# Canada copying americans



## hayterowensound (29 Aug 2005)

I was just at the Canadian Forces Recruiting site and I was very disappointed. The U.S.A has "Army of one." and our says basically the same thing. Very disappointed.


----------



## patrick666 (29 Aug 2005)

If there was a point to this, I missed it. 

Cheers..


----------



## The_Falcon (29 Aug 2005)

Your point is what exactly, both site offer info about their respecitve organizations, job info, benfits, info for parents etc.   I don't see a problem with this.  In fact the recruiting pages for the Brittish Army and Aussies is kinda a similar to ours and the US.


----------



## Gouki (29 Aug 2005)

hayter said:
			
		

> I was just at the Canadian Forces Recruiting site and I was very disappointed. The U.S.A has "Army of one." and our says basically the same thing. Very disappointed.



That's nice


----------



## George Wallace (29 Aug 2005)

Actually....doesn't ours say "One Army"?  'Army of one' sounds too much like the "Mcdonald's Generation" of 'Me First', instead of anything resembling TEAMWORK.  Oh well, as someone has said before, "our border is like a sheet of oneway glass - the Americans look up here and see themselves, we look down there and see" whatever we think is different....or the same as in this case....


----------



## Fry (30 Aug 2005)

while I agree that our CF website does suck, compared to the americans (recruiting wise), I don't think for a minute that any aspect is copied. Infact, the two sites look almost totally different.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Aug 2005)

Fry said:
			
		

> the two sites look almost totally different.



Almost....totally....different?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Aug 2005)

Fry said:
			
		

> Infact, the two sites look almost totally different.



Well duhh ;D Their's show people with guns and guys in cam paint and real combat equipment, like tanks, planes and ships, produced by guys like Spike Lee. Our's shows a bunch of muticultural, genderless nintendo freaks hanging around CANEX produced by a guy with an 8mm camera wearing Lee jeans.


----------



## Fry (30 Aug 2005)

BWHWHBWHWAHWBWHHWBWAHWAHBWBWHWABBWA HOLY SHYTE.


Damn man, recceguy, that was absolutely f*cking hilarious!!!! I actually laughed out loud.


----------



## GO!!! (2 Sep 2005)

Or you could consider that the US military is the most effective fighting formation the planet has ever seen - and we should emulate them in more ways than recruiting!


----------



## rpatno (2 Sep 2005)

Well it essentially the same thing, but what else could you really put in an army recruiting site. There isnt a wide variety of slogans and "An army of one" is  not hard to think up - the americans just used it first. Its not copying so much as it is using what is available. Isnt out slogan "Strong. Proud. Today's Canadian Forces." ?           
Every time i see, say, or hear that by the way, i die a little inside. Just like where i live there is a sign "Welcome to victoria, Home of canada's Pacific naval fleet." Thats sad... on the east end of things.. there is like 3 or 4 ships... the east DOSNT count.

later


----------



## Jaxson (2 Sep 2005)

rpatno said:
			
		

> Well it essentially the same thing, but what else could you really put in an army recruiting site. There isnt a wide variety of slogans and "An army of one" is   not hard to think up - the americans just used it first. Its not copying so much as it is using what is available. Isnt out slogan "Strong. Proud. Today's Canadian Forces." ?
> Every time i see, say, or hear that by the way, i die a little inside. Just like where i live there is a sign "Welcome to victoria, Home of canada's Pacific naval fleet." Thats sad... on the east end of things.. there is like 3 or 4 ships... the east DOSNT count.
> 
> later




i see our forces as proud, if i get in, i know i will be proud, regardless of the fact were not that strong, their is still pride in serving your country... and yea our naval fleet is a bit sad, but that is not what this thread is about and i wont get into it.


----------



## Fry (2 Sep 2005)

And to think, our navy was very large at the end of WW2... 

I think our website should have a huge flash intro of all kinds of cool things to catch people's eyes, and make them want to sign up. What was one of the reasons for me signing up? I got to see the rangers and the reserves fire c7's and c6's. Very cool to any civvie.


----------



## Jaxson (2 Sep 2005)

you know i honestly think, no matter how much flashy things we have, if we cant process the recruits quick enough, and provide them with proper equipment *insert what is lacking* then no matter what we do as far as catching people eyes, it will have no effect, without funding the CF will fade right into the backgrounds and not even be considered by many as anything but a last resort. 


