Reserves - should they be deployed as the main force overseas?

[Ruthless4Life]

For example, in the US, the reserves and national guard has been used for a great extent regarding overseas operations, and this has been going on for many years. The reserves would take the responsibility of the regulars.

But here in Canada, the reserves still remain mainly at home, even though they can volunteer overseas, whereas the regulars are used extensively, that our regulars are stretched to the max, with such a low number and with our government trying to fulfill all these commitments worldwide. The regulars get no rest whatsoever.

So, should reserve force be deployed as the main fighting force worldwide?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Nope.

 

[gate_guard]

The reserves are in no position, at this moment, to deploy as a formed battle group nor is it their mandate. The reserves are to augment the regs not replace them (although I‘m sure some regs would say this already happens on tours). In time of war (full mobilization) the regs will go off to fight while the reserves are stood up to full strength (full regiments, not just company sized, peace time militia regiments) and then sent over. With the reserve company on Roto 11 at least (don‘t ask about roto 12), they proved that they can serve as a formed company in a battle group and operate in a peacekeeping theatre effectively. Does this translate to operating effectively in a theatre of war? No.
In my opinion, the CF doesn‘t have the level of training and standards in the militia to effectively deploy a main force. Until this changes, I think its a horrible idea. And this is ignoring the fact that you would be hard pressed to get the "volunteers" needed from the militia to form any sort of substantial force.

 

[muskrat89]

No, but I think they should be utilized more than they are. I lived a long time in a border town. I was in a Militia (Artillery) unit; 15 minutes awau, in Maine, was a National Guard Artillery Unit. We even did some exchange stuff, on occasion. To generalize, I think both sides felt that the Cdns training was at a much higher level, but the Yanks were "used" more. Besides Storm, etc., they had guys attached to Border patrol (mechanics), Customs (searching commercial vehicles) and all kinds of other neat stuff. I think some ways should be developed to give our Reserve Units a little more practical experience, even if it is not in their specific trade. Security? DUI checkpoints? Search and rescue units? I dunno. Maybe the Canadian psyche wouldn‘t tolerate soldiers being used in the public eye, but maybe there‘s some behind the scenes stuff, we could help with - and put some of that superior training to actual use...

 

[Michael Dorosh]

gate_guard, you may have it a bit backwards. In the last three major wars we had, the regular force stayed on garrison duty in the opening months while the reserves were used to form the main fighting forces. In 1914, the RCR went to Bermuda while the militia formed the CEF, and went to France in 1915. RCR didn‘t join the Canadians in France until the Third Division was deployed.

In WW II, there were less than 2000 full time infantrymen; the majority of them instructed or went to militia units as cadre; the RCR, PPCLI and R22eR all went over with the First Division, but were largely composed of militiamen and new recruits, not regulars.

In Korea, the 2nd battalions of PPCLI, RCR and R22eR all went over ahead of the 1st Battalions; again, largely composed of militiamen and men off the street.

In all three of those cases, we had the luxury of several months time to train these new troops.

 

[gate_guard]

I stand corrected. My opinion is on what might happen in a present day scenario of mobilization.

 

[Danjanou]

In all three of those cases, we had the luxury of several months time to train these new troops.

Which these days is unfortunately not the case. The "come as you are war" which requires troops on the ground ASAP, kind of limits the ability of using Reserves in large numbers and or units.

Perhaps they could be used in the second rotation, having had six months or so to train. Again though we face the problem of such things as numbers, training, and most of all political will to deploy them (can you say job protection).

 

[Bill Smy]

I believe the solution to this lies in political determination, leadership, and some revolutionary ideas on training reservists, especially army reservists.

A true reservist (working or student in the US or UK has about the same amount of time for military training as a Canadian (about 40 days a year, excluding summer concentrations). Yet the the US and UK were able to deploy not only individual reservists to Iraq, but formed units. Why can‘t Canada do this? Obviously, there‘s something wrong in the way reservists are regarded by the senior leadership (and this is really directed at the Regular Force which controls the training of the Reserves).

We could, but do we have the determination, political will, leadership and innovation.

One option which should be looked at is individual, promotional, and trades training. The Army Reserve needs to get out of the business of being the employment agency for the local high school or university, and to stop gearing all its activities to the school year. We got into this mess in 1957, the first year of the Student Militia.

