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

JTF2 & AFG (merged)

The insurgents and terrorists use the methods available to them. War is a case of you either win or you die. Therefore you adapt your strategy to best attain victory. It doesn't matter what makes a real man, because that doesn't matter to the dead. Doesn't matter what we think of their methods, we have to adapt. The right way to fight them is full on, with no rules of engagement, just like they fight us.

Just my opinion of course.
 
P-Free for every action,comment there is a reaction for each and I think it was wrong releasing that info as it puts us in to a automatic aggressive posture.

You see the Brit Government comment on the SAS?

I feel that who ever made the decision has made us look like an aggressor which this Task is not about.

Our Task is to try and reconstruct and the Battle Group is there to support that Task with all Arms as Intel. and actions dictate.

I and others know some who are on this coming tour and I feel this article has put our friends in possible unnecessary danger due to the aggresive nature of the article.


 
My father is on the upcomming roto to Afghanistan and it was always my impression that everything happening in Iraq was also happening in Afghanistan.

The media does not create the danger, they only hype it.
 
Spr.Earl said:
I and others know some who are on this coming tour and I feel this article has put our friends in possible unnecessary danger due to the aggresive nature of the article.
I tend to think that this sends the message that we are not going there to be pushed around.  The danger is there regardless.  Better to be seen as the wolf than as the sheep.
 
McG I think they already know we can't be pushed around from what is it now nearly 20yrs of Tours from all our Brigades from the Kuwait to the Balkans .Our abilities we have proven.

Our Task is reconstruction,bring some stability at this time,not come in as belligerents which the press release has intimated.

Secret Squirrel stuff is not the domain of the public or of the average Pvt.
 
Wow, missed this entire bout of Internet Tough guy.

Anyways, being the classic moral relativist that I am, don't chain yourself to a Western, secular, liberal democratic framework of thought if you want to get an idea of what the enemy is up to.  The enemy doesn't take things like the Geneva Convention, Hugo Grotius, and the Peace and Truce of God into their decision cycles....
 
Infanteer said:
Wow, missed this entire bout of Internet Tough guy.

.   The enemy doesn't take things like the Geneva Convention, Hugo Grotius, and the Peace and Truce of God into their decision cycles....

It's about time someone said that out loud!

Good points to remember for those both deploying and sitting home armchair quarterbacking! The enemy's moral compass does not point to North Ladies and Gents.

They do things their own way and we have to understand that to understand them!

Thanks Infanteer.

Cheers

Slim
 
Thought I was saying that all along in this thread, but it might have been missed in the middle of Hatchet Man's rants about supposedly supporting them..
 
Spr.Earl said:
Our Task is to try and reconstruct and the Battle Group is there to support that Task with all Arms as Intel. and actions dictate.

The PRT is there to rebuild; the BattleGroup is there to close with and destroy.

It's refreshing to see our Army talk and act the part.

IIRC Lewis MacKenzie stated circa '93 that anyone not wanting to be shot at should get the F out...

Canada was already on the Enemies scoreboard - they got 3 on Roto 0 and due to sheer dumb luck in some sits Roto 1 and Roto 2 lucked out.  Canadians are not worth as much to them as US and UK troops - but they are still gunning for us - anyone thinking differently needs to give their head a shake. 

Just cause we toned down our Operatiosn as part of Op Athena the Enemy still remembers Canadian soldiers killing them in '02 -- no amount of flowery kumbaya crap will change that.
 

 
"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."
General Rick Hiller

Maybe you aren't public servants when it comes to facing risks but you may still be when it comes to facing an uncaring bureaucracy.   This is from today's National Post

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=6794e775-a9d0-4fd0-87db-3fa74ed5e5e0&page=1
Security may stand in way of benefits
Secret military missions

a journalist
CanWest News Service

Monday, July 18, 2005

Canadian soldiers serving on clandestine missions or with allied forces in the war on terrorism could find themselves fighting an uphill battle to receive disability benefits if injured, a military official has warned.

The concern follows an incident this year in which the intense secrecy surrounding the Joint Task Force 2 special forces unit allegedly prevented one of its injured commandos from obtaining benefits since he could not produce the necessary details about his case.

"The situation is not unique to JTF2," Major Denis Pelletier, assigned to the office that deals with supporting injured military personnel, warned in a February e-mail. "Additionally, CF members serving with allied forces also face the same security restrictions."

The documents were released to the Ottawa Citizen under the Access to Information law.

"It is likely that this problem will only get worse with time as the war on terrorism ... [words censored for security reasons] ... become more the norm than the exception," the Major added in his e-mail.

It is unclear how many Canadians are working behind the scenes in specialized missions or assigned to other Western militaries in the battle against terrorism. Members of the Ottawa-based JTF2 have been in Afghanistan on and off over the past three years.

Other Canadian troops have served with U.S. and British units during the war in Iraq and its aftermath. In addition, Canadians are serving on board AWACS surveillance aircraft used to support U.S. and coalition efforts in various missions.

