Suggestion‘s to improve the C.F

[Michael Dorosh]

Why can‘t we live up to this ideal? Any good reason not to? What happens when the company clerk has to hump 50km through the hills with her company?

As an RMS Clerk myself, it always occurred to me that most of the people in my trade, at least in the reserves, have consistently gotten medical chits to avoid that kind of duty? At any rate, it sometimes seems I‘m in a minority of clerks in my corner of the world that I‘ve actually seen in the field.

In the reserve world, there are two factors at play - civilian jobs that don‘t provide much time for exercise (clerks in the reserves tend to gravitate towards administrative jobs civvie-side, or if not then are in Class B positions and don‘t do regular PT as they ought to - volleyball on Friday morning once a week doesn‘t count). The other is retention; again, the lack of martial spirit among the population at large tends to have clerks (if I may be so bold as to speak for them in general) not appreciating the need for them to qualify on the weapons, keep fit, etc.

Not to sound like the pot calling the kettle black; I was in much better shape when I was a bike courier than I am now working in a hospital. But I do enjoy going to the field and doing what is asked of me. So far, that has included mostly driver-signaller tasks, though I did my share of walking (short) patrols on the last combined ex we did with the CP Police.

I suspect this discussion applies more to the Regulars than the reserves anyway, so I won‘t hijack the thread any further - I just want to point out that not all the people in the support trades are unaware of the problems. There really hasn‘t been any impetus for many of them to do anything about it, which I agree is problematic - until one is asked to provide a solution, which is rather elusive.

Sometimes one almost wishes one of those airliners on 9/11 had crashed north of the American border.

I‘ll also add this; I‘m 5‘6" - my trade means I likely won‘t be employed in a platoon weapons det near you anytime soon. Ask me to carry my ruck, webbing, helmet, flak vest, rifle PLUS a Carl G and two boxes of C6 ammo and I‘ll do my best, but I probably won‘t make it to the top of that mountain.

If the CO wants a letter done up asking for funding in the next ten minutes, though, I type 85 words per minute and have a working knowledge of the English language sufficient to preclude me from using a spell checker. Is this a valuable skill I bring to my company/battalion? Yes. Should it be enough to get me a pass on carrying the Gustav?

 

[PilotGal]

I don‘t think weight OR height for that matter determine anything. It‘s the amount of determination one has that will play the key role in whether one succeeds in the military. (There are no specific weight, height, or age requirements, are there?)

And going back to the main question... improving the Canadian Forces -

1. More funding for the Canadian Forces!
2. More recruits! Honestly, look at the size of our country and look at the number of recruits we have in the military. Give more importance to qualifications rather than citizenship status. Background/security checks are easy to conduct. Get more determined people, they usually do better in the military.
3. Better, more advanced equipment - I don‘t think we have a wide variety of arms or planes or artillery! We might have good logistics, but we‘re not even close to being as good as the US forces with regards to equipment.
4. More fighter jets. Maybe get more CF-18s.

Maybe I‘m wayyyyyy out of line here, but well, that‘s my $0.02.

D.

 

[gate_guard]

PilotGal,
I think I understand your underlying point, which is fitness only takes you so far but determination takes you to the top. I agree, to a point. But if someone is just not physically prepared to a certain extent, no amount of determination will carry them. The military, and the combat arms in particular, demands consistency; the ability to perform at a peak level whenever called upon. For a guy or girl that can‘t run a few kilometers without stopping, they aren‘t going to be able to perform day in and day out at a consistent level. A certain level of physical fitness should be maintained no matter what your trade and no matter how determined you are. You cannot measure determination. You can measure fitness.

 

[PilotGal]

Yes, very true. But my point is, you should measure fitness, not weight or height. By determination I meant both emotional and physical determination. I‘m sure there are people in the army who are more than like 180 lbs and/or shorter than 5‘10". Of course, fitness means everything, and that‘s what I was referring to. Someone who is not of the "ideal" height or weight can succeed by determination to be fit.

Of course, you‘ll have to be able to run for a few KM without stopping if you‘re even thinking of APPLYING. That‘s for sure. I know that I‘m relatively "short" compared to the other applicants, but I work on being fit, and I *know* that I can do it. And that‘s the main thing.
And that also brings me to the argument that people should NOT be judged based on their height or weight, but rather their fitness and qualifications, which is apparently not what the army is doing in *some* (not all) cases. Anyone who passes the basic medical checks and background checks (including non-citizens and non-landed immigrants, people like me), should be given a shot to prove themselves worthy of being in the army (by showing that they are fit and consistent).

