# Extreamely disapointed in the Canadian Forces



## twilight_girl (9 Mar 2009)

Just a rant: Until today, I had always thought of the CF as something I could be proud of. Something worth supporting. Today that changed. I hope one day it will change back, but I fear that will not happen.

I thought that those with higher ranks would have gained some wisdom and ethics along the way. I had faith that they would do the right thing. I was completely wrong. I wonder what their wives would think if they knew the ethics of their husbands, or their children of their fathers, or their mothers of their sons.

For those serving who read this, please consider what those you care about in your life would think about your actions. Would they approve? If what you are doing is something "only someone in the military would understand", maybe there is a reason others wouldn't approve.

Thanks for listening.


----------



## Michael OLeary (9 Mar 2009)

What are you talking about?

A link or reference would be nice.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (9 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> Just a rant: Until today, I had always thought of the CF as something I could be proud of. Something worth supporting. Today that changed. I hope one day it will change back, but I fear that will not happen.
> 
> I thought that those with higher ranks would have gained some wisdom and ethics along the way. I had faith that they would do the right thing. I was completely wrong. I wonder what their wives would think if they knew the ethics of their husbands, or their children of their fathers, or their mothers of their sons.
> 
> ...



Huh?


----------



## Michael OLeary (9 Mar 2009)

Comments were removed that belittled the original poster's comments.  She at least deserves an opportunity to explain herself.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Teflon (9 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl

Please consider what those you care about in your life would think about your recent post (ie: the one without any point of reference). Would they understand it? (If yes then please have them join army.ca and have them post an explanation here for me) If what you are posting is something "only YOU would understand", maybe there ia reason others wouldn't understand (like a point???)


----------



## Lil_T (9 Mar 2009)

Wow, that was really random.  I too am interested in an explanation.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Mar 2009)

OK, until your ready to stop being cryptic and painting everyone outside your sphere as a degenerate slob, we're going to keep this locked. Try compose yourself and let people know what your problem is. If you can't perhaps this is not the place to voice your discontent. Maybe a Padre, or social worker, would be better.

Milnet.ca Staff

 I've reopened this after receiving a PM from twilight_girl. Hopefully she can articulate her concerns a bit better this time and, perhaps, come away feeling better about things.

No smart assed stuff, she seems to have a serious concern.


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

Ok, let's try this again, this is the just of what I wrote in my pm:

I ask that people think more strongly about their ethics. I think that's good advice for everyone.

I don't feel it is appropriate to go into details, given the ethics that were shown, I fear for retribution for those under them. But I felt the need to say *something*. Maybe if people read my post, tomorrow wherever they are serving they will think about it and serve with that much more ethical rightousness. I want to be proud of the CF. I was hoping that my rant would inspire some to behaving in a way more deserving of it.


----------



## Kat Stevens (10 Mar 2009)

And that cleared things up for us HOW, exactly?


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Mar 2009)

While I appreciate your passion driving you to write, I can't tell any more from your latest post than I can from the first one.

Can you even go into some (anonymous) detail about what type of "ethics" you're talking about?  Otherwise, this sounds like, "think hard about being a good person".


----------



## Michael OLeary (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl,

You are still being very vague.  I can only suspect you are talking about something like the subject in this thread.

Rest assured that the vast majority of CF members perform their duties every day with care for proper ethical and legal behaviour.  I would suggest you ask yourself this: what other employer in Canada has such a detailed internal investigative procedure and record-keeping process that would even allow the media to gain such statistics on their employees.  It is the CF's diligence in finding, investigating and tracking these incidents that have even allowed such information to come into the public eye.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Mar 2009)

..........and while were being vague, no story is ever one sided, and being ethical goes both ways.


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Can you even go into some (anonymous) detail about what type of "ethics" you're talking about?  Otherwise, this sounds like, "think hard about being a good person".



That's basically what it amounts to, but I will explain what I mean in a generalized way. There seems to be a military attitude of "look the other way." It is seen by reports of military investigations, some involving crimes as serious as rape, being stopped and buried. I find this horrid.

While I understand looking out for each other, there are certain things that cross the line. Does looking out for someone who commits a crime or doesn't follow serious orders look out for your team? I think it doesn't. I think it puts the comfort of that individual over the safety and well being of the team. I think a good soldier would turn their best friend in if they did something deserving of it, because the greater need of the team being safe and secure should overide his personal feelings. But it seems that my opinion of what makes up a good soldier differs greatly from that of the CF in this regard.

That is why I am no longer proud of the CF.


----------



## chris_log (10 Mar 2009)

Are you annoyed that people on this site have, quite rightfully, questioned the way a media report detailing sexual assaults in the CF was presented?