Reserve units should accept recruits at any time, but those recruits should be loaded onto an 18-month, full time, course at a training establishment (depots, if you will). There they would be trained to regular force standards in their particular trade, and there would be enough time to do some cross-trade training (make them a driver, radio operator, etc), and a bit of leadership training.

The soldier returns to the unit trained. And he has made some money. And he is a more attractive employee in the civilian workplace (mature, disciplined, trained).

Promotional and trades training would also take place at training establishments, with the individual opting to take the course in one full gulp, or in a succession of two-week bits.

In about 5 years, about 70% of the unit would be trained to regular force standards, enabling the unit to focus its training on operational tasks. Every training session would have that as a basis, with the exception of a few administative and ceremonial activities. Every week-end exercise and summer concentration would be focused on operational training.

Slowly, we could develop an Army Reserve capable in being deployed on operations. But it will take time, money, political guts, leadership, and innovation.

It might be too much to ask.

 

[Cycophant]

An interesting proposal.

One quick question though - if we can barely afford to fully outfit and train our Regular forces, how could we come up with the money to spend it on a superior Reserve force?

It would seem to me that whatever budget increase or materials we get would have a priority system of the Regular Forces first, then Reserves.

 

[Ruthless4Life]

The money is there, just that the Liberals would rather spend it on something else other than the military.

 

[Spanky]

Agreed, the money is there. It‘s just being spent on other things.
An 18 month training session? Would that not take away from the whole idea of a part-time reserve force?
One of the biggest problems, having been in the reserves for a few years, is the fact that when we go on a weekend or concentration, not everyone is able to go. If the entire squadron or company or battery went on every scheduled weekend or concentration, we would not have to re-invent the wheel everytime we go out. This would enable us to build on past training, instead of starting over everytime we go out.
This can only happen if job protection legislation is enacted. Then there would be no choice. Every trooper would have to go.
Of course, having the kit we are supposed to have would also have to be a condition.

 

[gate_guard]

An 18 month training period is unreasonable to ask of reservists. The idea of the reserves is that it is part time. Thus, the majority of the reserves will always be made up of college and high school students. To keep them in you need effective and challenging training. The retention problem started the day the first army was formed.

The reason why the U.S. can deploy their reserves is that they have job legislation. Canada is currently tabling legislation for job protection for reservists in case of an emergency callout, such as a flood or severe winter storm. This type of callout isn‘t new to the reserves in recent years but if this legislation passes, then reservists jobs would be protected if such an emergency were to occur. But, this legislation does not apply to reservists who would volunteer for a tour to Bosnia, for example. That is where the U.S. differs in its legislation regarding its reserves, and that‘s why they can send a battalion of National Guard over to Iraq (also because they have the manpower). The only time Canada can order its reserves overseas is through an act of Parliament, which last happened in WWII (Dorosh, your welcome to make any corrections if I‘m wrong).

Regarding the money issue, the CF will always need more money. That is the nature of a military, it takes money to stay on top of the latest gear and training. But, to steal a metaphor from Infanteer, sometimes pumping more water into a leaky hose isn‘t the best solution (or something like that!). Patch the hose first, get rid of waste and the CF will have a lot more money to play with. The Liberals have given the CF x amount of dollars to play with, so instead of bitching for more, the CF should just be smart with what they have. We‘ll just have to wait and see if McCallum can do what he says he will.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

A true reservist (working or student in the US or UK has about the same amount of time for military training as a Canadian (about 40 days a year, excluding summer concentrations). Yet the the US and UK were able to deploy not only individual reservists to Iraq, but formed units. Why can‘t Canada do this?

Because we have no job protection legislation.

Obviously, there‘s something wrong in the way reservists are regarded by the senior leadership (and this is really directed at the Regular Force which controls the training of the Reserves).

There‘s nothing wrong in the way reservists are regarded by senior leadership; the Regular Force views them for exactly what they are. The problem is in the legislation - if you consider a problem to exist. Do we really want a deployable Reserve force? That‘s what the Regular Force is for.

We could, but do we have the determination, political will, leadership and innovation.

We don‘t have the legislation in place to protect the jobs of those reservists, nor do we have a training system in which Reservists can marry up with their Regular Force counterparts without six months of workup training.

