Author Topic: Reserve Restructure  (Read 76754 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #50 on: September 21, 2002, 16:04:00 »
Posted by Ian Edwards <iedwards@home.com> on Fri, 31 Mar 2000 19:36:37 -0800
Oh, I dunno. Some of the armoured regiments in NW Europe suffered very
huge losses too.
And the RCEME LAD wasn‘t a cushy billet either. And there were a few
occasions in Holland where I wouldn‘t want to have been an Engineer
building bridges ahead of both the infy and the armd.
An Engineer and all others needs to know how to be an infanteer
because when the **** hits the fan someday they may find it necessary to
put down their spades and pick up their rifles in self defence. The rear
echelon types are often culled-out of their safe havens and remustered
when things get desperate - can‘t say they didn‘t sign up to be combat
arms, and there isn‘t time to start from scratch to train them when the
enemy is about to appear over the nearest hill. I would have expected
all soldiers would have had that explained to them on Day 1 of QL1 in
case it didn‘t sink in back at the CFRC.
dave newcombe wrote:
>
> Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> tradesmen second.  As an ENGINEER we were told that our secondary role was
> infantry.  Does this hold true for other trades.  If so are they given
> training opportunities to practice that role.
> In the event of a shooting war, it is primarily the Infantry that suffers
> huge losses.  They are the ones we need to find replacements for.  A
> mechanic can familize themselves with a Tank engine faster than an 18 year
> can learn how to fight in it.
> CHIMO
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #51 on: September 21, 2002, 16:24:00 »
Posted by "dave newcombe" <davebo@seaside.net> on Fri, 31 Mar 2000 19:31:06 -0800
Good point, lets hear feed back on this.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bradley Sallows"
To:
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Reserve Restructure
>
>
> >Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> tradesmen second.
>
> I continue to believe it would be useful to have all soldiers pass QL2/3
> infantry prior to moving on to any other trade.  Possibly alongside that
it
> would be necessary or useful to have a rifle/training platoon in every
unit
> regardless of role.
>
> Brad Sallows
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #52 on: September 21, 2002, 16:24:00 »
Posted by "William J <andy> Anderson" <aanderson@sk.sympatico.ca> on Sat, 01 Apr 2000 05:41:43 -0600
on 31/3/00 19:06,  dave newcombe at davebo@seaside.net wrote:
> Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> tradesmen second.  As an ENGINEER we were told that our secondary role was
> infantry.  Does this hold true for other trades.  If so are they given
> training opportunities to practice that role.
I guess that is what ‘arte et marte‘ means Dave... by skill and by fighting.
Tasks for CSS are often tactical instead of ‘trade‘ specific. Rear area
security often involves partroling and brigde demolition guards. This
training is in the trade specification so it has to be taught and it is up
to unit commanders to put it into their training plan to insure the skills
are practiced. The decentralised CSS soldiers in the CS units are not much
farther than two tactical bounds away from the smell of cordite. Take it up
a notch when attached to an infantry company and it is often hard to tell
who is the grunt and who the RCEME rat is. The soldiering skills are
normally used for self preservation rather that offensive but the skills are
required nonetheless.
> In the event of a shooting war, it is primarily the Infantry that suffers
> huge losses.  They are the ones we need to find replacements for.  A
> mechanic can familize themselves with a Tank engine faster than an 18 year
> can learn how to fight in it.
> CHIMO
Today‘s tanks are a lil more complex and need more than a fitter and a
crewman. It is a very ‘kewl‘ engine but frightfully finacky, as are the
comms, the gunnery, the surveilance and the rest of the goodies that let it
roam around on the modern battlefield.
arte et marte
andy sends:
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #53 on: September 21, 2002, 16:24:00 »
Posted by Gordan Dundas <dundas@prairie.ca> on Sat, 18 Mar 2000 06:25:58 -0600
I find myself in total agreement with you both and have at least some personal
experience to back it albeit a trifle removed .On 4 feb,1945 L / Cpl. K.M.Dundas
RHLI was wounded by shell /mortar fragments while attempting to lead/herd a
former brigade clerk who had been re-assigned as an infantryman.
                                        regards Gordon K.yep his sonDundas
Michael O‘Leary wrote:
> At 05:38 PM 3/31/00 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >>Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> >tradesmen second.
> >
> >I continue to believe it would be useful to have all soldiers pass QL2/3
> >infantry prior to moving on to any other trade.  Possibly alongside that it
> >would be necessary or useful to have a rifle/training platoon in every unit
> >regardless of role.
> >
> >Brad Sallows
>
> I agree with Brad here. We‘ve scratched the surface of this concept with a
> common officers‘ Phase 2, so is it really that great a leap of logic to do
> the same for our soldiers?
>
> Off the top of my head, a quick comparison of the Rgular QL3 courses for
> combat arms inf/arty/armd goes like this:
>
> QL3 Infantry - 16 weeks - about ten weeks of what I would call basic
> soldier skills and 6 of "advanced" infantry skills platoon tactics,
> fighting patrols, etc.
>
> QL3 Artillery - 14 weeks - 7 of basic skills and 7 for gun drills
>
> QL3 Armour - 8 weeks - equal parts basic skills, driver training and comms
>
> And what about the other trades? I suspect they most often tend to the
> lower end of the spectrum. I would yhink a common Army QL3 of about ten
> weeks would ensure a good baseline set of skills for any soldier
> subsequently deployed on operations. So, do we still send tradesmen
> overseas having rarely fired a weapon except on a 600 metre classificatiuon
> range? Or are we going to depend on having enemy trained to a lower
> standard also, just for confrontations with those troops we gave less basic
> soldier skills training?