The true problems lay in politics, they fund the CF, if we cannot gain the support of the people, we cannot gain the politics, or the funding.


----------



## GO!!! (2 Sep 2005)

Wow! I think you've figured it out - all we have to do is control these things called "politics" and we'll be saved! Brilliant!  :


----------



## Cabose (2 Sep 2005)

I think all the sites look the same in one way or another and our recruiting video was pretty good.  And don't underestimate the nave we have the most advanced ships around and will we may have 55,000 or so troops they are better trained then our friendly neighbours to the south. I do how ever agree that driving by "welcome to Victoria home of Canada's Pacific navel fleet" is pretty sad because or whole navy is about 64 ships (or maybe it was 32 cant remember  ;D ) but hey we can be proud of the fact that we have a small force that is in it way strong.  Remember bigger is not always better. and who says we copied them maybe they copied us who nows.



			
				Jaxson said:
			
		

> you know i honestly think, no matter how much flashy things we have, if we cant process the recruits quick enough, and provide them with proper equipment *insert what is lacking* then no matter what we do as far as catching people eyes, it will have no effect, without funding the CF will fade right into the backgrounds and not even be considered by many as anything but a last resort.
> 
> 
> The true problems lay in politics, they fund the CF, if we cannot gain the support of the people, we cannot gain the politics, or the funding.


You are right


----------



## GO!!! (2 Sep 2005)

Cabose said:
			
		

> I think all the sites look the same in one way or another and our recruiting video was pretty good.   And don't underestimate the nave we have the most advanced ships around and will we may have 55,000 or so troops they are better trained then our friendly neighbours to the south. I do how ever agree that driving by "welcome to Victoria home of Canada's Pacific navel fleet" is pretty sad because or whole navy is about 64 ships (or maybe it was 32 cant remember   ;D ) but hey we can be proud of the fact that we have a small force that is in it way strong.   Remember bigger is not always better. and who says we copied them maybe they copied us who nows.
> You are right



Where do you get the idea that our troops are better trained than our neighbours to the south? I would assume through some recent relevant study or years of experience....


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 Sep 2005)

Esp after Iraq and A Stan.


----------



## rpatno (3 Sep 2005)

Yea... sorry i always get carried away, usually off topic. Im bad at staying on topic. If my old SS11 notes are correct, after WWII we had something to the tune of 750,000 air force personell, 450,000 - 500,000 navy personell ( Including Merchant ships ) and land forces getting near 1 million.


----------



## Springroll (3 Sep 2005)

Cabose said:
			
		

> "welcome to Victoria home of Canada's Pacific navel fleet"



I enjoy going by that sign when ever I go home to visit. I am proud of our CF regardless of how tiny it is(its not all about size, guys ). 
These guys are well trained, most times extremely friendly and are awesome to party with!


----------



## usafchief (3 Sep 2005)

This particular thread seems to be addressing the recruiting efforts of the Canadian Forces and the American Forces. 15 of my 24 year career with the US Air Force were spent in Recruiting. The time frame -  late 60s to mid 80s. The training that AF Recruiters received revolved around salemanship ( that is, selling how the Air Force could meet YOUR needs). I recruited young men (many with Draft notices in their pocket) and women right out of high school, Pilots & Navigators (right out of college, doctors (many from Canada), dentists and veterinarians. Each of these individuals had personal reasons for joining the Air Force.  And for each need, want, or desire, The Air Force recruiter was ready with an Air Force benefit. We called it "The Mattress of Benefits" - MONEY, ADVANCEMENT, TRAINING, TRAVEL, RECREATION, EDUCATION, SATISFACTION and SUCCESS. Using Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, we discovered that one or more  of these elements satisfied our enlistee's personal need. < so Joe, you say that you want to go to college and can't afford it... Well, forunately the Air Force has a program that may be just down your alley.. Let me show you>.
The American Armed Forces are currently in a struggle attempting to meet their 2005 and 2006 recruiting goals. The negativity of Iraq and other foreign sites have turned off many American families, and patriotism and the "Mattress of benefits" are having a tough time balancing the scales. All American services, except the all volunteer Air Force are currently behind in meeting their goals. As I look back in reflection, my 24 years in the Air Force were certainly a highlight . I was fortunate. During my 6 enlistments, I benefits from each of the elements of the Mattress. From personal experience then, I can tell most young people considering a tour with the Armed Forces of either Canada or the US taht life is what you make of it and that the military services can be a great way of life.
My best!
usafchief


