The General Hillier Years. The Merged Superthread

[Storm]

Makes sense to me for him to stay here. We're useless to any allies until the home front is sorted out, and we already have some heavy brass sitting around NATO. What would he do over there that other brass can't? Time's better spent doing real work than taking photo ops with the PM as far as I'm concerned.

 

[DAA]

With General Henault being the NATO Military Adviser and Vice-Admiral Davidson being the CANMILREP, how many Generals do you think we really need in attendance?  Besides it most likely would have placed Gen Hillier in an awkward position being the newly appointed CDS.  Who would the PM's delegation have really been consulting with on military matters, the newly appointed CDS or the former CDS.

Either way you look at it is newsworthy.  Imagine the headlines "Canada Sends 3 Generals to NATO Summit"    ;D

 

[PPCLI Guy]

There is nothing sinister here:

"And he was told that the other chiefs of defence staff are not going (to Brussels)," the official said.

Plans change all the time.

Dave

 

[Pencil Tech]

I believe his 'lashing out' was a staged event with the cooperation of the PMO.

 

[Wizard of OZ]

Don't hold your breath for a big influce of cash just yet.  The defence policy has to be written before any major monies will be granted.  It was in the paper today.  I can't find the link right now, when i do i will post it here.  I think this may turn out to be a vicious circle again, budget no policy no budget no new election no budget no policy.................. 

 

[RatCatcher]

The fact that Henault actually commented in front of media after budget increased my opinion of him... as of my recollection nobody except DeChastelain ever did that. And the fact that he said that it was a start and that the decline over the past ten years can't be rectified in one means to me that he has a future vision of how he sees the CF in the next decade. A reminder too that I beleive he sent the defence/foreign policy back to the people writing it because he didn't like it. 

I think he will fight for ALL of our best interests, Air Force, Navy and of course the Army, not to mention ADM-HR(Mil) since it seems those of us that fall under that group are appart somehow..... but I digress.

Anyway IMHO Bravo Zulu to the CDS!

 

[Kirkhill]

The fact that Henault actually commented in front of media after budget increased...

Good post RatCatcher but perhaps you mean Hillier?

 

[RatCatcher]

ooooops...sorry 'bout that...sometimes fingers move before brain...hence why my curling shot has been off lately!! lol :blotto:

 

[buzgo]

Did anyone attend the event at the Congress Centre where General Hillier addressed everyone yesterday? I am on leave and couldn't make it, but I'm interested in what was said.

 

[54/102 CEF]

Points I remember from yesterday at 1100 Ottawa Congress Centre

1.      15 years after fall of Berlin Wall our doctrine and posture still reflect give all Canada has to NATO vs. the Russian Bear
2.      The bear is still there but more of a partner / competitor than opponent.
3.       Failed and failing states are the threat to the west or stable nations of the world - we are a part of that and we have to contribute - to show them the way of the west / or combat their surrogates if persuasion fails. He talked about shooting the enemy!
4.       There will be a re-alignment of how troops and ships / ac deploy - he spoke of a Joint package meaning a Naval Air and Land component being assigned to what we now know as Tours / Theatre deployments to Afghanistan / Iraq / Bosnia - ac could be CF18 / Herc / or smaller
5.       Does not mean tanks are required. Tanks were never deployed by us since Bosnia etc got the full attention of the world. AMDT 1901 Teus Fort Fumble time ---- he really talked up the perfoirmance of the LAV 25 basic model USMC used on the right flank of the advance to Bagdad and North of there -- then he spoke briefly of Coyote - the surveillance vehicle? and the latest troops carrier LAV - sorry I am a just an ex sapper roaming the halls of the freshly pressed CF greens at the Fort - unsupervised I might add   :.
6.       There is a need to cast off high cost old eqpt for newer more capable kit.
7.       We have to invest in the eqpt to get there and support our selves. He danced around the topic of C17 but he did not shy away from JSS ship.
8.       The 8000 new troops will be trained by the army. 1 pipeline, which sends out basic trainees - 3000 of these being reserves.
9.       There will be a littoral focus â “ most of the areas we go to are well within ship platforms range including surveillance eqpt to see and then be capable of hitting things or ensuring the area is shaped the way the alliances want it to be.
10.     He spoke openly of the need to clarify the future of certain units, which do not exist, and the formation of something called the Special Operations Group.
11.     He targeted internal Cold Warriors and Cold War solutions based staffs that things are about to change.
12.     Spoke of Canada Command and that we have to be able to cooperate internal to Canada and external in North America with US Military.
13.    He said the Minister is well aware of the need and the implications of not equipping the forces to the best possible state.
14.    Foreign deployments will be a more blended approach from other govt depts and businesses participating - get some action going in beat up areas of the world.
15.    He noted that internal or external to Canada people don't ask if you are Air - Army - Navy - Reg or Reserve- all they know is Canadian Servicemen and women are there to assist and that Cdn Tps reputation precedes them and it is universally positive wherever he has served.
16.    He said the operational experience that currently exists is a great asset at all levels and he is going to focus the CF to support the operators.
17.    Then he said it won't be easy but he will give it his best - he feels he has strong support from the Government and they understand what CF can do for them.