The CF is a microcosm of society and in our ranks will be drug users, pedophiles, rapists, thieves, racists etc etc etc.


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> It is the CF's diligence in finding, investigating and tracking these incidents that have even allowed such information to come into the public eye.



I worry it is instead the case that the media reports only the stories that make it into such reports. There are likely far more cases that never get discussed whatsoever. If a single person had acted without ethics today, I would agree that it was an isolated case. But a large number of them did. It seems to be a widespread problem.


----------



## chris_log (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> That's basically what it amounts to, but I will explain what I mean in a generalized way. There seems to be a military attitude of "look the other way." It is seen by reports of military investigations, some involving crimes as serious as rape, being stopped and buried. I find this horrid.
> 
> While I understand looking out for each other, there are certain things that cross the line. Does looking out for someone who commits a crime or doesn't follow serious orders look out for your team? I think it doesn't. I think it puts the comfort of that individual over the safety and well being of the team. I think a good soldier would turn their best friend in if they did something deserving of it, because the greater need of the team being safe and secure should overide his personal feelings. But it seems that my opinion of what makes up a good soldier differs greatly from that of the CF in this regard.
> 
> That is why I am no longer proud of the CF.



It's hardly fair to claim that 'the whole CF' covers up crimes. 

But thanks for tarnishing everyone with the same brush for what was done in a MINOR number of incidents.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Mar 2009)

Let me ask a question? Are you in the CF? If not, how much exposure have you truly had to make such a judgemental call on our lifetyle?


----------



## HollywoodHitman (10 Mar 2009)

Additionally, the chain of command takes ethics in the military very seriously. Please see http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/LF/english/5_10_1_3.asp if you'd like to look more into it. I hope this isn't the usual public knee jerk reaction at painting all of us with the same brush as those guilty of unethical acts or behaviour. 

I am still proud of all who serve despite some of the speedbumps along the way. The CF is supposed to be representative of the Canadian public, so to say you are no longer proud of the CF seems to be the same as saying you're no proud to be Canadian. 

Because of a few  bad people in an organisation?


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> Are you annoyed that people on this site have, quite rightfully, questioned the way a media report detailing sexual assaults in the CF was presented?
> 
> The CF is a microcosm of society and in our ranks will be drug users, pedophiles, rapists, thieves, racists etc etc etc.



No. I am referring to a specific incident that happened today to someone I know. I was merely discussing the more media exposed cases so as to give a general example of the attitude that bothers me.

Isn't the point of such stringent testing and training to weed out the "drug users, pedophiles, rapists, thieves, racists etc etc etc."?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> I worry it is instead the case that the media reports only the stories that make it into such reports. There are likely far more cases that never get discussed whatsoever. If a single person had acted without ethics today, I would agree that it was an isolated case. But a large number of them did. It seems to be a widespread problem.



You better have some pretty good proof of your allegations, and that doesn't mean something you read. You're tossing out some pretty harsh allegations and wiping them around with a big mop. I don't think you really have much to go on here, besides being sensationalistic.


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

I have not painted everyone with the same brush, as I keep being accused of. All I am stating is that I expected more of some of its members and I am strongly disapointed in their behaviour. I worry that their behaviour may be the prominant one in the CF and I want to encourage those of you serving to look at your actions and ensure you behave rightously.


----------



## chris_log (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> No. I am referring to a specific incident that happened today to someone I know. I was merely discussing the more media exposed cases so as to give a general example of the attitude that bothers me.
> 
> Isn't the point of such stringent testing and training to weed out the "drug users, pedophiles, rapists, thieves, racists etc etc etc."?



So, you're ranting that the entire CF is unethical and immoral because of an incident (of which we know nothing) that happened to ONE person? That's hardly fair. 

As to your point about testing and training, it's not hard to slip through. Heck, I could be sitting here browsing stormfront.org in a window beside army.ca and the CF wouldn't be the wiser. It's not hard to live a double life outside of the CF.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> I have not painted everyone with the same brush, as I keep being accused of. All I am stating is that I expected more of some of its members and I am strongly disapointed in their behaviour. I worry that their behaviour may be the prominant one in the CF and I want to encourage those of you serving to look at your actions and ensure you behave rightously.



You can be assured, that attitude IS NOT the prominent one. You can rest easy now, we appreciate your concern.


----------



## Kat Stevens (10 Mar 2009)

If you knew the first thing about the forces, you'd know that, after that Somalia fallout, if anything we became too transparent.  That's why you get to see those reports in the first place.  What do you suggest, every recruit gets shot up with sodium pentathol and given a battery of "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" questions?


