CANADIAN ARMED FORCES

[ENGINEERS WIFE]

I did a search and didn't come up with an answer to my question.  So, I will throw it out there to all you knowledgeable guys and gals.  Why do many people say "Canadian Armed Forces"?  I thought it was just the "Canadian Forces"  I have been corrected when I have used the term "Armed", but I also know people IN the military that say it.  And others, like my husband, say it was never "Armed"  Just curious.  And if this is in the wrong spot or has been answered just let me know or feel free to move it.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

""The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces."

ref: National Defence Act; R.S.C. 1985, c. N-5 s. 14

 

[Neill McKay]

To add a bit of background, the public "branding" of the Forces was, at one time, "Canadian Armed Forces"; more recently we've seen "Canadian Forces -- Regular and Reserve" and, currently, we usually just see "Canadian Forces".  Some have speculated it was to avoid the implications of appearing "Armed" to a peace-loving Canadian public, but I'm not at all certain of how the change has come about.

 

[ghyslyn]

quote:

February 1, 1968, Bill C-243, The Canadian Forces Reorganization Act became law and the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN), the Canadian Army and the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) were combined into one service - the Canadian Armed Forces, shortened to Canadian Forces.

 

[hugh19]

I own a book printed in 1919. That states canadian think of the militay as the Canadian forces. So it really a old term.

 

[ENGINEERS WIFE]

Thanks everyone for their info   It's always good asking questions here, because there is always so many people that know alot of different stuff.  thanks again, Robin

 

[CSOR]

I personally think it is the Armed forces but its alsoo sort of opinion based.

 

[ArmyRick]

Its not opinion based, read the first reply.

 

[vonGarvin]

There is no opinion involved.  As NFLD Sapper stated:

""The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces."

ref: National Defence Act; R.S.C. 1985, c. N-5 s. 14

It is in the NDA, it is not a matter of opinion.
Edit: ARMY RICK said the same as I.  I'll leave my response in as emphasis only.

 

[Jammer]

If you ask Julian Austin...It's Canadian Armed forces.
He said to me once in CM that taking the "Armed" out of it made us sound like P*&^ies!

 

[jollyjacktar]

When I was a young guy in the Reserves in early 80's it was the Canadian Armed Forces.  The decision was made to take the Armed out of the name as we were at that time not in a state of War or Armed Conflict with any other power and therefore it was improper.  This was the explaination given to me when I asked why we were getting all new letterheads on envelopes and blank paper with the "Armed" taken out.  I guess our present involvement in SWA does not count as a big enough reason to re-brand ourselves.

 

[geo]

We were and still are the Canadian Armed Forces
- People have made up all sorts of reasons and excuses as to why we usually see "Canadian Forces" instead of the full Canadian Armed Forces.

Armed wasn't popular - it made us sound agressive
We were doing Peacekeeping and with all the budget cutbacks, we certainly weren't doing much in the way of arming ourselves... more like disposing of all those old and nasty big guns, planes & ships.

But through all of that.... we are still the Canadian Armed Forces.

 

[vonGarvin]

*sigh*
I'll say it again
""The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces."
ref: National Defence Act; R.S.C. 1985, c. N-5 s. 14

So, jollyjacktar, there was NO decision to take "Armed" out of the name.  See above.  As for saying that it was taken out because we were not at war is junk.  There is no term in there that says "Canadian WAR forces".  As I recall in the 1980's, we were indeed armed.  Still are, last time I saw.
ENOUGH OF THIS.

 

[Teflon]

Does it REALLY matter? - Just because we are presently not using the ARMED in the title, the letterheads or the recruiting devices doesn't mean we are unarmed, well at least the last time I checked I still had my rifle and pistol in CQ stores, I don't get to fire it near as much as I should but it was only a month ago I last had it in my hands and I am damn sure that the 25mms in all the LAVs outside my office are real.

 

[ArmyRick]

Yes it does matter.

How about Patricia's Canadian Infantry in tead of Princess Patrica's Canadian Light Infantry?
How about Canadian Artillery instead of Royal Canadian Artillery?

I am a bit of stickler for some of the traditions and unless its officially done by the powers that by, lets stick to the proper name.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Yes, it is still officially the Canadian Armed Forces but common useage has always been "Canadian Forces" (even before the NDA that made it the Canadian Armed Forces).  There was no express intent to remove "Armed" from the title in the 1980s though some letterhead was probably changed at that time to make it in accordance with the Government of Canada identity policy.  From the time of unification, as titles changed and new units formed, there were many instances when CF was used instead of CAF.  I know that in the 70's I attended the Canadian Forces Recruit School (not the CAFRS) and CFMSS (not CAFMSS).  In fact before unification (in 1959) the term was used when the Canadian Forces Medical Service was formed.

 

[geo]

Remember, there was a time when we also used a Canadian flag logo that was missing a "the west coast".

We don't use it anymore, but it was a logo that was used for a long time & I think I still have a couple of reams of it for scrap paper hanging around somewhere.