# Public awareness of Canadian military drops, according to DND polling data



## daftandbarmy (3 Aug 2016)

Public awareness of Canadian military drops, according to DND polling data

General awareness of the Canadian Forces is dropping. In 2006 as the Afghan war ramped up, awareness of the Canadian military peaked at 74 per cent of those polled (they were asked if they had recently seen, read or heard anything about the Canadian Forces?).

By 2010 that had dipped slightly to 72 per cent. By 2014 it had plummeted – only 34 per cent of those polled said they had recently seen, read or heard anything about the Canadian Forces.) Numbers for this year are said to be about the same.

_Link removed because it leads to that guy._


----------



## Journeyman (4 Aug 2016)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> By 2014 it had plummeted – only 34 per cent of those polled said they had recently seen, read or heard anything about the Canadian Forces.)


Well _*clearly*_  this shows we need more Public Affairs line serials to get the word out!   I don't care how many Rifle Coys get mothballed!!  :nod:


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Aug 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Well _*clearly*_  this shows we need more Public Affairs line serials to get the word out!   I don't care how many Rifle Coys get mothballed!!  :nod:



Tsk, tsk... you KNOW the correct response would actually be more drill and ceremonial, right?


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Aug 2016)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Tsk, tsk... you KNOW the correct response would actually be more drill and ceremonial, right?




Of course, it is the eternal answer ... "The time never changes ... one, twoooooo, threeeeeee, *one*!"

All you need to do to save the military is shoot the foot and bend the knee.  :nod:


----------



## Lightguns (4 Aug 2016)

Back to normal, soon a new generation of uniformed young soldiers will be asked for directions in airports and shopping malls with the questioner thinking you are the local security guard.  Seriously, the only thing we are going to digest on the Canadian news for the next two years is MMIW.  Here's hoping Trump gets in to at least keep international news interesting.


----------



## Journeyman (4 Aug 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Seriously, the only thing we are going to digest on the Canadian news for the next two years is MMIW.


As if Canadians care about them either.  

Sadly, the only thing that may grab the sheeple's attention is if Sophie Kardashian Trudeau gets a new hair style, or something equally insignificant.


----------



## Altair (4 Aug 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> As if Canadians care about them either.
> 
> Sadly, the only thing that may grab the sheeple's attention is if Sophie Kardashian Trudeau gets a new hair style, or something equally insignificant.


How good Auston Matthews is going to be will suck up a good bit of attention come September


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Aug 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> As if Canadians care about them either.
> 
> Sadly, the only thing that may grab the sheeple's attention is if Sophie Kardashian Trudeau gets a new hair style, or something equally insignificant.




Right! I've been reading a book called "Going to War, Trends in Military Interventions," and one contributor talks about war weariness and makes the cogent observation that "People will be skeptical of military interventions not tied to clear and present security threats ..."

He's go it. Absent an existential threat to Canada or to our most deeply held core values ~ something that hasn't existed since, just for the sake of argument, 1960 ~ Canadians will care little and display even less interest in military matters, including the Canadian Forces.

At the risk of repeating myself too often: red t-shirts and yellow ribbons show that public support for the men and women in the military is a mile wide, but poll after poll after poll shows that the support is only 1/4 inch deep. And, one might suggest, that's how it should be and people like Harry Truman, Dean Acheson, Louis St Laurent and Hume Wrong built a "world order" that, circa 1959 ~ think the Nixon-Khrushchev "kitchen debate" in Moscow 

     
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





~ allowed us to develop "peace and prosperity" while the USSR kept arming and rearming itself, while it's people "ate grass." We have a lot for which to thank people like St Laurent and Diefenbaker, including a, generally, peaceful world.

Yes, Islamic extremism is a bother, but not a real, existential threat; yes Putin's opportunistic adventurism is a real threat but, as we should have learned from 1938, if we confront him he will back down; and yes, Chinese bullying of its neighbours and the USA in the Asia Pacific is a problem, but it's one which can be, and most people believe will be solved diplomatically. In fact, thankfully, Canadians don't care about the military because, again thankfully, it is not needed.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Aug 2016)

:goodpost:

I would slightly change only two things in Mr. Campbell's post:

First, I would substitute "universally and clearly recognized national interest" for his "deeply held core values". 

I think Canadians recognize that you can't go to war over values - no matter how deeply held. For instance I would think that Canadians totally reject slavery, yet know full well it goes on in some foreign lands. They certainly expect their government and Foreign Affairs department to work on it as much as they can, but I don't think they would support the CAF going to war over it. Similarly, I think a deeply held value is the right to be ruled by people elected in a fair and free election, but again, they would not expect us to go to war against dictatorships over it (though that one may have to do with another deeply held value our mothers instilled in all of us: "Don't stick your nose in other people's business!").

Second, I would say that support for the CAf is "a _kilometre_ wide but one _centimetre _deep". Sorry Mr. C: It's been 46 years since we switched: Time to get on with the times.  ;D


----------



## Haggis (4 Aug 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Second, I would say that support for the CAf is "a _kilometre_ wide but one _centimetre _deep". Sorry Mr. C: It's been 46 years since we switched: Time to get on with the times.  ;D



We are still members of the Commonwealth and, therefore, Mr Campbell`s use of Imperial measures is still highly appropriate.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Aug 2016)

The commonwealth nations all use the metric system, with a few specific exceptions to the system in England itself.

A strapping fifteen stones and four Scot like you should know that, Haggis.  [


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Aug 2016)

Yes my 2000 Range Rover is all metric as well.


----------



## MARS (4 Aug 2016)

Metric won't work...too many syllables makes it too clunky of a slogan.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Aug 2016)

However, the proportions are more accurate in metric...


----------



## GAP (4 Aug 2016)

but not word visual picture.   I don't imagine some 2.5 mm by a kilometer wide, but I can visually imagine something an inch deep and a mile wide........... :2c:


----------



## dapaterson (4 Aug 2016)

#MathGeek Ah, but one km is 62.5% of a mile, and a cm is 40% of an inch, and therefore the ratio of cm to km is 25% of an inch to a mile - making it an even better measure of support  :nod:


----------



## GAP (4 Aug 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> #MathGeek Ah, but one km is 62.5% of a mile, and a cm is 40% of an inch, and therefore the ratio of cm to km is 25% of an inch to a mile - making it an even better measure of support  :nod:



You have way to much influence by the #MathGeek crowd.....twit!!  ;D


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Aug 2016)

AFAIC it's a good thing we are less well known these days: it means the 'Highway of Heroes' isn't getting the traffic it used to.

Maybe what we need isn't recruiting as much as 'rebranding': 

The Army is launching a publicity campaign to keep its work in the public eye, following the end of combat operations in Afghanistan. 

The "Normal Day" campaign aims to explain to the public the roles the Army fulfils around the world. 

It has been launched alongside a recruitment drive, aimed at attracting regulars and reserves. Both campaigns will cost a total of £7m.

Last year the Army only recruited 20 fully-trained reserves. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30850622


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Aug 2016)

Why bother spending money on trying to recruit someone through a year + process?


----------