One option which should be looked at is individual, promotional, and trades training. The Army Reserve needs to get out of the business of being the employment agency for the local high school or university, and to stop gearing all its activities to the school year. We got into this mess in 1957, the first year of the Student Militia.

Agreed.

Reserve units should accept recruits at any time, but those recruits should be loaded onto an 18-month, full time, course at a training establishment (depots, if you will). There they would be trained to regular force standards in their particular trade, and there would be enough time to do some cross-trade training (make them a driver, radio operator, etc), and a bit of leadership training.

Absolutely 100 percent the wrong direction to go. The Reserves should be gearing their courses to On Job Training, the way many courses used to be, with two week blocks in the summer. That way you can still join up or change trades while having a "real" job even long after you are done high school or university. As it is, many mandatory remusters have to quit because they can‘t get time off for training.

The soldier returns to the unit trained. And he has made some money.

Why would he go back to the reserves? You want to spend 18 months training him to the same standard a Reservist now attains in a three months?

Promotional and trades training would also take place at training establishments, with the individual opting to take the course in one full gulp, or in a succession of two-week bits.

Sounds ok.

In about 5 years, about 70% of the unit would be trained to regular force standards, enabling the unit to focus its training on operational tasks.

Why would anyone joining the Army for 18 months full time training then revert to the Reserves? 70 percent sounds like a bit of a pipe dream.

Would the other 30 percent be discriminated against? How would they be integrated into unit training?

Every training session would have that as a basis, with the exception of a few administative and ceremonial activities. Every week-end exercise and summer concentration would be focused on operational training.

How does this prepare the Army for general mobilization - assuming by "operational" you are talking about peacekeeping?

Slowly, we could develop an Army Reserve capable in being deployed on operations.

How many people would join the Militia knowing they could be called out? The Canadian Army should be all-volunteer. Unhappy reservists can be as slack as draftees. Is that really something we want?

 

[Ruthless4Life]

How many people would join the Militia knowing they could be called out?

I don‘t really see the whole point of spending all this money into the Militia and training a bunch of people that cannot be called out. Since the CF is already low in money wouldn‘t that be just a waste of it?

The Canadian Army should be all-volunteer.

People are not forced into the Reserves.

Unhappy reservists can be as slack as draftees. Is that really something we want?

If they are unhappy, they can quit, or they shouldn‘t have signed up since they hadn‘t thought about the army thoroughly.

If they don‘t want to be in the military, then the military sure don‘t want them.

Reserves, at least in my opinion, should not be regarded as just any other regular job. Signing up means making a long-term commitment - to be ready when you are called upon when you are needed for this country.

I‘ve once heard a person say this: "It‘s not a question of IF you go into combat, it‘s a question of WHEN, and if you are ready for it."

It‘s not just a job where you work once a week and a weekend a month and get paid for it. It‘s really about why you are doing it, regardless of money, time, and the comfort of staying at home.

Also in my opinion, Reservists should not feel that they are trained because their jobs require them to be trained - but because they are to do their very best to defend their country. When this point goes straight into their heads and the Reservists truly understands that, they will not not unhappy anymore.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

If they are unhappy, they can quit, or they shouldn‘t have signed up since they hadn‘t thought about the army thoroughly.

You missed the point entirely. If your reserve unit is activated, are you saying they should be just allowed to quit?

This is the case now - if a unit is mobilized, they still need to volunteer (or "attest") for war service.

Reserves, at least in my opinion, should not be regarded as just any other regular job. Signing up means making a long-term commitment - to be ready when you are called upon when you are needed for this country.

So in essence, you propose that we draft people - send unwilling troops - to peacekeeping missions? How is that defending Canada?

US reservists and civilians alike were extremely upset about being called out in recent years to participate in what was not seen as the direct defence of American interests. How would you justify calling out units to serve in Bosnia, especially to the employers who lose workers for over a year?

I can see calling out troops for war service; but to deploy "operationally" in a peace mission? It‘ll never happen.

Also in my opinion, Reservists should not feel that they are trained because their jobs require them to be trained - but because they are to do their very best to defend their country. When this point goes straight into their heads and the Reservists truly understands that, they will not not unhappy anymore.

