- Status
S
SNoseworthy
Guest
In a nut shell, historically, the Reserves were alienated by the creation of a standing army. The Reserves thought for many many decades (some probably still do think this way) that they are all that is needed to defend Canada - that the citizen soldier will triumph in our times of need and defend the country valiantly (the Militia Myth is what Granastein coined it). Ever since the Regular Army was formed, especially in the early 20th century, there was a lot of animosity towards it by the Reserves, who felt they were being shoved aside in favour of a standing "useless" army.
The fact that the Permanent Force (as the Regs were known back at the turn of the century) ignored their duties in training the reserves, and that most PF members had next to no military knowledge whatsoever to earn the respect of the reserves with, the Reserves didn‘t respect the Regular Force. As well, the Regs saw the Reserves as holding them back from being real soldiers since the government at that time designated the PF to be solely for the training of the reserves.
And so is the historical basis for the rift between the regular force and the reserves. More recently, I highly suspect that since the Regular Force has gotten the better part of all equipment and duty in the past half century, that only made the Reserves despise the Regular force more.
Personally, I don‘t see a lot of animosity towards the Reg force being shown by people I know in the militia. However, it probably depends more on where you are in the nation.
The fact that the Permanent Force (as the Regs were known back at the turn of the century) ignored their duties in training the reserves, and that most PF members had next to no military knowledge whatsoever to earn the respect of the reserves with, the Reserves didn‘t respect the Regular Force. As well, the Regs saw the Reserves as holding them back from being real soldiers since the government at that time designated the PF to be solely for the training of the reserves.
And so is the historical basis for the rift between the regular force and the reserves. More recently, I highly suspect that since the Regular Force has gotten the better part of all equipment and duty in the past half century, that only made the Reserves despise the Regular force more.
Personally, I don‘t see a lot of animosity towards the Reg force being shown by people I know in the militia. However, it probably depends more on where you are in the nation.
N
nex
Guest
May I suggest that it‘s more of a jealous nature with reserves not getting all of the toys the reg forces get? :mg: Or the training they get? Or that they do full time, what a lot of reservists want to do but can‘t? Some people can‘t or won‘t leave their families or careers but would like to do what regforce does. My roommate is ex-regforce and he thinks everyone is just a weekend warrior, but still gives us reservists more credit than the average joe for signing on that dotted line in the first place. pfft.. 
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
May I suggest that discussing this at all is stupid and counter-productive at best, and trolling and flamebait at worst?
I can‘t think of a single person that would honestly say, today, that the Militia is all that is necessary to complete Canada‘s military tasks. The idea is ludicrous, and the Militia would be the first to admit to it. I don‘t doubt that the attitude may have been strongly held at one time, but hopefully has died off long ago, perhaps when Mister Hughes shuffled off this mortal coil. He responded to WW I by ripping the mobilization process to pieces, creating his own army out of the Militia units after renaming all the battalions, and then sending off the entire Permanent Force infantry to Bermuda, while the newly raised PPCLI went to the British Army! Guess we didn‘t "need" them at the time. I don‘t think the situation would be the same today - and don‘t think for a minute those unskilled Militia troops didn‘t suffer at Second Ypres, when 60 percent of them were gassed, wounded and killed in their first combat action - including the 10th and 16th Battalions, who attacked Kitchener‘s Wood Napoleon-style in tight packed ranks.
Not that the Milita today is not important; both components have serious work, and to date have pretty much done it very well.
I have nothing but respect for the regular force as an entity, and realize that since the end of the Korean War, it has been them that has kept the Canadian Army, Force Mobile Command, and Canadian Army (again) held in high regard in other nations. And without the PF/Regular army, there would not have been a cadre for the CASF in either WW II or Korea.
Militia augmentees in places like Cyprus, Bosnia, Afghanistan have been just that - augmentees, and I think have proven themselves capable - given the proper training, and that means full time - of operating alongside the regulars.