>
> mike
>
> Michael O‘Leary
>
> Visit The Regimental Rogue at:
>  http://regimentalrogue.tripod.com/index.htm
>
> Change is not to be feared. Simultaneously, change is not necessarily
> improvement. An effective leader improves through change. An ineffective
> leader seeks improvement through change. The first is sure of his
> end-state, the latter never is. - MMO
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #54 on: September 21, 2002, 16:25:00 »
Posted by "dave newcombe" <davebo@seaside.net> on Sat, 1 Apr 2000 07:01:55 -0800
Maybe the previous suggestion of everyone being QL2-3 infantry trained might
be a way to start.  Just have to convince our politicians that we need both
tradesmen and infanteers.  I get the feeling that the powers that be take
our soldiers for granted.  They figure we‘ll always have plenty of warm
bodies to fill out the regiments that go on U.N. missions.  Without knowing
that they are topping up with reserves.
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 3:41 AM
Subject: Re: Reserve Restructure
> on 31/3/00 19:06,  dave newcombe at davebo@seaside.net wrote:
>
> > Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> > tradesmen second.  As an ENGINEER we were told that our secondary role
was
> > infantry.  Does this hold true for other trades.  If so are they given
> > training opportunities to practice that role.
>
> I guess that is what ‘arte et marte‘ means Dave... by skill and by
fighting.
> Tasks for CSS are often tactical instead of ‘trade‘ specific. Rear area
> security often involves partroling and brigde demolition guards. This
> training is in the trade specification so it has to be taught and it is up
> to unit commanders to put it into their training plan to insure the skills
> are practiced. The decentralised CSS soldiers in the CS units are not much
> farther than two tactical bounds away from the smell of cordite. Take it
up
> a notch when attached to an infantry company and it is often hard to tell
> who is the grunt and who the RCEME rat is. The soldiering skills are
> normally used for self preservation rather that offensive but the skills
are
> required nonetheless.
>
> > In the event of a shooting war, it is primarily the Infantry that
suffers
> > huge losses.  They are the ones we need to find replacements for.  A
> > mechanic can familize themselves with a Tank engine faster than an 18
year
> > can learn how to fight in it.
> > CHIMO
>
> Today‘s tanks are a lil more complex and need more than a fitter and a
> crewman. It is a very ‘kewl‘ engine but frightfully finacky, as are the
> comms, the gunnery, the surveilance and the rest of the goodies that let
it
> roam around on the modern battlefield.
>
> arte et marte
>
> andy sends:
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #55 on: September 21, 2002, 16:29:00 »
Posted by "Lawson" <kplawson@csolve.net> on Sun, 2 Apr 2000 09:42:56 -0400
The regular force  Royal Canadian Army
 Other Ranks attempted and was successful in a great part, with the Infantry
Basic Training that was part of all Schools Basic and of course career
leadership course‘s were for the most part ran to an infantry standard.
 The Offices Training prior to CFOCS was Basically an Infantry Course
exceptions were the specialty required of Armored and Artillery Officer
Cadets plus the Service Support specialty training allowed those individuals
to take only the last portions of Arms Training during a specific phase.
  I took part in CAS OF Cadet training in 1967  68 at Borden and training
areas. Still trying to figure out how with my static posting to Borden, I
was constantly in the field with various schools as either a RCASC Support
NCO, Training Cadre or Warm Body  Gofer. Qualified on 106 during this period
a lot of the decisions taken for the Army prior to Tri Service were still
being implemented Carl Gustoph cold weather trails, storage of ammunition
under same conditions laser sighting trails,etc.
  The concept that the basic structure of the Army came from the Infantry is
not new, most good military organizations have practiced this idea to one
extent or another. In my experience such armies are readily identifiable and
very easy to work with.
  In the Canadian past following WW II and Korea a ready made cadre of
infantry experienced Officers and NCOs existed, they not only set the
Infantry standard they firmly believed the concept, another tri service more
man power to the Administration Base side of the house and less for the
Brigades. of course destroyed it.
   Remember frequently to day a field experienced individual can be caution
as being too military  field oriented and once again I am quite willing to
provided names and locations of events.
  NIL SINE LABORE
  K  Lawson
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael O‘Leary
To:
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: Reserve Restructure
> At 05:38 PM 3/31/00 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >>Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first and
> >tradesmen second.
> >
> >I continue to believe it would be useful to have all soldiers pass QL2/3
> >infantry prior to moving on to any other trade.  Possibly alongside that
it
> >would be necessary or useful to have a rifle/training platoon in every
unit
> >regardless of role.
> >
> >Brad Sallows
>
> I agree with Brad here. We‘ve scratched the surface of this concept with a
> common officers‘ Phase 2, so is it really that great a leap of logic to do
> the same for our soldiers?
>
> Off the top of my head, a quick comparison of the Rgular QL3 courses for
> combat arms inf/arty/armd goes like this:
>
> QL3 Infantry - 16 weeks - about ten weeks of what I would call basic
> soldier skills and 6 of "advanced" infantry skills platoon tactics,
> fighting patrols, etc.
>
> QL3 Artillery - 14 weeks - 7 of basic skills and 7 for gun drills
>
> QL3 Armour - 8 weeks - equal parts basic skills, driver training and comms
>
> And what about the other trades? I suspect they most often tend to the
> lower end of the spectrum. I would yhink a common Army QL3 of about ten
> weeks would ensure a good baseline set of skills for any soldier
> subsequently deployed on operations. So, do we still send tradesmen
> overseas having rarely fired a weapon except on a 600 metre
classificatiuon
> range? Or are we going to depend on having enemy trained to a lower
> standard also, just for confrontations with those troops we gave less
basic
> soldier skills training?
