and put them in position around a dozen cities as emergency responders.

It's a prohibitively costly exercise that will lay claim to thousands of already scarce troops who are needed on international fronts, particularly with the Taliban on the rise. The way some military brass see it, a domestic priority is admirable, but those soldiers just train for eventualities that may never come.

Still, O'Connor is adamant that his Canada First defence policy is critical and has infuriated the brass by demanding Hillier plan for the questionable deployment of a rapid-reaction battalion to Goose Bay, N.L., and the relocation of the Joint Task Force 2 to Trenton, Ont., which seems more to do with electioneering than legitimate military manoeuvres.

It all came to a head a few weeks ago when a top-level military meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper was scrubbed at the last minute because officials felt no consensus was possible.

Perhaps Hillier has cause to be confused. He keeps hearing the prime minister rattle Canada's sabre with talk of reasserting our place on a global scale, a view Hillier wholeheartedly supports, yet he keeps getting a domestic push from his minister.

To be fair, others close to the top insist the two men have patched things up. The minister's office acknowledges, in its usual not-for-attribution style, that Hillier had initially balked at the ambitious list of demands, but was pacified when he was promised the resources to deliver on both fronts.

That olive branch seemed to be on display Friday when Hillier went decidedly partisan in a speech to the Conference of Defence Associations, insisting the Conservatives have brought the military out from a "decade of darkness."

But Hillier's on-side words don't mask the looming showdown over insufficient budgets to stretch over divided priorities.

The rumbles from inside Finance are not encouraging. After the environment takes a hefty slice of the surplus, and billions more are diverted to Quebec and Ontario to resolve the fiscal imbalance, the military seems unlikely to be a windfall winner.

That sets up a showdown in a military trying to appease two politicians who could splinter the department into ineffective forces on both fronts.

Hillier sees the military as a growing international peacemaking force. O'Connor wants to put soldiers into Coast Guard and RCMP roles for national sovereignty and security.

Canada's military brass needs to see clearly into a focused and effective future. That won't happen if double vision, blinded by conflicting personalities, clouds the military's judgment.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Couple of thoughts from overnight.  The CDS also said that the military still has a number of areas "on life support", the message here to the present government being that the damage from the 90's has yet to be rectified. Second ref the partisan uninformed comments from Denis Coderre, Hillier is a Tory "prop", the Liberal opposition 2IC Michael Ignatief smiled and said something along the lines of well Denis does get carried away sometimes.


 :rage:

What kills me is down here in Halifax this darned liberal leaning rag called the Chronicle Herald prints that as a headline....picture of Hillier in CADPAT and beside it "Tory prop?"
they can't even begin to present a semblance of balance in their reporting....grrrrr


----------



## Northernguardian

The Liberals must be regretting their decision to appoint Hillier as CDS. They probably wish that they had appointed someone like De Chastelain. His honest assessment of the "decade of darkness" has hit a nerve. It is so refreshing to serve under such a man.

As we approach an election, the CDS has become a target for the Liberals, a foolish decision on their part as it'll only highlight their dismal record. One thing is for sure now, if the Liberals win, we'll lose the best CDS we ever had.


----------



## Clerkyman

Certainly from the standpoint of the soldier he appears to be doing a great job, leading change and "gettin' things done".  How would he have fared in 1994 during the era of chop 'n' save?  His appearance as the saviour of the CF is due in overwhelmingly large part to the current political will to spend money on the military; a will that will not last forever.  He's excellent on TV though but he's way more than the one-dimensional "soldier's soldier" that he's portrayed as - you don't get to be a General without being ruthless and political, among other unpleasant but necessary things.  He is benefitting from perfect timing.


----------



## 3rd Herd

Well Granatstein is now going to have another chapter for his book. Watching several differnet network coverage stories on this it was illuminating as to which sound bits they used. Finally, after years and years we may have a military leader.


----------



## GUNS

Clerkyman, it is true that timing has played a sufficient part in the CDS's popularity. In saying that I believe his personality makes up 75% of how others see him. How would he perform if he was CDS during the lean years, who can say. My opinion is that he would have numerous bootprints on his ass. 
Regardless of his popularity, he is making do with what is available, the CF has been doing that forever. The unfortunate thing from all of this is the undeniable fact that the CDS is a political position. He has two groups of people to serve, his soldiers and his political masters. I fear that if the Liberals(God forbid) regain power, our CDS and the military will slowly return to the old ways.


----------



## Bob Terwilliger

I think Hillier has stated publically what all reasonably informed Canadians already know. The "peace dividend" of the early 90's really meant a wholesale gutting of Canadian Forces (and other western armies as well). I also heard Michael Ignatief on CBC radio last night backpeddling rather adroitly, saying both Codierre and Hillier are "strong personalities" which is Lieberal  double speak for change the subject fast lest it be known that it was 10 years of Lieberal neglect that has put the Forces in a position where tens of billions of dollars are needed just to get back o square one.


----------



## Garett

God forbid someone rock the boat.....


----------



## retiredgrunt45

It's about time someone tipped the boat over and Let the Liberals know exactly what idiots they are!!


----------



## niner domestic

Well, I listened to Hillier's speech (as much as CTV covered that is) and certainly did not get a sense of the CDS being a Tory prop.  

Perhaps it is our overall Canadian mentality of seeing our nation run by leaders who come from the safer environments of law, economics, business and finance as opposed to that of the USA, where for the most part, their leaders have served the country first through their military careers followed by their service to the public in politics.  When our leaders speak, we are used to the cozy words of nation building, economic prosperity, equality and other warm fuzzy, make everyone feel good catch phrases.  American leaders speak in terms of military doctrine, figthing the good fight, and draw upon the frontiership and independence that forged their nation.  When we hear a leader such as Hillier in Canada, speak outside the cozy, warm fuzzy language of unity, mosaic and fiscal restraint and use language often seen in American leadership, we criticise.  We criticise because we aren't used to our leadership coming from the position of leading men and women into combat.  We, as a nation would rather have benign lawyers and economists as our leaders whose only inspiration to lead is the current Bank of Canada rate and where we are on the deficit scale.  

Of course Hillier is going to be criticised by the mainstream politician, those same men and women who left the comfortable offices of Bay Street or the former careers as car salesmen, hockey players or shipping magnates. Those men and women, who have never had to ask a young kid to die for their country or the husband and father to come home broken and maimed because they asked him to fight a fight they themselves would never dream of doing.  Those same men and women who after they tire of playing the "people's representative" can go safely back to their 44th floor office on Bay Street and never again have to think about what they asked of their fellow Canadians to sacrifice in the name of democracy. 

Yes, it's easy to criticise a General who every day has to ask of the men and women who serve their country under his direction to step up to the plate and if need be, sacrifice themselves in the name of democracy.   It's easy for those elected men and women who have no other concern except partisan politics, to call a leader of men and women -  a prop.   It's easy to lash out at the leader who, on his watch has lost men and women when one never has to face the grieving families and can remain safely absconded in a constituency office on the margin of reality.  

I believe we as a nation, are the cusp of change in the way we see leadership. No longer are those who have traditionally lead our country, blindly followed.  The constituents have tired of the bland, morally vacant, ethically bankrupt, talking heads we have elected to lead us in the past.  Times have changed from when a golf pro could lead a province or a well connected, businessperson could just buy enough votes with promises. I believe we are a nation seeking a change to the style of leadership and Rick Hillier is the epitome of that vision for the moment.  Those in power know it and fear it because they can't come within a fraction to what Hillier is doing and all they can do to respond is to criticise him and call him names. Hillier has unwittingly upped the ante of political leadership and the back benchers, hangers on and those who wistfully yearn for greater power don't like it one iota.  

I believe that in the future, we will see more Rick Hilliers on the campaign trails, we'll see men and women who have served their country in uniform running for office and less of the vapid talking head.  Like the States, I believe the our electorate wants to see proven leadership and that will show itself through military/police experience.  

So yes, after listening to Hillier's speech I can see why people like Coderre have nothing to say except to name call.  I mean do we really expect anything more these days from our politicians?  Coderre is staring the new style of leadership in the face in Hillier, and Hillier is a tough act to follow.


----------



## MarkOttawa

A post at _The Torch_:

National Defence critic is Liberal with the truth/Feuding at Fort Ottawa?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/national-defence-critic-is-liberal-with.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Bob Terwilliger

If anyone is interested in letting Dennis know he is offside, drop him a message. I did. Don't forget to mention that what General Hillier said is a matter of public record. 

http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/comments.asp?lang=en


----------



## MarkOttawa

Bob Terwilliger: Suggested he read the post at _The Torch_ mentioned above.  Thanks for tip. 

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## observor 69

Bob Terwilliger said:
			
		

> If anyone is interested in letting Dennis know he is offside, drop him a message. I did. Don't forget to mention that what General Hillier said is a matter of public record.
> 
> http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/comments.asp?lang=en



Beat ya too it.   Sent a zinger his way yesterday, Boy I am beginning to hate that man.


----------



## Bob Terwilliger

In addition to asking Codierre for a public apology, I asked him when exactly his party planned on paying back the Sponsonrship money.


----------



## aesop081

Bob Terwilliger said:
			
		

> In addition to asking Codierre for a public apology, I asked him when exactly his party planned on paying back the Sponsonrship money.



*IF* you get an answer to that one, i would love to see it


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> *IF* you get an answer to that one, i would love to see it



I sent him one too and ended with "the only reason you are offended is because the truth hurts."
Think he'll read it??


----------



## Signalman150

I'm weighing in a little late on this; I only saw the story on Yahoo Canada news about an hour ago.  Anyway, I sent dear Denis my thoughts in a gentle missive as well.  You know, when really all you want to say to someone is STFU, it really is a struggle to word things politely.  I did however.

*****

the comments reported in today's news by Denis Coderre, regarding General Hillier, the CDS, are completely inappropriate and out of line. 

The men and women of the Canadian Forces are performing a dangerous mission in Afghanistan. They have been forced to operate in a "catch-up" mode, because of decades of neglect by successive governments. Make no mistake about it, as a former soldier myself, I am all too aware of what party was in government during most of those years. 

Gen. Hillier's comments did not directly name the Liberal government of the day, but the collective guilty conscience of your party prompted you to speak out against him. I suggest that--given the dismal failure of former liberal governments to maintain an even remotely adequate level of support for the Canadian Forces--you keep quiet. 

Gen Hillier is the first CDS I have seen since JA Dextrase to work hard on behalf of his soldiers. Too many of Gen Hillier's predecessors have been more concerned about making political brownie points, at the expense of their soldiers. You, as the defence critic should appreciate that the CF as a whole is benefiting from the current "can-do" attitude of Gen Hillier. 

You owe the man an apology for your remarks, just as your party generally owes an apology to every soldier who served during those "dark years"--myself included.

*****

As an aside, I'm not even sure I can entirely rate JADex as a "great" CDS, but considering the likes of others, (and I won't mention any names, but we all know I'm talking about the guy who single-handedly disarmed the IRA), he was a prince.  Come to think of it, the guy did a pretty good job of disarming the CF too.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

I sent him a polite snotgram, if he even reads them..

Mr. Coderre, after reading your comments on our CDS, Gen Hillier i must say you probably have never served in uniform, have you? Because if you had, you would have a much different view on what he said. I'm a former soldier, 23 years i spent in the forces and i can say without hesitation that from 1993 to when i retired in 2001, was the bleakest, darkest time for the CF. This as you know when the Liberals were in power. Your party had no qualms about taking hundred's on millions of our dollars and squandering it on a wistfull sponsorship fiasco, and keeping it a secret from the Canadian people. So i don't think your qualified morally or ethically to criticise Gen Hillier's character, because by no means do you ever hope to be in the same league as the CDS. 
I was once a Liberal supporter. But when they were elected into power in 1993 and promised the military a better future and then suddenly did a complete about face and forgot about us, well my support as well as many others went to other parties. 
As you may know there is a large retired military population in this country and we all have very long memories. We are tickled pink that the truth is finally getting out to the public on what the Liberal party did to our once proud military. So i hope you enjoy your seat on the opposition side of the house because, that's were the Liberal party will be for the for seeable future. As for Gen Hilliers comments, they are a matter of public record and he was just stating the obvious.


----------



## Yrys

Biography of D. Coderre and infos for contact :

http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/biography.asp?lang=en

http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/ProfileMP.aspx?Key=79018&Language=E

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

No army. He doesn't seem to have do anything except study, works in radio,
works in poloitics.


----------



## GUNS

Having read those well worded and articulated emails that have been sent to Mr.Coderre, I thought of what impact these emails would have on the Canadian public if they were sent to " Letters to the Editor" section of the Ottawa newspapers. 

This would leave no doubt in anyones mind that the CF(former,present and future) is totally behind their CDS.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

I did just that, I sent a copy of the letter I wrote Coderre to the editors of the Ottawa citizen and Globe and mail.


----------



## MarkOttawa

A letter sent to the _National Post_ on Saturday:

'Denis Coderre certainly does not seem up to the job as Liberal National Defence critic.  According to this story, "Coderre labels Hillier a Tory party 'prop'" (Feb. 17): 

"Mr. Coderre...pointed out the Liberals had a comprehensive plan to replace military aircraft and other equipment, including the Hercules air transport fleet... 

The only difference between the Liberal and Conservative plans, he said, was that the Liberal plan did not include a $3.4 billion purchase of four C-17 Globemaster long-distance transport planes..." 

M. Coderre does not appear to know either what the Liberal government--of which he was part--did, or what the Conservative government has announced it will do. 

In November, 2005, then Minister of National Defence Bill Graham proposed the acquisition of tactical transport aircraft (Hercules replacement), heavy-lift helicopters, and fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft.  The government however only agreed to the acquisition of the Hercules replacement. 

On the other hand, last year the Conservative government announced it would purchase strategic transport aircraft (C-17s, now CC-177 for Canadian service--M. Coderre take note), the Hercules replacement, heavy-lift helicopters, Joint Supply Ships, and trucks for the army. 

So, pace M. Coderre, there is a vast difference between what the Liberals in fact were planning to buy and what the Conservatives are doing.  Indeed there are also very significant differences between Mr Graham's larger (rejected) plan and the Conservatives'.  The only common elements are the Hercules replacement and heavy-lift helicopters. 

Meanwhile,  Don Martin writes the same day in "War among generals a deadly distraction" that "Retired general O'Connor used to be Hillier's boss, but fell just short in his dream of reaching the top spot in the military's command..." 

Hardly.  MInister O'Connor's highest rank was Brigadier-General.  After that the ranks of Major-General and Lieutenant-General must be achieved before one gets to Canada's only full General position, Chief of the Defence Staff.' 

Pity about Mark Martin, no pity for Phil.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

good letter...BZ


----------



## GAP

Is Hillier out of line?
February 20, 2007 Michael Byers  TheStar.com 
Article Link

Chief of defence is playing a highly unusual public role in promoting the mission in Afghanistan, even bypassing the defence minister to deal directly with the Prime Minister

Canada's mission in Afghanistan is failing and Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier deserves much of the blame.

Since becoming Canada's top soldier two years ago, Hillier has pushed the politicians hard. At his own swearing-in ceremony, he criticized Paul Martin for underfunding the military; one month later, he browbeat the Liberal cabinet into volunteering troops for a combat mission to Kandahar.

Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited. So far, 44 soldiers have lost their lives. Hillier, the professional upon whose expertise the politicians relied, should have explained the real risks to them.

The Martin government also assumed Canada would contribute to the combat mission for a limited time only. But Hillier changed his tune shortly after Stephen Harper was elected: "From NATO's perspective, they look at this as a 10-year mission, right? Minimum. There's going to be a huge demand for Canada to contribute over the longer period of time." 

Hillier promised Martin that the combat mission would not preclude Canadian participation in UN peacekeeping missions elsewhere. He's since broken that promise, ruling out troops for Lebanon and Darfur on the basis that Canada is fully committed in Afghanistan.

We're experiencing a serious case of "mission creep." 

Under Hillier's leadership, Canada's role in Kandahar has morphed from a "provincial reconstruction team" made up of soldiers, diplomats and development personnel, into a "battle group" supported by Leopard tanks. 
More on link


----------



## ArmyRick

He supposively browbeat the liberals into the current combat mission? Is this going to be the liberals excuse when people point out that they started this mission in A-stan? 

I highly doubt there has ever been a Primie Minister that cringed and did what the CDS wants.

This complete left wing bullsh*t.

General Hillier is da man


----------



## 17thRecceSgt

+1.

Hopefully the CDS will ignore crap like this in print and soldier on.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin

A quick glance at Prof Byers' CV reveals the typical academic:  tenured,left wing, anti-US and anti-military, no practical experience and taxpayer funded.  

See here: http://www.ligi.ubc.ca/collateral/images/uploads/cv_byers.pdf

His article misses so many points and dredges up such old rhetoric that it isn't worth bothering with.  The lack of research by this tenured Professor is staggering.  Then again, he likely could care less in his haste to make political hay.   :boring:


----------



## 2 Cdo

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> He supposively browbeat the liberals into the current combat mission? Is this going to be the liberals excuse when people point out that they started this mission in A-stan?



Just like the Liberals to not let a thing like facts interfere with a sound bite supported by the obvious left-wing Star. :threat:


----------



## MarkOttawa

Is Hillier out of line?
Chief of defence is playing a highly unusual public role in promoting the mission in Afghanistan, even bypassing the defence minister to deal directly with the Prime Minister
_Crvena Zvezda_, Feb. 20, by Michael Byers
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/183409

Prof. Byers is Steve Staples' equally evil twin.  That anyone with such complete disregard for facts can be a university professor drives me nuts.  Some excerpts and comments:



> Since becoming Canada's top soldier two years ago, Hillier has pushed the politicians hard. At his own swearing-in ceremony, he criticized Paul Martin for underfunding the military; one month later, he browbeat the Liberal cabinet into volunteering troops for a combat mission to Kandahar.



We all know Liberals are wusses, but that wussy?



> Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited. So far, 44 soldiers have lost their lives. Hillier, the professional upon whose expertise the politicians relied, should have explained the real risks to them.



This is what Gen. Hillier said in July, 2005 (the Kandahar mission was announced by then MND Graham in May, 2005):
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/07/15/hillier-attack050715.html



> ...Hillier says Canadians should realize the mission the Canadian military is undertaking in Afghanistan is a dangerous one that could lead to casualties.



Did the General change his tune in just two months?

Byers:



> Under Hillier's leadership, Canada's role in Kandahar has morphed from a "provincial reconstruction team" made up of soldiers, diplomats and development personnel, into a "battle group" supported by Leopard tanks.



Where's the morphing?  Prof. Byers just called it a "combat mission" above.  Another July, 2005, report:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050715/AFGHAN15/TPNational/TopStories



> ...the next three missions [rotations, I think], involving 2,000 troops, will be heavily centred in the southern mountains, where soldiers will be called upon to hunt down and fight the insurgents.



Byers:



> Characterizing the enemy as "detestable murderers and scumbags" [in July, 2005] can only exacerbate the situation.



Well, Taliban Jack was against the scumbags before he was against the mission:
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/004571.html



> "Controlled anger, given what's happened, is an appropriate response," NDP Leader Jack Layton said. "We have a very committed, level-headed head of our armed forces, who isn't afraid to express the passion that underlies the mission that front-line personnel are going to be taking on.
> 
> "A bit of strong language in the circumstances, I don't find that to be wrong."



Byers:



> On the whole, Hillier has been content to adopt the approach of the Bush administration, emphasizing aggressive search-and-kill tactics and downplaying diplomacy, development, and international law.



Ah, the dreaded "B" word.  It just happens however that since last summer Canadian troops have following the approach of NATO ISAF, not the Bush administration.  The professor also never mentions in his piece that the ISAF mission has the unanimous authorization of the UN Security Council.



> Hillier shares the dubious company of U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair in stubbornly refusing to admit his mistake.



If there has been a mistake, primary responsibility rests with the Martin government, not the General.  MND Graham in a speech in the fall of 2005 (one of several explaining the new Kandahar mission that our media essentially ignored--and remember there was not one question on Afstan during the federal election leaders' debates):
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1805



> ...we will be deploying a Task Force of about 1,000 troops into Kandahar for one year. As an essential complement to the reconstruction efforts of our PRT, this force will provide much needed security in the region...
> 
> ...Canadians should be under no illusion; Kandahar is a very complex, challenging and dangerous environment and mission. The part of Afghanistan we are going to is among the most unstable and dangerous in the country. Indeed, that is why we have been asked to go there and that is why we are going there...



Bilge from Byers, I say.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## maniac779

I got half way through this article before I just stopped and uddered "this is bullshit" under my breath.

I shudder when I think that there are people out there who actually can believe this unsubstantiated crap.


----------



## gaspasser

IIRC, The CDS picked up a "hugely piled Charlie Foxtrot" from the previous CDS and the Liberals.  They asked for too much from too few who had too little to do too much.  Gen Hillier asked for and recieved that which he needed to do the job and do it right.  Now the Libs are backpeddling (as per usual) and stabbing the CDS in the back with political garbage.  
Gen Hillier was right when his sound bite hit the airwaves about the years of darkness and underfunding.  It will take years for the Canadian Armed Forces to return to it's previous numbers and funding of pre 1990.  
The public was okay with budget cuts, budget cuts and budget cuts to the military in the late 80's, now they complain about how we can't do the job and troops are coming home under flags.  
When will John Q. make up his mind?
Cheers,


----------



## Hebridean

I realize that the Liberals cut defence expenditures and living off the peace dividend with the end of the Cold War, but what would you have them do?  Canada was on the verge of a huge economic disaster with its massive debt.  The Wall Street Journal had made Canada an honorary member of the third world-and no one took Canada seriously.  And so the Liberals shaved about 1.5-2 billion out of the defence budget and made massive cuts everywhere.   But nearly every NATO military including the U.S acted similiarly. http://www.comw.org/pda/bmem10su.htm

The economy was turned around by the Liberals- so all these purchases that are made by the Conservative were because of the efforts of the Liberals, but they get the credit and we forget how their acts were responsible for the cuts in the first place (as already mentioned on the posts).    

I believe there are many myths of the Liberals being anti-military.  However, the military is not some purely conservative establishment, it is dichotemy of all Canadians and includes all political spectrums, including Liberal.  So I take exception to those that perpetuate this myth-including Hillier.  Case in point, the Liberals were roundly criticized for the cancellation of the Coromorant-and this has been shown as  to  demonstrate their hatred of the military.   But I am glad the did those were pretty expensive lemons as the CF search and rescue people are finding out: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=709f24a3-bdf0-48f8-8324-83f438a2aeab&k=40249. In any event the buying  of expensives ASW helicopters when the pride of the russian fleet rusts in harbour is not he best move strategically. But this is forgotten.  Lots of Nato countries use obsolete equipment.   For instance, the U.S president still uses the Sea King, the Marines the Sea Knight (which we called Labrador in Canada) and unitll recently the Italians were using the F-104.  

 If the Liberals really hated the military they would have gotten rid of it completely and formed unarmed friendship brigades to journey the world and make people laugh and smile ( I jest somewhat).  The Liberals did not sucumb to pressures from academics in the early 1990's to transform Canada into a third-world military (for more on this read http://www.amazon.ca/Whose-War-J-L-Granatstein/dp/0002008459). 

Part of the CF's troubles are due in part to waste at DND HQ and by virtue that the CF is too top heavy.  I believe the euphorism that we have more  Colonels and Generals than main battle tanks or fighter jets still holds true. While the Liberals did make cuts, which did hurt the military, I believe the military office leadership should also take some responsibility for poor choices and hair-brained schemes also.  Just consider the words of Gen. Hillier not so long ago, "Tanks are a perfect example of extremely expensive systems that sit in Canada because they are inappropriate to the operations we conduct daily around the world."  I am sure those in the know could find example that would make the aforementioned seem intelligent.

Sorry for the rant.

P.S Would I get in trouble if I campaigned for the Liberals in uniform?


----------



## MarkOttawa

A comment on this at another topic:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/56697/post-530432.html#msg530432

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Colin Parkinson

There is a difference between reducing costs because of a fiscal crunch and the malicious attack by the Liberals on the military and it’s culture. The military budget was a best a cash cow to be milked by the Liberals to gain votes and any purchases were done grudgingly to ensure that the military did not die completely. Yet they demanded that the military perform miracles on demand. It was truly the dark ages. The Liberals used the same tactic for anything they did like or didn’t need anymore, they would never end a program, just slowly starve it to death by slashing funding.


----------



## ArmyRick

Hebridean, get real, pal.

The US president's sea king is a NEWer, top of the line, one function, maintained to the stars Helicopter.

We geared up for more missions than we could shake a stick at in the early ninties pal. In 1993 we were in Cyrpes, Somalia, Bosnia and Croatia (Thats a Battle group at EACH theater). We can't pull that off now. Why? The liberals gutted us. 

The EH101 a lemon? Get lost. It has some glitches. Its alot bettervthan the Ancient Muesum peices called CF SEa KIngs.

We needed new tanks 10 years ago.

We needed IFV 25 years ago.

We need new helicopters 20 years ago.

We needed so much and the liberals stalled and stalled. Oh they did get us second hand submarines.  :


----------



## geo

Rick...
If you look at the UK right about now... they are going thru exactly what we went thru 10-15 yrs ago.

The Gov't had to balance the budget & work down the debt - no one, myself included was particularly interested in paying more taxes - were you?
Else - where was the money going to come from?.... Health & education?

Decisions were made
Elections were carried out
and we are where we are....


----------



## 3rd Herd

Rick,
 to add to your list. Some of us also remember the prospect of going to war in a riot control vehicle equipped with a water cannon courtesy of the Liberals. Which war was still undecided, Quebec or the plains of Europe. Nice rant by the way.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Hebridean said:
			
		

> I realize that the Liberals cut defence expenditures and living off the peace dividend with the end of the Cold War, but what would you have them do?  Canada was on the verge of a huge economic disaster with its massive debt.  The Wall Street Journal had made Canada an honorary member of the third world-and no one took Canada seriously.  And so the Liberals shaved about 1.5-2 billion out of the defence budget and made massive cuts everywhere.   But nearly every NATO military including the U.S acted similiarly. http://www.comw.org/pda/bmem10su.htm
> 
> ...



Well, for a start they might have avoided getting us into the bloody hole in the first place.  That economic illiterate P.E. Trudeau was the guy who created the _culture of entitlement_ and made the overly expensive, universal social programmes into a _sacred trust_.  That was an act of policy vandalism.
  


			
				Hebridean said:
			
		

> ...
> The economy was turned around by the Liberals- so all these purchases that are made by the Conservative were because of the efforts of the Liberals, but they get the credit and we forget how their acts were responsible for the cuts in the first place (as already mentioned on the posts).
> ...



Rubbish.  Mulroney turned the corner when he balanced the _programme_ budget.  What he failed to do, maybe could not do in the 'real' world was to cut expenditures during a recession so as to balance the interest on the debt.  To their credit Chrétien/Martin did that - largely by offloading expenses to the provinces and slashing defence spending; but the recessions was over; their 'reality' was different.



			
				Hebridean said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> If the Liberals really hated the military they would have gotten rid of it completely and formed unarmed friendship brigades to journey the world and make people laugh and smile ( I jest somewhat).  The Liberals did not sucumb to pressures from academics in the early 1990's to transform Canada into a third-world military (for more on this read http://www.amazon.ca/Whose-War-J-L-Granatstein/dp/0002008459).
> ...



Which is what that petty, puffed up, provincial, pseudo-intellectual poltroon Trudeau (and his foreign affairs _guru_ Ivan Head) wanted to do in '68/'69/'70 when they committed another, equally bad, act of policy vandalism - this time in the foreign/defence domain.  Trudeau was, without a shadow of a doubt, the biggest enemy Canada had post 1955.
  