Warm and Fuzzy feeling? Very - he is an excellent speaker and sprinkles his talk with anecdotes of life in Nfld, which show he is very approachable. He gave a small vignette of how the world is changing - while he was on duty in Kabul he told of a fire call at the Cdn Embassy - a Bosnian Fire Crew attended the blaze and security was provided by a Croatian Company.

Can it work? Yes - but I say public hangings are nec to encourage the troops - I would have thought after 15 years the staffs would have come up with a few more nimble ideas ----- what are we paying them for?

Hopefully those brain tidbits will help others who may have been there do a memory extraction.

 

[ArmyRick]

Putting the cold war mentality behind us is the first step in the right direction. Alot oserving people won't like this...

As Rafiki (the monkey in the movie the Lion King) says "Change is good"

 

[Sandbag]

Sounds like EBO (effects based operations) are finally on the horizon.  I agree it will challenge staff and decision makers alike.  It will be interesting to see what changes he proposes and how they are implemented and how we will fit that into continental defence.

 

[Rfn]

The CDS came to CFB Winnipeg to give a presentation on his ideas on Friday.(And he made clear they were onlyideasuntil a policy review was completed.) I was very impressed. He gave a good one.

Some points I remember:

-- A Special Operations group to be set up

--He explained a snake and bear analogy: that we are capable of fighting both, but currently we train to fight the "bear" (enemy conventional forces) by default, and train to fight the "snakes" (asymmetrical forces from failed states) only when we have to. This he wants to change, to set the default on "snake" and equip/train/organize accordingly while retaining some conventional capability.

--As was covered already on this thread, he reiterated the Air Force & Navy's major role was to support the Army. He mentioned his priority for aviation: TRANSPORT. He was impressed with the German's helicopters in Afghanistan, and their heavy lift high altitude performance.

-- Foreign missions are now to take a "Team Canada" approach. That is, govt orgs such as the Red Cross and CIDA would be involved.

There wasn't a lot of good news for that crowd (most of them were Air Force) but they gave him a standing ovation when he was finished! I think everyone appreciated his forthright tell-it-like- it-is attitude. For once I have a clear idea what is going on and why it is going on. And I believe anyone that has painted him as a "politition" has done him a disservice.

The only weakness in the plan is if Prime Minister Dithers gets cold feet and scuttles it after the CDS starts tinkering with sacred cows...

There was a lot more but I can't remember it all... I hope someone else that was there will post the stuff I missed.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

In todays Toronto Star...

Top soldier's weapon: Charm
Chief of defence urges support for Canadian soldiers

Command structure shakeup a priority, he says


BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU

Hidden deep in a crowd of 5,000 rioters, the gunman likely thought he was anonymous and invisible. But Rick Hillier was watching.

It was May, 2001, and Hillier, the Canadian in charge of 2,000 coalition troops in the Bosnian town of Banja Luka, nervously watched as the rioters closed in on diplomats and ambassadors who had taken refuge in a house.

The sharp-eyed cameras of a U.S. Aurora patrol aircraft flying 23,000 feet overhead had spotted the gunman, with a rifle slung over his shoulder, and relayed the video feed to Hillier's vehicle on the front line below.

"Now clearly he's there with a weapon ... he's there to do some business with it," Hillier recalled yesterday. "Our challenge was to talk our sniper detachments which were around the city `on to' that individual," he told a Toronto audience.

The sniper, he said, was "effectively neutralized."

"Here's a little clue. If you go out into a riot and if you're intent on doing something seriously wrong there, do not wear a bright red shirt," Hillier said.

Hillier, now Canada's top general, used the story as one example of the different conflicts that now confront Canadian troops on missions abroad.

In this case, Hillier said the lesson was the need for Canada to improve its own surveillance capabilities, including upgrading the country's fleet of Aurora patrol aircraft.

And it was just one "war" story the new chief of defence staff told yesterday in a luncheon speech to the Canadian Institute of International Affairs at the King Edward Hotel.