On Thursday, Chief of the Defence Staff General Rick Hillier confirmed that JTF2 commandos will be part of a new Canadian force that in the coming months will hunt down "radical murderers and killers" in Afghanistan. Comparing terrorists with Nazis and "detestable murderers and scumbags," Gen. Hillier said the recent bombings in London show there can be no let-up in the war on terrorism.

Canadian Forces officials say after Maj. Pelletier's concerns were raised, they looked into the matter and came to the conclusion the current administrative system can handle disability situations with personnel involved in secret operations. Lieutenant-Colonel David Wrather, director of casualty support and administration, said soldiers mainly need to establish they were injured in work-related duty and do not have to go into specifics about what they were doing or the location where the incident happened.

He said, for instance, that if military members, such as those assigned to the secretive Communications Security Establishment, were injured, they would not be required to produce specific details about their mission.

"If they were on some sort of intelligence operation that did not allow them to say where they were or exactly what they were doing, that's not germane to the accident report and the information that Veterans' Affairs Canada needs to adjudicate on a pension," explained Lt.-Col. Wrather.

In addition, troops deployed overseas in small numbers with foreign militaries have their own Canadian officials to take care of their administrative needs and to shepherd any documentation for injury claims. In other cases, if a detailed investigation is needed, then a board of inquiry could be convened and that could hear sensitive information behind closed doors.

The issue about what happens to those injured in the war on terrorism was raised earlier this year by Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant. Ms. Gallant went to bat for a JTF2 soldier after he ran into difficulties trying to get a disability pension for injuries suffered during training. The unit's draconian secrecy rules prevented the release of information needed to support his claim, according to Ms. Gallant, whose riding includes Canadian Forces Base Petawawa.

Lt.-Col. Wrather said after Ms. Gallant brought the issue forward his officials met with JTF2 officers to make sure the unit understood the process available to them. "My organization is geared to be an advocate for the [military] member," he said.

Ms. Gallant said she has followed up on the case of the JTF2 soldier and is satisfied he is now being taken care of.

Lt.-Col. Wrather said the Canadian Forces is in the process of producing a casualty administration manual to outline the specific responsibilities various military offices have to the troops. That manual is expected to be ready by the end of the year.

© National Post 2005

JTF2 people are not the only ones who (used to, anyway) deploy on classified missions.   The others do not, I hope, face anything like the same dangers but accidents do happen and casualties do occur.   I really hope LCol Wrather is giving us the straight goods because my experience with the pension bureaucracy - several years ago and on behalf of someone else - was frustrating, to say the least.   We had to go, eventually, DM to DM with 'eyes only' type correspondence and anyone who has tried to get the DM to sign a letter without getting it blessed by a legion of minions will know that was not easy and it was excessively time consuming - meanwhile the injured military member was in limbo.   (He got his disability pension, by the way but it took months and months longer than necessary just to get the wheels in motion.)

Edited: added 'used to' because I don't know if anyone does any more
 
As a well known French general once quoted "J'aime les soldats, je deteste les militaires."
 
Defence chief unfazed
By CP

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/News/2005/07/27/1149165-sun.html

EDMONTON -- Canada's top military officials are brushing off criticism from Independent MP Carolyn Parrish over the blunt language of Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier.

The maverick MP, a former Liberal, has called Hillier "dangerous" and "testosterone-fuelled" for saying that the job of Canadian soldiers is to be able to kill people.

Hillier said he hadn't seen Parrish's comments but wasn't particularly concerned about them.

"I'm part of ensuring that Canadians understand and appreciate just what these fine men and women ... just what fine work they do on their behalf," Hillier said.
 
It is my opinion that we, as voters, have the responsibility to thoroughly research potential MP's histories before we vote for them. Hopefully, in the future that will ensure noone who has had a lobotomy performed on them will be representing the public in parliament.
 
Our politicians should be required to complete our CFAT testing, that would probably weed out 95% of them ;)
 
Big Foot said:
Defence chief unfazed
By CP

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/News/2005/07/27/1149165-sun.html

EDMONTON -- Canada's top military officials are brushing off criticism from Independent MP Carolyn Parrish over the blunt language of Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier.

The maverick MP, a former Liberal, has called Hillier "dangerous" and "testosterone-fuelled" for saying that the job of Canadian soldiers is to be able to kill people.

If Caroline Parish gets voted out in the next election she should easily be able to ge a job with the CBC ... ::)
 
Personally I think Ms Parrish is the one "degrad[ing] the hard-earned reputation of this country"  ::)

From today's Globe...

Parrish continues attack on Hillier

By OLIVER MOORE

Thursday, July 28, 2005 Page A7

Amid rumoured talks about rejoining the government, Independent MP Carolyn Parrish has released a letter calling the most senior officer in the military "truly barbaric."

Ms. Parrish, who was booted from the Liberal caucus last year for refusing to toe the party line, said this week that "a lot" of her former colleagues want her to come back to the government benches.

But this week she also showed her trademark outspokenness by lambasting General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, for calling terrorists "murderers and scumbags." She said the comment was an unfortunate echo of the black-and-white mentality of the U.S. military. She followed up with an equally sharp letter to Defence Minister Bill Graham.