			
				Hebridean said:
			
		

> ...
> Part of the CF's troubles are due in part to waste at DND HQ and by virtue that the CF is too top heavy.  I believe the euphorism that we have more  Colonels and Generals than main battle tanks or fighter jets still holds true. While the Liberals did make cuts, which did hurt the military, I believe the military office leadership should also take some responsibility for poor choices and hair-brained schemes also.  Just consider the words of Gen. Hillier not so long ago, "Tanks are a perfect example of extremely expensive systems that sit in Canada because they are inappropriate to the operations we conduct daily around the world."  I am sure those in the know could find example that would make the aforementioned seem intelligent.
> ...



There was, still is, and always will be 'fat' in the CF.  The cuts of the '70s and '90s, however, went _waaaay_ beyond trimming the fat; they cut the meat and muscle and bone, too.  The Liberals don't 'hate' the military - they are, in near perfect reflection of the Canadian populace, indifferent to it.  That is a problem because politicians are supposed to be better than the electorate - more responsible.  The Trudeau and Chrétien Liberals were irresponsible.



			
				Hebridean said:
			
		

> ...
> P.S Would I get in trouble if I campaigned for the Liberals in uniform?



Neither more or less than you would if you campaigned for the Conservatives or the Greens; and that would be quite a lot of trouble.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Hebridean, get real, pal.
> 
> The US president's sea king is a NEWer, top of the line, one function, maintained to the stars Helicopter.
> 
> We geared up for more missions than we could shake a stick at in the early ninties pal. In 1993 we were in Cyrpes, Somalia, Bosnia and Croatia (Thats a Battle group at EACH theater). We can't pull that off now. Why? The liberals gutted us.
> 
> The EH101 a lemon? Get lost. It has some glitches. Its alot bettervthan the Ancient Muesum peices called CF SEa KIngs.
> 
> We needed new tanks 10 years ago.
> 
> We needed IFV 25 years ago.
> 
> We need new helicopters 20 years ago.
> 
> We needed so much and the liberals stalled and stalled. Oh they did get us second hand submarines.  :



They actually bought a good submarine....they just hemmed and hawwed for 5 years before they did it.
Imagine if you went to the car dealer today and said....I really like that car there and I intend to buy it...save it for me at the back of your lot....imagine what shape it would be in when you came to get it finally 5 years later! That is the whole trouble with the Libs...they always took too long to make basic decisions.

We will get these boats working in good order but it takes money and time to restore them. They are arguably a great asset....but most submariners you talk to will say that.
It's like restoring an old car left in a farmer's barn...great car but you gotta put the time and money into bringing it up to snuff again after it was neglected for a few years.


----------



## Jarnhamar

> Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited. So far, 44 soldiers have lost their lives. Hillier, the professional upon whose expertise the politicians relied, should have explained the real risks to them.



Bla bla bla. Explain the REAL risks instead of the pretend ones.
Our politicians really need to be explained what happens in a war zone? I hope our politicans aren't that stupid.

I hardly read these articles anymore.  

I would follow Hillier to hell and back just for the honour of serving under him.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

and the only other boat that came close was the U214 series and I think they are smaller with a shorter range.


----------



## 3rd Herd

Mods:
how relocating Colin P last post and  IN Hoc last post to http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/57635/post-530587;topicseen#new
we seem to be drifting from the General theme of this thread. ;D


----------



## Franko

Hmmmm.....IIRC he did spell out the dangers and went on and on for a few months prior to the move to Kandahar, at the PMOs direction at that.

Someone must have forgotten about 911 again....what's next?

We're in Afghanistan as invaders to take over the oil and their world class rail road        :

Utter tripe.

Regards


----------



## anonymous45673

> Since becoming Canada's top soldier two years ago, Hillier has pushed the politicians hard.At his own swearing-in ceremony, he criticized Paul Martin for underfunding the military



Isn't that the CDS's job? To try to do the best for the military? So a position created by the government and supported by all Canadians is finally being filled correctly, and it's a bad thing?



> He browbeat the Liberal cabinet into volunteering troops for a combat mission to Kandahar.



Hmmm, if a government succumbs to any position/person then i would not call them a very good government, but a very good thing they are not in power. 



> The Martin government also assumed Canada would contribute to the combat mission for a limited time only.





> Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited.



Wow, this Liberal government commits its troops to a mission without fully researching it? They signed up for Kandahar based entirely on assumptions! Just woke up the day the mission was up for grabs, rushed to the UN early, and made sure they were first in line for the sign up sheet.



> Foiled terrorist plots in Toronto and London were reportedly motivated, at least in part, by anger at the presence of Western troops in Afghanistan.



Note to author, Canadian troops were in Kabul prior to Hillier. And "Western" includes the US, who commits troops there as well.



> A new approach is clearly needed, one that focuses on effective and transparent development assistance, the training and ongoing support of a well-paid and professional Afghan police force, and dialogue and diplomacy with at least some of the groups we're fighting against.



Where has this guy been in the past few years? I'm pretty sure a police and military force is being trained. Pretty hard to just train without combatting the criminals. 
We should just offer the taliban a peace treaty, snd let each side build up and train their forces. Thus hoping more afghans defy taliban threats to join their "army"; but choose to sign up for the West's Wonder Police Force instead (which offers huge salaries paid for by taxpayers' money of course! Then, when we feel the WWPF is well enough trained, we'll pull out entirely, (to avoid a combat role), and let them handle their own problem. 



> He's played a highly unusual public role in promoting the mission, and has even used wounded soldiers as part of an elaborate cross-Canada PR campaign.



So he's saying not to get Canadian support behind the troops?



> On Friday, Hillier, who claims to be non-partisan, called the Liberal cutbacks of the 1990s a "decade of darkness" for the military.



Actually the military enjoyed the constant budget cuts, ask any soldier serving in that era.



> Last week, the Senate Defence Committee asked: "Are Canadians willing to commit themselves to decades of involvement in Afghanistan, which could cost hundreds of Canadian lives and billions of dollars, with no guarantee of ending up with anything like the kind of society that makes sense to us?"



I think there are a fair few Canadians, who believe in promoting a higher standard of life, and trying to share the great quality of living we have in this country with nations who do not. 
He's got one thing right though, there is no guarantee this mission will work, but damn I think it's well worth a try. 

(Always remember for every left-wing concept, there is a right-wing concept.)


----------



## armyvern

Girls are going to school. Boys and girls are flying kites, smiling, laughing and playing. Small business' (even those with women at the helm) are popping up. Women are no longer being executed centre-stage in _'soccer'_ stadiums. Music can be heard playing. Afghan citizens have voted, they have tasted democracy. 

Seems like the mission has been somewhat successful to me so far. 

What would they have General Hillier do? Lie? He's just stating the facts. Reminds me of a little line from _A Few Good Men_. Some people "can't handle the truth."


----------



## CdnArtyWife

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Girls are going to school. Boys and girls are flying kites, smiling, laughing and playing. Small business' (even those with women at the helm) are popping up. Women are no longer being executed centre-stage in _'soccer'_ stadiums. Music can be heard playing. Afghan citizens have voted, they have tasted democracy.
> 
> Seems like the mission has been somewhat successful to me so far.
> 
> What would they have General Hillier do? Lie? He's just stating the facts. Reminds me of a little line from _A Few Good Men_. Some people "can't handle the truth."


+100


----------



## warspite

All this is is a load of hot air....
It's not getting worked up and ruining my day over......


----------



## armyvern

warspite said:
			
		

> All this is is a load of hot air....
> It's not getting worked up and ruining my day over......



That's because you're not old enough to vote yet. Pay very close attention to things like this. Knowledge is then power when you do reach the age of majority. 

All you have to do is remember how many times a party has managed to make you state "this is hot air and they're not worth getting worked up over."

I don't think it's ruined anybody's day here actually. We've kind of grown used to hot air.


Edit: typo


----------



## retiredgrunt45

We'll see how worked up you get once you start paying taxes.


----------



## peaches

The asshat who wrote the article was on TV a few months ago spouting the exact same words.  It was on of those CBC "townhall" BS show's, you know the ones where they find evry nutball around to come in an have camera time debating issues.

Anyhow, this twit was on the stage with a PPCLI Capt who'd been wounded in Afghanistan.  This prof crapped all over the mission, basically said he like soldiers like the Capt as long as he was only peacekeeping.  The Capt put up with his BS until the prof started jabbing at Gen Hillier, then gave him a good jab.

He's another know nothing know it all.  Another exibit for the *National Ass Clown Museum*..... :mg:


----------



## warspite

Perhaps I should clarify, it's not that I don't care and that I think this is unimportant, I'm well aware of how public opinion can be influenced by such crap as this article. It's that I'm not going to wreck my day by getting angry about some fool who wrote some article that's already been published, course that don't mean I don't think this guy shouldn't get his just desserts....


----------



## Osotogari

Out of line or not, at least Hillier isn't the type to cover for anyone (remember Baril covering for Cretin's ski holidy during Assad's funeral).  
A refreshing change, I just hope there's more like him to carry on after he retires.


----------



## career_radio-checker

In other news relating to the CDS, I see he has a new medal. 
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Feature_Story/2007/02/19/originals/DSC0065.jpg

Is it approriate to say "Nice rack Sir"?

A toast to the CDS! The ballsiest and most qualified man for the job in a long time


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> In other news relating to the CDS, I see he has a new medal.
> http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Feature_Story/2007/02/19/originals/DSC0065.jpg
> 
> Is it approriate to say "Nice rack Sir"?
> 
> A toast to the CDS! The ballsiest and most qualified man for the job in a long time



Which one is new? The order of St John of Jerusalem?


----------



## career_radio-checker

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Which one is new? The order of St John of Jerusalem?


yeah that one


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> yeah that one



very cool ribbon....black with a maltese cross medal.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/DHH/honours_awards/engraph/honour_awards_e.asp?cat=3&Q_ID=15


----------



## Franko

He's had that one for a while.      

Regards


----------



## Cloud Cover

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Which is what that petty, puffed up, provincial, pseudo-intellectual poltroon Trudeau (and his foreign affairs _guru_ Ivan Head) wanted to do in '68/'69/'70 when they committed another, equally bad, act of policy vandalism - this time in the foreign/defence domain.  Trudeau was, without a shadow of a doubt, the biggest enemy Canada had post 1955.



So, then you're not going to jump into the next wave of Trudeaumania when the heir apparent shows up with the CBC in tote acting like Christ walked up the St. Lawrence?


----------



## Edward Campbell

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> So, then you're not going to jump into the next wave of Trudeaumania when the heir apparent shows up with the CBC in tote acting like Christ walked up the St. Lawrence?



Oh, I'll probably manage to restrain my enthusiasm.

But I do not believe that the (very grave) sins of the father ought to be visited upoin the sons.  Maybe the Trudeau _'fils'_ can make themselves into something other than paper cut-out celebrities for the aging baby boomers who still worship at the alter of Trudeau _'père'_.


----------



## geo

.... But the boys are a marriage of Quebecois & BC culture.....
Ad mare usque ad mare..... (and other clichés)


----------



## geo

BTW.... we should get back on topic...... 
W're supposed to be sailing praise and speculation about the CDS, present & future.... aren't we?


----------



## The Bread Guy

OK, how's this for a link to the original stream:  should former political back room boys stay outta the current governing fray and in their own lane, like Eddie "Fast Eddie" Goldenbreg suggests Hiller do?    Also, WTF with the cheap shots against someone he, himself, admits shouldn't be able to defend himself politically - class, real class....

Shared with the usual disclaimer...

*Chretien ally to Hillier: Keep out of politics*
Goldenberg chastises top general for criticism of Grits' military spending
Paul Gessell, Ottawa Citizen, 22 Feb 07
Article Link

Canada's top soldier has no business complaining about the level of military spending -- the "decade of darkness" -- under the last Liberal government, according to Jean Chretien's former right-hand man.

*"Generals are there to serve, not to govern," says Eddie Goldenberg. And it is the elected politicians, not the generals, who decide how much money should be spent on the military, Mr. Goldenberg said during a speech to a fundraising breakfast yesterday for the Ottawa Art Gallery.*

The war of words between Liberals and Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of defence staff, began last week when the blunt-talking soldier complained that cuts to military spending during Mr. Chretien's Liberal government left "some deep wounds" and comprised "a decade of darkness."

The statements seemed uncharacteristically political for a soldier holding a supposedly non-political job.

Denis Coderre, Liberal defence critic, immediately accused Gen. Hillier of being out of line and turning himself into "a prop for the Conservative party."

Mr. Goldenberg's remarks about Gen. Hillier came during a speech about the need for governments to make tough choices when deciding who should get scarce funds.

*"His so-called 'decade of darkness' for the military was the same decade that saw $12 billion invested in higher learning through the creation of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the endowing of 2000 Canada Research chairs in our universities and much else," *said Mr. Goldenberg, an Ottawa-based lawyer. "For Canadian universities in general and particularly here in Ottawa for the University of Ottawa and Carleton, it might be called the 'decade of enlightenment'."

Mr. Goldenberg took another shot at Gen. Hillier by saying *"he probably also was disappointed we did not join with the Americans in Iraq."* ....


----------



## MarkOttawa

As for cheap shots, see the second part here, with reference to Jim Travesty:

Afstan: Same coin, different faces  
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/afstan-same-coin-different-faces.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## hank011

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> b]"His so-called 'decade of darkness' for the military was the same decade that saw $12 billion invested in higher learning through the creation of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the endowing of 2000 Canada Research chairs in our universities and much else," [/b]said Mr. Goldenberg, an Ottawa-based lawyer. "For Canadian universities in general and particularly here in Ottawa for the University of Ottawa and Carleton, it might be called the 'decade of enlightenment'."


Having lived through the 90's in the military I was impressed that someone actually recognized how dark a time it was. This Mr Goldenburg is correct as well though, the dollars spent probably went towards these fine programs and resulted in uh...incalculable stuff. But at what cost to the country? We play catch up and pray that the support remains...thats all we can do is pray. Strong leaders mean a strong military, obviously these programs were more important to Mr Goldberg than National Security.


----------



## The Bread Guy

A tiny bit more faith in the general public....

*Canadians Think Hillier Should Speak His Mind*
Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research, 26 Feb 07
News release - Full report (.pdf)

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Many Canadian adults believe their chief of defence staff should be able to express his views freely, according to a poll by Angus Reid Strategies. 58 per cent of respondents think Rick Hillier is entitled to speak his mind publicly, regardless of political implications.

Conversely, 30 per cent of respondents think Hillier, as the chief of defence staff, should not make public statements that could have political implications, and 12 per cent are unsure.

Earlier this month, Hillier criticized former Liberal governments for under-funding the military, and referred to the 1990s as a "decade of darkness" for the Canadian Armed Forces. Hillier justified his comments, declaring, "I describe things as accurately, as clearly, as bluntly and as frankly as I possibly can and that’s what I’ve done. We’ve gone through a decade of darkness and we’re starting to come out of it and that’s a description of the Canadian Forces. Like it or not, that’s the description."

Former cabinet minister and current Liberal parliamentarian Denis Coderre expressed dismay at Hillier’s allegations, claiming the chief of defence staff has become "a prop" for the Conservatives.

Canadians renewed the House of Commons in January 2006. The Conservative party—led by Stephen Harper—received 36.3 per cent of the vote, and secured 124 seats in the 308-member lower house. Harper leads a minority administration after more than 12 years of government by the Liberal party.

Polling Data

As you may know, Rick Hillier, Canada’s chief of defence staff, recently criticized former Liberal governments for under-funding the military. Hillier also referred to the 1990s as a "decade of darkness" for the Canadian Armed Forces. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view?

As the chief of defence staff, Hillier is
entitled to speak his mind publicly,
regardless of political implications         58%

As the chief of defence staff, Hillier
should not make public statements
that could have political implications      30%

Not sure                    12%

_Source: Angus Reid Strategies
Methodology: Online interviews with 1,069 Canadian adults, conducted on Feb. 20 and Feb. 21, 2007. Margin of error is 2.9 per cent._


----------



## GAP

CPAC's Primetime Politics host Peter Van Dusen speaks to General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, in an exclusive interview about Canada's mission to Afghanistan and the funding of the Canadian Forces.

Video Interview


----------



## Franko

Well he was certainly fishing at the end of the interview.

Not bad at all.

Regards


----------



## GAP

Probably one of his best interviews to date. Clear, concise...good to see.

Unfortunately, few people watch  CPAC.


----------



## CdnArtyWife

"well duh!"

+100 to the CDS

I agree, definitely the best interview I've seen. I especially liked how he shot down the fishing at the end.

Cheers,

CAW


----------



## imjustsomeguy

Well done Mr Hillier. I wish that was on the national news.


----------



## GUNS

Excellent interview by the CDS. I wish just for once someone would come out and tell the CDS what an outstanding job he is doing and drop this " Decade of Darkness" crap.

The CDS deserves a pat on the back but who will give it to him and when?


----------



## CdnArtyWife

GUNS said:
			
		

> Excellent interview by the CDS. I wish just for once someone would come out and tell the CDS what an outstanding job he is doing and drop this " Decade of Darkness" crap.
> 
> The CDS deserves a pat on the back but who will give it to him and when?



Unfortunately no one will, cus politically that would be too right wing...or journalistically, too sympathetic.

Meh, he's the type of guy that knows "its better to be the guy who gets no praise and have his peers or those under him think he deserves it, than to be the guy who gets the praise and noone think he deserves it."

Cheers,

CAW


----------



## career_radio-checker

I liked how he shrugged off being called a "prop".

Hat's off to the CDS (not before saluting though  )


----------



## mercury

The Cdn Forces are indeed fortunate to have general Hillier.  No BS, tell the truth.  He may not be great on the Ottawa cocktail circuit, but  he sure as hell calls a spade a spade and not a shovel.  Every new CDS should have a least one tour in the big A, to be groomed and fully understand whar war is all about.  
sorta reminds me of Lt General Quinn, now there was a great leader..


----------



## MarkOttawa

Steve Madely interviewed the General from 0800 to 0900 today. Audio clips:
http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/Rick_Hillier1_Feb28.mp3
http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/Rick_Hillier2_Feb28.mp3

My brief summary of what the CDS said:

*Tanks vs. Mobile Gun System: MGS capabilities, esp. protection, still not up to snuff; Leopard I replacement needed.

*Strategic airlift (CC-177) is essential for missions at home (e.g. disaster assistance) and abroad.

*No specific "airborne" regiment will be created.

*The General is not feuding with MND O'Connor...but they have "intense discussions".

*In asserting Arctic sovereignty the Canadian Coast Guard has a role and the CF also have a part to play (no mention of any specific type of navy vessels, whereas Auroras, troops were mentioned).

*Submarine program is on course except for Chicoutimi.

*CF-18 replacement, around 2017, will almost certainly not be a UAV.

*The Cyclone helicopters are scheduled to start delivery in early 2009.

*The Griffin helicopters are OK for operations in Canada but have "huge limitations" for operations abroad.

*The Taliban this year are not going to try to seize and hold ground in major "offensives"; rather they will focus on suicide bombers, IEDs and simultaneous small scale hit and run ambushes.

*1,400 out of 2,500 Canadian troops live outside the Kandahar base.

*Recruiting goals are being met and the Afstan mission is actually a major pull factor; attrition is relatively low.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## exgunnertdo

From today's National Post

Way to go, sir!! 

Liberal slur worst insult, Hillier says: Defence chief vs. MP: General fires back for Coderre's Tory 'prop' slight

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA - Canada's outspoken top soldier says he's been shot at, targeted by suicide bombers and called every name in the book. But none of that was worse than being called a political "prop" by a Liberal politician. 

General Rick Hillier, the Chief of the Defence Staff, has fired back at Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre for levelling that accusation against him two weeks ago. 

Gen. Hillier drew Mr. Coderre's ire after he referred to Liberal cuts to defence spending in the 1990s as a "decade of darkness" during a speech to hundreds at a major military symposium in Ottawa. 

"I never thought he would become a prop for the Conservative party," an angry Mr. Coderre fumed afterwards. 

"I felt it was part of a communications plan ... To get involved in politics, there is one way: You should run." 

At the time, Gen. Hillier said he was not taking sides politically. 

But in an interview with the CPAC television network that was broadcast yesterday, Gen. Hillier was asked again about what he thought about being called a "prop" by the Liberals. 

"I've been shot at. People have attempted to blow me up. I had a suicide bomber targeted against me when I was the commander in Afghanistan. And I've been called every name in the book, I'm certain," Gen. Hillier replied. "I don't think I've ever been so insulted as to be called a prop for a political party." 

He reiterated the purpose of his one-hour speech at the Conference of Defence Institute's annual meeting was not to pick sides politically but to talk about the state of the Canadian Forces. 

Indeed, he has used the same "decade of darkness" metaphor in the past, including in his speech the previous year before the CDA. 

"I'm not a politician. I'm a soldier and I call things the way I see them, factually, and I try not to put the slant on that," Gen. Hillier added. 

"I do that because I think the government of Canada needs that honesty from the Chief of the Defence Staff." 

The Liberals cut defence spending by nearly one-quarter in the 1990s but in 2005 infused $13-billion into the defence budget, the largest increase in military spending in a decade. 

That extra spending -- the largest single outlay of military spending by the federal treasury in decades -- was the result of intense lobbying by former Liberal defence minister Bill Graham, who also lobbied former prime minister Paul Martin to appoint Gen. Hillier to defence chief. 

Mr. Graham and Gen. Hillier also helped convince Mr. Martin to send Canadian troops to Kandahar to take part in heavy fighting as well as reconstruction projects. 

After their election last year, the Conservatives pledged an additional $5-billion over the next five years and announced $17-billion in large equipment purchases for the Forces, including transport planes, ships, trucks and helicopters.


----------



## geo

Hmmm.....
Nice job on the fire mission sir!

I think we've hit the bulls, Aye!


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

I love it! He's a master at this stuff. To say that he's never been so insulted as to be called "a prop for any political party" reemphasizes the fact that Politicians are among the lowest on the honorable scale. Re-stating that he is a soldier and therefore a member of an honourable profession is brilliant.
right on the money! ;D


----------



## gaspasser

Words and Deeds, sir, words and deeds.
Leadership +
The CDS is personable to the troops, speaks his mind to the politicos and leads by example.  A proper officer.  An inspiration.
However, I think we should stop short of absolute hero worship and putting The Boss on too high a pedestal.


----------



## geo

But hes a Newfoundlander!


----------



## career_radio-checker

exgunnertdo said:
			
		

> From today's National Post
> 
> Way to go, sir!!
> 
> Liberal slur worst insult, Hillier says: Defence chief vs. MP: General fires back for Coderre's Tory 'prop' slight
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> OTTAWA - Canada's outspoken top soldier says he's been shot at, targeted by suicide bombers and called every name in the book.* But none of that was worse than being called a political "prop" by a Liberal politician. *
> General Rick Hillier, the Chief of the Defence Staff, has fired back at Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre for levelling that accusation against him two weeks ago.
> 
> Gen. Hillier drew Mr. Coderre's ire after he referred to Liberal cuts to defence spending in the 1990s as a "decade of darkness" during a speech to hundreds at a major military symposium in Ottawa.
> 
> "I never thought he would become a prop for the Conservative party," an angry Mr. Coderre fumed afterwards.
> 
> "I felt it was part of a communications plan ... To get involved in politics, there is one way: You should run."
> 
> At the time, Gen. Hillier said he was not taking sides politically.
> 
> But in an interview with the CPAC television network that was broadcast yesterday, Gen. Hillier was asked again about what he thought about being called a "prop" by the Liberals.
> 
> *"I've been shot at. People have attempted to blow me up. I had a suicide bomber targeted against me when I was the commander in Afghanistan. And I've been called every name in the book, I'm certain," Gen. Hillier replied. "I don't think I've ever been so insulted as to be called a prop for a political party." *



That is not what the CDS meant and proves once again that media can take people out of context at will
If you watched the last 2 minutes of the video you would see that Hillier was actually shrugging off the "Prop" insult, not taking offence.
Here's the link, watch it about 2 minutes from the end

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/58043/post-534252.html#msg534252


----------



## Northernguardian

I know I'm straying a bit off topic, but does anyone know what decorations/medals the CDS is wearing to the right (when facing him) of his CD2? 

There are three.

Thanks


----------



## MarkOttawa

Have a question for the CDS?

Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier answers your questions on the Canadian Forces
http://www.cbc.ca/news/chats/2007/03/chief_of_defence_staff_gen_ric.html



> CBC.ca invites your questions to Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of defence staff for the Canadian Forces...
> 
> Gen. Hillier will reply to your questions by e-mail and we'll post them here Wednesday, March 14.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## gaspasser

{praise, endearing himself to the AF}
I think the Ol' Man has spent too much time around the Air Force;    As I watched him on the boardwalk from KAF on CTV news tonight, he had his hands in his pockets.     Not to condone hands in pockets but maybe it is chilly over there.


----------



## gaspasser

:rofl:
+1, that kills me.  Never dawned on me about the Armoured bit.  Just an old Army hang up.


----------



## Yrys

Hillier visits troops in Afghanistan

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/03/12/hillier-afghanistan.html



> Canada's top soldier paid a surprise visit to Afghanistan Monday, a day after
> the defence minister arrived in the country.



ADD : in the photo, the Gen. has a timmie


----------



## gaspasser

I'd like to comment here on the main story about the CDS's and the MND's visit.  
If Canada did not hand over detainees and terror suspects then we'd be accused of cultural interferrence or interferring with the domestic policies of a foreign country.  
My 0.02


Three VIP's visits in as many days, looks good on the highers.


----------



## geo

BYT Driver said:
			
		

> I'd like to comment here on the main story about the CDS's and the MND's visit.
> If Canada did not hand over detainees and terror suspects then we'd be accused of cultural interferrence or interferring with the domestic policies of a foreign country.
> My 0.02
> 
> 
> Three VIP's visits in as many days, looks good on the highers.



Ahh.... must not interfere with the local culture

Must follow the "prime directive"!..... (or was that Star Treck?)


----------



## MarkOttawa

Jim Travesty of the _Toronto Star_ has his knives out:

Damage control
A single thread connects most of Canada's missteps in Afghanistan: Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier
http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/191006



> Gordon O'Connor's surprise visit to Kabul and Kandahar this week is pure and simple damage control. Having glossed over the fact that Canada effectively washed its hands of PoWs, the defence minister is now trying to restore public confidence that prisoners will be treated as the Geneva Convention requires and self-interest demands.
> 
> But the problem runs deeper than a defence minister so superficially briefed that he either didn't understand the agreement with Afghanistan or misled Parliament that the International Red Cross is monitoring detainees and reporting any abuse to Ottawa.
> 
> O'Connor's loose grip of what's happening in Afghanistan is symptomatic of governments that put Canadians in harm's way without fully defining the mission, analyzing limitations on success or limiting the risks.
> 
> Harsh as that sounds, the record is worse.
> 
> Liberals dithered so long in shifting the mission from north to south that more decisive allies grabbed the safer reconstruction projects while Canada was left to go toe-to-toe with the Taliban.
> 
> It's just as revealing – if easier to forgive – that neither the military nor its political masters forecast the fierceness of the fighting or that major battles would require Cold War weapons left at home.
> 
> Conservatives are guilty of reckless haste and playing partisan politics. In successfully dividing Liberals by extending the mission to 2009, Prime Minister Stephen Harper failed to extract from NATO, Pakistan and the Afghan government any of the admittedly hard-to-get commitments necessary to give the troops a fighting chance...
> 
> *A single thread connects most of this* [emphasis added]: Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier. As former Liberal defence minister Bill Graham says, Hillier's fingerprints are all over a mission that, among many other things, was intended to shake Canada's dated image as the world's peacekeeper and justify rebuilding the forces, particularly the army, into something leaner, faster-moving and more muscular.
> 
> Hillier's tough talk and blatant politicking continue to raise eyebrows: After all, he is a senior public servant and in this country mandarins are anonymous.
> 
> But Hillier is popular with the troops and useful to politicians who don't mind that he's increasingly identified with a war polarizing public opinion...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## ArmyRick

Oh yeah whatever. More fiction from the taliban star.  :

Its funny they don't mention that the liberals put Hillier in as CDS (one of there few but smart decisions)


----------



## MarkOttawa

Travesty actually makes two  very stupid, but typical, mistakes:

1) The CDS is no "public servant" or "mandarin"; those by definition are civilians.  He is a soldier.