>
>
> mike
>
>
> Michael O‘Leary
>
> Visit The Regimental Rogue at:
>  http://regimentalrogue.tripod.com/index.htm
>
> Change is not to be feared. Simultaneously, change is not necessarily
> improvement. An effective leader improves through change. An ineffective
> leader seeks improvement through change. The first is sure of his
> end-state, the latter never is. - MMO
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructure
« Reply #56 on: September 21, 2002, 16:29:00 »
Posted by "Elizabeth Fredette" <a4688@kelcom.igs.net> on Sun, 2 Apr 2000 22:58:28 -0000
I concur 100 .
U Should see FUBAR at 31 CBG
Recce Sqn
As For all troops completing Ql2/3 Inf:
I concur as well.  Have seen to many Cmbt Arms and REMFs who have NO
soldiering skills.  Regretfully this also occurs in Infantry due to the
B/Schools having to turn out troops to replace guys who retire from Reg
Force after their umteenth million tour with no rest.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawson"
To:
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2000 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Reserve Restructure
> The regular force  Royal Canadian Army
>  Other Ranks attempted and was successful in a great part, with the
Infantry
> Basic Training that was part of all Schools Basic and of course career
> leadership course‘s were for the most part ran to an infantry standard.
>  The Offices Training prior to CFOCS was Basically an Infantry Course
> exceptions were the specialty required of Armored and Artillery Officer
> Cadets plus the Service Support specialty training allowed those
individuals
> to take only the last portions of Arms Training during a specific phase.
>   I took part in CAS OF Cadet training in 1967  68 at Borden and training
> areas. Still trying to figure out how with my static posting to Borden, I
> was constantly in the field with various schools as either a RCASC Support
> NCO, Training Cadre or Warm Body  Gofer. Qualified on 106 during this
period
> a lot of the decisions taken for the Army prior to Tri Service were still
> being implemented Carl Gustoph cold weather trails, storage of ammunition
> under same conditions laser sighting trails,etc.
>   The concept that the basic structure of the Army came from the Infantry
is
> not new, most good military organizations have practiced this idea to one
> extent or another. In my experience such armies are readily identifiable
and
> very easy to work with.
>   In the Canadian past following WW II and Korea a ready made cadre of
> infantry experienced Officers and NCOs existed, they not only set the
> Infantry standard they firmly believed the concept, another tri service
more
> man power to the Administration Base side of the house and less for the
> Brigades. of course destroyed it.
>    Remember frequently to day a field experienced individual can be
caution
> as being too military  field oriented and once again I am quite willing
to
> provided names and locations of events.
>   NIL SINE LABORE
>   K  Lawson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Michael O‘Leary
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 10:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Reserve Restructure
>
>
> > At 05:38 PM 3/31/00 -0800, you wrote:
> > >
> > >>Maybe we could take seriously the addage that we are soldiers first
and
> > >tradesmen second.
> > >
> > >I continue to believe it would be useful to have all soldiers pass
QL2/3
> > >infantry prior to moving on to any other trade.  Possibly alongside
that
> it
> > >would be necessary or useful to have a rifle/training platoon in every
> unit
> > >regardless of role.
> > >
> > >Brad Sallows
> >
> > I agree with Brad here. We‘ve scratched the surface of this concept with
a
> > common officers‘ Phase 2, so is it really that great a leap of logic to
do
> > the same for our soldiers?
> >
> > Off the top of my head, a quick comparison of the Rgular QL3 courses for
> > combat arms inf/arty/armd goes like this:
> >
> > QL3 Infantry - 16 weeks - about ten weeks of what I would call basic
> > soldier skills and 6 of "advanced" infantry skills platoon tactics,
> > fighting patrols, etc.
> >
> > QL3 Artillery - 14 weeks - 7 of basic skills and 7 for gun drills
> >
> > QL3 Armour - 8 weeks - equal parts basic skills, driver training and
comms
> >
> > And what about the other trades? I suspect they most often tend to the
> > lower end of the spectrum. I would yhink a common Army QL3 of about ten
> > weeks would ensure a good baseline set of skills for any soldier
> > subsequently deployed on operations. So, do we still send tradesmen
> > overseas having rarely fired a weapon except on a 600 metre
> classificatiuon
> > range? Or are we going to depend on having enemy trained to a lower
> > standard also, just for confrontations with those troops we gave less
> basic
> > soldier skills training?
> >
> >
> > mike
> >
> >
> > Michael O‘Leary
> >
> > Visit The Regimental Rogue at:
> >  http://regimentalrogue.tripod.com/index.htm
> >
> > Change is not to be feared. Simultaneously, change is not necessarily
> > improvement. An effective leader improves through change. An ineffective
> > leader seeks improvement through change. The first is sure of his
> > end-state, the latter never is. - MMO
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> > to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> > message body.
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #57 on: September 21, 2002, 18:53:00 »
Posted by "dave" <davidwillard@home.com> on Thu, 25 May 2000 23:33:19 -0400
Here is something many may find refreshing albiet sad, a subject about the
army.
Just read an insightful article by Strome Galloway in the May edition of
esprit de corps magazine.
The article talks about the "viablity" aspects, or rather the non-viabilty
of certain regiments earmarked for disbandment.  One of the reasons given
for these units becoming non-viable was, "their current performance, mainly
through lack of numbers, does not merit their continued existence, being
judged unfit for battle." I would argue that there is probably not one
single unit in the Canadian Forces today that is properly manned, equipped
and supported non-supported by government that is fit for battle, Army,
Navy or Air Force.
