Suggestion‘s to improve the C.F

[Jarnhamar]

"Something either happened or didn‘t, especially when it comes to clearly documented things like WWII."

History is writen by the victors (I know, over used)
Pick up a german history book about ww1 and 2 sometime and give it a read through. You‘ll be amazed at how "clearly documented" things can differ.


Theres 2 soldiers in my company who have 404‘s and only have a G1 licence and one or two (i think one) who has 404‘s with no civilian licence.

 

[Spr.Earl]

OI,NOW I IS SHOUTING,LET‘S GET BACK ON TOPIC!!!

Don‘t pee off a Hengineer!!
I‘ll blow all of ya away :>))) LOL

Come on ladies and gent‘s I started this thread hoping for some good ideas and constructive discussion so we may come out with some constructive ideas to improve both the reserve‘s and Reg.‘s!!!

No more slagging,O.K.

Adult Time!!

 

[PilotGal]

Spr. Earl,

Agreed. We went wayyyyyyyyyyyy off-topic, so let‘s just go back to the main topic.

D.

 

[deathwing5]

We propably wont go back on topic, and when we do i‘ll have nothing to say. I dont know how to improve the C.F. Perhaps some monkey butlers for the officers.

 

[nULL]

Here‘s a question: Does anyone who actually makes defence policy even care what any of you grunts think needs to be changed?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

nULL, that‘s another question that can only be answered by life experience.

When I was a bike courier, I was as vocal as anyone about management in our company.

When I was promoted to Operations Manager, as much as I wanted to convince myself I was still "one of the boys", the new priorities in front of me convinced me I couldn‘t. I also realized that the worker bees very often have no understanding whatsoever of how the queen bees do their business. It‘s why I don‘t often criticize the government since I have never actually been an MP and really don‘t know what kind of priorities they have.

I may vent some frustration about them on occasion, but I am convinced most of us will never know what THEY have to do in order to keep US equipped and operating.

Anyone who hasn‘t served in a managerial role really has nothing to say on the subject.

 

[nULL]

Yeah, I thought that‘s how it works. Don‘t get me wrong, I‘m not coming down against the Chretien government. I think that they‘ve done a good job, given what they had. They‘ve managed to not sell out the country (like those conservatives seem eager to do) and have kept Canada‘s voice distinct from the American one. Were there an election tomorow, I‘d vote Liberal. That said, my question was not directed to come down against the powers-that-be. Personally, I think that workers have no right to question the motives of their superiors. For that matter, I don‘t believe there should be influential opposition parties in parliament either. I was just wondering if in the CF, the input of the soldiers is listened to.

 

[gate_guard]

nULL,
Why shouldn‘t one question superiors? I‘m not saying widespread insubordination should be the order of the day and obviously if soldiers everywhere constantly questioned orders, the CF would never get anything done. There is a big difference, though, between being ordered to take a position even though you‘ll probably die and being ordered to commit acts of genocide on a civilian population. There is nothing wrong with questioning authority as long as its called for and appropriate. With regards to the government, yes we aren‘t in a position to know the problems and issues that MPs (not meatheads!) face day in and day out. But that is their job, our job as citizens is to voice our opinion when we don‘t like what the gov‘t is doing. The next step from never voicing out against the gov‘t is a fascist state where it is illegal to do so. I‘m proud of my country and part of that comes from the fact that we have the freedom, regardless of political views, to be heard. I have worked as a store manager and I understand how frustrating it can be to get things done when those under you don‘t understand the big picture or just don‘t do the job you need them to. But I think this problem is poor leadership more than it is an issue of insubordination. I would rather have subordinates who asked questions and gave me input than just blindly followed what I said. What would happen to the infantry if every new, inexperienced Lt who was given a platoon had a Warrant and Sergeants who didn‘t say anything when the Lt gave a bogus order? Like I said, there is a time and place for questioning orders.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I think gate_guard just stated that much better than I stated my response two posts ago.

The good thing about our system - both in the military and society in general - is our ability to listen to the varying levels of "command" (if you will) and learn from each other.