2) In Canada mandarins are no longer "anonymous"; they testify constantly to parliamentary committees, make public speeches at conferences, and so on.

As the CDS said in July, 2005:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1121433777212_154

'"We're not the public service of Canada," he said. "We're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."'

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Kirkhill

Jimmy's just bugged that he doesn't get invited over to 24 Sussex for beer and pizza anymore.

His rolodex isn't what it used to be.


----------



## Yrys

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Have a question for the CDS?
> 
> Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier answers your questions on the Canadian Forces
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/chats/2007/03/chief_of_defence_staff_gen_ric.html



They will post the answers soon, but the comments section his still open.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070309.whillierQA0313/CommentStory/Front/home

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070309.whillierQA0313/BNStory/Front/home


----------



## GAP

General Rick Hillier on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan
Globe and Mail Update Update Thursday, March 22, 2007
Article Link

General Rick Hillier has answered your questions (see below). Due to reasons beyond our control, Gen. Hillier was not able to provide answers last week as expected. We apologize for the delay and appreciate your patience. The reader response to this Q&A was phenomenal. Many questions were submitted after the cutoff. While these can't be answered, we encourage you to leave a comment here. Thank you.

There is no shortage of news coming out of Afghanistan and the Canadian Forces mission there.
More on link


----------



## CdnArtyWife

In Depth
Canada's Military
Chat with Gen. Hillier
Last Updated March 2007
CBC News
Article Link 

Gen. Rick Hillier (Les Perreaux/Canadian Press) Before taking command of the Canadian Forces in February 2005, Gen. Hillier was in command of the NATO's stabilization force in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 2000. In 2003, he was appointed Chief of Land Staff, commanding the Canadian army, and later commanded the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan in 2004. 

Recently, Hillier gave a speech at a meeting of the Conference of Defence Association Institute in Ottawa, in which he described the "negative legacy" of the defence spending cuts that began in 1994 and that left "deep wounds." He called the past 10 years in the Forces "a decade of darkness," but didn't name the Liberal government specifically. 

Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre called Hillier's comments "highly political" and "inappropriate." 


"I never thought he would become a prop for the Conservative party," Coderre said. Full story

In a later interview with CPAC, Hillier said he's "been called every name in the book." But, "I don't think I've ever been so insulted as to be called a prop for a political party," he said. Full story 

Hillier has also faced questions about the mission in Afghanistan and whether other NATO members are pulling their weight. Gen. Hillier on The Hour with George Stroumboulopoulos 

These are his replies to questions asked earlier this month by our readers. 

*Hillier:* I thank you for taking the time to ask me questions through this forum, and for being patient with me, as I took some time to respond to your many excellent questions. As many of you know, I was in Afghanistan last week and hoped to respond from there with that immediate and fresh context in my mind. Once I received your questions, however, it was clear that I needed to dedicate several hours to respond fully, and thus I have given your questions the thought and time they deserve. I hope you have found it worth the wait. Thank you for your interest in the work of the outstanding men and women serving in the Canadian Forces, whom I have the honour to represent.
*More on Link*


----------



## Cloud Cover

Well, he didnt answer my question, but I think the CBC vetted it in favour of the idiot who asked the question about 'detestable scumbags."


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Nor mine...then again I would not expect CBC to do anything on the contrary


----------



## GAP

Hillier in Kandahar with Stanley Cup and ex-NHLers
Updated Wed. May. 2 2007 6:50 AM ET CTV.ca News Staff
Article Link

Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier arrived in Afghanistan today with 19 former NHL players and the Stanley Cup in a show of support for Canadian troops. 

The group of players includes enforcers Bob Probert and Dave (Tiger) Williams, goaltender Ron Tugnutt and former Montreal Canadiens stars Rejean Houle and Yvon Lambert. 

The players also brought along the Stanley Cup for troops to take pictures with and even laced up for a little old-time hockey. 

Last month, Canadian troops received another taste of home when they were visited by Eugene Melnyk -- owner of the Ottawa Senators. 

Melnyk came to the base in Kandahar to deliver $50,000 worth of hockey equipment and 2,500 Tim Hortons gift certificates. 

The troops, many of whom play ball hockey as a pastime, received new goalie equipment, hockey sticks, inline skates, balls and NHL and Team Canada jerseys. 
More on link


----------



## geo

Hoo-ahh!
The cup in Kandahar

That is great! - and you couldn't ask for a better santa-claus (with newf accent and all )


----------



## a_majoor

Good thing I'm on duty that day; being hip checked into the boards by the General would be a very painful experience  

I'm glad people are coming over, not only is it good for the troops, but these visitors will be bringing back a positive first hand report on what we are doing and why; they'll tell two friends and so on...


----------



## Journeyman

Since today marks the 40th anniversary of the last time the Maple Leafs won the Stanley Cup, it's quite fitting that it should be displayed that far from Toronto.   ;D


----------



## deedster

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Since today marks the 40th anniversary of the last time the Maple Leafs won the Stanley Cup, it's quite fitting that it should be displayed that far from Toronto.   ;D


HaHaHaHaHa....good one!


----------



## vonGarvin

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Since today marks the 40th anniversary of the last time the Maple Leafs won the Stanley Cup, it's quite fitting that it should be displayed that far from Toronto.   ;D



Of course, this is very depressing, as I realise that I am in the minority of Canadians now:

Someone who was alive when the Leafs won the Cup

:crybaby:


----------



## Mike Baker

Now this I like to see  ;D



			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> Since today marks the 40th anniversary of the last time the Maple Leafs won the Stanley Cup, it's quite fitting that it should be displayed that far from Toronto.   ;D


 :rofl: That was a good one!


----------



## deedster

Captain Sensible said:
			
		

> Of course, this is very depressing, as I realise that I am in the minority of Canadians now:
> 
> Someone who was alive when the Leafs won the Cup
> 
> :crybaby:


CS
I belong to the same minority, however, I lived in Montreal at the time and have therefore seen the Cup a few more times than you


----------



## Mike Baker

Oh snap


----------



## MikeM

Quite the treat for the troops in KAF, hopefully some of the BG guys got to see it on some R&R in KAF.

Good on Gen. Hiller and the ex NHLers going over with the cup.


----------



## Sig_Des

It really was a treat.

Kind of a wind-down, and a lot of people there. I never in my life thought I'd be near the cup with a rifle on my back, that's for sure. Lot's of entertainment, and some really nice people.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Nice interview with him and a M/Cpl on Coach's Corner last night also.


----------



## safeboy43

Wow, that is amazing. It was good of Gen. Hiller the ex NHL stars to do that for the troops.


----------



## jswift872

MikeM said:
			
		

> Quite the treat for the troops in KAF, hopefully some of the BG guys got to see it on some R&R in KAF.
> 
> Good on Gen. Hiller and the ex NHLers going over with the cup.



as a member of h coy, yes we are in, festivities are still rockin oh yea, and its great posing with the cup with your weapon, has a cool factor civies love, lol


----------



## Sig_Des

J-Swift said:
			
		

> oh yea, and its great posing with the cup with your weapon, has a cool factor civies love, lol



It really is. The BBQ was awesome, and it's fun to get everyone together...A good time for sure!


----------



## safeboy43

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> It really is. The BBQ was awesome, and it's fun to get everyone together...A good time for sure!


Did you drink out of the Stanley Cup?


----------



## Mike Baker

My dad saw my cousin with the cup


----------



## Thompson_JM

It was a great night. the beer was cold, the BBQ was good and the CDS was his charismatic self.... I had the priviledge of hearing him talk when he spoke with H-Coy earlier in the afternoon as well, and I was moved.. He is increadably down to earth very freindly and probabbly one of the best things to happen to the CF in the past 20-30 years! 

those who have met him or heard him speak know what im talking about. hes just plain and simple a great guy.

im hopeing to get a pic with the cup tonight since i missed it last night!

cheers
  Tommy


----------



## bilton090

Good time had by all !
    Hockey game, Beer, the cup, ex-NHLers, And Hillier it just doesn't get much better than that !    

      Chimo from Kandahar !


----------



## GAP

Hillier arrives in Kandahar for surprise visit
Updated Mon. Oct. 22 2007 9:50 AM ET CTV.ca News Staff
Article Link

Canada's chief of defence staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, arrived at the Kandahar airfield for a surprise visit with Canadian troops on Monday.

This is Hillier's first visit to Afghanistan since Quebec's Royal 22nd Regiment was deployed in July. He arrived in a Hercules aircraft accompanied by Canadian soldiers returning from leave.

Canada's top soldier was met on the tarmac by Brig.-Gen. Guy Laroche.

CTV's South Asia Bureau Chief Paul Workman said Hiller's visit is likely a routine trip where he will gather information about the mission and spend time with soldiers in the field.

"It's mid-period of this rotation of Van Doos and that's probably why he's here," Workman said.

It's unknown how long he will stay in the country. Hillier, often described as an "accessible general," is expected to address the media later in the week.

Workman said it's standard practice for senior commanding officers not to reveal their travel plans ahead of departure for "operational security reasons."

Hiller's visit marks the second round of senior commanding officers to visit Afghanistan in less than a week. Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, Canada's top army general, and Maj.-Gen. Stuart Beare, commander of the Land Force Doctrine and Training System, arrived in the country last week to visit every forward-operating base in the province.

Hiller's visit comes less than a week after the Conservative government proposed extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan until 2011 instead of 2009.

Workman said Hillier is unlikely to address the latest political developments.
More on link


----------



## geo

Though it's occasionally a pain in the a$$ to have VIPs showing up all the time, it's even worse when you never get the chance to see "the big cheese".

Excellent that the CDS is taking the time to lead from the front & not from the boardroom.

CHIMO!


----------



## PuckChaser

Hopefully I'll get to meet him while he's here!


----------



## Armymedic

I was reading on G&M and on the comment boards for the article. You'd swear by some of the comments there is some great comsiracy going on or that the CDS is going over to boost morale cause all the soldiers there are going to be there until 2011.

If ignorance was bliss, some G&M readers must be in heaven.


----------



## N.Grundle

General Hillier is the best thing to happen to the Forces hope there is more like him


----------



## Kiwi99

The field army is at war, like it or not.  The Navy is not, and neither is the air force.  Therefore, in my opinion, a general from the feild army should be leading the forces.  If the navy were at war, then likewise.  And if all three branches are at war, the again, it should be a field army general.  Here's a question, just cause you have to be bilingual to be CDS, does that mean you have to continually switch languages when speaking to troops?  In Bosnia on Roto 11 the last CDS (RCAF one) spoke to a all english weatern Canada based rifle company in french and english, and nobody had a clue what he said.  But I guarentee he wasn't talking about killing scumbags because he was a politician more than a leader.


----------



## aesop081

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> and neither is the air force.



Is that so ?

I'll remember that next time theres a CC-130 doing an air drop of supplies into an FOB or other similar location or taking your sorry a** out of the Ghan so you can enjoy your LTA.


----------



## aesop081

almost forgot.....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/05/31/chinook-afghanistan.html

Is that an Air Force beret and cap badge i see.......


----------



## aesop081

Wait...theres more......

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1703#athena



> A Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (TUAV) unit comprised primarily of personnel from 438 Tactical Helicopter Squadron (438 ETAH) based in St-Hubert, Quebec, and members from 5 RALC in Valcartier;


----------



## tomahawk6

Zoomies go to war 8)


----------



## GAP

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> almost forgot.....
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/05/31/chinook-afghanistan.html
> 
> Is that an Air Force beret and cap badge i see.......



What? He was a tourist?  ;D


----------



## aesop081

Just because its so much fun.....

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?find&catalog=photos&template=detail_e.np&field=itemid&op=matches&value=20922&site=combatcamera

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?find&catalog=photos&template=detail_e.np&field=itemid&op=matches&value=20918&site=combatcamera

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?find&catalog=photos&template=detail_e.np&field=itemid&op=matches&value=30244&site=combatcamera

and then....

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061215/oliver_resupplymission_061215/20061215/

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1991


----------



## PuckChaser

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> A Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (TUAV) unit comprised primarily of personnel from 438 Tactical Helicopter Squadron (438 ETAH) based in St-Hubert, Quebec, and members from 5 RALC in Valcartier;



I totally couldn't resist this one.... remember, its the army that goes and picks those TUAV's up after they crash, so the Jawa-like Afghan's don't steal em.  ;D

PS. The preceeding post was not intended to be a flame, in fact I solemly believe that we should have up-to-date strike aircraft deployed here. I mean heck, the French have Mirages here, and their troops are safely up north.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> The field army is at war, like it or not.  The Navy is not, and neither is the air force.  Therefore, in my opinion, a general from the feild army should be leading the forces.  If the navy were at war, then likewise.  And if all three branches are at war, the again, it should be a field army general.  Here's a question, just cause you have to be bilingual to be CDS, does that mean you have to continually switch languages when speaking to troops?  In Bosnia on Roto 11 the last CDS (RCAF one) spoke to a all english weatern Canada based rifle company in french and english, and nobody had a clue what he said.  But I guarentee he wasn't talking about killing scumbags because he was a politician more than a leader.



This is a pretty army centric posting. I guess we'd better tell the divers from FDU(A) who are over in theatre working on those IEDs that they're not at war and the seventy pers who went from MARLANT on the last roto too while we're at it. Oh yeah and that ship that's departing here in the next little while to go on a six  month tour to enforce the blockade we'd better tell them to stand down too (gosh they have a helicopter on board too with a whole bunch of blue uniforms).
One of the reasons we've gone to this Joint command structure is because we're all in this together. Just because you're not sitting in a slit trench doesn't mean you're not fighting the war...it's a group effort.
Having said all that I think the mantle will pass to an army general  anyway and that would be because he is the best qualified military leader to do it IMHO.


----------



## vonGarvin

How about this:
The Canadian Armed Forces are at war.  Canadians are at the mall, wondering when the retail prices will drop due to the soaring dollar.  (104.12 cents US in overseas trading as of 0900 26 Oct 2007)


----------



## Kiwi99

Six month blockade...of what?  A landlocked country?  Please.



			
				PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I would go a step further and add that it is the Field Army that is "at war" - I remain unconvinced that the Institutional Army has made that leap.



And this guy gets paid mre than most of us.  The Air Force  supplies a couple of aircrews and says they are at war!!!  The navy does a blockade!!  A bunch of Taliban rowing in the ocean or something?  The field army is at war, the rest may be supporting, but they are not at war.


----------



## Infanteer

Easy Kiwi.

You make the point, but try to do it better.  Yes, the Army is bearing the brunt of the effort in this war, but our sister services are doing their best where they can and I have no doubt if needed on a larger scale, they would come through.  Let's not denigrate the other services because the Taliban don't have boats or planes....


----------



## Neill McKay

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> And this guy gets paid mre than most of us.  The Air Force  supplies a couple of aircrews and says they are at war!!!  The navy does a blockade!!  A bunch of Taliban rowing in the ocean or something?  The field army is at war, the rest may be supporting, but they are not at war.



Do you feel that the army is at war, or only the infantry?


----------



## Jarnhamar

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> Six month blockade...of what?  A landlocked country?  Please.
> 
> And this guy gets paid mre than most of us.  The Air Force  supplies a couple of aircrews and says they are at war!!!  The navy does a blockade!!  A bunch of Taliban rowing in the ocean or something?  The field army is at war, the rest may be supporting, but they are not at war.



Bullshit.
What do you call the Navy EOD types and Airforce truckers (to name two) who you'll run into at the FOBs?

This kinda eat your own 'my trade is better than your trade army beats airforce' shit is what needs to get punted from the forces.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> Six month blockade...of what?  A landlocked country?  Please.
> 
> And this guy gets paid mre than most of us.  The Air Force  supplies a couple of aircrews and says they are at war!!!  The navy does a blockade!!  A bunch of Taliban rowing in the ocean or something?  The field army is at war, the rest may be supporting, but they are not at war.



You better brush up on the elements of war. Blocakade is an act of war and the ships are searching and seizing nasty stuff and people that are bound to go in and give the grunts a bad day. (it moves through other couuntries that are not land locked) Are the pilots that are flying your UAVs at war or are they just REMFS too?) It's a total effort and if you don't believe that try to get into theatre without the Air Force. I understand that people are getting shot at, wounded and killed on the ground and that is the toughest part of the fight without a doubt but the support tail is an important part of the fight.


----------



## aesop081

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> Six month blockade...of what?  A landlocked country?  Please.
> 
> And this guy gets paid mre than most of us.  The Air Force  supplies a couple of aircrews and says they are at war!!!  The navy does a blockade!!  A bunch of Taliban rowing in the ocean or something?  The field army is at war, the rest may be supporting, but they are not at war.



Awesome, i will call the Commanders of 8 and 17 Wings on Monday and inform them that all CC-177, CC-130 and CC-150 crews and aircraft can come home and that the air bridge from Canada to Afghanistan can stop.  Its certainly a wasted effort as the army doesnt require it. While i'm at it i will also call Comd 1CAD and let him know that he can repatriate all the cooks, medics, sup techs, mse ops, air field engineers, clerks, traffic techs, etc, etc.... that came from Air force bases around Canada.

This will leave the air force more personel and resources for dealing with the Russians, monitoring the north, fisheries patrols, search and rescue, humanitarian operations........all of thos things we do at the same time as Afghanistan.


----------



## Jarnhamar

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Awesome, i will call the Commanders of 8 and 17 Wings on Monday and inform them that all CC-177, CC-130 and CC-150 crews and aircraft can come home and that the air bridge from Canada to Afghanistan can stop.  Its certainly a wasted effort as the army doesnt require it. While i'm at it i will also call Comd 1CAD and let him know that he can repatriate all the cooks, medics, sup techs, mse ops, air field engineers, clerks, traffic techs, etc, etc.... that came from Air force bases around Canada.
> 
> This will leave the air force more personel and resources for dealing with the Russians, monitoring the north, fisheries patrols, search and rescue, humanitarian operations........all of thos things we do at the same time as Afghanistan.



Checkmate


----------



## c_canuk

I think that the next CDS should not only be Army, but should be Cbt Arms for the reason that the part of the mission that is the most dangerous and important to long term success rests with the Combat arms; therefore a leader with the education and experience of service within the combat arms needs to be in the lead.

The Navy and Airforce are contributing in very real and significant ways, however their leaders are not equipped to command a force fielding a 2500 member task force engaged in a ground based conflict especially since the vast majority of that force is army. 

Commanders from the Navy and Airforce can and will petition the CDS for their needs which is why there are Generals/Admirals that report directly to the CDS on behalf of their elements.

The consequences of the CF loosing sight of it's requirements to support the ground force or mismanage it's assets to the detriment of the ground force in Afghanistan, however unlikely you might think it is, is too great a risk to ignore in order to be PC and make sure the Airforce or the Navy don't get their feelings hurt in the setting aside of the traditional custom of choosing the next CDS from each element in sequence.

Airforce and Navy pers serving alongside the army in Afghanistan will suffer any policy shift that puts the ground troops in greater danger and hardship as well, so it is in their best interest to have the most qualified CDS for the time we live in to be in charge. Even to the possible, yet unlikely, detriment of the Navy and Airforce pers back home in Canada.

The bottom line is that the person most qualified should get the position, however, it is out of the military's hands as the promotion to CDS is a political task and will be done in accordance to the ruling political party's best interests not necessarily the CFs.

Therefore a flame war between the elements on who is more important is pointless and a waste of time. No one element can stand without the support of the others.


----------



## Neill McKay

c_canuk said:
			
		

> I think that the next CDS should not only be Army, but should be Cbt Arms for the reason that the part of the mission that is the most dangerous and important to long term success rests with the Combat arms; therefore a leader with the education and experience of service within the combat arms needs to be in the lead.
> 
> The Navy and Airforce are contributing in very real and significant ways, however their leaders are not equipped to command a force fielding a 2500 member task force engaged in a ground based conflict especially since the vast majority of that force is army.
> 
> Commanders from the Navy and Airforce can and will petition the CDS for their needs which is why there are Generals/Admirals that report directly to the CDS on behalf of their elements.



I would note, though, that personally running land (or any) operations is not the CDS' function.



> the traditional custom of choosing the next CDS from each element in sequence.



Do we have such a custom?  If so it's been poorly observed in recent years.


----------



## geo

c_canuk said:
			
		

> I think that the next CDS should not only be Army, but should be Cbt Arms for the reason that the part of the mission that is the most dangerous and important to long term success rests with the Combat arms; therefore a leader with the education and experience of service within the combat arms needs to be in the lead.


Uhh... Combat arms are part of the Army.



> The Navy and Airforce are contributing in very real and significant ways, however their leaders are not equipped to command a force fielding a 2500 member task force engaged in a ground based conflict especially since the vast majority of that force is army.


The CDS does not directly command the deployed troops in the field.  You can consider the Commander of the Army or the Commander of CEF.COM to be the fearless leader of the troops at the pointy end.



> The bottom line is that the person most qualified should get the position, however, it is out of the military's hands as the promotion to CDS is a political task and will be done in accordance to the ruling political party's best interests not necessarily the CFs.



True


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

I agree that the best qualified should get the job regardless of his branch of service and that the CLS is the commander of the field army not the CDS, however, we all know that the CDS has a great deal of influence over where the priorities are placed. Hopefully the choice will be one which does not forget that we are all in need of pers and equipment and dollars. We must never sacrifice the safety of our pers in the theatre or in the air or at sea....or in the office/warehouse.


----------



## dapaterson

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> ... the CLS is the commander of the field army not the CDS...



Actually, the CLS is responsible for the force generation of land-centric forces.  Once they deploy to the field, the force employer takes over - in North America, Canada Command; outside North America, Canadian Expeditionary Forces Command.


----------



## c_canuk

my point was the mission in Afghanistan is top priority right now and therefore the CDS needs to have the background to plan around it effectivly just as if we were scouring the seas to eliminate pirates attacking oil tankers or what have you the CDS should be of a Naval background. While the CDS doesn't directly control the mission, policies and decisions the CDS makes will affect the mission.

When I said not only army but combat arms I meant an army combat arms trade CDS, ie not supply or log for example.


----------



## geo

cc
Regardless of the colour of his uniform, the CDS surrounds himself with specialists from all branches.  He would be neglignet to ignore or short change even one branch.

The best man for the job is the one who should get it.... Period!

At present, we have the chiefs of Land, Sea & Air AND the chiefs of Canada.com, CEF.com & SOF.com as possible contenders for the big job.


----------



## GAP

Rick Hillier is revered by troops in Afghanistan, which predictably -- and unfairly -- makes him the target of a shooting gallery at home  
By PETER WORTHINGTON, TORONTO SUN
Article Link

No question about it: They are out to "get" Rick Hillier, the general who has revived Canada's army as a fighting force. 

Who are "they?" 

Well, some are politicians (not all of them in opposition ranks), some are anti-military peace-at-any-pricers, some (these are among the most dangerous) are insiders at DND, and some are unwitting media types who mindlessly regurgitate what they are told. 

The "why" is more difficult to explain. 

Why would anyone want Hillier removed or replaced as chief of defence staff (CDS) when his leadership has effectively raised morale and made the army more like it was when Canadian troops fought in world wars? 

Our military's role and effectiveness in Afghanistan have boosted Canada's reputation and status in the world. It has done Canada and Canadians proud. 

Credit for this isn't all Hillier's, but irrefutably he's the face of our "new" army and he relishes the spotlight -- which in a way is part of his trouble. 
More on link


----------



## geo

To some, a CDS should be like a child:  "Seen but not heard" - and the CDS does not fit that mold.
Those inside DND who don't like him?... 
functionaries who liked the old way of doing things (7 year procurment process) don't like to have people tell them to get it done in 6 mths to 1 year)
soldiers who liked it the old fashioned way... ineffective leadership accepting excuses for not getting things done
I could go on and on....


----------



## Greymatters

I think its just that many politicians dont like the military (as they've been taught in poli-sci), and are offended that a senior officer is more popular than they area... it seems to be the nature of national-level politicians to tear down whosoever is above them regardless of whether that person is doing a good thing or not...


----------



## geo

... People will trust the  soldier
 - and they won't trust the politician


----------



## Steve 1 RNFLDR

I think it's funny that he didn't mention the Duke of Wellington among the popular military figures who went on to public office.


----------



## CougarKing

Greymatters said:
			
		

> I think its just that many politicians dont like the military (as they've been taught in poli-sci),



Here we go again generalizing Poli Sci grads. Not all political science majors/grads are military-hating peaceniks. And on that same note, not all politicians and bureaucrats have a degree in Political Science; the politicians have to be elected, as you well know, and the career bureaucrats are just as likely to get their job regardless of whether they were Business or Poli Sci majors or whatever liberal arts major.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

I think Worthington has done a pretty acurate piece here. He's certainly correct that there is concern among those in the Air Force and Navy about concentration on things Army. I've heard the rumours of the "them and us" rift between those who worked outside the wire and those inside the wire, this is pretty normal I think for Armies who are engaged in fighting war. I'm not sure why he's connecting that to Hillier or blaming him for it...it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The feeling that some have of thinking that those who don't deploy right into country are second class has been evident to me by some on this forum. I'm not sure that those attitudes can be blamed on the CDS or that there is any cure for it. There will always be a chasm between those who get shot at and those who are in a support role back at KAF or back in Canada or at sea or in the air doing a different aspect of security. 
I think personally the CDS himself might be wondering if after three years of a pretty tough and tiring job it might be time to move on.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Ruxted has a little to say again on this topic.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/67739.0.html


----------



## Bigmac

> Alexander Panetta, THE CANADIAN PRESS
> 
> 
> Canada's top soldier is unapologetic about his outspoken style and vows to keep talking publicly despite suggestions his political bosses want him to tone it down.
> 
> Chief of defence staff Gen. Rick Hillier says he works for his troops as much as he does for the government - and says he's proud to act as their voice.
> 
> He has also suggested that promoting their work is an essential part of his job - so essential that anyone who can't perform that duty should be replaced.
> 
> "I will be the public champion of those brave men and women," Hillier told a group of broadcasters.
> 
> "They are Canada's sons and daughters, ladies and gentlemen. If we can't market Canada's sons and daughters back to Canada's moms and dads, we need to find somebody to replace us to do the job.
> 
> "Because that's what needs to be done."
> 
> Officials for the Conservative government have been quoted in news reports saying that Hillier was given his marching orders and told that his job is not to be chief spokesman for the military.
> 
> The government was annoyed when Hillier publicly suggested that it might take a decade to stabilize Afghanistan - after the government declared it was feasible by 2011.
> 
> But Hillier has said nobody's told him to tone it down.



http://www.recorder.ca/cp/National/071106/n1106113A.html

Gen. Hillier is the best CDS we have ever had! Good on you, Sir!


----------



## geo

bigmac

Gen Hillier is good, he may even be great but, only time will tell if (after Hillier) he was the best that we have ever had.

The Canadian military has had chiefs of the Defense staff (or Militia) for some some 140 years (2007-1867).  
Neither you nor I are adequately qualified to definitively determine who was the best we have ever had.