The article also quotes one militia general who said, "Soldiers don‘t join
the reserves, they join a regiment." It goes on that, "part time soldiering
no longer attracts young men as it did before the two world wars, whereas
veterans have long since passed the age when they can continue to serve." I
surely don‘t buy that statement. In my short time on this planet I have seen
some of these regiments flourish when they were ably equipped and properly
funded. When the funding allows training and other activities that reserve
soldiering should be providing it does attract young men. Without the
support of government society, of course all aspects of part time
soldiering shrinks or becomes next to non existant, apathy sets in and of
course the viability of the whole thing lessens. This has everything to do
with government neglect and the shirking of responsibilty of providing a
credible national defence for our country. Not only does our government
Liberals not fulfill it‘s overall responsibity to maintain a credible
military, it doesn‘t even come close to providing anywhere near the required
support to provide for peacekeeping, supposedly a safer, less costly
secondary duty. This Liberal group of MEGA-PRETENDERS are a total
embarrasment not only to the military but the population at large. The only
thing worse than this current state of inept, mindless insanity is the
repeated re-election of these nincompoops by what has to be an apathetic,
fence sitting and uncaring population of Canadians.
The regiments earmarked for disbandment are a good chunk of our heritage
consisting of gallant men who bled and died to make this country what it is.
I won‘t go into the thoughts that rocketed through my mind as I watched the
top dog Chretien stand with his head bowed in front of the coffin of "The
Unknown Soldier." There are pretenders, then there are are pretenders. Two
faced contradictory vote getting stunt.
"Lest We Forget"
The Canadian Scottish Regiment
The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada
The Royal Winnipeg Rifles
Queen‘s Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada
The Princess of Wales Own Regiment
The Irish Regiment of Canada
The Algonquin Regiment
The Royal Regina Regiment
The Royal Newfoundland Regiment
Anyone for a coup? Joke
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #58 on: September 21, 2002, 18:53:00 »
Posted by Gunner <randr1@home.com> on Thu, 25 May 2000 22:13:55 -0600
The reserve viability study that is discussed in esprit de corps is
taken out of context hard to imagine Scott Taylor would ever do that.
If you are a reservist and don‘t believe there have to be changes in the
reserve system then you are a fool.  There are too many units, too
little resources and too few reasons for talented soldiers to stay in
the Reserves quite honestly I think it is boring/frustrating for most
people now - when was the last time you had alot of fun doing
interesting and stimulating training on exercise?.
Getting back to the Reserve viability study ... it is simply one
criteria in the restructuring of the Reserves.  The likelyhood of some
of the Regiments you quote being disbanded is highly unlikely and it
should be noted that just because a unit is deemed "viable" does not
determine automatically "save" that unit...viable and non-viable are
simply a snapshot in time of a reserve unit.  
Compounding the problem of the viability study is that fact that all
four areas used different criteria.  Let‘s say the Royal Montreal
Regiment is a viable unit is it going to be moved to Calgary because
the Calgary Highrs is non-viable...no of course not.  If the Royal
Winnipeg Rifles is unviable as an infantry unit, what makes you think
they will be viable as a mess tin repair outfit or a NBCD unit?
I have a certain amount of trust in the Army, our Honorary Colonels and
other stakeholders COs, RSMs, etc and hopefully they will come to an
agreement and a workable solution that can be implemented.  Hopefully it
will address some of the structural weaknesses in the Reserve system.
Anytime a unit regular or reserve is relegated to the supplementary
order of battle is a sad day.  However, recognition must be given to the
fact that the reserves have not been well taken care of by our
government or by the Regular Force.  They are sorely neglected and need
solution fast money will not solve all their problmes.  I think
compounding the problem is changing demographics within Canada, changing
youth attitudes and a largely apathetic society toward the military.
Either we have a political will to pump more money into the Reserves or
we restructure them to make them relevant, or perhaps a combination of
both.
I‘d love to hear what others think.    
dave wrote:
>
> Here is something many may find refreshing albiet sad, a subject about the
> army.
>
> Just read an insightful article by Strome Galloway in the May edition of
> esprit de corps magazine.
>
> The article talks about the "viablity" aspects, or rather the non-viabilty
> of certain regiments earmarked for disbandment.  One of the reasons given
> for these units becoming non-viable was, "their current performance, mainly
> through lack of numbers, does not merit their continued existence, being
> judged unfit for battle." I would argue that there is probably not one
> single unit in the Canadian Forces today that is properly manned, equipped
> and supported non-supported by government that is fit for battle, Army,
> Navy or Air Force.
>
> The article also quotes one militia general who said, "Soldiers don‘t join
> the reserves, they join a regiment." It goes on that, "part time soldiering
> no longer attracts young men as it did before the two world wars, whereas
> veterans have long since passed the age when they can continue to serve." I
> surely don‘t buy that statement. In my short time on this planet I have seen
> some of these regiments flourish when they were ably equipped and properly
> funded. When the funding allows training and other activities that reserve
> soldiering should be providing it does attract young men. Without the
> support of government society, of course all aspects of part time
> soldiering shrinks or becomes next to non existant, apathy sets in and of
> course the viability of the whole thing lessens. This has everything to do
> with government neglect and the shirking of responsibilty of providing a
> credible national defence for our country. Not only does our government
> Liberals not fulfill it‘s overall responsibity to maintain a credible
> military, it doesn‘t even come close to providing anywhere near the required
> support to provide for peacekeeping, supposedly a safer, less costly
> secondary duty. This Liberal group of MEGA-PRETENDERS are a total
> embarrasment not only to the military but the population at large. The only
> thing worse than this current state of inept, mindless insanity is the
> repeated re-election of these nincompoops by what has to be an apathetic,
> fence sitting and uncaring population of Canadians.
