• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Congo

Journeyman said:
Waiting for BlackBetty to come in here and sort some people out
:pop:




BB has nothing to say.  :-X

However, here is an article zakiuz may want to read.

Factual reference

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/04/30/canadian-military-congo-deployment.html

Military plans post-Afghanistan review
Canadian Forces won't deploy large force to war-torn Congo: sources
Last Updated: Friday, April 30, 2010 | 4:14 PM ET CBC News


Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, a high-profile Canadian general suggested to lead a potential large troop deployment to Congo, has instead been ordered to plan a top-down reorganization of the entire military.

Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, the Canadian Forces' outgoing chief of the land staff, visits Afghanistan earlier this month. Leslie had been touted as a possible head of the world's largest peacekeeping force in Congo. (Murray Brewster/Canadian Press)
Meanwhile, sources tell CBC News the Canadian military will not deploy a large force to the Democratic Republic of Congo after its mission in Afghanistan ends next year.

Gen. Walt Natynczyk, chief of defence staff, confirmed to CBC News on Friday that Leslie has been tasked to lead a transformation of the military's complicated organizational structure, similar to the one begun by the Canadian Forces in 2005.

The chief of defence staff said the Canadian Forces have had a "certainty and clarity" since the military's move to Kandahar in 2006 when headquarters and formations were organized to meet that challenge.

But with the Afghan mission heading to a conclusion, Natynczyk said it's time to refocus and reorganize, so Leslie will spend about a year looking at the entire structure, command and control of the Canadian Forces.

"We have got to set ourselves up for success in that post-2011 process," Natynczyk told the CBC's James Cudmore.

Natynczyk would not comment on Canada's plan to scrub the proposed mission to Congo, also known as Congo-Kinshasa, where some 20,000 United Nations peacekeepers are currently stationed in an attempt to quell violence that has continued since the country's bloody five-year civil war ended in 2003.

Last month, the military announced Leslie would be replaced as army chief, but his new job was not revealed. Natynczyk said Leslie clearly has "a bright future and has performed exceptionally well" as commander of the army for four years.

Afghanistan, Haiti missions took toll
Natynczyk led the 2005 reorganization before he was promoted to the top position of chief of defence staff to replace a retiring Rick Hillier. That review led to the establishment of several new headquarters to manage operations both at home and abroad.

But there is now a sense that process led to an over-complicated structure — with too many staff officers at too many headquarters.

There is also a feeling inside the Defence Department that the military is too overstretched to deploy to the Congo due to its missions in Afghanistan, Haiti and at the Vancouver Olympics — as well from its upcoming roles during this summer's G8 and the G20 summits.

"We're seeing such a significant step in the post-Olympics, post-Afghanistan time frame that we really do need to put the horsepower to make sure we get this right to take us through the rest of this decade," Natynczyk said.

Without a large force ready for a Congo mission, it makes little sense to send a high-ranking Canadian general to lead it.

Since the military needs time to recuperate and reorganize, the decision to hold off on the Congo mission frees up Leslie to lead the military reorganization instead.

With files from James Cudmore




Nothing like a little R&R  8)
 
zakiuz,

I don't know if you're trolling, are really this thick, or you just don't get it.

You have been told innumerable times and yet you come back asking why.

We are not here for your entertainment or to increase your post count.

You have incurred the wrath of many much wiser and worldly than yourself and still don't think any of it your fault and refuse to take responsibility.

Post one of your dire pleas, for the Congo, or whatever you want to call them, again and the thread will be locked and you'll graduate to the Warning System.

Milnet.ca Staff
 
Black Betty said:
Nothing like a little R&R  8)

I'll believe it when I see it.  Last time the CF took an "Operational Pause", my unit had the most man days worth of deployment in it's history.
 
Black Betty said:
Factual reference
Look at the date of that article. You would more correctly refer to that as a historical reference, rather than factual.
 
211RadOp said:
I'll believe it when I see it.  Last time the CF took an "Operational Pause", my unit had the most man days worth of deployment in it's history.
Hahaha ... wait for it.  8)
 
ArmyVern said:
Hahaha ... wait for it.  8)
BUt if it's an NDP coalition, we'll be deploying everywhere.....but with Spanish Army ROEs  ;D
 
Journeyman said:
BUt if it's an NDP coalition, we'll be deploying everywhere.....but with Spanish Army ROEs  ;D

"Make bombastic speeches and/or run quickly in the opposite direction when guns are shown OR hide in our OP's"?

MM
 
Journeyman said:
Look at the date of that article. You would more correctly refer to that as a historical reference, rather than factual.

Are you still trying to take make an arse out of  me.  :crybaby:
Historical or not, the only other article I could Google up was an article, outlining why a Canadian/DRC mission would not take place and the many obstacles for Canadian Troops.

http://www.cdfai.org/granatsteinarticles/Do%20We%20Really%20Want%20to%20go%20to%20the%20Congo.pdf

Please timeline this one for me Journeyman.  :blotto:
 
Black Betty said:
the only other article I could Google up was an article,

So in other words, there is not too much interest in Canada for a mission there.
 
Black Betty said:
Are you still trying to take make an arse out of  me.  :crybaby:
Historical or not, the only other article I could Google up was an article, outlining why a Canadian/DRC mission would not take place and the many obstacles for Canadian Troops.

http://www.cdfai.org/granatsteinarticles/Do%20We%20Really%20Want%20to%20go%20to%20the%20Congo.pdf

Please timeline this one for me Journeyman.  :blotto:

Cut the crap. He doesn't have to help you with something you've already accomplished yourself. He's just putting a datum context on your out of date article, and no member here is required to do your research for you.

At the speed things move today and the way our fickle population change their minds, even an article from Mr Granatstein, dated April last year, is out of date already.

A small hint for the future, just because you use smilies doesn't mean it's not trolling.

Milnet.ca Staff
 
zakiuz said:
If Google said do it must be true.

Surely, if Canadians were even marginally interested, there would be more smash on this in the media.
 
Black Betty said:
Are you still trying to take make an arse out of  me.  :crybaby:
I sincerely apologize for having left the impression that I'm interested, personally, in any individual site members or others' perceptions.

My point, as has been mentioned, was merely to add context (in this case, a date) to what has been posted, in order to assist readers in making an informed opinion.
 
Journeyman said:
I sincerely apologize for having left the impression that I'm interested, personally, in any individual site members or others' perceptions.

My point, as has been mentioned, was merely to add context (in this case, a date) to what has been posted, in order to assist readers in making an informed opinion.


The article I posted was dated April 30, 2010 however, the second article was undated.
 
Black Betty said:
The article I posted was dated April 30, 2010 however, the second article was undated.

Which is why he correctly identified it as being more a historical document. Your undated one was identified by more than one of us as being from the beginning of April 2010 also. In the context of this discussion, that makes the second one (first by date) historical also.

If you wish to participate, please read the responses carefully and try to follow along before formulating a nit picky, and abysmally useless, response to others here.

Milnet.ca Staff
 
Back
Top