But to suggest we could do away with the Regulars - absolute nonsense. I wouldn‘t join the Regular Army for all the money in the world, and if I tried, they would never take me. My hat is off to them for doing the nation proud, and to be perfectly honest, doing things on an individual level that I would not be capable of doing.
That‘s why they‘re there, and I‘m not. And I‘m personally grateful to them for doing it.
As for any Regular Force troop who would stick his nose up at the Militia; that‘s his right, maybe he‘s even earned some right to feel that way. But it‘s his loss.
We‘ve gone over all this "we‘re all part of the same team" crap often enough on this forum to realize instinctively that it‘s true.
Different components - different purposes. That‘s why there are two components.
Right?
Hats off to both of them.
I can‘t think of a single person that would honestly say, today, that the Militia is all that is necessary to complete Canada‘s military tasks. The idea is ludicrous, and the Militia would be the first to admit to it. I don‘t doubt that the attitude may have been strongly held at one time, but hopefully has died off long ago, perhaps when Mister Hughes shuffled off this mortal coil. He responded to WW I by ripping the mobilization process to pieces, creating his own army out of the Militia units after renaming all the battalions, and then sending off the entire Permanent Force infantry to Bermuda, while the newly raised PPCLI went to the British Army! Guess we didn‘t "need" them at the time. I don‘t think the situation would be the same today - and don‘t think for a minute those unskilled Militia troops didn‘t suffer at Second Ypres, when 60 percent of them were gassed, wounded and killed in their first combat action - including the 10th and 16th Battalions, who attacked Kitchener‘s Wood Napoleon-style in tight packed ranks.
Not that the Milita today is not important; both components have serious work, and to date have pretty much done it very well.
I have nothing but respect for the regular force as an entity, and realize that since the end of the Korean War, it has been them that has kept the Canadian Army, Force Mobile Command, and Canadian Army (again) held in high regard in other nations. And without the PF/Regular army, there would not have been a cadre for the CASF in either WW II or Korea.
Militia augmentees in places like Cyprus, Bosnia, Afghanistan have been just that - augmentees, and I think have proven themselves capable - given the proper training, and that means full time - of operating alongside the regulars.
But to suggest we could do away with the Regulars - absolute nonsense. I wouldn‘t join the Regular Army for all the money in the world, and if I tried, they would never take me. My hat is off to them for doing the nation proud, and to be perfectly honest, doing things on an individual level that I would not be capable of doing.
That‘s why they‘re there, and I‘m not. And I‘m personally grateful to them for doing it.
As for any Regular Force troop who would stick his nose up at the Militia; that‘s his right, maybe he‘s even earned some right to feel that way. But it‘s his loss.
We‘ve gone over all this "we‘re all part of the same team" crap often enough on this forum to realize instinctively that it‘s true.
Different components - different purposes. That‘s why there are two components.
Right?
Hats off to both of them.
W
WINDWOLF
Guest
I served with some of the militia in Gagetown &
found them to be seroius,diligent & pretty professional group of boys. They learned quick & retained the training. Ambushing phase 3 & 4 officer cadets sure was a lot of fun for them.
Never had a problem with them,but had to step on some necks of the reg guys who thought the were head & shoulds above the militia. They may not have the training but as long as they show desire & committment, they should be show the respect all serving members are givin.
:sniper:
found them to be seroius,diligent & pretty professional group of boys. They learned quick & retained the training. Ambushing phase 3 & 4 officer cadets sure was a lot of fun for them.
Never had a problem with them,but had to step on some necks of the reg guys who thought the were head & shoulds above the militia. They may not have the training but as long as they show desire & committment, they should be show the respect all serving members are givin.
:sniper:
F
Fader
Guest
Inspite of my knocking them every chance I get, I like the reserves. While at times it‘s conservative nature can result in brutal mismanagement, it‘s still, at the very least, a more interesting organization to be a part of than most.