>
> The regiments earmarked for disbandment are a good chunk of our heritage
> consisting of gallant men who bled and died to make this country what it is.
> I won‘t go into the thoughts that rocketed through my mind as I watched the
> top dog Chretien stand with his head bowed in front of the coffin of "The
> Unknown Soldier." There are pretenders, then there are are pretenders. Two
> faced contradictory vote getting stunt.
>
> "Lest We Forget"
>
> The Canadian Scottish Regiment
>
> The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada
>
> The Royal Winnipeg Rifles
>
> Queen‘s Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada
>
> The Princess of Wales Own Regiment
>
> The Irish Regiment of Canada
>
> The Algonquin Regiment
>
> The Royal Regina Regiment
>
> The Royal Newfoundland Regiment
>
> Anyone for a coup? Joke
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #59 on: September 21, 2002, 18:54:00 »
Posted by "dave" <dave.newcombe@home.com> on Thu, 25 May 2000 22:39:01 -0700
It disgusts me to think that the fate of any regiment is in the hands of
people who have never served.  I think this list is a good place to start a
grass roots movement, to fully back the adequate funding of our reserves, as
well as the regs.
Your right people haven‘t lost interest in the militia, the feds don‘t see
enough photo op‘s thats all.
Recruiting is full time endeavor, do they still visit schools, and explain
the reserves to students?
Why don‘t we ask them to prove the units are not viable?
there must be thousands of former reservists out there who will fight this,
can everyone contact some?
Is there any more lists that we can cooperate with.
----- Original Message -----
From: dave
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 8:33 PM
Subject: Reserve Restructuring
> Here is something many may find refreshing albiet sad, a subject about the
> army.
>
> Just read an insightful article by Strome Galloway in the May edition of
> esprit de corps magazine.
>
> The article talks about the "viablity" aspects, or rather the non-viabilty
> of certain regiments earmarked for disbandment.  One of the reasons given
> for these units becoming non-viable was, "their current performance,
mainly
> through lack of numbers, does not merit their continued existence, being
> judged unfit for battle." I would argue that there is probably not one
> single unit in the Canadian Forces today that is properly manned, equipped
> and supported non-supported by government that is fit for battle, Army,
> Navy or Air Force.
>
> The article also quotes one militia general who said, "Soldiers don‘t join
> the reserves, they join a regiment." It goes on that, "part time
soldiering
> no longer attracts young men as it did before the two world wars, whereas
> veterans have long since passed the age when they can continue to serve."
I
> surely don‘t buy that statement. In my short time on this planet I have
seen
> some of these regiments flourish when they were ably equipped and properly
> funded. When the funding allows training and other activities that reserve
> soldiering should be providing it does attract young men. Without the
> support of government society, of course all aspects of part time
> soldiering shrinks or becomes next to non existant, apathy sets in and of
> course the viability of the whole thing lessens. This has everything to do
> with government neglect and the shirking of responsibilty of providing a
> credible national defence for our country. Not only does our government
> Liberals not fulfill it‘s overall responsibity to maintain a credible
> military, it doesn‘t even come close to providing anywhere near the
required
> support to provide for peacekeeping, supposedly a safer, less costly
> secondary duty. This Liberal group of MEGA-PRETENDERS are a total
> embarrasment not only to the military but the population at large. The
only
> thing worse than this current state of inept, mindless insanity is the
> repeated re-election of these nincompoops by what has to be an apathetic,
> fence sitting and uncaring population of Canadians.
>
> The regiments earmarked for disbandment are a good chunk of our heritage
> consisting of gallant men who bled and died to make this country what it
is.
> I won‘t go into the thoughts that rocketed through my mind as I watched
the
> top dog Chretien stand with his head bowed in front of the coffin of
"The
> Unknown Soldier." There are pretenders, then there are are pretenders. Two
> faced contradictory vote getting stunt.
>
> "Lest We Forget"
>
> The Canadian Scottish Regiment
>
> The Seaforth Highlanders of Canada
>
> The Royal Winnipeg Rifles
>
> Queen‘s Own Cameron Highlanders of Canada
>
> The Princess of Wales Own Regiment
>
> The Irish Regiment of Canada
>
> The Algonquin Regiment
>
> The Royal Regina Regiment
>
> The Royal Newfoundland Regiment
>
>
> Anyone for a coup? Joke
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
RE: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #60 on: September 21, 2002, 18:55:00 »
Posted by Derrick Forsythe <Derrick.Forsythe@gov.ab.ca> on Fri, 26 May 2000 09:24:59 -0600
There are too many units, too
little resources and too few reasons for talented soldiers to stay
in
the Reserves quite honestly I think it is boring/frustrating for
most
people now - when was the last time you had alot of fun doing
interesting and stimulating training on exercise?.
This goes to the heart of my ongoing argument:
too many units?
Maybe, but remember those units give the CF, as a whole, a larger
footprint in communities across the country.  I mean outside of Steele
Barracks and maybe Gagetown most Reg Bases are in isolated locations and as
such contact with civilians is limited. It‘s difficult to put a price tag on
the important role these units play in raising the overall profile of the
organization - I am willing to argue toe-to-toe with anyone Reservists
generate more good will, pound for pound, than any/all of the Regular units.
too little resources?