----------



## Cabose (4 Sep 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Where do you get the idea that our troops are better trained than our neighbours to the south? I would assume through some recent relevant study or years of experience....
> 
> Think of it logically.
> 1. our forces are smaller and therefore better to train
> 2. we have endowments that are similar to some around the world


----------



## Cabose (4 Sep 2005)

oops every thing from "think logically" down is me


----------



## 48Highlander (4 Sep 2005)

"logic" can lead you to any conclusion you desire and is never a substitute for direct observation through experience.  I'd suggest you do the logical thing and pay attention to those who know what they're talking about.


And what the hell kind of "endowmnets" are you talking about?  I hope you're not trying to compare the size of our genitals....


----------



## Cabose (4 Sep 2005)

Sorry its supposed to be environments for some reason i didn't show up when i hit spell check sorry.


----------



## paracowboy (4 Sep 2005)

Cabose said:
			
		

> I think all the sites look the same in one way or another and our recruiting video was pretty good.   And don't underestimate the nave we have the most advanced ships around and will we may have 55,000 or so troops they are better trained then our friendly neighbours to the south. I do how ever agree that driving by "welcome to Victoria home of Canada's Pacific navel fleet" is pretty sad because or whole navy is about 64 ships (or maybe it was 32 cant remember   ;D ) but hey we can be proud of the fact that we have a small force that is in it way strong.   Remember bigger is not always better. and who says we copied them maybe they copied us who nows.


So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...


----------



## GO!!! (4 Sep 2005)

I'm not wasting any more time here...

<leaves thread>


----------



## Britney Spears (4 Sep 2005)

Idiots like this are the reason why the CF is broke.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (4 Sep 2005)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...



I am the walrus.


----------



## paracowboy (4 Sep 2005)

Shut the f*&k up, Donny! *V.I.* Lenin! Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov!


----------



## Cabose (5 Sep 2005)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...



S**t ever since i came on this form everybody i have talked to has been a big jerk your supposed to be representing the CF and your not doing a good job of it just because something is new doesn't mean its bad (eg people freaked out when i said "u", "r", or "lol") if u guys are stuck that far back in the past then I truly feel sorry for you and maybe you should maybe think about how the person on the other end is going to interpret it especially when the don't under stand it ( where did you get Donny)  thats all I'm going to say and some of you will freak out again eg) "well if you don't like it then leave"  every time I hear this said to some one this comes in to my head  
:gunner: :akimbo:  :flame: the person  :fifty: and if u dont like it then suck it up cuz i dont give a S**T


----------



## Michael OLeary (5 Sep 2005)

Cabose, rein in your attitude. Before you continue on this path, you should review the following threads:

Army.ca Conduct Guidelines: MUST READ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html

FRIENDLY ADVICE TO NEW MEMBERS - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937/post-259412.html#msg259412

MSN and ICQ "short hand" -  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33247.0.html


----------



## Cabose (5 Sep 2005)

okay read my post again then if you don't get what I am getting at say so and ill try to explain further


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2005)

OK go follow the direction Michael gave you and it will explain things for you. You may want to pay attention to the Warning Procedure, how it works and combined with contraventions of the guidelines, how you will get started on it.


----------



## Michael OLeary (5 Sep 2005)

Cabose, what is at issue here is not whether I understand your last posts, it is whether or not you understand the acceptable rules of conduct for posting at Army.ca. the links above are there for your review and eduction. I can see that you spent a few minutes at each, but your performance will prove if you have hoisted aboard the salient points.

You get to choose - you can either play by the site owner's rules, by which the Moderators police activities here, and spend your time learning about the CF through Army.ca ...... or ...... you can continue to be argumentative, protesting and banging your virtual head against the conduct guidelines and wind up being marched out on the Warning System.

It's your choice.