----------



## Bigmac

geo said:
			
		

> bigmac
> 
> Gen Hillier is good, he may even be great but, only time will tell if (after Hillier) he was the best that we have ever had.
> 
> The Canadian military has had chiefs of the Defense staff (or Militia) for some some 140 years (2007-1867).
> Neither you nor I are adequately qualified to definitively determine who was the best we have ever had.



OK, my politically correct disclaimer: I base my "opinion" upon only the CDS's I have seen in my 23 years of service. There may have been better ones in history but I leave that to the historians. So to rephrase; Gen Hillier is, in my opinion, the best CDS I have seen in my 23 years of service. This is "my opinion" and does not reflect the opinion of the CF or all it's personnel presently or previously serving.


----------



## geo

Don't get me wrong, I like the man, I will go so far as to say "I love the man" (platonic)
A down homer with a huge heart.  Willing to stand up for his men & women and who has singlehandedly brought back pride and esprit de corps where it had withered away and dissapeared.


----------



## MikeM

+1 to the big man, he's got my support.


----------



## MG34

He's doing much better than the political shills we had before, about as good as we could get considering who they had to pick from.


----------



## geo

MG34
We have to consider that, if the Gov't isn't willing to listen to what the CDS has to say, all they have to do is replace him...
So does he spout off & get canned OR does he "heel" and try to get his licks in when an oportunity presents itself?

In the days of Trudeau, Mulroney & Chrétien, the CDS had to kowtow to the Politicos if they had any hope of providing some protection for their soldiers, sailors & airmen.

Not making excusses for them but, I can visualise the problem


----------



## GUNS

Have to agree with geo here.

 It would be better for the CDS to rein himself in a bit here and remain in command rather than continue his out-spoken manner and view the military from the sidelines.


----------



## Edward Campbell

I disagree, GUNS. I think he's doing a great _communications_ job, even when he _oversteps_ the bounds a bit. I'm fairly sure that he and his media advisers understand when he's going to cross a line but, generally, they are lines that need a bit of crossing. Some civil servants, a few more politicians and a whole boat load of political staffers are unhappy: *Tough!* He's not breaking any rules. he may be writing a few new ones and reshaping (bending) a few old ones but I don't think he's broken any important ones. No one with the brains the gods gave a green pepper should give a damn about anything Sandra Buckler says. D'ya hear me, Mr. Harper?

He is approaching the end of his tour as CDS. There is no magic time limit: three years has been about the norm, some have served four. I suggest that more than four is hard on the individual and not too good for the service, either - no matter how popular and effective the incumbent CDS might be. Change is almost always a good thing.

So let's have more of Hillier being Hillier while he still has the _bully pulpit_.


----------



## geo

Edward,
Hillier is doing a great job - no taking away from his accomplishments. 

However, do you think he would have survived very long, acting the way he does, under Trudeau, Mulroney or Chrétien?


----------



## Reccesoldier

Well said Edward.

Another aspect of the Generals outspoken method is that it might encourage the Government specifically the PMO and Foreign Affairs to step up their game with regard to the message and their communication of it, which as we all know has been lacklustre at best.


----------



## Greymatters

Dont know if he's the best ever, but he's certainly a far cry better than anybody else in quite a while.  Hard to tell if he's better than General MacKenzie was without the two of them being side-by-side for comparison.


----------



## Edward Campbell

geo said:
			
		

> Edward,
> Hillier is doing a great job - no taking away from his accomplishments.
> 
> However, do you think he would have survived very long, acting the way he does, under Trudeau, Mulroney or Chrétien?



I doubt someone like him would have been a flag/general officer in the '60s, '70s and '80s. The _system_ was different: admirals and generals were seen but not heard. But, of course, neither was anyone else: ministers spoke for their departments and, until Trudeau, were accountable for their departments. Government got a lot more complicated in the '60s and '70s (not Trudeau's fault) - as did business and everything else. Trudeau's ministry _system_ changed with the times.

Further (see Clarkson and McCall, _et al_) Trudeau actively disliked the military - and that's not a strong enough word. He disliked and mistrusted soldiers and just wanted them (us) all to go away, quietly. The military didn't much like the government, either - not after Hellyer vs. Landymore and Moncel (another of the best CDS we never had).

Mulroney didn't *dislike* the military but he didn't care about it either. It simply was never a priority during the Mulroney years. The infamous and strategically blind white paper with nuclear submarines wasn't even written in NDHQ. The work was farmed out to a bunch of Tory insiders in Toronto - so called defence experts (just like we have now) who completely and utterly missed the mark and were technological and financial illiterates to boot.

Chrétien was in the Trudeau mould, but he understood the need to 'sell' his government and he picked Hillier _because_ of his public _face,_ not despite it.


----------



## riggermade

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Dont know if he's the best ever, but he's certainly a far cry better than anybody else in quite a while.  Hard to tell if he's better than General MacKenzie was without the two of them being side-by-side for comparison.



I think Hillier was needed at this time and is doing a good job.  Mackenzie IMHO is another one of the many wannabees you see on tv who were seen but rarely heard while in uniforum and now have alot to say when they are out of uniforum.


----------



## Greymatters

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Further (see Clarkson and McCall, _et al_) Trudeau actively disliked the military - and that's not a strong enough word. He disliked and mistrusted soldiers and just wanted them (us) all to go away, quietly. The military didn't much like the government, either - not after Hellyer vs. Landymore and Moncel (another of the best CDS we never had).



Not up on Hellyer and Landymore, so did a quick search.  Only found one article with good details here:
http://www.st-timothy.com/newsletters/0206/vondette-complete.php?layout=1 

Anyone able to confirm as to whether this is an accurate portrayal?


----------



## Greymatters

riggermade said:
			
		

> I think Hillier was needed at this time and is doing a good job.  Mackenzie IMHO is another one of the many wannabees you see on tv who were seen but rarely heard while in uniforum and now have alot to say when they are out of uniforum.



Not according to the soldiers I knew who worked under him in Sarajevo...


----------



## GUNS

E.R, all soldiers support the CDS. I support the CDS. But he is walking a fine line when he attracts better media attention than his employer? 

I am concerned that our political leader will not make the same mistake twice and have another Hillier as a CDS. 

When I served during the 60's & 70's the CDS was rarely mentioned or seen. Today a vast majority of Canadians are aware of who is the CDS. Which speaks volumes for Gen. Hillier ability to communicate with the masses.

I believe if the CDS walks on to many toes,  the military will suffer when the PM selects the next CDS.


----------



## riggermade

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Not according to the soldiers I knew who worked under him in Sarajevo...



I agree that he did an awesome job in Sarajevo and he was likely muzzled while in uniforum but from civilians I speak to they see him in the same ilk as all the other so called ex-military who seem to be on the television


----------



## Greymatters

riggermade said:
			
		

> I agree that he did an awesome job in Sarajevo and he was likely muzzled while in uniforum but from civilians I speak to they see him in the same ilk as all the other so called ex-military who seem to be on the television



In that regard I have to admit some dissapointmnet, especially when I got a letter today and see he is as acting as a spokesperson for United Way.  It makes one wonder, did he sell out, or is this the best he can do after being effectively shut out of the Ottawa three-ring circus of retired experts?  Regarding his television appearances, I do recall he acted as an 'expert' during the US road trip to Baghdad, and was considered the only one who said anything credible.  Perhaps he has done some silly things since then that I havent seen out here on the west coast?


----------



## pbi

> I believe if the CDS walks on to many toes,  the military will suffer when the PM selects the next CDS.



This is the part that worries me. We finally have an effective, outspoken, well-recognized CDS: I hope that the politicians don't get scared of the idea. I guess it depends on the strength of character of the particular MND and the PM in power on the day the decision is made. If they are real leaders who are secure in their positions and comfortable with power and responsibility, they will probably be able to deal with a strong subordinate. If, on the other hand, they are greasy backstabbers who trust no-one, or nervous newbies scared of their own shadows, they'll look for a silent office boy.

Cheers


----------



## Bigmac

What I find refreshing about Gen Hillier is he always advocates for the troops even if it makes him unpopular to the media or political parties. Most of the other CDSs I have seen would wait for their bottled response to be given to them so they wouldn't close the door on future civilian political posts.

Maybe Gen Hillier is the military's version of Don Cherry, outspoken and says what most soldiers are thinking but are afraid to say in public? Only time will tell if he is replaced. Even if he is replaced, he has served his full term and will always be remembered as a great CDS. My only hope is the next CDS is just as voracious and a soldier first, political lapdog second.

My opinion. ;D


----------



## GUNS

+1


----------



## pbi

Maybe this country is growing up? Maybe both General Hillier and...yes...even Don Cherry...are both symbols of a new way we are starting to look at ourselves. Maybe we will gradually shed this mumbly-peg foot-shuffling eternal bridesmaid image we have of ourselves (and that some Canadians seem to almost pathologically enjoy projecting to the world) and step up a but more. Perhaps that's a bit much to project from the actions of  one person, but sometimes I think I see signs that we are starting to come of age.

Cheers


----------



## geo

Nah... it's Gen Hillier's down home personality... no one can get mad & stay mad at a Newf.

What he has done & what he has gotten away with... probably wouldn't work with most other General officers.


----------



## GAP

Canada's top soldier talks up the troops
  Alisha Morrissey The Telegram Friday, November 16, 2007
Article Link

ST. JOHN'S, N.L. -- Always a soldier's soldier, Gen. Rick Hillier talked up the troops in a speech in St. John's, N.L., Thursday.

Hillier talked mostly about the future of the Canadian forces and what he called "the pillars" of the future military, when he spoke to hundreds of delegates and invited guests, including the Military Family Resource Centre.

He outlined the new Canadian forces framework, talking about uniting the army, navy and air force, building up special forces, the renewed focus on physical fitness and training and recruitment.

"We're hearing around the world that, 'You guys are great. We need more of you,' " Hillier said, before asking the audience how many had seen the new recruitment advertising.

Most had seen the military's new ad campaign, which Hillier described as true-to-life advertising.

He said the ad that was playing when he joined was a soldier in dress uniform climbing down from a plane with a brief case in his hand. Hillier said when lying in trenches, muddied and tired during training he realized that the ad's slogan - "There's no life like it" - was true, but not much else.

Hillier also talked about Afghanistan, the problems there, the entrepreneurial people and culture and what Canada is doing to help.

He talked about how children attend schools in three shifts a day, because they want to be educated.

"A well changes your life," Hillier said, when showing how soldiers help dig wells for communities, "if your well is five kilometres away and you're the little boy or little girl who has to go get (water)."

He encouraged the women in the audience to click their heels proudly on the sidewalk, explaining that in Afghanistan women are whipped for the same act. There was a collective gasp, when he showed photos taken of a woman who was about to be executed because she'd been seen in public with a man who wasn't in her immediate family.

Hillier showed slides of food and supply drops, soldiers meeting with district leaders; photos taken while the country's first census was being taken and inoculation and education for Afghan children.

But not every soldier is serving in Afghanistan, he pointed out, saying that the military's "no-fail mission," is responding to needs at home in capacities like search and rescue.

It was then that he introduced two real soldiers, Vicky Stamp and Derrick Curtis, who serve respectively as a supply technician and search and rescue technician.

Stamp, he says, worked on the Swiss Air disaster and on 9/11 relief. Curtis rode a bike across the country to raise money to fight violence against women and parachuted into a blizzard in Canada's north in a search and rescue operation.

Hillier later introduced Sgt. Sheldon Herritt, who has served in Afghanistan and who was injured earlier this year when trying to disable an improvised explosive device.

Hillier said that when Canadians support their troops - with red rallies, magnetic yellow ribbons on their cars, renaming highways after lost soldiers, and even sending Tim Hortons gift certificates to a war zone - it encourages the troops and reminds them why they do their jobs.

"When you're 10,000 miles from home and somebody out there perhaps is trying to kill you, you can be forgiven for thinking you're in this by yourself," he said. "So when you're back here in Canada or here in Newfoundland and Labrador these things inspire us."
More on link


----------



## MarkOttawa

Eugene Lang--topic on his and Janice Stein's book here--
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/67585.0.html

to my amazement defends CDS Hillier's public role.  I couldn't find anything between the lines, except maybe the reference to UK CGS Dannatt's evangelical Christianity, and the reference to Gen. Hillier's being "the architect of the Kandahar mission"--no doubt paranoia on my part.

Don't leave talk to the politicians
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071116.wcoessayhillier1117/BNStory/specialComment/



> For the first time in several decades, a serving military officer, General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, has emerged as one of Canada's leading public figures. Since his appointment in 2005, he has occupied centre stage on the war in Afghanistan, and he has spoken out on many other military issues.
> 
> Is this very public general encroaching on the terrain of politicians? Is he overstepping his authority? These questions are on the minds of many.
> 
> While Gen. Hillier is undoubtedly charting a new course for Canada's military leaders, his actions remain in keeping with basic principles delineating the respective roles of generals and their civilian masters. Moreover, comparison of his actions to those of top generals in other democracies suggests he is well within accepted parameters...
> 
> ...if some Canadians think Gen. Hillier has been too vocal, treading on the politicians' turf — especially in his recent musings about the length of time required to establish an effective Afghan army — they should consider some of the public comments of Sir Richard Dannatt, head of the British Army. Gen. Dannatt has waded deeply into foreign policy debates and domestic politics. He has openly questioned the British military's involvement in Iraq and has linked Britain's "difficulties around the world" to its presence in Iraq. *An evangelical Christian, Gen. Dannatt has expressed his concern about the decline of Christian values in Britain, which he claims has allowed Islamic extremism to flourish* [emphasis added]. He has criticized the Bush administration's recent positioning on Iran, saying, "Dialogue and negotiation make eminent sense and military posturing doesn't."
> 
> Gen. Dannatt is well over the political-military dividing line. Yet he keeps his job, and the British press has labelled him "the honest general." He makes Gen. Hillier look positively cautious...
> 
> Gen. Hillier has chosen to be a public figure at the top of an important national institution. He is a passionate promoter of, and advocate for, all things military. He is an effective communicator with an astounding ability to connect with the rank and file, the general public and the media. Canada has probably never had a senior military officer with such profile and such common touch.
> 
> By contrast, in the two decades before Gen. Hillier's appointment, chiefs of the defence staff were hardly known to the public. That is how governments of the day wanted things. The CDS tended to be cast in the mould of deputy ministers: powerful figures operating behind the scenes but rarely in the public space, except for ceremonial duties. The position reflected the realities of the Canadian Forces; this was the era of military downsizing and budget-cutting. It was also a period of deep-seated morale and image problems for the Canadian Forces, stemming from the infamous Somalia scandal. The Forces were in serious decline as an institution, with a tarnished image. There wasn't a positive story for senior military leaders to tell the public, if they had wanted to do so.
> 
> Things are now much different. The CF is experiencing a renaissance and growing by several thousand personnel. Its budget is being increased radically by Canadian standards, by $18-billion in the next half-decade. It is re-equipping itself and becoming an operationally focused post-Cold War force that can act as a key instrument of our foreign policy and national security. The war in southern Afghanistan is its largest and most challenging deployment in decades.
> 
> This is a new era for Canada's military, calling for a new kind of leadership. Today, there is a compelling narrative to convey to the public about the Forces. And Gen. Hillier is creatively seizing the opportunity...
> 
> Undoubtedly, Gen. Hillier is redefining the role of the CDS. But it is hard to argue he is overstepping his authority or getting ahead of government policy.
> 
> Rebuilding the military, and restoring its image, have been objectives of both the previous Liberal and the current Conservative governments. Gen. Hillier has been working assiduously on this project for two prime ministers, advancing the government's agenda.
> 
> The Afghanistan mission adds another vital dimension to Gen. Hillier's public role. The Canadian Forces, for the first time in decades, are fighting a war. More than 70 CF personnel have lost their lives and hundreds have been wounded in the Afghan war. When the military is at war, it should come as no surprise that Canadians are hearing more from the generals. Indeed, in such times, the public should want to hear directly from the military leadership to get the unvarnished facts. It is not Gen. Hillier's job to stay "on message," as some have implied. That would be inappropriate. His job is to lay out the facts, both behind closed doors and, to a degree, in public.
> 
> The CDS would be crossing the line — wading inappropriately into the political domain — if he advocated publicly a specific policy direction.
> 
> Gen. Hillier has more influence over defence and foreign policy than any CDS in Canadian history. He literally wrote the defence policy for Paul Martin's government, and *he is the architect of the Kandahar mission. Some may find that troubling, but elected leaders have chosen to give him that influence* [emphasis added].
> 
> Nevertheless, Gen. Hillier has been careful not to advocate publicly a particular future course of action in Afghanistan, notwithstanding the serious implications for the Canadian Forces. He has tried to explain to Canadians what the military is doing in Afghanistan, and the nature of the challenge they face in that country. That is within his mandate. Does this more vocal type of military leadership pose challenges for political leaders? Absolutely — this is new terrain for Canada. But it is a challenge our political class needs to accept as a new normality. It is not unusual in other democracies for military leaders to say things in public that make life awkward for politicians, or that appear to civilians to be uncomfortably pro-military. This is especially so when the military is at war...
> 
> ...successive governments have asked the CF to do some very heaving lifting, and to incur significant sacrifices, in Afghanistan. Those realities both require and produce a different kind of military leadership from what we have had in the recent past. It is a leadership that is much more visible and acts as an unapologetic champion for the institution of the Canadian Forces and the men and women of the Forces. Gen. Hillier is the first generation of this new leadership. He will not be the last.
> 
> Eugene Lang is co-author (with Janice Stein) of The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar and was chief of staff to two ministers of national defence.



Meanwhile, Prof. Stein "will be online Monday from 2-3 p.m. EST" (Nov. 19) at the _Globe and Mail_:

Janice Stein on Afghanistan, politicians and Gen. Hillier
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071117.wlivestein1119/BNStory/specialComment/

*Questions or comments can be submitted in advance and will be "moderated"*.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## geo

An architect draws up plans and works with his engineers & troops to execute the will of his masters..... 

If the Government did not want us to be there, we would all be home right now.

Canadian foreign policy is the "author" of our foray into a combat mission.


----------



## MarkOttawa

More on Gen. Dannatt's views, though not made public by him:

Our forces can't carry on like this, says General Sir Richard Dannatt
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/18/nforces118.xml&DCMP=EMC-new_18112007

Along with the view of the UK Defence Secretary:

The Armed Forces are safe in my hands
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/18/do1805.xml

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## pbi

It's high time we had people at the top who stand up and speak up, not in a partisan political way (officers should be careful NEVER to align themselves with any political party lest they be tarred with the brush of slime that eventually hits all parties: Gens MacKenzie and Dallaire take note...), but in a professional forthright and honest manner. The CDS is not just another senior civil servant, despite the fact that this is how the office has historically been regarded, by both the incumbents and Canadians at large. He has far too much life and death responsibility in his hands to just sit quiet like a good little office boy. The trick is for the CDS to keep the freedom of action and expression that the current CDS has, without threatening the government's comfort level too much, because then he may not be CDS much longer.

I hope that Gen Hillier is not a flash in the pan, but a trail breaker for a new approach to senior leadership in our forces. Too bad he comes along so late in my service...I wonder what we could have done if we had guys like him back in the days of Yugo and Somalia.

Cheers


----------



## Greymatters

pbi said:
			
		

> The CDS is not just another senior civil servant, despite the fact that this is how the office has historically been regarded, by both the incumbents and Canadians at large. He has far too much life and death responsibility in his hands to just sit quiet like a good little office boy.



Good point, too bad the press contributes to this perception...


----------



## MarkOttawa

Greymatters:  As the CDS said in July 2005 under the Martin government after the new Kandahar mission had been announced:



> "We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces and our job is to be able to kill people."



And, as noted at the time, by a "progressive" writer:



> Paul Martin appointed Hillier. Both Harper and *Layton*  [emphasis added] have praised Hillier's comments. Where is the party for the 77 percent of us who want Canada to be known for our peace-keeping and conflict resolution instead of combat?



See the whole piece:
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2005/07/20/ToughGeneral/

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## PViddy

Just a quick question out of curiosity ? to be appointed CDS does that automatically mean you get bumped to full blown Gen ? has their ever been a CDS that skipped a rank ? (went from MGen to Gen ?) or has their ever been a CDS who was not a full General ?  If anyone has time on their hands, as i said just curious.


cheers

PV


----------



## dapaterson

General = Rank

CDS = Appointment


To my knowledge, it isn't indicated anywhere that the CDS must hold the rank of General.  In theory, the gov't could name Pte Bloggins on his BMQ in St Jean as CDS.

There have been instances (particulary in wartime) of people being jumped ranks for promotion (I seem to recall someone who jumped from Maj to Brigadier in WWII).  In peacetime, the promotion policy tends to be slower and more bureaucratic.


----------



## PViddy

Yep, was definately aware of that difference.  Thanks for the history and info.

cheers

PV


----------



## MarkOttawa

Two rather senior British generals, and one retired--why the hoo-hah about Gen. Hillier unless our pundits are oblivious as to what occurs in the original constitutional monarchy with a Westminster parliamentary system (usual copyright caveats)?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/23/dl2301.xml



> In the space of little more than a week, three of the country's most distinguished soldiers have spoken of an impending crisis in our Armed Forces.
> 
> The Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Jock Stirrup, led the charge in this newspaper, warning that the covenant between the military and the people was "under stress" because too much was being asked of our unappreciated soldiery. Sir Richard Dannatt, the Chief of the General Staff, took up the theme last weekend, saying that troops felt "devalued and angry".
> 
> And this week General Sir Mike Jackson, former head of the Army, went further and called for a fundamental re-think of the way the defence budget is spent.
> 
> New manpower figures published by the Ministry of Defence yesterday validate these concerns. They show that there has been a 50 per cent rise in the level of Army under-manning in the past year. This is not a recruitment problem - that is holding up well: it is a retention problem.
> 
> The grind of back-to-back tours of duty in two war zones, the frequently shabby accommodation to which war-weary soldiers return and the consequent pressures on family life are all contributing to the exodus. Over the past year, the number quitting the Army has risen by 10 per cent. The greater the number who leave, the more the pressure on those who remain. It is a vicious circle that needs to be broken.
> 
> At the root of the problem is the fact that the Armed Forces are being asked to do more than at any time in the past half-century, but the concomitant resources have not been made available. This week's death of two SAS soldiers when a Puma helicopter came down helps to illustrate the point.
> 
> The Puma has been in service since 1971. The Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft, one of which crashed last year in Afghanistan, has been in service since 1967. In military terms this is prehistoric. How often in recent years have we heard ministers assure us that soldiers on the front line will get the best equipment, and as much of it as they need? Of course they should - but they are not.
> 
> General Jackson went to the heart of the problem on Tuesday. He argued that the £31 billion defence budget is not only inadequate, given the demands of fighting on two fronts, but is also unbalanced. Urging a national debate on defence equipment priorities, Sir Mike gave the strongest hint that some immensely costly procurement programmes (of which there are many) should be re-assessed so that more resources can be directed where they are most needed - to the front line.
> 
> The post-9/11 world argues for highly mobile soldiery, rather than for more submarines, for example. The time is fast approaching when a choice will have to be made between over-priced kit or under-valued soldiers.



The good old Canadian bubble of, dare one say it, self-centred  and self-important ignorance?

After all we must do something, in terms of ministerial importance (rather than policy significance, but what can we do anyway?) about Pakistan:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071121.HARPER21/TPStory/National

But then we did the needful (hah!) anyway:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071122/queen_uganda_071122/20071122?hub=CTVNewsAt11

Yet somehow I doubt too many are listening:
http://communities.canada.com/nationalpost/blogs/posted/archive/2007/11/22/canada-on-the-world-stage-censuring-iran-and-booting-pakistan-out-of-the-commonwealth.aspx



> Canada has been making some noise on the world stage in the last few days...



Whereas the Dutch may soon be talking:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22807814-12377,00.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## DavidAkin

I kind of had an inkling why the CDS is a popular guy with those he leads, but in case there was any doubt, here's what he said when my colleagues in the Parliamentary Press Gallery asked him about the retraction made by the PM's communications director, Sandra Buckler. She had said that DND did not inform PMO that detainee transfers had stopped -- widely seen in Ottawa as a swipe at the CDS - and then she called to retract, saying she had "misspoke". The CDS was on a rare holiday with his wife in the Caribbean when this happened.  Here's what he said today:

"I was on the beach in the Dominican Republic and I had a little break and I heard about that and —- can I say this without everyone beating up on me across Canada? — I was on my third rum-and-coke and I really didn’t give a damn."

More "unplugged" Hillier over at our blog:
http://politicsblog.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2008/2/1/3500644.html

Cheers!


----------



## Mortar guy

Well, I love the guy because he has the extremely uncanny ability to remember my name every time I see him (and I am not anyone important). But it helps that he says what he means rather than what he thinks should be said. Maybe some of our politicians should try that!

MG


----------



## Roy Harding

DavidAkin said:
			
		

> I kind of had an inkling why the CDS is a popular guy with those he leads, but in case there was any doubt, here's what he said when my colleagues in the Parliamentary Press Gallery asked him about the retraction made by the PM's communications director, Sandra Buckler. She had said that DND did not inform PMO that detainee transfers had stopped -- widely seen in Ottawa as a swipe at the CDS - and then she called to retract, saying she had "misspoke". The CDS was on a rare holiday with his wife in the Caribbean when this happened.  Here's what he said today:
> 
> "I was on the beach in the Dominican Republic and I had a little break and I heard about that and —- can I say this without everyone beating up on me across Canada? — I was on my third rum-and-coke and I really didn’t give a damn."
> 
> More "unplugged" Hillier over at our blog:
> http://politicsblog.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2008/2/1/3500644.html
> 
> Cheers!



That would be the CDS I know and love.

I can't imagine another politician (and yes, CDS is in the political sphere) who could say that and not only get away with it, but increase his popularity.

He's a good man to smoke cigars with - I recommend the experience to any who might have an opportunity to do so.


----------



## Good2Golf

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> ....He's a good man to smoke cigars with - I recommend the experience to any who might have an opportunity to do so.


----------



## GAP

He has "KISS" down pat.....beautiful!!  Thanks David


----------



## Mike Baker

Thats the "Ricky" I know and love ;D


----------



## retiredgrunt45

Rick for PM!!!! ;D

I'd follow him to hell and back and then back again. He is a true soldiers, soldier.


----------



## Blakey

Listened to that piece on the drive from Shilo to Winnipeg today, laughed my cakehole off! +1 to the CDS.


----------



## warspite

Huzza for Hillier    ;D


----------



## GUNS

Hope the three "rum and coke" he had on the beach was "Screech and Coke".
Since the CDS is from that part of the country. :cheers:

On a more serious note, he is doing a damn fine job as CDS. He is an inspiration to all those who wear the CF uniform.

All CF members stand taller and walk prouder with Gen. Hillier as their CDS.

Those who follow in his footsteps now have a workable template to learn from if they so please.


----------



## slowmode

He speaks what he feels, this mans great. 

Best CDS in my lifetime so far


----------



## BinRat55

He is leadership personnified, a soldier among soldiers and my hero.


----------



## Former army brat

Saw your General at the Leafs/Sens game tonite on t.v.He exudes power and confidence,and I can certainly see why the people in uniform admire him.I think he is the right man at the right time,and I respect his opinion far more than any of the politicians.I wish they would just let him talk openly and honestly..but that would pi** off a lot of the loony left.And who the H cares if the Gen.had a rum or 3?I think he deserves some R&R.


----------



## Robbie

A new favourite quote.


----------



## Shadowolf

Well, i just re-read this topic, and how about the changes in the past 3 years.  Predictions that Gen Hillier would be a political flunky are right out the window.  However, the his beliefs that tanks and attack choppers are not needed by the military have been completely changed.   While I do believe that he does have an 'army-centric' view, right now the army is doing the majority (not all by any means) of the force projection, and therefore, IMHO, deserves the most attention.  How many people on this forum have had there views changed radically in the past 3 years about our CDS?