The letter was released yesterday, a page of blunt rhetoric that implores Mr. Graham to "muzzle the beast."

"We know [U.S. President George] Bush's 'War on Terrorism' has killed thousands. . . . For the top General in this country to emulate the simplistic phrasing of Mr. Bush, on behalf of you and our government, is to degrade the hard-earned reputation of this country and its people. I am shocked that you have tolerated it."

With an election expected early next year, senior Liberals are apparently concerned about another minority government and worry that Ms. Parrish could win her seat in the next election as an Independent.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050728.wxparrish28/BNStory/National/
 
I am liberal in alot of my thinking but this is insane
"But this week she also showed her trademark outspokenness by lambasting General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff, for calling terrorists "murderers and scumbags." She said the comment was an unfortunate echo of the black-and-white mentality of the U.S. military. She followed up with an equally sharp letter to Defence Minister Bill Graham."

I think Ms. Parrish is sitting in her little safe world where bad things never happen to good people.  But the writing is on the wall, bad things are going to happen to some good people( in Canada and around the world)  and when it does, will she say "lets not think in "black and white" terms, lets all get along.  " 

here is a concept: blowing up a subway or bus while people are just going to work to provide for their families does make you a scumbag and a murderer and it is very black and white.

and her comment on Gen. Hillier being dangerous, Correct me if I am wrong, he is the boss of the CANADIAN ARMED FORCES, I hope that he is alittle dangerous, being his job is to command soldiers( whose job is what again?)( pls read sarcasm as I am laying it on)

rant endth.

 
Another one from the Toronto Star today.  They sure do give the "Liberal Weiners" alot of space for their complaining about how evil the military, America and General Hillier are.

Canada's new enforcer

MICHAEL NICKERSON


If all Canadians embraced the world as one great "Rock'em, Sock'em Hockey" video and considered the major for fighting a badge of honour, the war on terror would be but a memory. The good guys would use low-skilled but belligerent thugs to win the game, with the rule makers standing aside and letting it all unfold.

Or at least so goes our chief of defence staff's dream for a new, bolder approach to crisis management and international diplomacy.

A week ago, Gen. Rick Hillier used the image of a career NHL enforcer to illustrate the role he feels the Canadian Armed Forces should play on the world stage. In so doing, he did a disservice to the rich and honourable history of our military and the intelligence of an entire country.

Hillier is appealing to the base emotions of the nation without providing sound reasoning for his cause. In essence, he wants us to lead with our fists and our hearts, not with our minds.

The metaphor of the NHL enforcer is instructive, however, if perhaps not in the way that the chief of the defence staff intended. For decades, fighting has been considered by many to be a vital ingredient in our national sport, one that can turn the tide and momentum of a game. I suspect this was the sort of image the general was after, one of the trench warrior doing the "hard stuff" for the rest of us.

But there are those who have been calling for an end to this brutish aspect of hockey for years, citing the need for better examples to set for the young, and the excitement of international play, where fighting is next to nonexistent.

In Europe, hockey culture does not condone or encourage fighting. In Canada, boys who have passed their 14th birthdays and who want to keep that NHL dream alive, learn to get their jerseys off as fast as they can and practise bare-knuckle skills otherwise found only in late-night bars and back alleys.

The culture of the NHL is to allow this belligerence, for coaches to encourage it, and for farm teams to teach it.

And while that sort of thinking has been part of Canadian hockey culture for some time, until now it has not been a key feature of our national culture. From his comments, it is fair to suggest this is a state of affairs Hillier is eager to address, and, like an overzealous hockey player, he wants us to embrace a requirement for brutality at just the moment when cooler heads are so sorely needed.

For it has suddenly become fashionable to scoff at the idea of "Canada the peacekeeper" in much the same way as those who question the need for hockey enforcers are written off as naïve fools who don't understand the game. Canadians are being told we need to wake up and recognize the threat that faces us, as if the nightly news and all the carnage it documents wasn't enough of an alarm bell.

Hillier has resorted to lowbrow and disingenuous scare tactics, most recently labelling terrorists as amoral psychopaths on par with the Olsons and Bernardos of the world, despite much evidence and research to the contrary.

His suggestion that Afghan heroin is a "weapon of mass destruction," was reminiscent of Tony Blair standing up in parliament in the fall of 2001, fingers crossed behind him, and telling citizens that the Taliban was putting heroin on British streets after the regime had spent the previous year destroying most of its crop.

In both cases, these were stunning and misleading assertions to justify lethal force in a foreign land.

Yet, in a world moving toward the mentality found in North American ice rinks and penalty boxes, Canadians are going to have to ask themselves whether they want to simply accept this new culture as many have with hockey, or work toward something different.

Do we want a world where violence is an accepted, even encouraged part of the game, or where it is used only as an absolute last resort?

Right now we have our chief of defence staff leading with his fists, which is what you expect of an enforcer. The question is why his coach hasn't called for a time- out instead of just letting him play.

Where are you, Paul Martin?

Michael Nickerson is a Toronto columnist for Esprit de Corps military magazine
and the e-zine Caffimage.com.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1122587411428&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
---------------------------------
 
Back
Top