D.

 

[nULL]

1. More funding for the Canadian Forces!


Not likely to happen, there just isn‘t enough money, and there are far, FAR more important things to spend money on, like social programs for ALL Canadians. Would you rather have a multi-billion dollar wing of Su37 fighter planes that you‘ll most likely never even go NEAR, or a functioning social health care system that does not discriminate towards those of lesser social status?


Back to physical requirements, I still think that the army should take what it gets, and make an effort to force recruits to conform to a set standard. Wouldn‘t it make more sense to say "in order to go on tour, you must be able to do XYZ?" I mean, why be picky? People join the army for different reasons, but I bet quite a few do it to become more physically active; I‘m looking forward to being in much better shape once "they" freakin‘ call be back.


2. More recruits! Honestly, look at the size of our country and look at the number of recruits we have in the military. Give more importance to qualifications rather than citizenship status. Background/security checks are easy to conduct. Get more determined people, they usually do better in the military.


I think nationality is a big deal because the CF does not want people who may/may not have decided to live in a country just to exploit its social benefits, or because their own country is "worse". Becoming a citizen of a country means that you have proven yourself willing to share the values and ideals of the country; which is the reason the CF exists in the first place.


3. Better, more advanced equipment - I don‘t think we have a wide variety of arms or planes or artillery! We might have good logistics, but we‘re not even close to being as good as the US forces with regards to equipment.


Again, back to the money. The US forces are as good as they are because they have alot more tax payers, and their government leaves many services to the private sector. As such, there are currently 45 million people in the United States without adequete health coverage; by 2020, that number is expected to reach 80 million.

(In 2001, there were only 31 million Canadians)



4. More fighter jets. Maybe get more CF-18s.


What‘s the point? The number we have now (around 80 if I‘m not mistaken) has proven to be all that is required by the CF. When are we next going to contribute any more than a dozen anyway to some far-off war? A strategic airlift capability on the other hand, would be much more practical.

 

[PilotGal]

I think nationality is a big deal because the CF does not want people who may/may not have decided to live in a country just to exploit its social benefits, or because their own country is "worse". Becoming a citizen of a country means that you have proven yourself willing to share the values and ideals of the country; which is the reason the CF exists in the first place.

Ummmm, actually, I‘ve never even thought about benefitting from the social programs in Canada, not even medical. I‘m not here to exploit anyone. I pay, and for 2 years now, have paid for my insurance and all medical expenses, etc. I‘ve also paid taxes, and benefited your country and its various businesses.

What I‘m trying to say is that if someone has no one in the country and has come as a tourist, that‘s an exaggeration and the application should be rejected. But someone who has lived in Canada for 4 years, paid taxes, got his/her post-secondary education in Canada, volunteered, and moreover has close relatives who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents in the process of getting Citizenship, as well as himself/herself is in the process of applying for immigration and is VERY likely to get it, should be given the *chance* to join the forces, on the condition that he/she has already applied for immigration. I‘m talking about giving a *chance* instead of throwing someone‘s application away or not even sending an application.

And of course, MOST people come to a country because they want to improve their situation, and not particularly because they want to "enrich" Canada‘s culture. In my case, it‘s because I have relatives here, including my grandmother, aunt, and cousin, and my sister has already applied for immigration and her papers are being processed. It‘s also because I have lived in Canada for 2 years, and I love the culture and want to be a part of it. It‘s not rocket science. It‘s just plain, simple reasons and objectives. Would the immigration department reject someone who has all her family in Canada? I don‘t think so - otherwise, all the other applications would be rejected if an application like mine is rejected. So technically, what is the point in not allowing someone like me to apply, and causing me to waste like 2 years before being able to join the Reserves and close to 5 years before being able to join the Regulars? It‘s stuff like this that the Canadian Forces need to improve. Policies that are unfair to those who really want to be part of this country and to serve in its Armed Forces. Remember, when I apply, I would have 4 years of experience in Canadian life and lifestyle, it‘s not like I‘m coming as a tourist and applying for the CF. So there are no logical underpinnings for not allowing people who still don‘t have their immigration papers processed but are in Canada, have excellent references and qualifications, and a post-secondary degree from a recognized Canadian university, to *try* to join the CF... Of course, I know that is the *law* but well, someone asked how to *improve* the CF, and that is one of my suggestions - just ignoring someone‘s application at face value just because either the "Canadian Citizen" or "Landed Immigrant" checkboxes aren‘t checked, is just ignorant, illogical, and unfair. In my case, you can fairly assess my chances of becoming a landed immigrant - almost 100% once I finish my degree, and I‘m sure the CF have the brains to assess that situation, if only they would look at it.