----------



## Cabose (5 Sep 2005)

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the rules what I'm saying is that people hear are not treating me with respect and it appears to be for no reason (and don't you earn respect I know that) and I hate being shut down everytime I say something I have not posted a single thread/ post with out being shut down. That is what I am saying not talking about rules talking about the people.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2005)

Cabose said:
			
		

> what I'm saying is that people hear are not treating me with respect and it appears to be for no reason (and don't you earn respect I know that)


 Yes, respect is earned, and your not doing a great job of it here, sorry.



			
				Cabose said:
			
		

> and I hate being shut down everytime I say something I have not posted a single thread/ post with out being shut down.



Because your way out of your lane. All the statements you made, had no basis in fact and you weren't willing to qualify them. That's a standard we maintain around here.

I'll make one more suggestion to try and ease your way into our community. Sit back for a few days, and read, unhook your keyboard and just read. Read as many threads as you can, and try and fathom the flow of things. Then come back and join in on a subject you know something about, and get the feel for things.


----------



## Cabose (5 Sep 2005)

I know right now I'm not earning much respect I'm not stupid you know.  would you like to explain to me how to reference stuff you pick up and put togeather... cuz i have know idea and finally why don't u read my first ever thread and post http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32913.0.html 
did anybody say he dude the net slang is not appreciated on this forum then give me a site that proved this. and then when i corrected my mistake it got worse. 
now i will take your advice and just watch for a few days but I hope I got my point across



sorry tired and pissed


----------



## 48Highlander (5 Sep 2005)

Cabose said:
			
		

> I know right now I'm not earning much respect I'm not stupid you know.



Your writing style tells me otherwise.

If I get some kid running up to me smacking himself in the head and trying to bite his ear, I'll know that we're not going to be able to communicate very well, and I'm not going to have much interest in debating anything with him.  Same thing goes for online discussions.  If your spelling, grammar, and abbreviations are so atrocious that I have to make an effort just to try and understand you, I'm automatically going to assume there's something wrong with you.  When, in addition to that, you fail to provide any evidence and instead claim that your viewpoint is "only logical", I'll know that you should probably be wearing a safety helmet and oven mitts.  You want to take part in discussions like these?  Learn to think, and learn to express yourself properly.  At the VERY LEAST, learn to keep your mouth shut when you're told what you're doing wrong, and make an effort to correct those shortcomings instead of telling us we're "old" and "un-cool" because we don't understand your l33tsp34k.  Otherwise nobody here will have much time for you.


----------



## hayterowensound (5 Sep 2005)

I like the comment about the  oven mitts. I have never heard that. I am still laughing. ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (5 Sep 2005)

> I think all the sites look the same in one way or another and our recruiting video was pretty good. And don't underestimate the nave we have the most advanced ships around and will we may have 55,000 or so troops they are better trained then our friendly neighbours to the south. I do how ever agree that driving by "welcome to Victoria home of Canada's Pacific navel fleet" is pretty sad because or whole navy is about 64 ships (or maybe it was 32 cant remember  FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=Grin" ) but hey we can be proud of the fact that we have a small force that is in it way strong. Remember bigger is not always better. and who says we copied them maybe they copied us who nows.





> Well it essentially the same thing, but what else could you really put in an army recruiting site. There isnt a wide variety of slogans and "An army of one" is not hard to think up - the americans just used it first. Its not copying so much as it is using what is available. Isnt out slogan "Strong. Proud. Today's Canadian Forces." ?
> Every time i see, say, or hear that by the way, i die a little inside. Just like where i live there is a sign "Welcome to victoria, Home of canada's Pacific naval fleet." Thats sad... on the east end of things.. there is like 3 or 4 ships... the east DOSNT count.



Just to correct the glaring errors made above regarding _naval_ (not navel) strength. Our navy has:
 3 area air defence/command destroyer (Iroquois class)
12 multirole frigates (Halifax class)
4 patrol submarines (Victoria class-----yes I know one is undergoing repairs)
2 AORs (Preserver class)
12 MCDVs (Kingston class)
plus Tugs, diving tenders, bargers and lighters that don't factor into the capital ship scheme of things. (mostly crewed by the CFAV)
So you are looking at 33 ships.

In Esquilmalt you have :
1 area air defence/command destroyer
5 frigates
1 AOR
6 MCDVs
1 submarine (soon to be 2)
for a grand total of 11 vice 3 or 4.


----------