We‘ve been squeezed by the same budgetary pressures as the rest of
government - but that is only half of the equation. Ultimately full-timers
set our budgets and when the fiscal noose tightens they look after their own
first so there‘s less of the reduced money trickling down to units.
too few reasons...?
This is the flipside of the para immediately above.  In addition to
having budgets reduced we are being required to conduct increased levels of
what I call "remedial training" under the warrior program. It‘s not rocket
science to see that as the two opposing forces approach achieve?
cross-over there is going to be "leadership challenges" to keep soldiers
motivated.
fun and interesting training?
Given the pressures resident in the above two paras it can be
difficult to build exciting training plans.  Not impossible however, it
takes a little creativity and a willingness from higher to allow units to
"think outside the box." It also requires us to maximize value for dollars
invested in training.  That means outside of winter indoc we should be
training "in the green" which means Sep-early Nov and early Apr-May time
frames.
Brigades too must work to ensure concentrations maximize training
value including integration with Regular Force timetables - augmentation is
our primary role after all.
On a larger scale there has to be a re-focus on training philosophy.
For instance QL2 should revert to training every soldier to the warrior
standards - yes it takes longer and yes it costs more up front, but it will
lessen the amount of remedial training required at the unit level and will
allow greater focus on trade training during QL3.  In fact many units could,
with proper support, conduct their own QL3 courses and work early on at
building the values inherent within a "Regimental Family".  That would allow
Jr. and Sr. NCOs and Jr Officers to develop their leadership skills and
provide challenges on a range of levels.
As for the nature of unit training exercises, perhaps more should be
placed on integrating training - for instance we are starting to send FOOs
out with tankers and grunts lending an added level of realism on both sides.
It would be valuable as well to integrate with the Svc Bns to
exercise facets of our business like DPs and operating Fd kitchens.
Those are a few of my incoherent ramblings - questions, comments?
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #61 on: September 21, 2002, 18:55:00 »
Posted by "Bradley Sallows" <Bradley_Sallows@ismbc.com> on Fri, 26 May 2000 12:25:55 -0700
The media continue to bat 1.000 in their inability to correctly interpret
anything military.
>Just read an insightful article by Strome Galloway in the May edition of esprit
de corps magazine.
"inciteful" might be more appropriate, although I suppose I should first read
the article.  To my knowledge there is not, as yet, any correlation between
"non-viable" and "disbandment".  Once again, the "assume" principle seems to be
demonstrated.
The LFRR evaluations employed some unusual metrics.  Low numbers on a unit
nominal roll were not the only source of a low score.  I thought the same
methodology was applied across Canada in the final assessment, but perhaps not.
Anyway, in LFWA one of the magic numbers was a count of "effective soldiers".
To be "effective", a soldier had to be trade-qualified QL2 alone was
insufficient, pass Warrior, and parade a minimum of 70 if memory serves of
scheduled unit parades and training activities.  Again if memory serves,
although the total score of 20 was divided into 4 major sub-scores of 5 points
each, Warrior pass rates had a direct bearing on no less than 11 points and
some spare change of the total score owing to the methodology.
Thus, a large unit with a predominance of QL2-level soldiers, low Warrior pass
rates, or a large number of soldiers each attending only 2/3 of all activities,
could score low - and it in all likelihood might reflect a temporary state of
affairs hence the term, "snapshot".  If one doesn‘t have access to the final
LFRR evaluation report submitted by a particular unit, then one doesn‘t know
jack s*** about why that unit scored "viable" or "non-viable" and should refrain
from commenting on the probable future of that unit.
>The article also quotes one militia general who said, "Soldiers don‘t join the
reserves, they join a regiment."
This is not an accurate representation of all reservists.  I first enrolled at a
"regiment", but was joining "the reserves for a summer job" - the "regimental
identity" was irrelevant.  I transferred to a different unit when I returned to
university.  Any reservist in a one-unit town doesn‘t exactly have a choice to
"join a regiment".  Where choice exists, I suspect soldiers join to be "a
gunner", "a crewman", "a rifleman" rather than to be a "1st Battalion
somethingorother", or join simply because they already have friends in the unit.
Clearly the service support soldiers are not joining "a regiment".  Most
recruits are a blank slate when it comes to their "regiment" until they have
been indoctrinated.  Is this an Ontario-centric thing, where regiments are thick
on the ground?
Brad Sallows
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #62 on: September 21, 2002, 18:55:00 »
Posted by "Bradley Sallows" <Bradley_Sallows@ismbc.com> on Fri, 26 May 2000 12:31:03 -0700
>However, recognition must be given to the fact that the reserves have not been
well taken care of by our government or by the Regular Force.  They are sorely
neglected and need solution fast money will not solve all their problmes.
My belief is that if the Regular Force truly believes it needs the reserves as a
source of individual augmentees and direct component transfers, then the single
most beneficial thing it could do would be to commit as a highest priority to
staffing summer courses to make up shortfalls of available reserve instructors
who, in some cases, are on an operational rotation or have transferred to the
Regulars.
Brad Sallows
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
RE: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #63 on: September 21, 2002, 18:56:00 »
Posted by "Dave Kenney" <cao@lf.ab.ca> on Fri, 26 May 2000 17:04:28 -0600
Brad Sallows wrote:
>Is this an Ontario-centric thing, where regiments are thick on the ground?