That‘s my main suggestion to improve the CF. Of course, it might not appeal to you because it‘s a very minor and specific suggestion/improvement, whereas you were looking for more general ones, but well, you gotta start somewhere. In most cases (even ALL cases, I would say), non-citizens joining the army is NOT an indicator that they are doing it to influence/hasten their immigration/citizenship application processes. Getting into the army is a career. For someone like me, I have no chance of joining the army back in Lebanon - they don‘t allow women into the army except for office jobs, which is NOT what I want to do. It is for reasons like those that people come to Canada - for opportunities for development and future.

Anyhow, I consider myself because Canada has given me something no rejection of immigration or citizenship status can take away. Immigration is an issue of mutual trust, and if they are not willing to trust me, there is nothing much I can do except respect their position and move on. It is not up to me to make those changes in policies for the Canadian Forces either. It is up to Canadian citizens, people like you, who have the chance of joining and whose suggestions are listened to. I would‘ve agreed with you that if I were from the States or some other developed country that had an Air Force and allowed women into the army, that would become a security issue, but I‘m a woman, and won‘t be allowed into my country‘s army anyhow, so there is no issue of me going back and taking all that knowledge to my country. Heh, nope, I‘m not whining. I‘m just stating my case and how the CF can try and improve. I really hope someone who *can* change things in the CF is reading this.
How many Canadians would want to lose 7 years of their life, and join the army after they‘re 30 if they can help getting in at 20? Think about it.
And just because I don‘t have a piece of paper or a passport that signifies that I‘m a Canadian citizen, doesn‘t mean that I am an unreliable person, especially that I have lived in Canada for almost the period that it takes for someone to become a citizen. And THAT is my point.

D.

 

[nULL]

Hey hey! If it were up to me (or anyone cared what I thought ) I‘d let you in! You listed some very specific reasons, but like you said, I was going for something considerably more general. I just don‘t think that in a country such as ours that the beurocracy is terribly efficient; I doubt they look at these things one case at a time. I had some passport issues about 3 years ago, and although the issue was very minor, it was only recently (6 months ago!) resolved. Had someone taken a look at my case and seen how trivial it was, I wouldn‘t have had a problem. I think the main problem is that if they treated ONE person differently, they‘d have to do the same thing for everyone, which would obviously create problems.

Best of luck to you though!

(BTW, what did you think of CSCI? I fell halfway asleep during multidimensional arrays way back in C )

 

[PilotGal]

Heh, sorry if that came on too strong. You‘re right, sometimes we can‘t do anything about it. But I really hope that in the long run, the conditions would be changed and more open to people who really want to get in. I don‘t think they‘d lose anything by looking at all applications, I‘m sure there won‘t be a million more applications if they accept applications from non-citizens and non-landed-immigrants. You know what I mean?

I fell asleep during my COSC classes. I did fairly well on them though (lowest mark was a B), but that was just not interesting for me. I switched out as soon as possible. I don‘t want a career in anything related to computer science, or even an office/admin job in the CF. I‘m mainly interested in Air Force and alternately Infantry or Artillery.

D.

 

[Ruthless4Life]

And yes, the CF and its recruits need a specific attitude change too - is the Canadian Army the best army in the world? Well, is it? If it‘s not, and you‘re saying it is, then it‘s a step back, not a step forward. And for that matter, have you served in the US Army to know what they have and what they don‘t?

There is no best army, and no one said we are the best. Almost all western armies are equally well trained. And about the US Army, the US population is 10X ours.

We are not THE best, but we are one OF the best I can assure you that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Luxembourg could have the "best" army but you also have to take into consideration the size.
One US aircraft carrier has more sailor then we have combat soldiers.
Quantity has a quality of it‘s own (Stalin).
Our army is pretty good but we are missing a lot of things that other countries have. Ability to move our troops around. Training using combat aircraft. Attack helicopters. Main battle tanks.

As negitive as it sounds, in a conventional war we could only fight an enemy up to brigade size, nothing more. (Taking into consideration that 3:1 doctrine). In 7 years i‘ve never seen or heard of an excersise with infantry or tankers working with CF18s. (Could be im sheltered though)
If Canada faced off against iraq who do you think would win?

 

[PilotGal]

If Canada faced off against iraq who do you think would win?