----------



## OldSolduer

In my opinion, we have a true leader in the CDS. He is not afraid to speak his mind publicly, however as of late he has toned it down. One can only imagine what he says when he speaks to his inner circle, or the MND. One can only imagine what he says when he briefs PM, who is a pretty plain speaker for a politician.
I lived through the days of generals who thought they were polticians saying and doing what please the party in power at the time. Notice I said generals....most admirals spoke their minds and then resigned in disgust.
The soldiers, sailors and airmen who serve our country deserve good leadership, and I do beleive we have it in General Hillier.


----------



## FSTO

The politicians and media pundints do not know how to deal with him. They are so used to a bland shell of a man (the have all been men) who parrots the party line that a dynamic personality throws them for a loop.


----------



## Good2Golf

FSTO said:
			
		

> The politicians and media pundints do not know how to deal with him....



...especially after he's had three rum-and-cokes on a beach in the Dominican Republic.  Bless the man for his no duff, straight shooting style.  Refreshing indeed!

G2G


----------



## Yrys

Hillier, Team Canada touch down in Kandahar for ball-hockey rematch  


> KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Star-struck Canadian soldiers were girding for a battle of a different sort Wednesday as a team of National Hockey League veterans,
> the Stanley Cup in tow, touched down on a mission to boost military morale. Gen. Rick Hillier, Canada's chief of defence staff, and Defence Minister Peter MacKay were
> also on hand as the towering silver trophy went on display on the tarmac at Kandahar Airfield for the second time in less than a year.
> 
> MacKay, who was on his way home after a top-secret three-day visit, likened the mood among the troops to that of a kid on Christmas Eve. "The soldiers on the base
> - there's probably a few of them who didn't sleep last night in anticipation of getting to play against some of their heroes, getting to see the Stanley Cup," he said.
> "It's just a huge morale boost."
> 
> Mark Napier, a two-time Cup winner who played with the Montreal Canadiens and Edmonton Oilers, was among the players who visited last April for several games
> against what turned out to be a scrappy team of soldiers. "We've got plenty of beef," Napier grinned. "They pushed us around a little last year, so we brought a little
> more muscle." That includes enforcers like former Canadiens winger Chris Nilan and Bob Probert, who racked up more than 3,000 penalty minutes over a 15-year
> career with the Detroit Red Wings and Chicago Blackhawks.
> 
> Conspicuous by his absence, however, was legendary tough guy Tiger Williams, who was expected to make the trip but ended up being delayed in Yellowknife, Napier
> said. "When we were thinking about people to come, y'know, the troops love the tough guys, so this year we loaded up with tough guys," he said. "I'm sure the troops
> will love having a chat with them, get their autographs and just generally take their minds off the war for a while." Also on the ground at Kandahar Airfield were
> country-rock crooners Blue Rodeo, Montreal rocker Jonas Tomalty, Newfoundland songstress Lori Anna Reid and singer-songwriter Gregg Lawless.
> 
> But there was little doubt that the true star attraction was hockey's gleaming Holy Grail. "For Canadians, I mean, this symbolizes something that every young boy or _girl
> grows up dreaming about - playing for the Stanley Cup_," MacKay said. The group arrived via military transport, which can often be a daunting experience for first-timers
> who aren't used to what's typically a sharp and steep landing manoeuvre.
> 
> Despite a propensity for air sickness, Jim Cuddy, Blue Rodeo's lead singer, said he rather enjoyed watching the landing from the cockpit, along with Tomalty and former
> Toronto Maple Leaf Mike Gartner. "We had that Hercules just kind of singing up there," Gartner said of the landing. "We were able to watch the great skill of the pilots
> as they manoeuvred this great, huge flying dump truck into (Kandahar Airfield)."
> 
> Hillier and the players mingled briefly on the tarmac with MacKay as soldiers posed for photos with Hillier, the minister and the cup. Hillier, an outspoken and long-suffering
> Leafs fan, took great delight in pointing out where on the cup he hopes - nay, expects - to see his team's name etched after the playoffs. "This is the location right here,"
> he said, only half-jokingly. "It's blank right now, but this is where the Toronto Maple Leaf roster will be in June of this year." MacKay couldn't resist jabbing back. "And
> here's the last time they were on the cup, right here," he said, pointing to the names of the 1967 champions.
> 
> Before winging his way back to Ottawa, MacKay said it will be an invaluable opportunity for soldiers to recharge their batteries in an environment known for back-breaking
> work, long hours and the ever-present threat to life and limb. "It's an escape from the day-to-day challenges and the real work that they're doing here," he said. "To have
> a nice little repose, a little opportunity to engage in some friendly competition, to play with these NHL stars, to listen to Blue Rodeo ... brings them home. It's a piece of home in Kandahar."
> 
> Both Hillier and Brig.-Gen. Guy Larose, the senior Canadian commander in Afghanistan, are expected to suit up Thursday for the first of several games between soldiers
> and the NHL players.



Article link

Well, I don't know what kind of girl Mr. McKay knows, but _I_ didn't dream of playing for the Stanley cup... 
I hope that they will make an article about the KAF games.


----------



## Mike Baker

Can't wait to see who wins 


Give 'er Troops!


----------



## Yrys

Mike Baker said:
			
		

> Can't wait to see who wins



Well, then, you may have biais if you can't tell who win between soldiers and NFL NHL hockey players   !  :-X

I had difficulty finding that article in English...

The Toronto Sun , March 21, 2008 Friday , Pg. 7., BY LANCE HORNBY, SUN MEDIA


Troops take on pros under the Afghan sun



> Cpl. Joanne Lyster volunteered for a dangerous assignment yesterday, but could laugh about it afterward.
> 
> With only a few minutes' notice, she donned goaltending equipment in 26C afternoon tempertures to mop up for the Canadian Army's ball hockey team. They were
> in the midst of being slaughtered by a high-powered, highly motivated visiting NHL team in front of a few hundred armed forces personnel and chief of defence staff
> General Rick Hillier.
> 
> *9-2 FOR THE PROS*
> 
> Lyster, an MP from Edmonton, fared better than the male counterparts who opened the floodgates in the 9-2 loss, allowing just one goal. "I had played net at Grant
> McEwen College a few years ago, but you don't play a lot of ice hockey here," Lyster said with a laugh. "The goalie that was supposed to play the third period didn't
> show. I was nervous at first, because I've never faced a shooter like Mike Gartner, but I made a couple of saves." Lyster walked away with a Blue Rodeo CD in her
> catching mitt, from NHL recruit Jim Cuddy, though fellow guitarist and hockey enthusiast Greg Keelor twisted his ankle before sucking it up for an evening concert
> for the troops.
> 
> More than 100 men and women attended four tryouts for about 36 coveted spots to play Team Canada, which included Hall of Famer Gartner and two-time Cup
> champion Mark Napier. Air force Capt. Steve Jeffrys, of Fort Erie, also had a thrill, playing the second period for overheated ex-Leaf Mark LaForest.
> 
> *EASY TUNE-UP*
> 
> With Chris Nilan, Bob Probert, Troy Crowder and Stu Grimson here and not about to let their tough guy reputations slip in front of this audience, the NHLers had
> an easy tune-up for future games against select U.S. and Canadian teams. For Trenton's Don Doyle, a civilian contractor working with the army and going a bit stir
> crazy here after five months, it was a memorable game. "The most fun I've had since I came here, because hockey is the only form of entertainment for some of us,"
> said Doyle. "I took out Napier with a hit, I had an assist, Stu Grimson gave me a hockey nickname, the Doyler, and TSN's Jennifer Hedger (here to host the games
> and the concert) called me the Doyler twice."
> 
> 3 photos (not shown on link) 1. photo by James Mccarten, CP Blue Rodeo's Greg Keelor and Brig.-Gen. Guy Laroche get into the action during a ball hockey game in Kandahar yesterday. In addition to Laroche, the commander of Canadian forces in Afghanistan, the Canadian Forces team included Gen. Rick Hillier, Canada's chief of defence staff. 2. 2 photos by Ronald Duchesne, Combat Camera Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, shakes hands with former two-time Cup champion NHL Mark Napier in Kandahar.




Link


----------



## Mike Baker

Yrys said:
			
		

> Well, then, you may have biais if you can't tell who win between soldiers and *NFL* hockey players   !


National Football League hockey players? ;D


----------



## Yrys

Troops dazzled visiting NHLers



> KANDAHAR -- This was the ultimate road trip for NHLers Dave Hutchison, Bob Probert and Mark Napier.
> 
> The trio joined Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment Ltd. executive vice-president and COO Tom Anselmi to experience a night "outside the wire" of Kandahar Airfield
> in that part of Afghanistan where Taliban activity is much higher. Accompanied by Canadian Forces personnel, they travelled by helicopter to visit several forward
> operating bases near the hot spots of Taliban activity. "Absolutely wild," Hutchison said. "The troops are about as old as my kids, but you can't believe how little
> our troops have to exist on out there. Our tent had an inch of dust on the ground, yet it was considered the penthouse suite. And all these soldiers came up to us
> to thank us for coming when it's us who should be thanking them."
> 
> The Taliban scatter whenever the multinational task force brings out its big weaponry, but it's still able to launch crude missles, usually old Soviet ordnance on timed
> fuses that land harmlessly around KAF. "We also saw some Afghans who have to carve a trench out of the mountain just to get a little water," Hutchison said. The
> Team Canada group was also allowed to take part in a simulated field exercise with body armour, paintball type ammunition and balaclavas.
> 
> Anselmi knew of the conditions here from last year's visit to the KAF hospital. A father had walked miles to bring in his young daughter, whose leg had been blown off
> and one eye blinded by the same Taliban mine that killed her two brothers. Just as the Canadian doctors had stabilized her, hoping to send her to a military hospital
> in Germany, the father returned from burying his sons and discharged his daughter. Her fate remains unknown.
> 
> "Throughout the day and night we were gone, we saw a lot of ways that Canadians are making a difference," Anselmi said. "We flew over fields that had been empty
> a few years ago and now there were farmers waving at us. "There was a Red Cross school which the Taliban had attacked and killed people a couple of years ago
> that is now operating again. "We saw where our Provincial Reconstruction Team has been building roads and putting the Afghans to work, instead of letting them
> get recruited by the Taliban."
> 
> The latter's ability to bribe the locals into opposing the multinational effort, usually through drug money, is hampering Canadian attempts to bring stability. The route
> home included an eventful drive through Kandahar City, which has its share of poverty, but has seen a spike in population after many fled the Taliban.
> 
> "There were people sleeping on the side of the road and traffic whipping past them," an amazed Hutchison said. "There wasn't any traffic control to speak of."



Link


----------



## NL_engineer

Yrys said:
			
		

> Well, then, you may have biais if you can't tell who win between soldiers and NFL NHL hockey players   !  :-X



Well it probably ended like any other army ball hockey game "next goal wins"  ;D


----------



## Gazoo

I would like to be the first to suggest what would be a perfect job for General Hillier:  Canada'a next ambassador to Afghanistan.
Any thoughts.


----------



## dapaterson

DFAIT and Gen Hillier have had at best a rocky past; even if appointed, I can't see DFAIT doing much to support him.

The one thing I'm certain of is that it won't be tyhis:

http://www.grokdotcom.com/wp-content/uploads/Bryan/walmart_facebook.jpg


----------



## Old Sweat

As a wild stab, how about the NATO envoy to Afghanistan? I am thinking about the job for which  the Afghans vetoed Paddy Ashdown's nomination.


----------



## Gazoo

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> As a wild stab, how about the NATO envoy to Afghanistan? I am thinking about the job for which  the Afghans vetoed Paddy Ashdown's nomination.


I just found this from a Dec 07 article:
"NATO foreign ministers discussed Friday the possible appointment of an international "super envoy" to coordinate civilian and military efforts better in Afghanistan."
It does sound perfect for General Hillier.


----------



## stegner

Howabout Supreme Allied Commander of NATO?


----------



## Haggis

Gazoo said:
			
		

> I just found this from a Dec 07 article:
> "NATO foreign ministers discussed Friday the possible appointment of an international "super envoy" to coordinate civilian and military efforts better in Afghanistan."
> It does sound perfect for General Hillier.



Would that be Class B or Class C?  As an annuitant, he would only work 330 days per year.


----------



## DONT_PANIC

I think the Vancouver Canucks are looking for a new GM...


----------



## George Wallace

Haggis said:
			
		

> Would that be Class B or Class C?  As an annuitant, he would only work 330 days per year.



Just because he gives up the CDS job, doesn't necessarily mean he needs to Retire, as demonstrated by the previous CDS, Gen Heneault, who went off to NATO.


----------



## Carbon-14

From the CDS's email:


> I have chosen to retire from the Canadian Forces...


----------



## George Wallace

Carbon-14 said:
			
		

> From the CDS's email:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have chosen to retire from the Canadian Forces...
Click to expand...


I have heard that before.   Samething.  An offer came in for Brussels and it was taken.  Now he is back in NDHQ and my boss once again.  People given the right offer will make up their minds as to what they want.


----------



## Haggis

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just because he gives up the CDS job, doesn't necessarily mean he needs to Retire, as demonstrated by the previous CDS, Gen Heneault, who went off to NATO.



True, but why not "double dip" as a Toon?


----------



## George Wallace

Haggis said:
			
		

> True, but why not "double dip" as a Toon?



Too much time off.  35 Unpaid days Lve.  20 -25 days Paid Lve.  A work-a-holics worse nightmare.   ;D


----------



## Haggis

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Too much time off.  35 Unpaid days Lve.  20 -25 days Paid Lve.  A work-a-holics worse nightmare.   ;D



Well, he can be like the rest of the "temp help" crowd: having a leave pass just means you can come to work in civvies every day. :


----------



## armyvern

Gazoo said:
			
		

> I would like to be the first to suggest what would be a perfect job for General Hillier:  Canada'a next ambassador to Afghanistan.
> Any thoughts.



I said that yesterday at work. You know what they say about people who think alike eh?


----------



## Redeye

Haggis said:
			
		

> True, but why not "double dip" as a Toon?



I wonder how many line serials there are in the Mo for Generals.  Of course, he could just reduce in rank to Captain or Major or something like that, he'd make a great RSS guy at some reserve unit.


----------



## Good2Golf

Redeye said:
			
		

> I wonder how many line serials there are in the Mo for Generals.  Of course, he could just reduce in rank to Captain or Major or something like that, he'd make a great RSS guy at some reserve unit.



Didn't Gen DeChastelain do round two as a C-classer?


----------



## armyvern

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Didn't Gen DeChastelain do round two as a C-classer?



Apparently not, according to his bio. In '93 going Sup R List, but recalled to the RegF in '94.

General A.J.G.D. de Chastelain, OC, CMM, CD, CH (ret’d)



> In January 1993 he transferred to the Supplementary Reserve and was appointed Canada’s eighteenth Ambassador to the United States of America.   In January 1994 he was recalled to regular force duty and re-appointed CDS.   He stepped down from that post and retired from the Canadian Forces on 31 December 1995.


----------



## 1feral1

Refence Hillier, haven't you heard??

Us Aussies are poaching him, ha!

 ;D


----------



## armyvern

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Haven't you heard??
> 
> Us Aussies are poaching him, ha!
> 
> ;D



I'm quite sure he's heading to a certain Island *NOT* in your vicinity!! 

You guys hear the word "Island" and automaticly assume it you??  8)


----------



## Mike Baker

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm quite sure he's heading to a certain Island *NOT* in your vicinity!!
> 
> You guys hear the word "Island" and automaticly assume it you??  8)


Vern I think that it's probably more of a Rock then an Island  ;D


----------



## armyvern

Baker said:
			
		

> Vern I think that it's probably more of a Rock then an Island  ;D



Damn better accent too!!  >


----------



## Mike Baker

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Damn better accent too!!  >


Oh snap ;D


----------



## George Wallace

Baker said:
			
		

> Vern I think that it's probably more of a Rock then an Island  ;D



Yeah.  I suppose he can afford the ferry from Cape Breton now.


----------



## 1feral1

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm quite sure he's heading to a certain Island *NOT* in your vicinity!!
> 
> You guys hear the word "Island" and automaticly assume it you??  8)



Semi hijack, but with that bum, you can come to my island anytime, and thats my island (Bribie Island - google it)


----------



## dapaterson

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Apparently not, according to his bio. In '93 going Sup R List, but recalled to the RegF in '94.
> 
> General A.J.G.D. de Chastelain, OC, CMM, CD, CH (ret’d)



"Recalled to Regular Force duty" could mean class C reserve service - note that it does not say "rejoined the Regular Force".


----------



## RangerRay

I think HM the Queen should appoint him Governor General.


----------



## Danjanou

dapaterson said:
			
		

> "Recalled to Regular Force duty" could mean class C reserve service - note that it does not say "rejoined the Regular Force".



Thread tangent      I Heard he was actually put on the Cadet Instructors List to get around CRA. :   end thread tangent


----------



## a_majoor

Give him moderator status and privileges on Army.ca. That will certainly put an end to flame wars, trolling, +1 spamming and a whole lot of other impediments to a great site. (How many other mods can reach through the Internet and grab miscreants?)

He'd probably wrestle the bandwidth problem to the ground as well........ ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Gazoo

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm quite sure he's heading to a certain Island *NOT* in your vicinity!!


I actually posted a comment twice on CBC hoping he would come back to the rock and join Danny William's fight with the Feds.


----------



## KingKikapu

Rick Hillier is so strong, he can slam a revolving door.

Couldn't resist.  /Hijack


----------



## The Bread Guy

Gazoo said:
			
		

> I just found this from a Dec 07 article:
> "NATO foreign ministers discussed Friday the possible appointment of an international "super envoy" to coordinate civilian and military efforts better in Afghanistan."
> It does sound perfect for General Hillier.



Although he would likely do a great job, this one's already taken (for now):  "Ambassador Kai Eide, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Afghanistan, visited NATO on 16 April 2008. He met with the NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, and addressed the North Atlantic Council and Partners contributing troops to the ISAF mission.  The NATO Secretary General reiterated the Alliance’s support for an enhanced UN role in coordinating civil and military efforts aimed at promoting Afghan development ...."

Agree that too much conflict (that even I, as a fat civvy, heard about) with DFAIT makes an ambassadorship likely out.


----------



## Yrys

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Give him moderator status and privileges on Army.ca.



THAT is such an exciting idea !


----------



## Gazoo

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> Rick Hillier is so strong, he can slam a revolving door.
> 
> Couldn't resist.  /Hijack


OK,-- General Hillier doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants.


----------



## armyvern

For all you _Crackbookers_ ...

Here's a new Group for you all:

The Best damn Soldier and CDS Ever!! Farewell and Thanks!


----------



## 2 Cdo

I need a new front deck put in the house. How's Rick with a hammer and nails? ;D


----------



## G-spot

I heard a rumor that he had plans to join the infantry as a corporal


----------



## danchapps

Graeme said:
			
		

> I heard a rumor that he had plans to join the infantry as a corporal



That's too bad, I hear we are super short on Supply Techs. I bet if he told you "You're not entitled" people would actually listen and not moan about how they didn't get anything


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/rex_murphy/farewell_to_the_general.html

Rick Hillier is more popular than Avril Lavigne.

But let's forget popularity, Hillier owns a far less vaporous distinction.
He's probably the most respected public figure in all the country. 

It's easy to be liked when nothing's going on, and no big deal to be respected when things are calm and easy.

Hillier's standing with the Canadian public comes however from his service as the head of Canada's military, at a time when it is engaged in active engagement in a still unresolved conflict, suffering the inevitable losses of real combat, in a war that claims far from universal support here in Canada.

He has had what is arguably the most difficult and painful job - though for true military being a solider is more of a vocation - of anyone in Canada, but from one coast to the other, from the north to the south, General Rick Hillier has earned almost universal respect and admiration.

The accomplishments of his tenure have a lot to do with this. He hauled the Canadian military out of the cellar of public opinion, and from the bottom of every government's real priorities. Within the military and without he refurbished its morale, bolstered its prestige. Other professions in this country are well regarded. Soldiers are honoured.

Canada's regard for its soldiers used to be manifested almost exclusively on Remembrance Day and other ceremonial occasions. Hillier brought that regard to every day of the living calendar. He recemented the connection between the military and the Canadian public.

A Canadian soldier today, therefore, man or woman, in army, navy or airforce, walks a little prouder, smiles a little wider because of that strengthened connection.

Hillier is smart, straight and knows what he wants. He works like a dog. 
The modern military man has to know the battlefield and warfare, but he has to be equally skilled in politics, the media, the inside arts of Parliament Hill and the twilight combats of the bureaucracy. Hillier has the whole package.

He is distinctly unchoked by political correctness, and he could offer master classes to politicians (and journalists too) in the almost abandoned art of saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. His deepest gift, I think, was knowing what his real job was --- as he's put it often --- his first responsibility was to the men and women of Canada's military. 

He said he was working for them and their families, and you know, they believed him. It was no pose.

Which brings me to the central characteristic of our now departing General. He inspired trust and people, in and out of the military, genuinely looked up to him.

The question his leaving might pose is why - in all the other public fields - and in politics which is leadership too --- there are not more like him. Hiller is as large as he is --- and this is not said to his detraction --- because leadership in other areas of public life is so flat, feeble and mediocre.

Some politicians are said to have feared or envied him. They would have feared and envied less if they tried to be bigger themselves.

We can leave that for now. This is Hillier's moment - I think we can all be very pleased that we have had a public servant --- for such finally a general most fundamentally is --- who has elevated the service he led,
and renewed the spirits and esteem of the Canadian military, and, the spirit of esteem in which we hold them.

For The National, I'm Rex Murphy.


----------



## Steve 1 RNFLDR

I expect that in several years' time he'll be Lieutenant-Governor of Newfoundland (The Honourable John Crosbie was only sworn in a few months ago, and I expect the General would rather occupy himself with something a bit more strenuous in the meantime), and Honourary Colonel of The Royal Newfoundland Regiment (it goes with the Lt.-Governor job).


----------



## TylerSnap!

When Chuck Norris grows up, he wants to be General Hillier.


----------



## Yrys

TylerSnap! said:
			
		

> When Chuck Norris grows up, he wants to be General Hillier.



Care to post that there :

Thee Chuck Norris Thread   ?


----------



## TylerSnap!

oops my bad   :-[


----------



## FascistLibertarian

I have listened to a lot of peopel in the CF talk with great passion and conviction about what a great leader he is and how they would follow him anywhere. 
Seems to me (strictly from talking with people) that it is his "this is what we will need to get the job done" no bs that made him so popular. He wouldnt sign off on things to make the politicans happy, he would give them the truth as he saw it. Thats my view, but I figure here would be the place to ask.
He really seems to have had the support and loyality of the rank and file. A very few number of generals have it.
What was it about him? What traits did he have that made him so loved and respected?

Why do you think he is such a great leader?


----------



## Edward Campbell

Suggest you read LWQ's post (just below, as I type) quoting Rex Murphy on Rick Hillier.

I think Murphy gets as close as necessary without getting too philosophical about leadership.

Canadian soldiers care about Rick Hillier because he cares about them.


----------



## armyvern

Integrity.
Honesty.
Loyalty.
Courage.
Diligence.
Fairness.
Responsibility.

Pride.

He does them all awesomely well.  

Oh, and if he's had occasion to meet you before, he could pick you out of the crowd to say hello the next time he ran across you too, just to see how you were making out. Lew MacKenzie was also good for that. That's a nice thing to experience for one of us 'men'- and it's something that I appreciated in both of them.

Their ivory towers weren't built to skyscraper level, rather they built bungalows. Ground level. Everyone part of that team, and certainly not shy to express their thanks to us "little people" for our efforts and hard work -- and really, had an uncanny ability to dispel the myth of there actually being any "little people" in the CF.

Leadership by example --- at it's finest.


----------



## exgunnertdo

I don't know how to put a finger on it.  But when he says that he's proud of us, that he gets his inspiration from us, that spending a day with the troops revitalizes him, and when he thanks us for our service...I get that he really means it.  From his heart.  I have rarely had a supervisor (at any level) who thanked me for my service, and I honestly can't remember really believing it like I believe Gen Hillier.


----------



## SOLDIER702

It seems to me, that the position of CDS is a political one and that, like it or not, once you take up that position you become a politician. The thing about Rick, is he never stopped being a soldier. Most CDS's just accept their role as a politician and fold to the every word of their politician bosses. Hillier knew what it was about, he never let the aspect of command leave him, and always employed the basic principles of leadership that make a good section commander, in order to be one helluva CDS. That's my view anyway


----------



## Teflon

In 2006 while in Afghanistan, my Pl was in a small little patrol house when he visited. The CO and everyone else was there ready to brief him on numerous things but they couldn't nail him down until he had gone around and talked briefly with EVERY troop there, he didn't want any briefing or talk to anyone in the chain of command till he had spoken to every soldier there and asked how things where going. When he talked to you he truely seemed to listen and when he thanked you for some thing, you believed it, that it wasn't just the polite but meaniless thank you.

But that is just my take on it


----------



## PO2FinClk

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Rex Murphy on Rick Hillier.



Here is link to video and transcript: http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/rex_murphy/a_salute_to_the_general_1.html

Also from my perspective, it was not just what he embodied, such as humility, genuine and passionate. But also what he didn't. He isn't/was not arrogant, sanctimonious or priggish, he never became or portayed political propriety. Rather as others mentioned he remained a soldier who lead by example who never failed to impress upon all the importance of people at every level.


----------



## armyvern

SOLDIER702 said:
			
		

> The thing about Rick, is he never stopped being a soldier.



Which pretty much sums up exactly why he has earned the respect that he commands ... and is exactly why he made such an excellent CDS.

There it is in a nutshell. Good on you (+1  >).


----------



## simysmom99

As a spouse with a wounded soldier I really appreciate his candor and his support.  He and his wife Joyce have always shown the greatest support for our families and they put actions behind their words.  I will miss seeing "the big guy", asking him crazy questions, and getting the information on goose berries.


----------



## Greymatters

Many articles recently are discussing Hillier and saying what a bad CDS he is/was (as if he were already out the door).  Many complain that he was too high-profile, didnt heed his masters.  In general they complain that he doesnt know his place as a lapdog for the ministers.

This is so much crap.  The CDS is supposed to be a bulldog, straining at the leash.  The person who, when the going gets tough, you point at the problem and say "go get'im", not someone who asks "oh, more tea, sir, can I get you a cushion?"

On military matters, the CDS is the  subject matter expert (along with his staff and advisors).  Not some politician or bureaucrat who is more concerned with playing favorites than in making sure the equipment is of the best quality and most practical use.  It is the CDS' right, and responsiblity, to point out bad choices by the political leaders we elected, and demand equipment that we dont have to get the job done.

Methinks a lot of these critics out there need a few lessons in what leadership is about and how important it its to have it when in crisis situations or when a job needs to be done quickly and efficiently...


----------



## OldSolduer

Hello Greymatters....I like the cut of your jib. 
The CDS is the military advisor to the government of Canada. He is not a YES man, as we've seen in the past.
Many of the critics wouldn't last 10 minutes in a uniform before some crusty old man would be "Counselling" them for poor performance.
It seems most "experts" dona  uniform for 5 years, then get out and regard themselves as "experts" on the military
Scott Taylor and Sunil Ram come to mind. Just because you wear a suit now, publish a magazine (trash) and get to speak on CBC once in a while does not make you an expert. ARE YOU TWO LISTENING??