No.  I joined the Ontario Regiment in 1968 because
1 I wantd a job to earn some money
2 They were recruiting
3 They were the only unit within walking distance of home.
4 It wouldn‘t have mattered if they were Artillery, Armoured, Infantry or
Postal
5 Pride in unit came later
6 Dedication came later
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Reserve Restructuring
« Reply #64 on: September 21, 2002, 18:57:00 »
Posted by Gunner <randr1@home.com> on Fri, 26 May 2000 17:41:46 -0600
Good comments Dave Kenney. I think your comments of 1968 are valid today
as they were then.  I agree with you that a minority of soldiers join a
certain Regt because of the tradition of that unit.  A soldier may join
because a member of their family had joined...but I think they are few
and far between.  
When I joined the artillery it was it was the only unit in my hometown
and within walking distance.  I stayed in though when I took pride in
my unit and dedicated to it.  When I leave full time service, I will
join the Reserves again, because I enjoy doing it.
I think we put to much emphasis on the Regt system and not enough
emphasis on the Army.  If the Regt system is so important...why was the
Soviet Union no Regt system the main winner of WWII?  What about the
runner up of the US no Regt system?  Loyalty to your country above all
else, followed by the CF, the army, and your unit not the reverse.
Dave Kenney wrote:
>
> Brad Sallows wrote:
> >Is this an Ontario-centric thing, where regiments are thick on the ground?
>
> No.  I joined the Ontario Regiment in 1968 because
> 1 I wantd a job to earn some money
> 2 They were recruiting
> 3 They were the only unit within walking distance of home.
> 4 It wouldn‘t have mattered if they were Artillery, Armoured, Infantry or
> Postal
> 5 Pride in unit came later
> 6 Dedication came later
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Restructuring the Militia
« Reply #65 on: September 21, 2002, 22:13:00 »
Posted by freegroup@acbm.qc.ca HLCOL Dennis Dwyer on Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:05:26 -0400
The following comments were submitted by
HLCOL Dennis Dwyer freegroup@acbm.qc.ca on
Wednesday, August 23, 2000 at 11:05:25
to the Canadian Army Mailing List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To All,
I‘m initerested in opinions, articles, letters, books, etc that will help me to better understand how we in Canada and people in other countries can improve our Militia, get a better bang for our buck for our tazpayers yet imrove morale within our units and brigade headquarters.
Dennis Dwyer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information, please see The Canadian Army Home Page at:
 http://army.cipherlogic.on.ca
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Restructuring the Militia
« Reply #66 on: September 21, 2002, 22:14:00 »
Posted by Rhett <lawson@cclacbrome.qc.ca> on Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:40:14 -0400
Hello Dennis
As you know the system is in poor repair and we are all hoping that somehow LGEN Jefferies will be able to pull the rabbit out of the hat.
Be glad to talk to some time about this
Rhett Lawson
HLCOL Dennis Dwyer wrote:
> The following comments were submitted by
> HLCOL Dennis Dwyer freegroup@acbm.qc.ca on
> Wednesday, August 23, 2000 at 11:05:25
> to the Canadian Army Mailing List.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To All,
>
> I‘m initerested in opinions, articles, letters, books, etc that will help me to better understand how we in Canada and people in other countries can improve our Militia, get a better bang for our buck for our tazpayers yet imrove morale within our units and brigade headquarters.
>
> Dennis Dwyer
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> For more information, please see The Canadian Army Home Page at:
>
>  http://army.cipherlogic.on.ca
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Restructuring the Militia
« Reply #67 on: September 21, 2002, 22:20:00 »
Posted by Gunner <randr1@home.com> on Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:44:09 -0600
To all:
I‘ve been reading alot of the good comments that are being made by all
the members of this newsgroup.  Whether the correct amount of class A
days is 35 or 36, I think it is difficult to narrow it down to merely
this one area that is effecting reserve effectiveness.  Although it has
been several years seven at last count since I was a member of a
Reserve Unit, I have dealt with reserve issue at the Area HQ and
interacted with many reserve officers and NCMs on trg, etc.
There is no magic solution to the problems plaguing the reserves as they
are widespread and far reaching problems.  The limited number of full
time Res/Reg F assigned to each unit, limited trg ammo, limited trg
eqpt, limited trg realism at unit level, limited Cl A mandays, limited
opportunities for Reg F crses, limited call outs to Reg F units,
benefits and pay that will help keep trained and experienced people in,
lack of a percieved role besides a reg f manning pool that takes the
best and most motivated, lack of recognition by the Reg F much better
now then it was, etc, etc.  
I‘m a firm believer in the Govt, MND and the CF deciding what the Res F
must do and what it should be capable of becoming and allocating
resources that are adequate plus vice the current scrappings of the
bottom of the defence budget that the militia currently is allocated.
Will this mean the closing of units?  Sure it will and this is not a bad
thing. I don‘t advocate a militia of postal and NBCD units, however they
have their place and reservists could fill that role.
The militia has always been a very poor second cousin compared with both
Reg F understandably and especially compared with our cousins in air,
sea, and comm reserve.  Why is this?  Why has it been allowed to
happen?  I really haven‘t seen anything from any of the studies
commissioned that really address the heart of the matter.  The reserves
are on life support and it will take an intensive shock therapy to get
them into the 21st century.  
My two cents....
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Restructuring the Militia
« Reply #68 on: September 21, 2002, 22:20:00 »
Posted by "The MacFarlanes‘" <desrtrat@amug.org> on Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:14:22 -0700
One problem that I identified personally while in my unit - with no
mandatory work release from employers, and very little PR, even, generally
the people that we were sending on courses, callouts, peacekeeping duties,
whatever, were people who didn‘t have long term, stable careers. Chances
are, if you were a leader as a soldier, you were a leader at your civilian
job. Not knowing much about the Militia, and having no legislation to back
you up, your employer could ill afford to let you go on course for 6 weeks.