It‘s hard to say... There really is no simple answer to that. I for one don‘t think USA "won" the war on Iraq. Not YET anyway. But that‘s another issue. I think Iraqis have good guerilla tactics, but not good equipment. Question remains, is that particular combo good enough to force us to back off? And are our forces coordinated enough on air, field, and so on, to be able to achieve victory or force them to surrender/withdraw?

I don‘t claim to know how the Canadian Forces function, and how good their logistics are, and there are different views on this amongst military personnel too, but I don‘t think the Canadian Forces are one of those forces that *can* do a sweep-takeover of any city without having massive loss in lives. Think about the number of people our forces would‘ve lost if *we* were the ones who had declared war on Iraq... 149 dead only? I don‘t know. Hard to tell. There really is no fixed "fact" on that one, I think. It depends on your enemy and their tactics. Just like the Viet Nam war. It‘s not always about the good equipment or the good training. If you‘re in the wrong spot at the wrong time, even if you have a machine gun, you‘re gonna go - busted. The question now is - do you have good logistics? Because if you have neither the logistics nor the equipment and technology, then you‘re kaput. But if you have excellent logistics and not very good equipment, then you have a chance there. Do the CF have good logistics? Someone said our logistics were brutal. Brutally good or brutally bad? And, if it was brutally bad, do we have the good guns, fighter jets, etc. to keep the edge on our enemies?

D.

 

[Jarnhamar]

If it just us vs them we would get out a$$s handed to us
Thats just a matter of physics and quantity though.

"I think Iraqis have good guerilla tactics, but not good equipment."
I‘m not too sure about that. They took out a few M1a1 main battle tanks and some appaches. I heard syria or someone was giving them advanced russian equipment.

It‘s sad how many americans keep dying over in iraq. I can‘t stand hearing about iraq people starting crap with the us, especially after what the US did for them. Im sure you can argue that the US did some bad things but in the end they still had their psycho of a leader kicked out and they are safer for it.

 

[Spr.Earl]

Arty I‘m just as bad getting side tract but have ended my post‘s let‘s get back on track.


So folk‘s let‘s get back on track with the subject.

Let‘s start with should reserve course‘s be intergrated with reg force.i.e. x reservist‘s slotted in reg.course‘s?
What would the benifit‘s and shortfall‘s be?

The Brit reserve‘s all go on Reg force course‘s and their Reserve‘s out do our‘s any day!

I‘m one of the lucky few who has had reg force
course‘s and have the qualification‘s for
Dump driver,F.E.L.,machine gunner‘s,Comm‘s course,just to name three.

 

[deathwing5]

that reminds me, You can get a military license to drive vehicles even if you dont have your civillian drivers license right?

The tracked artillery, I think it‘s called the 109 155 mm I really love the way it looks.

 

[Spr.Earl]

Wrong!!

That went out yonk‘s ago.

You must have a civie licence first before you get your 404‘s.

When I joined in 76 no sweat your 404‘s covered you then in about 78,79 they made it manditory you have a civie licence before you could take a vehicle drver‘s course.


Argon you just side tracked!!!!

Let‘s back on track (no pun intended)

 

[deathwing5]

lol alrite alrite no sweat.

 

[Spr.Earl]

LOL!!
Have any good suggestion‘s?

 

[deathwing5]

Nope i have no opinion on that. I just want to get in soon. I got my interview in 3 days, and everydays‘ been feelin like a week. Then maybe i‘l have an opinion on it.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Spr - things may have changed again since 79, at least in the reserves. I did my Dvr Wh in 1995 or so, and we had at least one candidate who had never driven a car in his life.

 

[muskrat89]

Sapper Earl - not to stay off track, but I remember between 83 and 96 - Driver Wheeled courses being run at the Arty School, where guys didn‘t have their civvie licenses. You are probably correct about the policy change, but I have to believe that even in the 80s and 90s, Units were being selective about enforcing it....

Pilot Gal you arrogance and lack of deference serves only to build your pedestal even higher - someday you will be toppled off. There are plenty of folks on this board that I don‘t always agree with, but I always respect their opinions because they have earned the right, and gained the experience required to form them. I have seen 100s like you - in all walks of my life - theorists - with no practical experience, but an answer for everything. All ended up with shattered perceptions. Those with enough huevos to admit it were always 100% in agreement - "I wish I would have listened". Your opinions mean nothing to me, frankly - but your attitude is as ignorant as I‘ve seen on this board. Your starry-eyed idealism won‘t last long, in the real world. Good luck, because it appears you won‘t have recruited many friends to lean on. Cheers