I agree more with Dominas‘s post, except I don‘t think jealousy is the only thing that motivates rifts among reserves and reg force people. I again look at human psycology; that being, most reserves call themselves soldiers and take pride in that fact, just as reg force members do; but as Michael Dorosh pointed out, the reg force do more of the dirty work that many reservists are either incapable or unwilling of doing. Whatsmore, reserves opperate on a more "do what you can" sort of mentality whereas the regular forces opperate on a "do what you‘re told" mentality as they are more obliged to do so. Worse, since many reserves have a fraction of the experience that most regforce do ("Some of those guys have forgetten as much as I have learnt" is a common sentiment among alot of us) it‘s only natural that such an attitude exists.
It‘s no differant than any profession where that is the case. If you take a full time coder who has worked for a large software corporation for 10 years, he‘ll obviously have a more condescending attitude to a young student who has done a year long internship and worked part time in the summers for small software companies, or on individual projects.
I agree more with Dominas‘s post, except I don‘t think jealousy is the only thing that motivates rifts among reserves and reg force people. I again look at human psycology; that being, most reserves call themselves soldiers and take pride in that fact, just as reg force members do; but as Michael Dorosh pointed out, the reg force do more of the dirty work that many reservists are either incapable or unwilling of doing. Whatsmore, reserves opperate on a more "do what you can" sort of mentality whereas the regular forces opperate on a "do what you‘re told" mentality as they are more obliged to do so. Worse, since many reserves have a fraction of the experience that most regforce do ("Some of those guys have forgetten as much as I have learnt" is a common sentiment among alot of us) it‘s only natural that such an attitude exists.
It‘s no differant than any profession where that is the case. If you take a full time coder who has worked for a large software corporation for 10 years, he‘ll obviously have a more condescending attitude to a young student who has done a year long internship and worked part time in the summers for small software companies, or on individual projects.
L
Lenn Wilson
Guest
Hey, first off I apologise if this is a stupid bunch of questions, but Im curious.
Its obvious our army in whole is underfunded, and we are lacking in numbers. But which is more important, the Reserve portion of the army or the reg forces? It has always seemed to me, that the reserves were a last resort or a 'just incase' but it seems bigger then our reg force. They get sent overseas just as often and they are having more money pumped into them. There are alot more recruiting advertisements for reserves then reg forces. Are we as a country not able to support the growth of a full time army? I have nothing but respect for the reserves (havieng just finished my own BMQ and SQ courses last summer) and I am in no way trying to 'bash' them, but i would like to see that we are not takeing steps back in how we are developing as a country. I dont want more dependance on american forces to keep us 'safe'.
If any of my info is wrong, please tell me.
Its obvious our army in whole is underfunded, and we are lacking in numbers. But which is more important, the Reserve portion of the army or the reg forces? It has always seemed to me, that the reserves were a last resort or a 'just incase' but it seems bigger then our reg force. They get sent overseas just as often and they are having more money pumped into them. There are alot more recruiting advertisements for reserves then reg forces. Are we as a country not able to support the growth of a full time army? I have nothing but respect for the reserves (havieng just finished my own BMQ and SQ courses last summer) and I am in no way trying to 'bash' them, but i would like to see that we are not takeing steps back in how we are developing as a country. I dont want more dependance on american forces to keep us 'safe'.
If any of my info is wrong, please tell me.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Just remember:
-It's the reservist who gives up his vacation for the Army. The reg force member (unless deployed or doing work up training) gets his nice vacation.
-It's the reservist that gives up his weekends for the army. The reg force member gets to relax with the wife, kids and friends.
-It's the reservist who juggles a civilian job and a military job. The reg force member has but one.
-It's the reservist who manages school, studying and the army. Not usually the case for a reg force member.
-It's the reservist who risks losing his job for the army. Not the case for the reg force,
-It's the reservist who is dedicated enough to do this. Think about that the next time anyone wants to bad mouth a reservist.
-It's the reservist who gives up his vacation for the Army. The reg force member (unless deployed or doing work up training) gets his nice vacation.
-It's the reservist that gives up his weekends for the army. The reg force member gets to relax with the wife, kids and friends.
-It's the reservist who juggles a civilian job and a military job. The reg force member has but one.