Thus, again, generally the people getting qualifications and eventual
promotion were not the best people in your unit. They were the people who
couldn‘t/wouldn‘t/didn‘t want to have a regular, full time career.
Obviously, there were some exceptions to this, especially as you got higher
up in rank. No severance packagethen, no pension, relatively low pay,
morale suffering - those of us who stayed in the Unit a long time were there
because we were loyal, and enjoyed it. Incidentally, I lived in a border
town, and there was a National Guard unit 15 minutes away. They were
artillery like us, so we compared notes a lot. We seemed to be much better
trained, but utilized much less, and had, of course, generally crappy
equipment, compared to theirs. They used guard personnel to assist US
Customs in drug interdiction work, the Border Patrols‘ mechanics were NG,
they were mobilized for the Gulf.. you name it. I tried to organize an "Aide
to the Civil Power" exercise once assist/observe local mounties or town
police at a DUI checkpoint, and it got blasted by higher ups. Too much
liability, not PC, etc. For the most part, people in our town were
supportive of our local unit - well, those who knew anything about it. The
lack of knowledge regarding the Armed Forces, and Militia in particular, is
making it even easier to shut down units, strip away traditions, etc. What
our Government has done to our Army, Navy and Air Force, regular and
reserve, has hurt me more than any other thing as a Canadian. If the average
citizen understood some of the traditions/history of these units, knew the
esteem in which the average Canadian soldier is held in the rest of the
world, and understood the dedication of our troops they want to volunteer,
and are not allowed??!!!, I am sure they would be ashamed too. I had some
other points when I started out, but I digressed, rambled, and forgot them.
I will try to remember them for next time.
Ubique
M J MacFarlane
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gunner"
To:
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Restructuring the Militia
> To all:
>
> I‘ve been reading alot of the good comments that are being made by all
> the members of this newsgroup.  Whether the correct amount of class A
> days is 35 or 36, I think it is difficult to narrow it down to merely
> this one area that is effecting reserve effectiveness.  Although it has
> been several years seven at last count since I was a member of a
> Reserve Unit, I have dealt with reserve issue at the Area HQ and
> interacted with many reserve officers and NCMs on trg, etc.
>
> There is no magic solution to the problems plaguing the reserves as they
> are widespread and far reaching problems.  The limited number of full
> time Res/Reg F assigned to each unit, limited trg ammo, limited trg
> eqpt, limited trg realism at unit level, limited Cl A mandays, limited
> opportunities for Reg F crses, limited call outs to Reg F units,
> benefits and pay that will help keep trained and experienced people in,
> lack of a percieved role besides a reg f manning pool that takes the
> best and most motivated, lack of recognition by the Reg F much better
> now then it was, etc, etc.
>
> I‘m a firm believer in the Govt, MND and the CF deciding what the Res F
> must do and what it should be capable of becoming and allocating
> resources that are adequate plus vice the current scrappings of the
> bottom of the defence budget that the militia currently is allocated.
> Will this mean the closing of units?  Sure it will and this is not a bad
> thing. I don‘t advocate a militia of postal and NBCD units, however they
> have their place and reservists could fill that role.
>
> The militia has always been a very poor second cousin compared with both
> Reg F understandably and especially compared with our cousins in air,
> sea, and comm reserve.  Why is this?  Why has it been allowed to
> happen?  I really haven‘t seen anything from any of the studies
> commissioned that really address the heart of the matter.  The reserves
> are on life support and it will take an intensive shock therapy to get
> them into the 21st century.
> My two cents....
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.

Offline Milnet.ca

  • Guest
  • *
  • -285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 0
    • Milnet.ca
Re: Restructuring the Militia
« Reply #69 on: September 21, 2002, 22:23:00 »
Posted by Ian Edwards <iedwards@home.com> on Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:00:05 -0600
Gunner from Ian: good posting and I agree with everying you say. Phew,
isn‘t that a relief :
But to snip out all but one remark:
Gunner wrote:
>
> To all:
> ... The reserves
> are on life support and it will take an intensive shock therapy to get
> them into the 21st century....
Ian on his soapbox sez:
The Militia reached a postwar postWW2 peak strength in numbers about
1964. As an example I was on two annual "garrison" parades of 23 Mil Gp
Northern Alberta and we had 1800 I saw them no exagggeration on
parade each year. We had no equipment but shiny boots and highly
polished brass. Even the Dental Corps unit in Edmonton had over 50 on
parade that‘s a lot of teeth.
Then came the fold-up of units the Dental Corps unit bit the dust as
did Northern Alberta‘s only armd unit, the 19th Alberta Dragoons.
Everyone knew the 19D were going to be cut because Ottawa took away
their perfectly serviceable/usable Ferret Scout Cars without any
replacement the armd cars were sold for scrap. Then came the
hippy-dippy long hair popular culture and dislike of anything military
due to the Viet Nam war. And cut backs almost constantly thereafter one
step forward and two steps back. The Militia body is, indeed, still on
life-support. Why? Because between then and now no-one, in Ottawa or in
our lobby groups sic has a LONG RANGE PLAN to garner public support
for the Reserves nor for a "favourable" foreign policy that drives the
raison d‘etre for the Reserves local natural disasters
notwithwstanding.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
> to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:  To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@cipherlogic.on.ca from the account you wish
to remove, with the line "unsubscribe army" in the
message body.