----------



## George Wallace (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> I........... If a single person had acted without ethics today, I would agree that it was an isolated case. But a large number of them did. It seems to be a widespread problem.



Could I ask what you define as a "Large Number"?

How large do you think the CF is?

I hesitate to ask what percentages you think you are talking about, in the CF and in the Canadian population?


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I don't think you really have much to go on here, besides being sensationalistic.



How can you say I don't have much to go one? I know the situation, and I strongly feel that is was handled with poor ethics. Very poor ethics. This isn't something I read. This is a specific incident, the details of which I am fully aware. That is what I am going on.


----------



## bradlupa (10 Mar 2009)

If i may when was the time before that you heard something bad about the CF first hand and compare that to the corruption in the civvy police force that protects you..Now were do you see more problems


----------



## Teflon (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> I have not painted everyone with the same brush, as I keep being accused of. All I am stating is that I expected more of some of its members and I am strongly disapointed in their behaviour. I worry that their behaviour may be the prominant one in the CF and I want to encourage those of you serving to look at your actions and ensure you behave rightously.




Well you did name the topic "Extreamely disapointed in the Canadian Forces" not "strongly disappointed in certain individuals behavior"

CF would be an extremely wide brush


----------



## HollywoodHitman (10 Mar 2009)

I hate to say this....

But without specifics, you're just making noise. State your issue and present some solutions (like the CF ethics program) that aren't already in play, and some of the thoughtful people on here will have a chance to wade in and offer some opinions.

Otherwise, all I am seeing is an excuse to be 'disappointed' with almost 80,000 people that serve in the CF both Reg, Res and Civ.

Not cool.


----------



## Teflon (10 Mar 2009)

bradlupa said:
			
		

> If i may when was the time before that you heard something bad about the CF first hand and compare that to the corruption in the civvy police force that protects you..Now were do you see more problems



First hand knowledge of this corruption in the civy police force?


----------



## twilight_girl (10 Mar 2009)

I seem to have misspoken. I did not mean a large number in reference to the entire CF. I meant a large number is reference to percentage wise of all those who are involved.

And bradlupa, I don't like to see corruption or poor ethics in any who is entrusted to protect me. Pointing out problems in other areas does not lessen the problems here.

Teflon, true. But as I said, it seems that this is the prominant behaviour that the CF encourages. The actions of the members reflect on the whole. I am disapointed in the CF. I am not disapointed in all those who serve the CF. I am disapointed in some who serve the CF. I hope that clears things up.

Hollywoodhitman, I have stated my issue. Lack of ethics. I presented a solution. Think more carefully about your behaviour. That is all I wanted to achieve from my post.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> How can you say I don't have much to go one? I know the situation, and I strongly feel that is was handled with poor ethics. Very poor ethics. This isn't something I read. This is a specific incident, the details of which I am fully aware. That is what I am going on.



And you think, because of that *one *  instance we're all knuckle dragging morons? Good night to you. Casting such wide dispersions is, in itself, unethical. Please berate yourself. Good night to you. As long as I operate within the bounds of a civilized society and maintain the higher standards expected of a soldier, I will not be moralized too by someone that can't, or won't focus on the bigger picture.

I'm outta here


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> How can you say I don't have much to go one? I know the situation, and I strongly feel that is was handled with poor ethics. Very poor ethics. This isn't something I read. This is a specific incident, the details of which I am fully aware. That is what I am going on.



YOU are not FULLY aware unless you were there.......so were you?


----------



## Sub_Guy (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> How can you say I don't have much to go one? I know the situation, and I strongly feel that is was handled with poor ethics. Very poor ethics. This isn't something I read. This is a specific incident, the details of which I am fully aware. That is what I am going on.



There are always two sides to the story.  Always.  

I doubt you know all the details, and this thread is giving me a headache.


----------



## Fusaki (10 Mar 2009)

> I seem to have misspoken. I did not mean a large number in reference to the entire CF. I meant a large number is reference to percentage wise of all those who are involved.
> 
> And bradlupa, I don't like to see corruption or poor ethics in any who is entrusted to protect me. Pointing out problems in other areas does not lessen the problems here.
> 
> ...



Well, just so you know, I'm very disappointed in you too. :tsktsk:
_
But I'm not going to tell you why..._


----------



## Michael OLeary (10 Mar 2009)

twilight_girl said:
			
		

> I have stated my issue. Lack of ethics. I presented a solution. Think more carefully about your behaviour. That is all I wanted to achieve from my post.



And with that, there is little reason for this one to continue.

Locked.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------