----------



## Proud_Newfoundlander

My dad said he was liked because he was assertive and had a mission in mind. He said when Hillier was being interviewed for the job of CDS he laid out huge paper on the floor with everything he intended to do, from restructuring and everything. You know, he was there to do a job, and take it seriously, not just holding a place. His euthusiasm and down to earth attitude was good to, you know, he didnt have that "general 30 miles behind the lines" persona or just visited for the odd ceremonial thing now and then.


----------



## Strike

All the accolades about how he's done in the job aside, he is just a really great guy.

He's shown up at St-Jean with a 2-4 to share a few with his son (who's really going to tell the CDS there's no drinking in the mega?).

He remembers people he may have only met once.

And when he talks to you in front of, and away from the cameras, it's the same person.  THAT is a hard thing to achieve.

He's got a wicked sense of humour (I insulted his Leafs watch).  I mean, we've all seen him kissing the soldier on the cheek.  How many past CDS' would have tried that?

He reminds me of the captain that you think would never get promoted, because they always spoke their mind and said it like it was, and weren't afraid to piss people off.  But someone saw something, and thank God they did, because this crazy, loud captain got promoted to major, then LCol, Col, etc.


----------



## exgunnertdo

Proud_Newfoundlander said:
			
		

> He said when Hillier was being interviewed for the job of CDS he laid out huge paper on the floor with everything he intended to do, from restructuring and everything.



The urban legend I heard was that the "candidates" for the position were invited to present their "what I'll do if you make me the CDS" speech.  The others came in with fancy PowerPoints and such, and Gen Hillier came in, much like the quote above and basically talked from his FMP.

Probably wanted to take 'em outside and do a sand model!

Edit - silly typo!


----------



## armyvern

Strike said:
			
		

> * (I insulted his Leafs watch).  *



 > Good for you!! We sent him a PEI Rockets jersey during my tenure as the Det Comd there ... his name on the back and everything. Slightly worn of course.    I simply couldn't resist hauling it on over my uniform for the requisite pic opportunity that presented itself.

 ;D


----------



## tabernac

Strike said:
			
		

> He's shown up at St-Jean with a 2-4 to share a few with his son (who's really going to tell the CDS there's no drinking in the mega?).



Wait, he has a son in the CF??


----------



## George Wallace

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> Wait, he has a son in the CF??



Gold Digger.......or is the COD Digger    ;D


----------



## brihard

Rex hit it right on the nose. Excellent statement.


----------



## 2 Cdo

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Oh, and if he's had occasion to meet you before, he could pick you out of the crowd to say hello the next time he ran across you too, just to see how you were making out. Lew MacKenzie was also good for that. That's a nice thing to experience for one of us 'men'- and it's something that I appreciated in both of them.



So true Vern. Met General Rick twice, once in uniform and once in civvies and he remembered me from the first meeting almost a year earlier. A straight-forward, honest, no bullshit man. He will certainly be a tough act to follow.


----------



## ENGINEERS WIFE

Even in a crowd of thousands, when he spoke, it felt like he was talking to YOU!!!  You felt appreciated, heard and that he genuine.  He wasn't blowing smoke up your a@#. I think he treated each member of 'his' forces as he would treat his own family and that he thought of his soldiers as his 'family'. He had a great traits that cannot be taught, you either have it or you don't.  And he DEFINITELY had it!!!  I will always remember him calling in his troops on parade in and saying "And you know what I want, take a knee"  The Canadian Forces were lucky to have him.


----------



## GUNS

I along with many others have the highest respect for the CDS but Peter Worthington of the Toronto Sun asked in his article, " Should a General leave his soldiers during a battle"?

He goes on to say, if the PM wants him to stay, why is the CDS retiring during the A'stan. mission.

Don't jump all over me, just the messenger.


----------



## exgunnertdo

GUNS said:
			
		

> I along with many others have the highest respect for the CDS but Peter Worthington of the Toronto Sun asked in his article, " Should a General leave his soldiers during a battle"?
> 
> He goes on to say, if the PM wants him to stay, why is the CDS retiring during the A'stan. mission.



I think we need to remember that Gen Hillier is a person with a life, just like us.  Word around here (Ottawa) is that his three years as CDS have taken a real toll on him - it's a stressfull job, I would imagine.  His family and his health need him to step back, likely, and take care of what's important.

I don't buy what Peter Worthington said - the mission in A'stan is not one person's mission.  Gen Hillier has (I would assume) a great team working for him, and if he's situated it right, his leaving will not affect the mission.  Worthington's argument holds no more water than the ones of "now that Hillier's leaving, we can go back to our traditional role of peacekeeping, blah blah."  It's not Gen Hillier's mission alone.  I don't expect much will change.


----------



## George Wallace

GUNS said:
			
		

> I along with many others have the highest respect for the CDS but Peter Worthington of the Toronto Sun asked in his article, " Should a General leave his soldiers during a battle"?
> 
> He goes on to say, if the PM wants him to stay, why is the CDS retiring during the A'stan. mission.
> 
> Don't jump all over me, just the messenger.



Then my question to him and supporters of that thought would be:  "Should it be expected that a General die of old age in fighting a War, or should he "pass the Torch" to younger men with fresh ideas?"

Has Peter Worthington now joined the "Mcdonalds Generation" where we go in and get our burgers and get out in under 5 minutes?  Afghanistan is not a problem that can be solved in a couple of years.  It will take decades to bring peace to that Region.  Does he expect General Hillier to be CDS for the next two or three decades?


----------



## Good2Golf

Gen Hillier has set the conditions for continued success of the CF by developing a greater understanding by the Canadian people of the CF in general, and the Afghanistan mission specifically.  He is, without a doubt, also the single most important individual to have fostered the return of pride of service within the CF.  As others have said, the mission in Afghanistan in no one man's mission.  It is a military principle to have depth in leadership, and good depth amongst all servies is something the CF now has, much of that due to the fine example that Gen Hiller has provided.  Folks outside the CF, or those inside as well for that matter, may have differing views of Gen Hillier's achievements, but he has shaped what the CF will be capable of achieving for Canadians and the greater global community.  The CF is not without issues, certainly, but Gen Hillier has given a huge amount of his personal capital to the CF and the country.  There is absolutely no shame of dishonour to pass the torch to another CF leader -- none at all!  Godspeed General Rick!  

G2G


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Many articles recently are discussing Hillier and saying what a bad CDS he is/was (as if he were already out the door).  Many complain that he was too high-profile, didnt heed his masters.  In general they complain that he doesnt know his place as a lapdog for the ministers.
> 
> This is so much crap.  The CDS is supposed to be a bulldog, straining at the leash.  The person who, when the going gets tough, you point at the problem and say "go get'im", not someone who asks "oh, more tea, sir, can I get you a cushion?"
> 
> On military matters, the CDS is the  subject matter expert (along with his staff and advisors).  Not some politician or bureaucrat who is more concerned with playing favorites than in making sure the equipment is of the best quality and most practical use.  It is the CDS' right, and responsiblity, to point out bad choices by the political leaders we elected, and demand equipment that we dont have to get the job done.
> 
> Methinks a lot of these critics out there need a few lessons in what leadership is about and how important it its to have it when in crisis situations or when a job needs to be done quickly and efficiently...



Well look at where 20years of quiet CDS's have gotten us, and look where 3 years of Hillier has done. I pity the next CDS because no matter how good of a job he does, he will be compared to Hillier.


----------



## ENGINEERS WIFE

If his, Peter Worthignton's theory is that the CDS shouldn't leave while his troops are still in battle.  Then the CDS for the Korean War or WW2 would have been around a LONG time.  I didn't quite understand his logic. Peter's, not Hillier's.  And it's normally a 2 year job isn't it?  So, he did stay on longer.  And I can only imagine, for someone like Hillier, who genuinely cares about his troops. that it must be physically and emotionally draining.  He has done a great job!  I personally wish he could stay on forever, but only for selfish reasons.  But, completely understand that isn't a job he could do forever and wish him the best of luck.
I LOVED my Grade 3 teacher, but that doesn't mean that I stayed in Grade 3 forever !!!  Sometimes we have to move on.
And I also don't believe he's gettin 'pushed' out.  As outspoken as he is I can't see him just lying down and taking that!


----------



## PuckChaser

Great statement, especially the part about inspiring trust in his subordinates. It seems like such a simple thing to earn the trust of your peers and subordinates, but it goes so very far if you genuinely have it.


----------



## Strike

> The question his leaving might pose is why - in all the other public fields - and in politics which is leadership too --- there are not more like him. Hiller is as large as he is --- and this is not said to his detraction --- because leadership in other areas of public life is so flat, feeble and mediocre.
> 
> Some politicians are said to have feared or envied him. They would have feared and envied less if they tried to be bigger themselves.



So so true.  Here's hoping the General has inspired some of those in the political field to become more than they are.


----------



## deedster

The same could be said of Rex himself.
Well done!


----------



## OldSolduer

I think a lot of the reason most polticians come off as flat and mediocre are:

1. The Main Stream Media - they tend to blow things out of proportion, and if they don't like you, you're s#rewed;
2. Most are flat and mediocre, except for Elsie Wayne and John Crosbie.....remember the Tequila Sheila comment;
3. The public wants them to be flat and mediocre;
4. They act flat and mediocre so the MSM doesn't crucify them..see comment 1.

General Hillier was definitely not flat and certainly not mediocre....one can only hope this is the first in a long line of CDS' who are soldiers (sailors or airpersons) first.


----------



## 3rd Herd

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Integrity.
> Honesty.
> Loyalty.
> Courage.
> Diligence.
> Fairness.
> Responsibility.
> 
> Pride.
> 
> He does them all awesomely well.
> 
> Oh, and if he's had occasion to meet you before, he could pick you out of the crowd to say hello the next time he ran across you too, just to see how you were making out. Lew MacKenzie was also good for that. That's a nice thing to experience for one of us 'men'- and it's something that I appreciated in both of them.
> 
> Their ivory towers weren't built to skyscraper level, rather they built bungalows. Ground level. Everyone part of that team, and certainly not shy to express their thanks to us "little people" for our efforts and hard work -- and really, had an uncanny ability to dispel the myth of there actually being any "little people" in the CF.
> 
> Leadership by example --- at it's finest.



Had the pleasure last Thursday, all true Armyvern.   And if he shakes your hand you will remember that for a long time and aviod it a second time, what a grip.


----------



## 3rd Herd

Mods Feel Free To Move:

Hillier’s shoes, hard to fill? That’s an understatement​
Rick Hillier was too able, too outspoken, too likable and too impatient to last for more than a few years in the upper echelons of Ottawa. Yet in little more than three years as Chief of the Defence Staff he achieved more than half a dozen of his predecessors did combined. 

Virtually single-handedly, Hillier reversed the disgraceful mistreatment of the Canadian Forces by the Chretien Liberals in the 1990s. He transformed the CF into a modern fighting force. He persuaded and bullied a succession of hapless defence ministers into doing the right thing - about equipment, about budget, and about Afghanistan. Always and everywhere, he stood up for his people. For all those reasons, Canadian soldiers don’t just like the man: They love him. To say that his shoes will be hard to fill, doesn’t quite cut it. 

The broader public didn’t pay a whole lot of attention to Rick Hillier until July of 2005, when he famously said of the Taliban: These are detestable murderers and scumbags, Ill tell you that right up front. They detest our freedoms, they detest our society, they detest our liberties. 

The context of those remarks was a public push by the then-Liberal government to prepare Canadians for a much bolder and more dangerous military mission than we had seen since the Korean War. And of course, Hillier was exactly right: The Taliban are detestable murderers and scumbags. There’s no other way to describe people who behead teachers and doctors and blow up children by remote control. 

But Hillier’s choice of words, as often seemed to happen to him, were too vivid for us to leave in context. Overnight he became the brash general, and the outspoken Newfoundlander with a gift of the gab. With that came popularity and a big public persona that made politicians twitchy. And the chattering classes were delighted to be scandalized by this throwback, who could say with a straight face: We are the Canadian Forces and our job is to be able to kill people. 

When Hillier said that, soldiers, sailors and airmen across Canada and around the world whispered a silent thank-you. Finally, someone with the stones to tell the truth. But in Ottawa, among the flatterers and the courtiers, honesty goes down very poorly indeed. Its impolite. It makes all the liars look bad. 

And that was the least of it. Behind the scenes, Hillier was bulldogging past decades-worth of bureaucratic inertia. In 2005, after he persuaded Prime Minister Paul Martin and Bill Graham, then defence minister, that Canada could take on the bigger mission in Kandahar, Hillier needed gear - trucks, armoured vehicles, tanks, helicopters, planes. He needed everything and he needed it now. 

So never mind the traditional procurement process, which typically involved at least a decade of bidding by various global defence contractors and thousands of pages of reports. Instead, Hillier in effect sketched a wish list on the back of a napkin and handed it to the defence minister. My guess is that this took him all of five minutes. Miraculously, it worked. 

That ruffled feathers in a serious way, because by then there was big money at stake - billions. Corporations such as Lockheed-Martin and Boeing were vying for the right to build aircraft for Canada. Lobbyists for one firm would whisper, anonymously, that Hillier was too friendly with lobbyists from the other. The backbiting was intense. In the end the general shut them all up, by persuading the new Harper government to buy aircraft from both companies, as well as helicopters, ships, trucks, personnel carriers, tanks and other badly needed materiel.

There were more twists: The very Liberals who’d claimed prideful ownership of the Afghan mission in 2005 turned dead against it the moment they fell from power in 2006. The Harper government developed a mania for controlling every speech by any senior government figure and tried to impose this on Hillier. He resisted. He clashed with his new defence minister, Gordon O’Connor, and won. 

Through it all, Hillier continued speaking out in defence of his soldiers and in defence of the mission in Afghanistan. He developed a madcap friendship with comedian Rick Mercer. He persuaded the chief executive of Tim Hortons to set up a franchise in Kandahar. He flattered his troops as though he was their proud father, rather than their boss. And he continued to take the calls, at all hours of the day or night, each time a Canadian soldier fell in combat. Those moments, he said, were always his worst. And somehow, you believed him. 

The supreme irony of Rick Hillier’s career? His greatest gifts are those we once expected of politicians: vision, idealism, brains, eloquence, bluntness. Yet he’ll never be in politics. He said so categorically this week. The reason why is obvious five minutes into any of his speeches: He’s too dead-honest to have anything but loathing for that profession, as it now exists in our capital city. A sad state indeed.

-30-

michael.dentandt@sunmedia.ca


----------



## OldSolduer

3rd Herd:

Well said. And yes, like it or not, the job of the CF is to kill people. I 've said that for over 30 years, and will continue to say it. Too many lace panty wearers (both in and out of uniform) thought we were Boy Scouts with rifles.


----------



## 2 Cdo

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> 3rd Herd:
> 
> Well said. And yes, like it or not, the job of the CF is to kill people. I 've said that for over 30 years, and will continue to say it. Too many lace panty wearers (both in and out of uniform) thought we were Boy Scouts with rifles.



Thankfully the ones in uniform are getting fewer and fewer.


----------



## geo

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> 3rd Herd:
> Well said. And yes, like it or not, the job of the CF is to kill people. I 've said that for over 30 years, and will continue to say it. Too many lace panty wearers (both in and out of uniform) thought we were Boy Scouts with rifles.


Funny how a couple of years of fighting a real foe will clear the cobwebs and make people realise that, we are an army & our No 1 job is "to close with and destroy the ennemy".


----------



## Gunner98

I had the chance to hear the CDS speak on a number of occasions and got to shake his hand in Norway during pre-deployment training. I think the thing the everyone needs to rememberis that he has managed to schedule visits into his itinerary so that he can see his soldiers doing whatever they are doing and not on formal parades.  His visits to KAF have been frequent and he has 'dragged' a variety of personalities with him, whether they be rich guys like Eugene Melnyk, former NHL superstars, the Stanley Cup, Tom Cochrane and the list goes...  He has not made one 'novelty' photo op trip but many important and unexpected visits, especially at Christmas when he could have kicked back with his family, instead he was with his extended family - his troops - shaking hands, serving meals and sharing a laugh and a pat on the back.

He has been the epitome of a leader - visbily ubiquitous and always morale-raising.  I think Peter W. has forgotten that Afganistan has been Hillier's war for more than just his tenure as CDS.  He commanded the NATO ISAF in Afghanistan from February 9 to August 12, 2004 at which time he began the concept of the Strategic Advisor Team. 

A few of my favorite CDS quotes:
"When a soldier steps on foreign soil in a high-risk environment, every single Canadian should be walking with him or her." 
"Any time you are close to or come under direct or indirect fire, it concentrates the mind wonderfully." 
"You have to be confident that what you're doing is right and that the sacrifices are actually going to mean something. Is that on my mind? Damn right it is."
  
Edit to add fav quotes.


----------



## combat_medic

Too bad it's illegal for us to sign petitions. I bet we would get every serving member of the CF to sign a petition to ask him to stay on.


----------



## geo

T'would be flattering BUT, I think the fella has done a tremendous job of slapping us out of our 50 year doldrums.
I think he deserves a break AND it would bode poorly on him if there were no one coming up behind him to take the reigns.  I figure that if he has decided that this is the time, then he knows there is someone out there to take the lead.

To the CODFATHER..... Thank you!

CHIMO!


----------



## Yrys

combat_medic said:
			
		

> Too bad it's illegal for us to sign petitions. I bet we would get every serving member of the CF to sign a petition to ask him to stay on.



... and some civilians. *I* would .

Maybe someone could start it and circulated it among troops family and friends. Would be a nice gift departure ...

What would also be a nice gift departure is a Canadian flag (or something more army) with the max sig by troops ...


----------



## Eland

That's a petition I would gladly sign - if I could, considering that I ceased being an Army reservist over 25 years ago. 

I have a huge, huge amount of respect for General Hillier. Simply because he has been a tireless and fearless advocate for the military in general and the troops he commands and in so being, has done Canada a tremendous service. Not only has he put Canada's military back on the map, he has put Canada back on the world stage. He has done what few politicians (or Chiefs of the Defence Staff) in previous administrations would have had the courage to do.

The other reason why I like General Hillier is that he is a soldier's soldier. His concern for the welfare of the soldiers, sailors and aircrew serving this country is real and it's sincere. That concern is the byproduct of working his way up the ranks. In other words, he not only knows how to talk the talk, he knows how to walk the walk. He's also not afraid to speak his mind and takes 100% responsibility for what he says and does - unlike some of the sycophantic politicians-in-uniform the CF has been saddled with in the past.

What makes him so unique is that he has captured the imagination of and galvanized the people of Canada, who have tended think of themselves as a somewhat unmilitary people. You could even say that he stands as tall as General Dwight Eisenhower did in the minds of Americans during the Second World War. The only other Canadian generals in recent memory who have earned a similar degree of esteem and respect (in my mind, at least) are Lewis MacKenzie and J.A. Dextraze.

It's truly a shame to see him go. A soldier like Hillier makes me feel proud to be Canadian again. Bravo Zulu, sir. Bravo Zulu.


----------



## Leigh Patrick Sullivan

.....not only did he work tirelessly to rebuild the Canadian Armed Forces to a level of respectability, he instilled a long-lost pride in our military by spearheading the change from ‘peacekeeping force’ to actual ‘military’. In some nations, they would give him his own ‘day’.

In usual Canadian form, he is underappreciated and, in some cases, scoffed at by his countrymen.....

http://www.themoderateseparatist.com/2008/05/general-ly-speaking.html


----------



## geo

LPS.... I for one have not heard anyone scoff at the CDS - if anything, he's one of the people working out of Ottawa that receives respect wherever he goes.

Giving him his own day?.... you're kidding aren't you?

The CDS did his job like few other CDS' have over the last century.... he's just put the bar up .... real high for the next one.  (The next CDS might want to try and deride the current CDS - if only to reduce expectations of his work.).


----------



## Old Sweat

Geo: (The next CDS might want to try and deride the current CDS - if only to reduce expectations of his work.).

I can't think of anything that would destroy the new CDS quicker than an attempt to demean Rick Hillier's legacy.


----------



## geo

Heh... I know that    (wouldn't if be interesting for him / them to try )

he certainly has set the bar real high for those that follow


----------



## Garett

This is too long so I'm just going to post the link.

http://www.legionmagazine.com/en/index.php/2008/05/chief-of-the-defence-staff-general-rick-hillier/


----------



## combatbuddha

Maybe a good job would be as a civilian instructor at the Leadership Acedemy.
Maybe if we can get to the young 'uns before they get assimilated in with the rest of the ticket punchers we might have a shot at actually having folks who follow the Principles of Leadership rather than see them as a list of things to avoid.

Just a thought


----------



## glock17

Any chance he might be sitting in the House as a Conservative MP, or even Cabinet Minister after the next Fedral election?  

The Right Honourable Rick Hillier, Minister of Defence?

And if that Dog don't hunt, how about the PM's job after Mr. Harper?

He's a pretty popular guy on the street as well as in the CF.

I know, too good to be true....


----------



## 9nr Domestic

Last weekend he mentioned something that if the Toronto Maple Leafs asked him to be GM he would consider it.


----------



## Love793

9r domestic said:
			
		

> Last weekend he mentioned something that if the Toronto Maple Leafs asked him to be GM he would consider it.



He'd be the only Leaf to to touch the cup in a couple of years. ;D, and the job is up for grabs, but he'd probably be more suited for Paul Maurice's old job.


----------



## Mountie

Any predictions or hopes for the next CDS?  My vote would be for LGen. Leslie.  I think he would be the closest thing to a Hillier and would continue in his foot steps.  Then ship Gen. Hillier over to the RCMP.  We'll take him as Commissioner!


----------



## GAP

'General Charisma' leaves big boots to fill
New leader will have experience, but not the bravado
Don Martin, National Post  Published: Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Article Link

OTTAWA -The guard will change at the top of Canada's military on Independence Day.

Okay, so the U.S. holiday timing's a bit strange, but sources say General Rick Hillier will surrender his chief of defence staff title at a ceremony on July 4 and call it quits four days later.

That clears up one theory --and kickstarts another.

The handover date means Gen. Hillier has no intention of peddling his influential military insights on the open market.

It's important to clear up the possibility created by, ahem, a certain National Post columnist whose face appears at left, because Gen. Hillier insists he never ever wants to be a lobbyist unless it's to seek the job of Toronto Maple Leafs general manager. The man clearly relishes no-win assignments.

Besides, the thrust of new lobbyist regulations is targeted below his level. The new legislation coming into force on July 2 extends the number of public servants officials banned from lobbying to "former designated public office holders and former designated members of a prime minister's transition team," according to Registrar of Lobbyists Michael Nelson.

But the second question now that Gen. Hillier has decided this old soldier will fade away in just over four weeks, likely with all the subtlety of a police siren, is wither his replacement?

This isn't a transition that can be accomplished over a long weekend. It's a seriously steep learning curve to guide the 55,000 troops plus reservists under the position's command, particularly if the appointment is an underdog, and it would be useful to have Gen. Hillier around for seasoned guidance.
More on link


----------



## Mike Baker

Honestly, whoever will be the next CDS, I don't think that they will be as great as General Hillier was, and still is for that matter. He brought the nation to respect the Military, and more people to join, and for the Gov to increase funding. He was truly a great man, and I wish I would have the honour to meet him one day.


General Hillier, thank you.


Baker


----------



## geo

Baker,
Given that you are on the rock and the Genereal is from the rock, there's a better than average chance that you will one day meet him.

Let's be honest, it would not be fair to expect his successor to be exactly like him.... The Cupboard is bare of "spare" Newf Generals at this time 

We can only hope that the one they decide on is as much of a "driver", competent and "for the boys" as the last...


----------



## scoutfinch

... can he be for the girls too?


----------



## gaspasser

Baker, take it from me and many others, Gen. Rick Hillier exudes respect.  He talks to you as if he's at your kitchen table, grips your hand with and iron grip, and looks you straight in the eyes.  Thats probably why we all respect him so much and will "mourn" his passing into private life.
I've met four CDS's and Gen Hillier doens't ask for respect, he commands it and hands it back to the troops.
   Thank you, sir, for giving us back the respect of the country.   



BTW, does anyone know who is up next?  I think it's the Navy's turn, but will they go Army agian to wait out the next few years of the war??


----------



## vonGarvin

BYT Driver said:
			
		

> BTW, does anyone know who is up next?  I think it's the Navy's turn, but will they go Army agian to wait out the next few years of the war??


Though there was a time when that happened, Hillier's tenure was "due" to be going to the Navy.  I think that they no longer do that.  Instead of affirmative action to represent all three services at the CDS level in an equitable manner, they are appointing the best person, irrespective of uniform colour.


----------



## Sigger

Decent enough article.


----------



## from darkness lite

Reported in today's Windsor Star....

Hillier to head N.L. university

ST. JOHN'S, N.L. - Gen. Rick Hillier will be appointed chancellor of Memorial University on July 3, a day after he steps down as chief of defence staff. 

"I am deeply honoured and excited to have been offered the position of chancellor of Memorial University -- an institution established to preserve the memory and sacrifices of Newfoundland and Labrador's men and women in uniform." said Hillier in a news release. "I am looking forward to reconnecting with the students, faculty and staff of the university from which I personally graduated." 

The announcement of the new post for one of Memorial University's best-known graduates was made Thursday by Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams. 

Hillier will be Memorial's sixth chancellor. 

"It is with immense pleasure that I announce the appointment of this distinguished individual whose stellar contributions to Canada are widely recognized, not only within our country, but well beyond its borders," said Williams, in the same release. "I cannot think of a more qualified individual to take on this role, and I look forward to the general's contributions to the province in this regard." 

On July 2, Hillier hands over his appointment as chief of the defence staff -- the highest ranking position in the Canadian Forces -- after a military career of more than three decades. 

A formal installation of the new chancellor will be held during Memorial's fall convocation in October. 


Cheers, FDL


----------



## GAP

He rallied the troops – and the Canadian public
JOHN WARD The Canadian Press June 28, 2008 at 1:04 AM EDT
Article Link

OTTAWA — Rick Hillier brought a refreshing bluntness to the country's top military job, but his legacy may be that he reintroduced Canadians to their soldiers and instilled a pride in both.

The general retires on Canada Day after three turbulent years as chief of the defence staff, during which he presided over a hard-fought war in Afghanistan, wrangled new money and equipment for his troops, and attended more memorial services than perhaps any of his predecessors.

Brian MacDonald, a retired artillery colonel and a senior analyst for the Conference of Defence Associations, said Gen. Hillier's crowning achievement was to raise the military from the shame of the Somalia affair of the 1990s into the new world of the 21st century.

“He reconnected the Defence Department to the Canadian public and that is a critically important thing, and it's turned the prospects of the Defence Department right around,” Mr. MacDonald said.
More on link


----------



## Mike Baker

I'll post this up here.

Hillier plans to use chancellor job as 'soapbox' to promote Memorial University




> Gen. Rick Hillier said Friday he plans to use his high profile to promote Memorial University on an international stage as he assumes the role of chancellor.
> 
> "My engagement internationally, across the country, does give me a certain soapbox … to be able to articulate what Memorial University is doing, perhaps to help articulate the vision of where they will go in the future," Canada's retiring chief of defence staff said in an interview Friday with CBC News, a day after his appointment was announced by Premier Danny Williams.
> 
> "But then also to articulate for Canadians, and people around the world ... what Memorial University is, and what it can offer and what it can bring, and help solidify its position on the world stage and therefore the position of Newfoundland and Labrador, to a certain extent."
> 
> Hillier, 52, replaces former federal cabinet minister John Crosbie, who left the post in February after being appointed the province's lieutenant-governor.
> 
> Hillier, chief of defence since February 2005 who will be replaced by vice-chief of defence staff Walter Natynczyk, is set to officially step down Wednesday and take over as Memorial's chancellor the day after — an appointment that some on campus predict will stir controversy.
> 
> "I think it's definitely very contentious and I don't think its going to be well received on campus at all," Kerri Breen, editor in chief of the Memorial's student newspaper The Muse, told CBC News.
> 
> "I think lots of groups on campus are left-leaning, generally opposed to the war in Afghanistan. I'd be interested to see what the student union has to say about it."
> 
> Cameron Campbell, who's with the student union, says: "I think it's [Hillier's appointment] definitely going to come with some controversy, but we're eager to meet with the new chancellor, to get some time to discuss student issues with the chancellor and see what his opinion is on that," Campbell said.
> 
> Hillier, who grew up in Newfoundland and Labrador, and has a bachelor of science degree from Memorial, said he's not bothered by talk that his appointment may become controversial, and said he will take it in stride.
> 
> "I'll just pile on and do my very best, as I've always done with any appointment that I've had," he said.