It is distressing that some sectors of the government turn a blind ear and eye to anyone who would seek to explain our desires, wants, or needs, and simply bull ahead with their own agendas. It often appears they only wish to exercise power for its own sake. I am sure that is true in some cases (and depending on the individual, sometimes in most cases).

But it is the best system we have. Take the good with the bad? Like I said, sometimes one thinks it will take a jetliner crashing into the CN Tower or something truly ****ty like that to get some people to better understand what it is we do, but it is also not all as bad as some would paint it either.

Soldiers gripe - it‘s what we do - but once it turns into wallowing in self pity (a fine line sometimes), there is something wrong.

So in the words of one of my former bosses, if we at this end take care of the nickles and dimes, hopefully the dollars at that end will take care of themselves.

 

[nULL]

It is distressing that some sectors of the government turn a blind ear and eye to anyone who would seek to explain our desires, wants, or needs, and simply bull ahead with their own agendas. It often appears they only wish to exercise power for its own sake. I am sure that is true in some cases (and depending on the individual, sometimes in most cases).


OK, well, alot of that is easy to understand and agree to, but I‘m suddenly curious about soldier politics. For instance, on just about every Canadian army forum, including this one someone or other seems to bring up the Canadian Alliance white paper, and then you have a whole lot of people (albeit not all of them soldiers....or so it would appear) start badmouthing the Liberal government, and claiming that they vote conservative.

So here‘s a question for YOU. Do you, as soldiers, really think that it would be worth having a better equipped military in exchange for Canada‘s social programs? I mean, that IS what the cost would be.

(I say "better equipment" because everybody else says that; truth be told, I have no idea the state of your kit....yet.)

It just seems to me that slandering our leaders seems to be a Canadian tradition, that the military seems all too willing to carry on. **** , most of you openly slam Chretien; were this a US army forum board, and one of you started slandering Bush, you can sure as **** bet that people would start flaming, even though Bush deserves the harsh critisism oh so much more.

(Ok, raise hands, how many of you want to start grilling me for saying that about Bush, even though he is a foreign leader?)


The next step from never voicing out against the gov‘t is a fascist state where it is illegal to do so. I‘m proud of my country and part of that comes from the fact that we have the freedom, regardless of political views, to be heard.


gate_guard, how many times have you had someone who was in no way associated with the military, and not "in" per se, start openly bashing the CF? Doesn‘t that aggravate you knowing that that person is going to influence other people, that that person is going to use their uninformed vote to choose the next government who in turn will make your decisions for you? Just look at how many Canadians try to take the fifth amendment, or claim that Canada is a republic. Do you like the thought of those people being on the same level as you? What about the crazy person who lurks in back alleys, biting the heads off rats? Do you think he should be heard? I don‘t know...I‘ve always believed that political power should be centralized, not spread out or shared. Couldn‘t you define a facist state as one where things get DONE, where those most fit to wield power end up?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

But how many fascist states actually worked within the boundaries of human rights, or even for that matter worked efficiently?

Hitler‘s Germany was based on a society marginalizing huge segments of the population - Jews, the retarded, the elderly, gypsies, immigrants, even Catholics came in for their share of mistreatment.

Mussolini got the trains to run on time, at least, but their foreign policy was also predicated on the idea that they were a new world power, when their weak military really didn‘t allow that to happen.

A Fascist government doesn‘t bring order for the sake of order, it usually brings order so the fascist government itself can remain in power; are there any examples of benevolent fascist states you could share with us? Would Cuba count?

 

[nULL]

Good point, but there‘s got to be a first one

However, there are lots of "democratic" nations which suffer from equally as disturbing problems. For instance, not sure if you‘ll read this in time, but right now on the Passionate Eye is a documentary called "War Photographer"....half of the countries being portrayed are those of democratic nations.

And what of Cuba? We‘ll never know if it could have worked, thanks to massive US sanctions.