-It's the reservist who manages school, studying and the army. Not usually the case for a reg force member.
-It's the reservist who risks losing his job for the army. Not the case for the reg force,
-It's the reservist who is dedicated enough to do this. Think about that the next time anyone wants to bad mouth a reservist.
- Reaction score
- 8,558
- Points
- 1,160
Well, here we go again. Thanks for dredging up this ancient topic. Everytime it get's put to bed, someone decides it's time to get the mudslinging going again. Oh well, watch and shoot, I guess.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
This topic was 3rd from the top of the list when I replied.....
- Reaction score
- 11,245
- Points
- 1,160
Hey i remember old "warrant" windwolf
Lenn Wilson, if you search through numerous threads regarding the regular forces and reserves I think you'll come to the conclusion that they each play an important role for the Canadian Forces. Each has it super soldiers and each has it's morons.
You can't take the regular force and hold the reserves to the same standard. The reserves are not about being career soldiers (though some pull it off somehow). The reserves is about being a part time soldier, part time student/teacher/cop/bum whatever.
Which is more important? I don't think it's a fair question to ask. You obviously need a full time military and that full time military needs reserves to suppliment their ranks as we are seeing in Iraq.
Lenn Wilson, if you search through numerous threads regarding the regular forces and reserves I think you'll come to the conclusion that they each play an important role for the Canadian Forces. Each has it super soldiers and each has it's morons.
You can't take the regular force and hold the reserves to the same standard. The reserves are not about being career soldiers (though some pull it off somehow). The reserves is about being a part time soldier, part time student/teacher/cop/bum whatever.
Which is more important? I don't think it's a fair question to ask. You obviously need a full time military and that full time military needs reserves to suppliment their ranks as we are seeing in Iraq.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 410
For high readiness, the Regular Army is required. For sustainment, rapid expansion and for connection with Canadians where they live, the Reserve is necessary, unless we intend to have a Regular Army so huge that it can do all of this on its own. No Western nation that I know of, including the US, does this.
What do you mean "bigger than the Reg Force?" Canada's Army Reserve is smaller than the Regular Army. Reserves are just that: a "reserve"-but they need not be a last resort. In domestic emergencies in many areas of Canada the local Reserve unit can respond more quickly than the nearest Regular Army unit which may be many hours away by road. This is one of the reasons that the Army is placing incerasing responsibility on the Reserve for humanitarian emergency operations in Canada.
No, they do not get sent overseas "just as often". The Army uses a figure of about 10-20% of contingent strength for Reserve participation in overseas operations, with the recent exception being Op BRONZE in Bosnia that was almost all Reservists. The other 80-90% are Regulars. And the Reserves do not get "..more money pumped into them", I can assure you that the capital and operating budgets of the Regular Army are many times those of the Reserve, but for good reasons. Higher readiness forces do not come for free.
Really? None of the ads I've seen recently have been for the Reserves. We do have advertising for the Reserves, but I do not believe that the Res gets more advertising effort than the Regular Force (even if we do need it...)
How does having an effective Reserve make us more dependent on the US? I'd say that as part of an overall improvement of our military capability, a strong Reserve goes a long way toward making us less dependent.
Unfortunately, it seems to me that almost everything you posted was wrong. I wonder what you were taught, or what you heard, during your Reserve service that led you to these opinions? You need to check your facts a bit better.
Cheers
L
Lenn Wilson
Guest
lol Well it seems all my information was wrong. (what i was taught during BMQ and SQ has nothing to do with the subject.) And well, this is me checking my facts. Thanks guys, and sorry for opening this subject again, I have been doing a little looking around since i opend My account here yesterday and I will make sure to do some more before i put up any more posts.
- Reaction score
- 8,558
- Points
- 1,160
Thanks, we appreciate it.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 410
Normally, when one belongs to an organization, one tries to learn a little bit about it. I just assumed that you would have, too, either during formal lectures or in less formal ways such as discussions in the mess, pamphlets, recruiting info, etc.
Cheers.
- Status
Similar threads