 ;D


----------



## Good2Golf

Seems some of its very own students don't know why it's called Memorial, and not just NewfU...it would seem to them that Memorial is just an academic institution.

Memorial University of Newfoundland



> Memorial University College was established in 1925 as a living memorial to the Newfoundlanders who had lost their lives on active service during the First World War.
> 
> It was later rededicated to also encompass the province's war dead of the Second World War.
> 
> Three hundred and ten former students of the Memorial University College offered themselves for active service in the Second World War, 1939-1945. Thirty of these students lost their lives. Their names are recorded in the front of the University Calendar each year.
> 
> A plaque erected by the Newfoundland Command of the Royal Canadian Legion in the Arts and Administration Building at Memorial's St. John's campus includes this dedication:
> 
> _This University was raised by the People of Newfoundland as a Memorial to the fallen in the Great Wars 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, that in freedom of learning their cause and sacrifice would not be forgotten.
> 
> The plaque was unveiled by HRH the Princess Royal, Colonel-in-Chief on September 21, 1964 on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the formation of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment 1914-1919._


----------



## Mike Baker

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Seems some of its very own students don't know why it's called Memorial, and not just NewfU...it would seem to them that Memorial is just an academic institution.


It's sad isn't it.

I asked my teacher who went to MUN why it was given that name, and she didn't know, so I pulled out the reason why, and she had no idea that it was named for that.


Deadpan


----------



## Danjanou

Ah nice to see that the wing nuts from the MUSE and the usual suspects from the Arts Bldg and TSC are as brain dead now as when I was an undergrad at MUN.  :


----------



## Mike Baker

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Ah nice to see that the wing nuts from the MUSE and the usual suspects from the Arts Bldg and TSC are as brain dead now as when I was an undergrad at MUN.  :


I'll see if I can set 'em straight when I'm in there Dan 


-Dead


Here is what it says on the MUN site about Gen. Hillier as the new chancellor.



> Memorial University of Newfoundland’s acting president welcomes the appointment of General Rick Hillier as the university’s chancellor.
> 
> Premier Danny Williams announced on Thursday, June 26, that Gen. Hillier, a graduate of Memorial and ardent advocate of the university, will be appointed effective July 3. A formal installation of the new chancellor will be held during Memorial’s fall convocation in October.
> 
> “We are delighted that Gen. Hillier will be the new chancellor of Memorial. He has always been a tireless supporter of Memorial and he brings his immense experience, energy and enthusiasm to our university community,” said Dr. Eddy Campbell, acting president.
> 
> “Our students, faculty, staff and alumni will benefit from the many contributions he will make. I thank him for taking on this new role.”


More on the link.


----------



## GAP

*Why Gen. Hillier was so loved by his troops*
George Petrolekas, Citizen Special Published: Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Article Link

He was our own JFK; a man who stirred our emotions and hopes like no other CDS before him.

While many pundits have sought to define the tenure of departing Chief of the Defence Staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, in the oblique forms of masterminding our Afghanistan role or the re-equipment of the Canadian Forces, such opinions miss the essence of the man. And while those are things he certainly had a hand in, his tenure is better marked by the words of soldiers who wistfully mark his passage with regret that their greatest champion has left.

I first became close to the general as he prepared to take over the NATO mission in Kabul. At the time, I was acting as his point man for the Canadian team of officers and soldiers that would dominate the NATO mission in 2004. The first day he met his international staff, he disdained the norms and, instead of lecturing, he launched into a two-way dialogue with every single person regardless of national provenance and linguistic ability. Quite something in a span of three hours with more than 300 people in the room. But magically, he was able to do so and thus made everyone feel important and a part of what they were about to embark on.

To the class-conscious Europeans, this was unheard of. A Norwegian officer, among others, came to me afterwards saying "I have never seen a general like that." A refrain I would hear for the next four years.

In Kabul, nothing changed. He was the most accessible commander I ever saw, and I've seen every NATO commander since 2003. Germans, Italians, Brits and every other nation imaginable and of every rank, would come away amazed that this general would know their name, and preferred to eat in their company instead of in private or with other generals. Soldiers from other nations who had served in Bosnia with him a decade earlier would ask me about the "General" on seeing a Canadian flag on my shoulder. "Say hi to him for me" they would ask.

And while he did lead a re-equipment of the Canadian Forces, his prime thought was to connect and make Canadians understand the perils of service. Simply put, he refused to put soldiers in harm's way without the tools necessary for their survival. And Canadians should have no doubt, that prior to Gen. Hillier we frequently took short-cuts or "managed risk" as if soldiers were mere poker chips to be played on the international stage. The success of our soldiers and of our nation was always at the forefront of Gen. Hillier's thoughts.

But there are two images of the man that remain indelibly printed in my mind, which go far in explaining why soldiers loved him so.
More on link


----------



## geo

> They say you can't easily fool a soldier. Every single soldier knew that with this CDS, they would be cared for before, during and after their missions, as would their families. It is why they would do anything for this man. But these are not my words and thoughts alone; they are the thoughts of thousands of soldiers, who on Gen. Hillier's retirement could only say, "say it isn't so." It is like our own Camelot has ended.
> 
> It is that legacy of compassion that will endure: that he was the champion of the common soldier. And that legacy is probably the one he would prefer best; and it is why we loved him so.


While I don't always agree with Col Petrolekas on some subjects (young subbie), on this day, I can't fault him on his words
The departure of a great man!  I hope we hear from him again in the not too distant future.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is a provocative, I guess that’s the right word, article by retired diplomat Gar Pardy, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=75536539-2d73-4478-aa99-76d32f456356


> Gar Pardy . Hillier's legacy
> 
> Gar Pardy,
> 
> *The Ottawa Citizen*
> 
> Published: Wednesday, July 02, 2008
> 
> The Hillier comet has now faded from our Canadian skies. It was a comet of some brilliance and its brightness will be with us for some time to come.
> 
> For many, Gen. Rick Hillier's presence for the past three years as chief of the defence staff, ending officially today, has taken on an almost messianic colouration of things military and the importance of the Canadian soldier. Temporarily at least he created a closer bond and understanding between Canadians and their military.
> 
> Afghanistan is Gen. Hillier's war. While efforts have been made to label it Paul Martin's and/or Stephen Harper's war, the Kandahar deployment now stretching into 2011 and with serious talk that it needs to extend well into the next decade, is Gen. Hillier's more than anyone else. He put together the Canadian Afghan plan in 2005.
> 
> As such in no small measure the General's historical legacy is intimately tied to that war and its eventual outcome. The associated policies of the transformation of the Canadian Forces (which was to produce resources for other military deployments) and massive equipment purchases are bogged down in the normal Ottawa morass and will do nothing for the General's long-term image.
> 
> Every commentator, political and military leader who has spoken in recent weeks has concluded that Afghanistan is worse today than it was in 2005. This is not only in the south but in the east (attacks up 40 percent over the same time last year) and expectations are rife that it will include the northwest in the coming months. Even the Pentagon, not known for its pessimism on military matters, recently reported to Congress that there are no short-term or easy answers in Afghanistan and gloomily reported that the Taliban has "coalesced into a resilient insurgency." The Senlis Council in its usually breathless style is now telling us that there are too many young men in Afghanistan.
> 
> For all of those committed to the current military strategy, the only corrective action is deploying thousands of additional foreign troops and pushing further into the future the date when all of this will produce a peaceful Afghanistan. The American commander who has come recently to Afghanistan is now asking for more than 10,000 additional troops. Lyndon Johnson must be cursin' in his grave.
> 
> In the meantime, the spectre of the tribal areas of Pakistan providing support, sanctuary and militants for the Taliban has become more real with each passing day. The Pakistani Taliban has emerged from the shadows and is in open revolt against Islamabad and there are attacks in and near Peshawar. Pakistan's fledgling democracy with large expectations from the people and stubborn opposition from the military is in no condition to effectively control matters or effectively direct the future.
> 
> Rather it will stumble along with an effort to wean the tribals from the dual dangers of deepening fundamentalism and closer ties with the Afghan militants. In the meantime with weak governments in both Kabul and Islamabad their relations will become more acrimonious. Loose talk by western politicians for military action inside Pakistan will not help.
> 
> One can only hope that the west and NATO are learning a fundamental lesson in this debacle. NATO's ability to co-ordinate military action in Afghanistan is non-existent. Afghanistan is far too removed and the dangers it may have represented a few years ago no longer course through our bodies politic. Rather, other issues have come to the fore and there is a need to rethink how to deal with places like Afghanistan which will remain a regional trouble spot for decades to come. It no longer represents a danger to significant western interests and the sooner this manifests itself into a coherent non-interventionist military strategy then the sooner we can end the ramp ceremonies at Trenton.
> 
> When the Afghan mission was open for discussion in 2005, prime minister Paul Martin and his colleagues did not exercise due diligence; the discussion to the extent that it is known was not about Afghanistan but rather whether it might pre-empt other initiatives by the government in such places as Darfur, the Middle East or Haiti.
> 
> Even when, a year later, Prime Minister Harper wrapped himself and his government in the Hillier plan, there was no significant public discussion or careful consideration by either the prime minister or his ministers. When a further extension of the mandate was considered necessary, John Manley and his panellists rounded the edges and dulled the debate, ensuring that the Liberals and Conservatives merged their slight differences.
> 
> The surprising element in all of this is that the debate in Canada has had very little to do with Afghanistan. Rather it has much to do about Canada and Canadians and their never ending willingness to see themselves as they would like to be seen rather then how others may see us. Mr. Manley and his panel unintentionally expressed it best when they wrote "Canada's participation in the outcomes, will directly affect Canada's security, our reputation in the world, and our future ability to engage the international community in achieving objectives of peace, security and shared prosperity."
> 
> Modern local wars rarely provide desired outcomes or create conditions that we think are important to our well being. As with drunken drivers there are no straight lines. As we approach the eighth year of the Afghan war there are no signs that the outcome will add to the historical legacy of Gen. Hillier. Rather there will be proof that when you are smarter than the politicians who surround you, then you need to do the thinking for everyone.
> 
> _*Gar Pardy* retired from the foreign service in 2003._
> 
> E-mail: garp@rogers.com
> 
> © The Ottawa Citizen 2008​



Gar Pardy was Director General of the Consular Affairs branch when he retired. You may need to deal with _Consular Affairs_ if you pocket is picked in Paris and you need a new passport or if your teenaged daughter is detained while hiking in the lower Himalayas or trekking inThailand. You will hope that they will deal with your problems in a sympathetic and expeditious manner. Those were no doubt the hopes of William Sampson and Maher Arar, too- but their hopes appear have been dashed.

I will not comment on the snarky tone or the innuendo or the weak attempts at character assassination – they are about par for the course from mid-level bureaucrats (a director general is an _executive_ but not, actually, a senior one) speaking for a second rate (and falling) department. DFAIT’s knickers are in a huge twist because DND has taken the lead in strategic policy; DFAIT is right to be concerned – DND should *not* have a lead role, it is an _implementing_ organization, not one that should have a major voice in policy or strategic planning; DFAIT’s problem is not, however, that DND has _risen_ – the problem is that DFAIT has fallen because it has too many second rate people and strategy and policy are the exclusive domain of first rate people.

I will focus on the areas where I think Pardy makes useful points.

First: “Afghanistan is Gen. Hillier's war.” Despite the fact that nonsense has been thoroughly debunked – Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, surrounded by foreign affairs bureaucrats, real policy experts and some of the most astute political minds in the country decided, for their own good reasons, to send the CF to Afghanistan, twice, and then from Kabul to Kandahar. But the second raters (serving and retired) in DFAIT cannot accept that because they think, for the moment, that Afghanistan is going badly so blame must be assigned - and DND is the eternal enemy of the striped pants set in _Festung Pearson._ The media are willing accomplices to this bit of fiction – they don’t like Rick Hillier, either. But, lie though it is, it is now a generally accepted lie.

Second: “NATO's ability to co-ordinate military action in Afghanistan is non-existent.” True, too, and too true, I think. The UN does need a new, better military _subcontractor_  Afghanistan is liable too look easy when we must, finally, confront Africa.

But: Pardy shows his true colours when he says that Afghanistan and, presumably, the whole (badly misnamed and poorly focused) Global War on Terror (which ought to be the Global War on Barbarism) “no longer represents a danger to significant western interests and the sooner this manifests itself into a coherent non-interventionist military strategy then the sooner we can end the ramp ceremonies at Trenton.”

There is, indeed, a “coherent non-interventionist” strategy – it is precisely what China advocates for us! Such a strategy does not serve our national vita interests or those of our important, traditional allies; to suggest it is intellectually vacuous, it is bad policy advice  – about what I have come to expect from *executives* in DFAIT and the reason Paul Martin turned to e.g. Rick Hillier. Martin, understood that Pardy and his associates were incompetent bunglers.


----------



## North Star

Wow. ER Campbell, you rock.

BTW, I always find it funny that nobody sees that if Afghanistan should fall to the Taliban, Pakistan will be the next state to disintegrate. In fact, that disintegration has already started. The Red Mosque crisis is only one example of how Pakistan is starting to lose the ability to monopolize the use of force within its own borders.


----------



## Sigger

Was anyone at the change of command?


----------



## geo

They have part if his speach on Sympatico's startup screen.....

Good man - speaks from the heart - if and when I get to St John's - will have to look him up

Am certain that he will be around to champion other causes - Waay too young to be put out to pasture


----------



## Old Sweat

As for General Rick's future, after the Second World War General Eisenhower headed Columbia University for a while. Sheer speculation, but maybe a media lurker will run with it.


----------



## Haggis

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> As for General Rick's future, after the Second World War General Eisenhower headed Columbia University for a while. Sheer speculation, but maybe a media lurker will run with it.



No speculation required.  The Big Cod is off to become chancellor of the Memorial University of Newfoundland, effective tomorrow.


----------



## medaid

Really? Will he allow transfers to his university in a student's 5th year? Leave from school for deployments, half cost living for serving PRes members that go there? Scholarships? If yes, I will be the first one to transfer there to bask in the holiness that is The Big Cod.


----------



## Old Sweat

Haggis,

I knew he was off to MUN. I was having fun with the comparison to DDE.

Cheers,

Sweatie


----------



## Haggis

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Haggis,
> 
> I knew he was off to MUN. I was having fun with the comparison to DDE.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Sweatie



 :-[

Seen.  Too much sun yesterday, I guess.


----------



## Blackadder1916

MedTech said:
			
		

> Really? Will he allow transfers to his university in a student's 5th year? Leave from school for deployments, half cost living for serving PRes members that go there? Scholarships? If yes, I will be the first one to transfer there to bask in the holiness that is The Big Cod.



The Chancellor of Memorial University of Newfoundland is (like most university chancellors in Canada) a titular position.  Though I am sure that Gen Hillier will probably be the most vocal and visible chancellor that MUN has seen, the actual "chief executive" of MUN is the President and Vice-Chancellor.  There are some duties that the Chancellor must peform as well as automatically being a member (ex-officio) of the university's Senate and the Board of Regents, but there have been periods when there was no chancellor at MUN and some past chancellors did not reside in the province.  The outgoing chancellor, John Crosbie (new Lt-Governor of Nfld), continued the practice of law during his tenure.  You may find that Gen Hillier, in addition to whatever role he carves for himself at MUN, will probably be spending a lot of time on the speaking circuit and writing.


----------



## GAP

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> You may find that Gen Hillier, in addition to whatever role he carves for himself at MUN, will probably be spending a lot of time on the speaking circuit and writing.



You mean he may replace Stephan Staples, et al ??

*Joy to the World!!*  ;D


----------



## Blackadder1916

Top soldier recruited to join law firm's ranks


> JANE TABER
> From Saturday's Globe and Mail  July 5, 2008 at 2:06 AM EDT
> 
> Fresh from running a war,* Rick Hillier, who stepped down as chief of the defence staff this week, is temporarily joining Gowlings, a huge law firm in Ottawa, to consider a future “career in the private sector*.” The general is not a lawyer and says he has not made any firm decisions about his future. Still, a statement provided by the firm said he “has indicated that when he assumes a new career in September, he is looking to provide strategic advice, leadership training and other consulting services.” And Gowlings can help him with all that. Does this spell lobbying? Certainly, Mr. Hillier's name and expertise in the defence world will add even more cachet to the national firm, Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP.
> 
> There is a trend developing among law firms to hire well-connected non-lawyers; former Newfoundland premier and former federal cabinet minister Brian Tobin became a senior business adviser to another big firm, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, and last January, former Alberta premier Ralph Klein joined Borden Ladner Gervais LLP.



Working with/for lawyers!  Could he not find a more honourable workplace, like a brothel?


----------



## geo

They may represent a brothel by the time The Big Cod has finished with them.

I am confident that the General will NOT lend his name to any organisation without first ensuring that they do not "use and abuse" his a$$(est)


----------



## GAP

Hillier gets combat-ready for business world
JANE TABER From Monday's Globe and Mail July 6, 2008 at 8:47 PM EDT
Article Link

OTTAWA — Rick Hillier begins his second career knowing two things: He won't become a defence lobbyist or a politician.

The rest of it, however, he doesn't know. He will take the summer to decide, pondering his future from the Ottawa offices of Gowlings, a big national law firm with particular expertise in trade and banking. After three years as Canada's top solider, he stepped down last week and is joining the firm. 

“We have no regrets and nothing but positive feelings coming off this. I feel very good, very confident, taking a little bit of a break here and then we'll assess what life's going to bring us from there,” he said in an interview on Sunday, interrupting his brunch in the Byward Market with his wife and friends.

At age 53, however, the blunt-speaking former soldier isn't nearly ready to retire.
More on link


----------



## The Bread Guy

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._

*Hockey sticks and helicopters*
How a general made Canada more comfortable with fighting wars
The Economist, 24 Jul 08
Article link

“WE ARE not the public service of Canada,” General Rick Hillier once told journalists. “We are the Canadian Forces and our job is to be able to kill people.” Such a robust view of military power was unusual when General Hillier was appointed chief of the defence staff. In the three years he spent in the post before stepping down earlier this month, he almost succeeded in making it mainstream.

Canadians have often seemed more comfortable with an army that puts up tents and dishes out aid than with one that actually shoots people. The reasons for this are partly historical: the Liberal Party, which ruled Canada for most of the second half of the 20th century, drew much of its support from Quebec, where a dislike of military adventures dates back to the days of the British empire. Defence spending was frozen in the 1970s and 1980s, and then cut back in the 1990s. 

Bucking this history, Canada announced in 2005 that it would assume NATO responsibility for providing security in Afghanistan’s Kandahar province and sent 2,000 soldiers to do the job. The task of selling the deployment of these troops fell to the plain-speaking general. The Taliban and Osama bin Laden were, he explained, “detestable murderers and scumbags” who should be hunted down.

To keep public opinion on his side, General Hillier made regular appearances on television accompanied by Afghan veterans, bringing him a level of fame previously unknown for an army officer in Canada. He took ice-hockey players to visit the troops and installed an all-Canadian doughnut shop on the army’s base in Kandahar. The election of the Conservatives in January 2006 made the task easier, providing strong political support for the intervention in Afghanistan. Even with the number of casualties rising (the 88th Canadian soldier was killed there on July 18th), Parliament has approved a two-year extension to the mission until 2011.

Money has followed. The government has acquired over 100 second-hand Leopard 2 tanks, four Boeing C-17 heavy transport aircraft, 17 Hercules planes and made a commitment to buy 16 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters. The navy has not been left out, with a C$1.1 billion ($1.1 billion) refit for a dozen frigates and a C$2.9 billion contract for three ships to support army operations. There is even a plan for a naval port in Nanisivik, in the territory of Nunavut, and up to eight Arctic patrol vessels to fly the flag in the increasingly ice-free far north. In May Stephen Harper, the prime minister, unveiled a new defence strategy called Canada First, with a pledge to increase the annual budget for the military by two-thirds over 20 years.

General Hillier’s successor, Walter Natynczyk, has so far shown a less sure touch. When visiting troops in Kandahar recently he first played down the violence in the region and then conceded that things were in fact getting worse. He also has some unfamiliar problems to deal with. Soldiers are worn out after repeated tours and the army is having trouble retaining them and recruiting suitable replacements. So much so that they have begun to look for recruits in unlikely places. A Canadian Forces recruiting booth at Toronto’s gay pride festival was a surprising first.


----------



## neilinkorea

GAP said:
			
		

> Hillier gets combat-ready for business world
> JANE TABER From Monday's Globe and Mail July 6, 2008 at 8:47 PM EDT
> Article Link
> 
> OTTAWA — Rick Hillier begins his second career knowing two things: He won't become a defence lobbyist or a politician.
> 
> The rest of it, however, he doesn't know. He will take the summer to decide, pondering his future from the Ottawa offices of Gowlings, a big national law firm with particular expertise in trade and banking. After three years as Canada's top solider, he stepped down last week and is joining the firm.
> 
> “We have no regrets and nothing but positive feelings coming off this. I feel very good, very confident, taking a little bit of a break here and then we'll assess what life's going to bring us from there,” he said in an interview on Sunday, interrupting his brunch in the Byward Market with his wife and friends.
> 
> At age 53, however, the blunt-speaking former soldier isn't nearly ready to retire.
> More on link



This is from Gowlings web site (http://www.gowlings.com/industry/govt.asp).  They are lobbyists!!  Afirm doesnt let you "work out of their offices", they pay you to do a job for/represent them.  What's up Rick?

The Government Industry Group has two components. The first provides regulatory affairs and government relations *(lobbying) services * to clients in the private sector. The second serves governments and government organizations in Canada and around the world. With experience in almost all areas of public policy, Gowlings professionals provide legal advice and consulting services on an extensive range of regulatory and government issues.

Government Relations and Regulatory Affairs: Gowlings has a long and distinguished history of involvement in Canadian public policy, having acted for decades on behalf of governments, private sector interests and public interest organizations on a wide variety of issues.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Is there a point to your post neil or are you just trying to stir the pot?


----------



## neilinkorea

I guess my point is that he said he wouldn't be a lobbyist, but is employed by(/affiliated with/connected to/whatever you want to call it) a law firm that provides lobbying services.  General Hillier is not, to the best of my knowledge, an attorney.  So what else could he do for that firm?

If Jack Layton did something like that, many on this board would be very quick to point it out.  I was surprised to see no comment on this thread since the summer.


----------



## Cloud Cover

Gowlings, like a  good many Canadian firms, can use some objective,honest, goal minded leadership for a change. Since Jack Layton has no enterprise leadership experience [he rules by party constitution], he's an occupier of space on a political org chart, but certainly not a leader of objectively honest, purposeful people.


----------



## neilinkorea

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Gowlings, like a  good many Canadian firms, can use some objective,honest, goal minded leadership for a change. Since Jack Layton has no enterprise leadership experience [he rules by party constitution], he's an occupier of space on a political org chart, but certainly not a leader of objectively honest, purposeful people.




*some objective,honest, goal minded leadership * that has no knowledge of or training in their core area of business, the practice of law.  I don't think many military members would be pleased to hear that "some objective,honest, goal minded leadership" from the legal field was being brought in to the CF.  A law firm that lobbies the government on behalf of private enterprise is aquiring intimate knowledge of the DND requirements and procurement process and the connections to those currently in charge of it when they hire a recently retired general.  I can't comment on what the general is willing to do for them, but certainly he was intelligent enough to know that this is what was expected of him when he was hired.

I didn't mean Jack Layton being in this exact same situation, I meant if Jack Layton appeared to have gone back on his word as the general seems to have done.


----------



## Jed

FFnA, just what are you trying to say here?

I think, you are possibly trying to paint Gen rtd Hillier as a hypocrite. You then attempt to justify this aspersion by providing a comparison to Mr Jack Layton's possible actions. 

I just don't get it. Please bring up some logical point or back away from the drive by mud slinging.


----------



## geo

FFA
General Hillier retired from the CF last summer after a wonderful/great run as CDS
The CF is a whole lot richer for his having been at the lead.

It has been announced that he is / will become the vice chancelor of Memorial University of Newfoundland
It has been announced that he is / will become a motivational speaker associated to the TD Bank
.... so it's announced that he is associating his name with Gowlings... that's nice.  Unless you can point out what he is doing wrong, might I suggest that you "cease fire" & hold your fire - until such time as he does something wrong & you can wag your finger at.

The man is no longer a member of the CF, the man was never a politician - give the fella a break


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

So to answer my question, you just want to stir the pot...go figure. :


----------



## Greymatters

Fear said:
			
		

> *some objective,honest, goal minded leadership * that has no knowledge of or training in their core area of business, the practice of law.  I



While not trained as a lawyer, it is rare for any government official or senior military member to rise to the top without gaining some experience or knowledge of legal affairs, even if it is mainly layman's terms.   I sincerely doubt that the General lacks the ability to read and interpret legal text, or to read/interpret/apply the laws/legislation/stautes/acts/orders/policies he comes into contact with as part of a leadership role...


----------



## Teeps74

"... defence lobbyist...". That seems pretty specific to me, so unless you got a piece of paper that says he is lobbying for a newer better tank... 

Even if he is working for a lobbyist company, you are barking up the exact wrong tree. Consider this tree to be somewhat regal, tall, mature. Deserving of far more respect then FFnF offered in his post here... I suspect I am not the only one that believes thusly.

Even if he did take up working as a defence lobbyist, or politics... He is a private citizen. Last I checked, private citizens are allowed to change their minds... Sometimes even allowed to change it frequently.

Are you suggesting that he should not be allowed to change his mind? Should we engage big brother? Mayhaps he engaged in thought-crime... Perhaps you should investigate FFnF.

EDIT TO ADD: Jack Layton is NOT a private person. He is in the service of the Queen as a representative in our House of Parliament.


----------



## neilinkorea

Jed said:
			
		

> FFnA, just what are you trying to say here?
> 
> I think, you are possibly trying to paint Gen rtd Hillier as a hypocrite. You then attempt to justify this aspersion by providing a comparison to Mr Jack Layton's possible actions.
> 
> I just don't get it. Please bring up some logical point or back away from the drive by mud slinging.



I never compared the General to Layton.  I was comparing the response by posters here to similar actions if they were taken by both men.  I think that there is a lot of group think and blind following that goes on here for a board where many posters claim to base their opinions on facts and the analysis of those facts.  I think Hillier was an excellent CDS, an excellent soldier, and served Canada honorably for many years.  I think it is fine for retired bureaucrats to go into lobbying/consulting/speaking for pay/whatever they want to do.  It is a free country.  I am disappointed that  General Hillier seems to have changed his tune regarding the profession of lobbying.  I recall him saying that lobbyists were to blame for a lot of the procurement problems that faced the CF during his tenure.  Many of his changes to the procurement process seemed to attempt to bypass them all together.

