Cut PRes funding to support the Reg F (Split from: Base closures?)

[BACKERCOY]

Q: This wouild be a tough call but what if DND stood down all of the PRes Units and applied all budget savings to maintaining reg force bases

:yellow:

 

[vonGarvin]

Q: This wouild be a tough call but what if DND stood down all of the PRes Units and applied all budget savings to maintaining reg force bases

:yellow:

Then the USSR would then become resurgent, and absorb half of Europe, including NATO Ally Poland.  Then there would be war, I would be relevant again, Cold War Warrior and all that I am. 

 

[BACKERCOY]

LOL - good response - but seriously, given that at least our army reserve is a small force relative to the US and others isn`t there an argument to me made - i mean i see the waste in the reserves and if it were all directed top the regs maybe that would be best right - happy new year guys

:nod:

 

[aesop081]

our army reserve is a small force relative to the US and others

How is that relevant ?

 

[REDinstaller]

To base closures not at all. Most reserve units aren't on Bases anyways, the supporting base might be hours away. ie, LSSR Marathon to CFB Winnipeg.

 

[BACKERCOY]

Its completely relevant because economically other countries have figured out that it is cheaper to have the larger portions of its armed service on "reserve" status that in garrison full time - think about it - in the US a "Guardsman" is not on the public payroll for the most of his service career unless called up - we have it backwards - our Reg force is larger than our reserve force - SO if that is the model the government wants then do away with the reserves.

 

[REDinstaller]

And some of their Guard units also are liable to deploy as such, A UNIT. We don't have that capability at all, hence why the reserves AUGMENT the RegF on deployments.

 

[aesop081]

SO if that is the model the government wants then do away with the reserves.

The smaller size of the reserves in Canada does not eliminate the need for one. As far as what the US is doing, yes we should do it the way they do. Everything the US does is better right ??

Rank: Cpl
Unit: 4RCR
MOC: INF

Might want to update your avatar then........

 

[REDinstaller]

Worst thing is, it changed about 5 min ago.

 

[BACKERCOY]

The smaller size of the reserves in Canada does not eliminate the need for one. As far as what the US is doing, yes we should do it the way they do. Everything the US does is better right ??

Yes Aviator you got it! They spend properly on defence. The public supports them more. They have better kit. Better post deployment rehab - on and on I could go.... Let's live in the real world. I hate to believe it but the Canadian taxpayer does not put their money where their mouth is and that's why this thread started "Base Closures" - we have nothing left to close that is a "base" that does not critcially support the reg force so logically what is left dudes? the RESERVES. (i'm not saying this with glee). :-\

 

[REDinstaller]

Since when does the taxpayer choose where their tax money goes besides the Receiver General? The politicians do all the spending.

 

[aesop081]

They spend properly on defence.

...and spending themselves into ruin too ! Go ask SECDEF Gates if he thinks they are spending properly.

The public supports them more.

So f'ing what.....

They have better kit.

They have some better kit.

Better post deployment rehab

Yeah...never any scandals at VA over poor treatment and benefits...............

- on and on I could go....

So could i, i work along side US forces regularly.

Let's live in the real world.

I most certainly do.

Canadian taxpayer does not put their money where their mouth is

Actualy, they do. It is not in defence but it is what the majority wants. Politicians spend money where it will get the votes.

 

[BACKERCOY]

Since when does the taxpayer choose where their tax money goes besides the Receiver General? The politicians do all the spending.

?? - By electing an MP who will represent their views in the House. The Reciever General does not set DND policy at last check :boring:

 

[aesop081]

?? - By electing an MP who will represent their views in the House.

Pssssssttt.......They have.

 

[REDinstaller]

He does receive all the back tax checks that are submitted. And an MP can say all he wants until elected, then try firing him until the next election. Good luck with that.

 

[BACKERCOY]

OK CDN Aviator - your a pro obviously and I won't argue - if it were not for the US we would have been invaded long ago - but I guess I'm just an army guy that does not understand that our airforce can't actually patrol and defend our airspace without the yanks

MHO - good night and happy new year to all iper:

 

[aesop081]

if it were not for the US we would have been invaded long ago -

Oh yeah ? By who ?

but I guess I'm just an army guy that does not understand that our airforce can't actually patrol and defend our airspace without the yanks

You certainly got the first part right.........

 

[gcclarke]

And some of their Guard units also are liable to deploy as such, A UNIT. We don't have that capability at all, hence why the reserves AUGMENT the RegF on deployments.

I would like to point out that our reserve units are also liable to deploy as a unit, IAW section 31 of the NDA, when said unit is placed upon active service by the Governor in Council. It's just not likely to happen unless we enter into another total war.

 

[Brasidas]

Q: This wouild be a tough call but what if DND stood down all of the PRes Units and applied all budget savings to maintaining reg force bases

Why do you think that maintaining infrastructure (as opposed to consolidating to fewer bases) is more important than having a ready reserve of trained personnel?

 

[Spanky]

Its completely relevant because economically other countries have figured out that it is cheaper to have the larger portions of its armed service on "reserve" status that in garrison full time - think about it - in the US a "Guardsman" is not on the public payroll for the most of his service career unless called up - we have it backwards - our Reg force is larger than our reserve force - SO if that is the model the government wants then do away with the reserves.

Using this argument, we should greatly reduce the size of the regular force, and use the savings to increase the size of our reserve.