 

[onecat]

"So here‘s a question for YOU. Do you, as soldiers, really think that it would be worth having a better equipped military in exchange for Canada‘s social programs? I mean, that IS what the cost would be."

I really don‘t think it has anything to do with social programs; the reason the CF lacks the manpower and equippment...is totally a Liberal policy. This my opinion, but their record speaks for it‘s self, the Liberals have been a party that has thought much of military. Even going back the days of King, you can see their distaste for the military.

Canada already has enough money to do both, the defence department doesn‘t need to be much more... maybe 16 billion a year, and have the other programs it‘s budget supports removed and there would be enough money to would allow for more people and better equippemnt. And this would still allow a full range of social programs. But this will never ever happen under a Liberal gov‘t.

I‘m not in the CF yet but, but when I do get in I don‘t plan on changing my views any time soon. I think the CF should be more politial, so it can get the budgets and the money it needs to do it‘s job... just like the RCMP or the local police forces... thgey speak out when their budgets are cut too much... they say this won‘t work and the public supports this. The CF brass should be doing it too.

 

[McInnes]

the problem is, the public often does not support our military. the most common response to it that ive expericanced is "well we dont even need a military in canada". so if the public does not support the military, the mil. doesnt get the proper amount of funding that it needs. cuz after all, the money that would be spent on national defence, could be benefitting that person all the time, instead of whenever their asses are on the line, which doesnt tend to happen at all in canada, being the peacefull nation that we are. (sigh)

 

[gate_guard]

And that is one of the sacrifices that we make that often goes unnoticed.

 

[haplo6]

I think the CF, reserves specifically should introduce/reintroduce more competition. Competition at the Troop/Squadron, even unit level will force members and units to wake up and face the reality of their own capabilities. With the current funding shortages and recruitment problems competition could be a simple answer.

For example you could take the 3 Armoured Recce Units in Ontario and pit them up against each other at all levels and in all roles. Various competitions, possibly leading up to one big one would allow everyone to learn, improve and really objectively see how well they are progressing. The incentive: Losing unit gets axed! Harsh yes, but with funding and manpower shortages this is necessary. Allow the strong to survive and thrive.

Competition Drives our lives, business and industry. Why not let it drive the military?

Just my 2 cents, take it for what it is.

 

[Danjanou]

generals being kept out of the political scene?

You know Michael there are some that would argue that the opposite is true. That some of Generals are too political. Anyone remember the great CDS missing Somalia paper search?

 

[Spr.Earl]

That‘s the trouble with our system ,once an officer goes above Capt.,it all become‘s political,to get promoted and they get the C.J. syndrome and forget all about what they were taught about looking after thier men and performing in the field.

And we bitch about the Brit‘s about thier class sociaty!Our Military is one big class structre!
If your a ringer,your in!!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I participated in the search for the Somalia radio logs. I can safely report, without breaching national security, that the Somalia papers were not found in the desk belonging to one Corporal MA Dorosh, Finance Clerk extraordinaire for the Calgary Highlanders.

Seriously, what a boondoggle; as I recall it, every clerk in the brigade stopped work for a morning to search for these papers.

As to the main point - let‘s not confuse service politics with national politics. While I don‘t disagree that there are always "politics" going on inside the military - **** , even the junior ranks mess has its own political codes - I think what we are discussing are generals being allowed to promote the Army as if it were an interest group in the same manner as, say, a pro-gun group or an anti-abortion group.

There are some grassroots organizations, such as Canadians For Military Preparedness, but serving soldiers don‘t seem to be at the head of these groups.

The question is - should that change?

 

[Gorgo]

In an attempt to get this conversation back to where the original poster wanted to ask in the first place, I personally believe we -- and I mean as many people as possible -- need to engage in a national debate over what exactly <b>are</b> Canada‘s stragetic and tactical defense needs in the first place, <b>then</b> restructure the CF to match those needs as best as possible.

IMHO, since the Cold War ended, the CF has been suffering from a considerable level of drift when it came to what exactly it should do and why. This is the first thing we need to correct before we launch into a conversation over exactly WHAT we need to do to make things better.