FACT- Hillier said he wouldn't become a lobbyist
FACT- Hillier now works for a lobbying firm(in some capacity)

It is annoying to see a man that I admire so much for his straight talk and low B.S. content start to play the game that he seemed to stand against.  Maybe he isn't technically called a lobbyist.  Maybe he is an independent contract facilitator, or a government procurement analyst.  Whatever you want to call it, he is now doing the work of those he spoke against while in uniform.  I think he has the right to do whatever he wants.  It just makes me sad to think that the last straight shooter in Canadian leadership may have started down the slippery slope of spin and half truths.  (Not lies.  I am NOT calling him a liar.)

I thought that there would have been someone taking notice of it here.  The posters on this board, who I respect because of their heated debates and analysis of the things that most others let slide, didn't say boo about this.  It is one thing to respect a man for the way he conducts himself, it is another never to even question him because of that respect.


----------



## GAP

That's crap


----------



## neilinkorea

GAP said:
			
		

> That's crap



Wow.  You really make a well thought out argument.  The notion that two people can have different opinions and neither be wrong, or crap as you so eloquently put it, seems to be lost on you.


----------



## Teeps74

Fear said:
			
		

> Wow.  You really make a well thought out argument.  The notion that two people can have different opinions and neither be wrong, or crap as you so eloquently put it, seems to be lost on you.



"That's crap." Is the only necessary rejoinder for your arguement. From your own quote:



> ...He won't become a defence lobbyist or a politician.



Grow up, learn how to build an arguement, do not leave room for people to simply say "That's crap.". On the evidence of what you provide, you have no arguement. None. You argue that someone who is now a private citizen should be held to the same standard as someone in service to this nation? That is a crap arguement. 

You are an agent provocateur, nothing more.


----------



## OldSolduer

Me thinks FFNA could be Army Goon or CogDiss.....

Why the derision for the best CDS we've had in 30 years?


----------



## neilinkorea

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> "That's crap." Is the only necessary rejoinder for your arguement. From your own quote:
> 
> Grow up, learn how to build an arguement, do not leave room for people to simply say "That's crap.". On the evidence of what you provide, you have no arguement. None. You argue that someone who is now a private citizen should be held to the same standard as someone in service to this nation? That is a crap arguement.
> 
> You are an agent provocateur, nothing more.



First of all, not once did I say he should be held to the same standard as a government employee.  In fact, I have said quite the opposite in a couple of posts.  I specifically said that I believe he is free to do whatever work he wants as a private citizen.  Perhaps you, Teeps74, should grow up and brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

As for facts, they have been laid out; Hillier said he wouldn't become a lobbyist - He is now employed by a lobbying firm.  These are facts.  I am not claiming to know the exact significance of them.  I am just a bit surprised to see him in a position where the good of the CF and the good of the people he represents may one day be at odds with one another.  Who does he choose then?  The people who pay him or the CF?  For a man who has made his image and reputation by representing the good of little guy(the individual soldier), he is risking that same reputation when he does, or at least appears to, represent the good of the contractors.  I don't know what will happen, but nobody knows better than the General that perception is very important.  He was a master at controling it during his tenure as CDS.


----------



## neilinkorea

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> Me thinks FFNA could be Army Goon or CogDiss.....
> 
> Why the derision for the best CDS we've had in 30 years?



Not trying to deride the man.  Just because he did a good job doesn't mean he should be able to get a free pass on everything.  Don't some of you who feel strongly about the great reputation Hillier has think he is risking it a bit by being associated with the lobbying profession?  Money clouds the judgement of all men.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Fear said:
			
		

> Not trying to deride the man.



It certainly doesn't seem that way. 



> Just because he did a good job doesn't mean he should be able to get a free pass on everything.



"Good" is such an understatement of what I personally think Gen Hillier accomplished as the CDS.  I've watched the man from short distances several times, giving a briefing to troops and once during an exercise he came to.  Have you?  Please elaborate on how he is getting a free ride.  No wait...I retract that statement.  Please don't elaborate...on anything.



> Don't some of you who feel strongly about the great reputation Hillier has think he is risking it a bit by being associated with the lobbying profession?



No.  I do agree with the great reputation statement though.  Might be the only thing you said that doesn't belong on a manure-spreader.  



> Money clouds the judgement of all men.



So if you aren't rich, what is your excuse?
 :

Personally, I think your statements and BS are insulting to a great former CDS, a great man and a proud Canadian.


----------



## neilinkorea

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> It certainly doesn't seem that way.
> 
> "Good" is such an understatement of what I personally think Gen Hillier accomplished as the CDS.  I've watched the man from short distances several times, giving a briefing to troops and once during an exercise he came to.  Have you?  Please elaborate on how he is getting a free ride.  No wait...I retract that statement.  Please don't elaborate...on anything.
> 
> No.  I do agree with the great reputation statement though.  Might be the only thing you said that doesn't belong on a manure-spreader.
> 
> So if you aren't rich, what is your excuse?
> :
> 
> Personally, I think your statements and BS are insulting to a great former CDS, a great man and a proud Canadian.



Oh, you've stood near him.  Why didn't you say so.  It must be like you can see into his soul now.  You say my statements are insulting to the man(which I don't agree with), but you didn't say factually incorrect.  The truth is only insulting if there is something going on that perhaps shouldn't be.  All I'm saying is that the line of work he is getting into could put him in an awkward position.  Then the attack start from all the members of the Hillier Youth.  He was a great CDS, but he is still a human being.  No person is as good, or as bad, as we believe them to be.  The cult of personality that rises up around leaders of any kind is crazy.  We should put principles before personality.  

I hope Hillier has a prosperous and personally rewarding career after his military service.  I don't think he will behave in a manner that is anything less than honorable.  However, the kind of work he will be involved in/surrounded by, leaves the purest intentions open to negative interpretation.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Fear said:
			
		

> Oh, you've stood near him.  Why didn't you say so.  It must be like you can see into his soul now.



No, thats not what I said.  I did have the pleasure of being present for a 2 hour briefing he gave to a group of Officers, WOs, NCOs and soldiers and was briefly introduced to him that evening.  I was on a joint Army/Navy Ex that he was present for 3+ years ago.  A highschool friend of mine was in a position where he worked for the General up close and personal on a daily basis for an extended period, travelled with him every where he went, and that friend told me many things about the General that increased my loyalty to and respect of the man.

The rest of your post is not worth anymore keystrokes.


----------



## OldSolduer

FFNA....your smart a$$ remarks and retorts are not conducive to a good discussion. The mods will be on you in a second. Just a warning.

How about General Boyle, who retired and went on to be a VP in McDonnell-Douglas immediately after his retirement?


----------



## dapaterson

To be fair, Gen (ret'd) Hillier has been given a free ride fro mcritics (other tha a small lunatic fringe).  An objective assessment of his tenure is needed.  While many of his efforts were entirely laudable, he must also bear responsibility for such abominations as the stand up of the dot COM headquarters, and the utter confusion of C2 those introduced.

Unforutnately, he's still too recent a CDS for there to be anything resembling an objective assessment of his tenure.


----------



## Jed

Point taken dapaterson, wrt objective look at the total body of excellent work accomplished by the former CDS, Gen Hillier. However, it appears to me that FFnA is in a hole and he is trying to get out of it by digging deeper.

I recommend he stop flinging the dirt around, reassess the situation, build a ladder with all the good advice he is receiving and  climb out of the hole.


----------



## Greymatters

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Unforutnately, he's still too recent a CDS for there to be anything resembling an objective assessment of his tenure.



Im sure someone out there is compiling a detailed and dissected history of his past for future publication even as we speak...


----------



## dapaterson

If it's a DND history publication, he's safe for several decades... the official histories of the Korean War are starting to come out now.


----------



## Old Sweat

The official history of the Canadian army in Korea was published in 1966 or 13 years after the end of hostilities.


----------



## tango22a

FFnA:

It seems to me that it is SO in fashion nowadays to belittle a person's accomplishments and bring him/her down to the belittler's level. I personally have never met Gen. Hillier, but from talking to friends and serving relatives I agree he was and is one of Canada's best-ever CDS.

So why don't you STFU and take your whinging remarks to another blog!!!!

Cheers (and don't bother replying),

tango22a

P.S.:
Since the hole you've dug for yourself on this forum is ever-deepening you MIGHT want to take more care .... you might end up in Kandahar.


----------



## dapaterson

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The official history of the Canadian army in Korea was published in 1966 or 13 years after the end of hostilities.



Mea culpa.  Still, Gen (ret'd) Cod should be safe for a decade at least.  Or, if it's like the history of the Navy, better than 60 years (Vol 2 of the history of the Navy in WWII was published in 2007).


----------



## Old Sweat

General Hillier has a powerful, charismatic personality. He was the right person in the right place at the right time. This, however, does not mean that he is incapable of erring and in a big way. As with any poweful, dynamic leader the challenge for his staff is to muster the courage to bring forward the negatives as well as the positives of any course of action. (I just finished Lewis MacKenzie's book. In it he recalls that after shortly taking command of LFCA, he assembled his staff and told them that he was concerned that no one on his staff ever objected to anything he proposed or informed him that we tried that before, and it didn't work for the following reasons.)  The staff do their boss a disservice when they do not lay out the implications of any course of action. This can be even more difficult if the staff are reluctant to incur the boss's wrath or adopt the 'we are the army and we have a can do attitude. Don't say it is a bad idea, make the program work.' 

Back to the main point, General Hillier was an exceptional CDS and probably the best one to date. All his decisions, however, were not the best course of action from our perespective. The question remains whether he was correct, or did we poor blighters in the trenches get in right? The jury is still out.


----------



## neilinkorea

tango22a said:
			
		

> FFnA:
> 
> It seems to me that it is SO in fashion nowadays to *belittle a person's accomplishments * and bring him/her down to the belittler's level. I personally have never met Gen. Hillier, but from talking to friends and serving relatives I agree he was and is one of Canada's best-ever CDS.
> 
> *So why don't you STFU and take your whinging remarks to another blog!!!!*
> 
> Cheers (and don't bother replying),
> 
> tango22a
> 
> P.S.:
> Since the hole you've dug for yourself on this forum is ever-deepening you MIGHT want to take more care .... you might end up in Kandahar.



I am really starting to question the reading ability of the people who are replying to my posts.  I did not say one bad things about Hillier's past accomplishments or his tenure as CDS.  In fact, I have done quite the opposite.  I am pointing out that he has made a reversal in opinion about employment in a certain sector of the business world.  The fact that this was not even commented on by the posters on this forum shocked me because they are usually all over public figures/politicians/journalists/academics/and "military experts" who do the same.(that is change their view or opinion on a topic not decide to become a lobbyist)  The General seems to have gotten a free pass on this one.  Not a big deal in and of itself.  It just goes to the blind bias exhibited by the type of person who tells someone to STFU when a fact they don't particulary want to hear is pointed out.
This has become not a place for discussion but the repitition of commonly held beliefs.  If you don't agree with those beliefs, you get told to STFU or have people call you names.  If you don't idolize and hold in proper reverence the personalities that all others do, you are called an idiot. 

While I agree that Hillier was a great CDS his success was as much a function of timing as it was of his effort and abilities.  Canada had been thrust into a war due to 9/11.  There was going to be increased military funding no matter who was in charge.  He was a master at using the media to get a lot of the credit for this.  He did politicize the office of the CDS during his time in it.  It will take some time to see if that was a good thing or a bad thing.


----------



## OldSolduer

The office of CDS was already politicized. It has been since the 70's and perhaps before that. 

The worst example was General Boyle. He did exactly what he was told to by MND, with little regard for the soldiers, sailors and airpeople under his watch. I can't recall all the CDS's I served under.....just what I perceive to be bad examples and good examples.

Did General Hillier politicize the office.....perhaps, but in the favor of the soldiers, sailors and airpeople under his watch.


----------



## CountDC

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> The office of CDS was already politicized. It has been since the 70's and perhaps before that.
> 
> The worst example was General Boyle. He did exactly what he was told to by MND, with little regard for the soldiers, sailors and airpeople under his watch. I can't recall all the CDS's I served under.....just what I perceive to be bad examples and good examples.
> 
> Did General Hillier politicize the office.....perhaps, but in the favor of the soldiers, sailors and airpeople under his watch.



So true on all counts - two opposites that stick in the mind - Boyle and Hillier.


----------



## CountDC

Although I am a firm supporter of The General (can't figure how anyone serving in the 80/90's wouldn't be) I do know of some senior Officers and NCM's that do not hold him in such high regards. From what I have heard he was a "my way or the highway" type leader and some chose the highway. The dot coms were a highly contested decision and there is already talk started of getting rid of them. 

FFNA - from reading the original post you commented on - did it occur to you that maybe that was the reporters words and not Hilliers?

There is no doubt that some here have to calm down and stop with the dramatic over re-acting, FFNA is right that he has not called into question the General's time as CDS.

Did Hillier say he would not be a lobbyist?  Don't know as the first line of the article does not indicate it was a quote from him. Could be his words or the reporters words.

Did he become a lobbyist?  Not yet as far as I know.

No doubt the company is hoping to pick some nuggets out of him and maybe he will provide them with some if he feels it is for the good of those serving.

Just have to wait and see what the man does in the future. Regardless of what he does it will not change the fact - He was amongst, if not the, best CDS.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Fear said:
			
		

> FACT- Hillier said he wouldn't become a lobbyist
> FACT- Hillier now works for a lobbying firm(in some capacity)



I once said I'd never own a Japanese motorcycle, drive an imported car, or drink Mexican beer.  I've now done all three.  March me off to the pillory, constables.


----------



## OldSolduer

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I once said I'd never own a Japanese motorcycle, drive an imported car, or drink Mexican beer.  I've now done all three.  March me off to the pillory, constables.



I once said I'd never work in a jail.....now I do..... :crybaby:


----------



## tango22a

FFnA:

Bias my a$$. A man can work for a company that lobbies while doing No lobbying himself. When I joined the Army in 1965 we were still using '52 pattern Jeeps and '52 pattern 3/4ton SMPs. We daren't return them to MSS for fear that we would never see them again. All through the 60s,70s and 80s...same story or worse. Role changes:Recce...Armour....Recce...Armour. and on and on. At least with Hillier we knew what to expect.

I truly believe Hillier will only advise his new employers in his proven areas of leadership and honesty.Too bad you can't teach charisma.

I have been reading since I was 4 years old, and though I am getting a little long in the tooth, my comprehension skills are fairly high. I can still recognize an under-handed attempt at character assassination. Possibly the STFU was not justified, but I can't sit idly by when a TROLL pulls my chain.
Very Uncheerfully,
tango22a


----------



## tango22a

Kat Stevens:

28 Days pillory .... to be served on alternate Thursdays in months without an "R" and years without a "0" or "1" in it.

Cheers,

tango22a


----------



## CountDC

I said I would never be

a clerk

regular force

Navy

have a family

work in Ottawa

live in PMQ

drive a van

guess I must be super bad as I have done all of those over the years since then. The reality is that at points we all plan and say things that get changed as time passes. 

I actually hope that he does become a lobbyist as I am sure that whatever he choices to lobby for will be good for the military.


----------



## GUNS

Why are certain people nitpicking our former CDS?
He served his time in the military and now he is on his second life.
He has found employment, let the man do his job.
If and when he does anything, then offer your opinions.

You are condemning the man for what he might do, not for what he done.


----------



## Edward Campbell

I think the unseemly _pile-on_ because Fear, Fervor nor Affacetion does not worship, mindlessly, at Rick Hillier’s shrine reflects poorly on those who are unable or, at least, unwilling to accept anything that is not 99.9% in accordance with their preconceived ideas.

But, FFnA go off on the wrong foot by misunderstanding the very nature of  Gowlings. It is, first and foremost a law firm – and, as far as I know, a very good, respected and respectable one. In Canada (as in the America) many law firms are also in the advocacy business – because law is, in the main, a matter of advocacy of various sorts. The _boundary_ between much of the ‘out of court’ work of big law firms and major lobby firms is blurred. One 'job' they all do is _executive placement_.

It is not now and never was clear to me that Gen. (ret’d) Hillier is an _employee_ of _Gowlings_ – rather, I think he is a _client_: _Gowlings_ is providing services to him – like getting him a job with TD Canada Trust, he is not doing anything for them.

Thus: FFnA has misread the situation but, rather than correct his facts, many members have decided to attack the messenger, which is amateurish, at best.


----------



## Teeps74

Fear said:
			
		

> First of all, not once did I say he should be held to the same standard as a government employee.  In fact, I have said quite the opposite in a couple of posts.  I specifically said that I believe he is free to do whatever work he wants as a private citizen.  Perhaps you, Teeps74, should grow up and brush up on your reading comprehension skills.
> 
> As for facts, they have been laid out; Hillier said he wouldn't become a lobbyist - He is now employed by a lobbying firm.  These are facts.  I am not claiming to know the exact significance of them.  I am just a bit surprised to see him in a position where the good of the CF and the good of the people he represents may one day be at odds with one another.  Who does he choose then?  The people who pay him or the CF?  For a man who has made his image and reputation by representing the good of little guy(the individual soldier), he is risking that same reputation when he does, or at least appears to, represent the good of the contractors.  I don't know what will happen, but nobody knows better than the General that perception is very important.  He was a master at controling it during his tenure as CDS.



Do you have a problem with honesty? The man said he would not be a defence lobbiest. There is a big, big, big difference herer, which you are very dutifully missing. 

I have read some of your other threads, and labelling your responses as crap, would be very appropriate.


----------



## tango22a

Gentlemen & Ladies:

I humbly apologise to this Forum for my Rant. Sorry, for practising what I was taught years  ago... "Never excuse a fault"

tango22a


----------



## Blackadder1916

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> It is not now and never was clear to me that Gen. (ret’d) Hillier is an _employee_ of _Gowlings_ – rather, I think he is a _client_: _Gowlings_ is providing services to him – like getting him a job with TD Canada Trust, *he is not doing anything for them*.
> 
> Thus: FFnA has misread the situation but, rather than correct his facts, many members have decided to attack the messenger, which is amateurish, at best.



As usual, clarity in your analysis; however, he did do something for them; he provided his name. Gowlings received favourable publicity by simply providing an office and a little advice to one of the most admired Canadians in the public eye at the time.  I think Gowlings was the greater beneficiary of that deal.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is a link to a video in which Gen. (Ret’d) Hillier passes on some _wisdom_ to the business community.

There’s some good stuff for serving soldiers, too; especially important is the 95/5 idea and his admonition to *not* spend 95% of your leadership time and talent on the 5% of the people who are problems, who hold the organization back.

I think a lot of people will agree with me that during the first week in command of this that or the other organization one gets to know the _problem children_ best – that’s natural because *commanding* is more than just leading – it is also about _managing_ and managing is about identifying problems and  solving them. But, in my opinion, one must not get too focused on problems – there is a staff and a ‘system’ to help deal with them and one can, usually, use them with reasonable confidence – rather one wants to focus, quickly, on reinforcing success: supporting and developing the good people (and procedures and equipment, too). Broadly, the best way to ‘solve’ problems is to prevent them and helping good people get better is often the best way to prevent them from becoming indifferent and even turning into problems, themselves.

Anyway, the _Codfather_ offers some food for thought for working leaders and would-be leaders in business and the military.


----------



## geo

Beautiful... thanks for the link Ed.
I think that the General never dissapoints when speaking his mind.


----------



## leroi

Mods, please feel free to move this post if not properly placed.  I'm glad he's being honoured; he deserves it.

U of G to Present Outstanding Leader Award to Rick Hillier
January 09, 2009 - News Release

http://www.uoguelph.ca/news/2009/01/u_of_g_to_prese.html

Retired Canadian general and chief of defence staff Rick Hillier will receive the Lincoln Alexander Outstanding Leader Award Jan. 13 from the University of Guelph's College of Management and Economics (CME).

Hillier will be the second person to receive the honour since it was created and first awarded in 2006 to Lincoln Alexander, who served as Guelph's chancellor for an unprecedented 15 years and is now University chancellor emeritus.

Hillier is being honoured for his exceptional abilities as a communicator with soldiers, the public and the media at a time of increased activity in the Canadian Forces; for improving the image and sustainability of the Forces both domestically and internationally; and for his efforts to lobby the federal government for increased military funding.

"Rick Hillier has never been afraid to speak up for what he believes in, which is always a signature of an exceptional leader,” said CME dean Chris McKenna. "Throughout his career, he has made some of the toughest decisions imaginable and worked tirelessly to advocate for the men and women who defend our nation. He is an exceptional leader who continues to share his expertise, even after retirement from the military.” 

Hillier’s 36-year military career included serving as commander of the Stabilization Force multinational division (southwest) and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, Afghanistan. He was named chief of land staff in 2003 and two years later became Canada’s chief of defence staff, the highest-ranking position in the Canadian Forces. He retired from the Forces in 2008.

Hillier has since brought his leadership skills to the world of business and post-secondary education. He now works for the TD Bank Financial Group supporting the enhancement of client and customer relations and assisting with the bank’s leadership development and training initiatives. He also serves as chancellor of Memorial University, his alma mater.

The annual Lincoln Alexander Outstanding Leader Award is presented to someone who has embodied and demonstrated exceptional leadership in the areas of service, advocacy, collaboration, learning and scholarship. 
The 2007 recipient was Frank McKenna, former premier of New Brunswick and former Canadian ambassador to the United States. 

For media questions, contact Communications and Public Affairs: Lori Bona Hunt, 519-824-4120, Ext. 53338, l.hunt@uoguelph.ca, or Barry Gunn, Ext. 56982, bagunn@uoguelph.ca


----------



## chris_log

And U of G's nutty left wing morons weigh in...

http://www.thecannon.ca/viewpoint_details.php?id=7723


----------



## chris_log

BUMP!

Come on people, I don't get really fired up about things but the article I posted takes the cake. Read the article folks, could this be considered as libel? If so, I'd appreciate it if someone would tell me.


----------



## Kirkhill

Piper, you nailed it in your first posting.

And as some of my fellow UniGoo types seem to be saying: "Don't dignify the oxygen thief".

Don't give this guy any more hits.  Don't waste any more of Mike's bandwidth on him.


----------



## chris_log

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Piper, you nailed it in your first posting.
> 
> And as some of my fellow UniGoo types seem to be saying: "Don't dignify the oxygen thief".
> 
> Don't give this guy any more hits.  Don't waste any more of Mike's bandwidth on him.



True. There's more at play here beyond the one article, however, if you're so inclined search "In defence of General (Ret'd) Hillier's award from the University of Guelph" on facebook and join up.


----------



## geo

Student activists are.... student activists.
They spout off about things they hear but really don't understand.... Been there & done that.

Scott Gilbert has a strong pen but fails to pick up on a number of key points....
General Hillier informed all comers that the Canadian Forces was a military & not a police force.  The whole thing about giving someone due process & reading them their rights is something that it is up to the politicians and diplomats to deal with.  When all else fails, break glass & bring out your military - we will be a bull in a china shop, we will break things - by the use of controlled violence, we will get it done.... but we should never be mistaken for being diplomats... we work for a living.


----------



## leroi

U of G  stands by it's decision.  Here's a small video  from CTV of  (Ret'd) General Rick Hillier and _one lone _ activist who has deluded himself into thinking he's speaking for the majority:

http://www.southwesternontario.ctv.ca/news.php?id=3652&PHPSESSID=5d7e9a22540ae07ec538e440ccd1dcc0


----------



## Greymatters

Piper said:
			
		

> And U of G's nutty left wing morons weigh in...
> 
> http://www.thecannon.ca/viewpoint_details.php?id=7723



That link doesnt seem to work any more, or at least the content has been moved or removed - what was the title of the article?

_Edit - edited after leroi's post below, question answered, saw title on another thread... _


----------



## leroi

Greymattters,

The controversy and title of the article you are wondering about is now on the army.ca homepage: last time I looked it was about the third article from the top.

I'm guessing, out of respect for (Ret'd) General Rick Hillier someone wisely decided it would be preferable to start a new thread and keep the controversy away from this thread where many of us have shown our appreciation for this wonderful man.

Sorry, I can't even bring myself to repeat the title ... here.


----------



## leroi

(Ret'd) General Hillier receiving his award: 

http://www.southwesternontario.ctv.ca/news.php?id=3677&PHPSESSID=617880fd8a38aa7c171fdd482831ce12

Updated Tue. Jan. 13 2009 8:42 PM ET

Retired Canadian General and Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier was honoured by the University of Guelph on Tuesday.

The award had stirred up controversy among some students last week; however the ceremony went smoothly.

Hillier was presented with the Lincoln Alexander Outstanding Leader Award for his role as Canada's military front man from 2005 to 2008.


----------



## Edward Campbell

And see here for some pot stirring, by Lawrence Martin - a columnist not famous for admiring Gen. (ret'd) Hillier - about his (Hillier's) rumoured political future.


----------



## The Bread Guy

I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if he went into politics - not because he couldn't do a good job, but because I think he might be less than comfortable following a party leader he may not necessarily fully agree with.  He'd have to believe in the boss pretty big time to put up with party discipline.. Then again, if he WAS the leader....  I think that would take some time, though, if he really was interested in order to build party presence.

My two cents...


----------



## dapaterson

I don't think Martin has spoken with Gen(ret'd) Hillier, as my impression from one address to the masses that he gave was quite clear; he endorsed (implicitly) the government of the day - and they weren't Tories.

(Indeed, given that at the time there was an election campaign ongoing, his implied endorsement of a government that was "doing such good things for us" was highly inappropriate; not that such a consideration ever stopped him in the past)


----------



## The Bread Guy

The official news release:  "Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP (Gowlings) is pleased to announce that General R.J. Hillier (former Chief of the Defence Staff) has officially joined the firm in the capacity of Strategic Advisor. General Hillier will assist Gowlings with client initiatives, business development and related strategic matters ...." (An aside:  how much can he "do" given lobbying rules for former government types?  or do the rules only deal with political/Ministerial staff?

And a denial:  "The tattle that retired General Rick Hillier is being lined up to replace Stephen Harper as leader of the Conservative party travelled across Canada before the truth had time to get its boots on.  Had anyone troubled to ask the general, they would quickly have realized that any attempt to draft him is a non-starter.  "There's nothing to it. I'm not and am not going to be a politician," he told me. Colleagues say he is more inclined to do some long-term business work around leadership development and training...."


----------



## helpup

Isnt there an old Saw about the best leaders ( of a nation ) are the ones who dont want to be leaders. 

Too bad The Codfather isnt interested in Politics, I personally think we need him less for getting everything right, but more for a breath of fresh air of saying what you mean and doing what you say.


----------



## The Bread Guy

helpup said:
			
		

> Isnt there an old Saw about the best leaders ( of a nation ) are the ones who dont want to be leaders.



I've heard (and I stand to be corrected) that in Mohawk culture, although the traditional Chiefs are men, the women select them.  And who gets cut from the short list first?  Those who want to be Chief.  Could be a lesson there...


----------



## Journeyman

Sounds like another General:

"If nominated I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."
                           _General William Tecumseh Sherman, 1884_ 



Obviously, over the years, Sherman had learned the benefits of more succinct quotes. In 1871 he said, "I hereby state, and mean all that I say, that I never have been and never will be a candidate for President; that if nominated by either party, I should peremptorily decline; and even if unanimously elected I should decline to serve."


----------



## leroi

Here's an audio podcast of Rick Hillier's award ceremony.  It's a bit dry to start with but picks up about one-third of the way through.

Lincoln Alexander is in attendance and says a few words of congrats.

Link's 87-years-old and not in good health; I'm surprised he came out at all considering the weather.

Senator Pamela Wallin gives a good introduction but the real star is Hillier himself.

Remarkable speaker. He casts a spell over the audience with tales of Afghanistan; he singles out by name some of the members who served under him as he presents the audience with a slide show and weaves his magic.

Still passionate in his advocacy for the Afghan mission, CF members and their families.

University of Guelph, February 2009

http://www.uoguelph.ca/


----------