Have you actually read any of CFL_Lui‘s posts? ;-)

 

[Recce41]

Nope
Why, because, some units have only 20 pers. All the tours I‘ve been on that Res came. Most fight, its the my unit is better than yours, my unit does it this way, etc,etc. I have instructed courses where Res instructors did not even follow the lesson plan. But used some crap from their unit.
Back during WW1/2, even Korea, units had a FULL Regts/Btl or at least a Sqn/Company. I have old pictures of the Windsors and E&Ks with 300 men on parade from the 50s. Now there was not even 300 from a whole Bge. Back then Res soldier‘s employers remembered WW1/2. Now most employers cannot even remember Nov 11. But some Res have dumb excuses for not showing. On this yrs ARTC and CTLC, which is to be taught by Ress. Only 5 NCOs showed and 2 Officers, instead of 24 NCOs and 7 Officers. So we REGs had to instruct, instead of going on leave. 90% of we instructors don‘t get leave this summer.
Example of the Instructors in Recce Troop (Armour School). June-Aug (ARTC,CTLC, (Ph 3, Ph4 which we are supost to instruct)) Sept (maybe a week/2 leave then Sept Adv Recce Surv Course-Nov, then Nov - Dec AFV Crew Commander Course/6B, Jan-March AFVCC/Ph3/6B/ Coyote Dvr, Surv Op/Gunner. March--May Ph3, June Prep for Res courses. We may have 2 weeks for Christmas and a March Brake. I was less busy at the Regt./Ottawa on tour.
So Ress have to get a grip and show up. Then they may get respect to go as a full unit.

 

[gate_guard]

All valid points, Recce. All too often, members of the reserves harp on the fact that everything is voluntary , a higher level of commitment is needed. I‘ve seen guys not show up with the excuse "I have to work" or "I can‘t get the time off" and you have to wonder if they even tried. I would say in defense of NCOs and SOME officers is that they usually have more at stake than the average pte or cpl. Half the NCOs in my unit are either police or corrections officers or firefighters and I respect the fact that they still make the commitment to come out. And these are the guys, just like a lot of reg NCOs, who have families at home and mouths to feed. Until there is job legislation, the reserves are going to continue to lag in providing instructors and fulfilling more roles than just plugging holes in a reg battalions orbat for the next roto. Until there is job legislation, your going to continue to have regiments on paper, but platoons on parade.
Of course, I‘m ignoring all the obvious problems of low standards for recruits, sub standard training, and retention in the reserves.

 

[ForeverPvt]

Its my belief that the reserves could not function on their own in a large scale operation. If you factor in the lack of standardized training, poor communication between individual units, and the fact that at least 40% of the members would run away at the first hint of war. I have yet to go on any exercise or operation that the regs haven‘t played a pivitol roll in running simply because we can‘t handle it on our own. Besides, who wounld want to sit in a trench with someone who only has to qualify on their weapons with dummy rounds? Just a thought.

 

[R_J]

I too would have to answer "no". The thing with reserves that I‘ve seen is that they usually have more motivation and dedication to their job (in a lot of cases they have to make sacrifices persoanlly and professionally to be there). However, when using that motivation you run into the problem of their leaders/role models are usually an NCO with half the time in of an equal ranked reg NCO (due to unit attrition, shorter leadership courses, etc). In addition to that, the standards have to increase. I‘ve instructed several reserve courses and have been amazed to find troops that have just been failed out of reg force QL2, but they were grabbed up by the reserves and passed the reserve equivalent (almost right after!). Also while teaching I have been amazed by the level of dedication shown by the reservists on the course. Then I‘ll see the same troops the following year and ask "what the **** happenned to them". A good way to offset this would be increase the number of RSS positions within the units, provide a few sgts and WOs with 12-20 years experience in key positions to be the role models of the leadership, as well as set up some training, run courses, etc. Then when reserves do come over to augment reg units, there is less of a culture shock.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Not to mention the fact that anytime the reserves go on a big call our or operation the individual units that are asked to supply equipment such as radios, vehicles & support weapons, they send their worst condition stuff. Makes a lot of sence sending $hit equipment for their guys to use whos lives will actually depend on it as opposed to keeping it locked up on the QM for week-end ex‘s.