- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Hey all, I was wondering if you think part of the problem behind funding, is Canadians Opinion of the CF as peacekeepers.
I was watching CBC newsworld and they were talking to the NDP Defence Critic and when the topic came up of should we be in Afghanistan, how long etc they used the magic world "Peacekeeper or peacekeeping". Does this term "Harm" the CF when it comes to the publics impression of it? To me the bottom line is the CF and all 3 services are there to protect the country. If there is a need then the Military goes to war to protect the lives of our country men, our ideals our way of life etc.
Granted no one wants to see our Soldiers, Airmen/women, sailors hurt or killed but when you put on that uniform no matter what trade,, what role you are in you might have to do something in combat. My aunt is in the AF - in logistics believe she does accounting and when she was deployed over to Afghanistan (Or in that part of the world around Afghanistan) I'm sure they had to qualify and train with the C-7 again.
Being an ex member of the RNR (Royal Newfoundland Regiment - Infantry Reserve Battalion) I don't know for sure but I think nor matter what you do, first of all you are trained to use a rifle in case you have to pick up a weapon in an emergency - maybe not so much for the AF and Navy (based on what she did I would think maybe for them also).
Anyhow back to the point if we stopped referring the members of the CF as peace keepers do you think the public would get behind spending more on the CF and be more accepting of Canada getting involved in combat operations?
I know Canada does an excellent job when it comes to peacekeeping, if not the best them I'm sure the CF is up there, but the public I thick they need to see our force as a combat force also. I think the public supports the CF but they need to know what we need, and the role that equipment plays for the CF and then maybe they would ask politicans more questions about why doesn't the CF have this that and the other thing...Maybe if the public viewed the CF for combat missions and roles also then they would support the CF more which would mean more resources for the entire Military - $$$$$, new equipment, etc.
Maybe that's to simplistic a view. Just my 2 cents.
I was watching CBC newsworld and they were talking to the NDP Defence Critic and when the topic came up of should we be in Afghanistan, how long etc they used the magic world "Peacekeeper or peacekeeping". Does this term "Harm" the CF when it comes to the publics impression of it? To me the bottom line is the CF and all 3 services are there to protect the country. If there is a need then the Military goes to war to protect the lives of our country men, our ideals our way of life etc.
Granted no one wants to see our Soldiers, Airmen/women, sailors hurt or killed but when you put on that uniform no matter what trade,, what role you are in you might have to do something in combat. My aunt is in the AF - in logistics believe she does accounting and when she was deployed over to Afghanistan (Or in that part of the world around Afghanistan) I'm sure they had to qualify and train with the C-7 again.
Being an ex member of the RNR (Royal Newfoundland Regiment - Infantry Reserve Battalion) I don't know for sure but I think nor matter what you do, first of all you are trained to use a rifle in case you have to pick up a weapon in an emergency - maybe not so much for the AF and Navy (based on what she did I would think maybe for them also).
Anyhow back to the point if we stopped referring the members of the CF as peace keepers do you think the public would get behind spending more on the CF and be more accepting of Canada getting involved in combat operations?
I know Canada does an excellent job when it comes to peacekeeping, if not the best them I'm sure the CF is up there, but the public I thick they need to see our force as a combat force also. I think the public supports the CF but they need to know what we need, and the role that equipment plays for the CF and then maybe they would ask politicans more questions about why doesn't the CF have this that and the other thing...Maybe if the public viewed the CF for combat missions and roles also then they would support the CF more which would mean more resources for the entire Military - $$$$$, new equipment, etc.
Maybe that's to simplistic a view. Just my 2 cents.