Hillier used charm and humour to urge support for "your men and women in uniform" as he launched on a sales pitch to build backing for the military.

Canada's armed forces are at a "turning point," he said, thanks to a defence minister, Bill Graham, who has an international perspective, top officers who have more operational experience than anytime in recent memory, and a recent budget that promised more than $12 billion in new spending over five years.

With the long-awaited defence and international policy reviews expected within weeks, Hillier wasn't spilling secrets yesterday to the crowd of academics, journalists and former politicians.

But he dropped some hints. He said the threat facing Canada has changed "from the Bear" to a "ball of snakes" â ” terrorists and organized crime â ” and suggested that the country's military has been slow to react.

"We've got to be relevant to those threats that are real around the world," Hillier said.

He related how a former Afghan finance minister told an Ottawa conference recently that the Canadian troops serving in his country were a "powerful nation-building tool."

"I thought you'd like to know that since they are your soldiers and since we are demanding a lot of money from you to make ... sure those soldiers and sailors and air men and women are well-equipped to do their job," Hillier said.

"I think it's a reflection of the broad abilities that the Canadian Forces and the men and women who wear the uniform bring to the operations internationally," he said.

That tale also provides a telling glimpse of the role expected to be laid out for Canada's fighting forces in the policy reviews.

But Hillier made it clear yesterday that the priority for the military will be here at home, starting with a shakeup of its command structure that for the first time will treat the country as an "operational theatre."

Defence officials have previously said that includes more sovereignty patrols of the Arctic and closer co-operation with the United States on maritime surveillance.

With the new money in the budget, Hillier said his priorities are moving ahead with recruiting 8,000 new troops, mostly for the army, and fixing up shortcomings in the forces, such as a shortage of spare parts for vehicles and aircraft and even boosting the stockpile of ammunition.

He reiterated the need for "lift" to be able to move troops and equipment around the globe by sea and air.

But he sidestepped the debate over whether there should be expensive long-range transport planes, saying he doesn't care whether the government leases, rents or buys the aircraft, as long as it's available.

Hillier said he has experienced no fallout from the United States over Canada's decision to opt out of further participation in the missile defence program.

But he said that Canada has to say "no" on these issues from a position of strength.

"Developing our own forces and focusing them on Canada first, defending Canadians and making sure we can handle any event that occurs at home here is fundamental to a strong relationship on the continent."

 

[PPCLI Guy]

And some more on the MND:

More military money helps overcome `demotion'
Bill Graham says he loved being foreign affairs minister

But now he's relishing his role in crucial defence portfolio


BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWAâ ”At the time, it was called a slap in the face, a demotion.

Despite a strong showing as minister of foreign affairs, Bill Graham found himself bumped last summer from the globe-spanning world of diplomacy to defence, a department with big ambitions but hobbled by chronic underfunding.

"I certainly didn't seek to leave foreign affairs. I loved being minister of foreign affairs," Graham says.

But he adds that he was consoled by Prime Minister Paul Martin's pledge of more cash for the armed forces.

"He did say it to me ... that the fundamental thing that we're going to have to do here is reinvest in the military. That is a huge and important task. It is the primary tool of our foreign policy," he says.

"He wanted me to be the defence minister to help achieve that. Perhaps that softened the blow somewhat."

Within days of taking the helm, Graham announced action on an issue that had become an embarrassment: a replacement for the aging Sea King helicopters. The groundwork had been long laid for the announcement but in light of what was to come, the move was symbolic. After years of budget cuts and political inattention, new days were coming for the armed forces.

Eight months later, Graham's "demotion" is looking pretty good.

With a new top general promising big changes, a budget that promised big bucks and a pending defence review that will lay out higher-profile roles for the military at home and abroad, Graham is riding what some are calling the renaissance of the armed forces.

Along the way, he's had to stickhandle the day-to-day challenges that go with defence.

The fatal fire onboard the submarine HMCS Chicoutimi in October renewed questions about military underfunding.

Over the holidays, Graham was Ottawa's front man during the tsunami crisis, covering for cabinet colleagues away on vacation. Ironically, one of them, Pierre Pettigrew, who replaced Graham in the foreign affairs portfolio, has been left in the shadow of a globe-trotting Prime Minister who sees himself as Canada's representative on the world stage.

Even Graham, the 66-year-old MP for Toronto Centre, seems a little surprised at how the new job has turned out.

"Whatever disappointment I might have had back then has been totally overshadowed by the experience I've had by being defence minister. It's a remarkably interesting job," he says in an interview in his Parliament Hill office.

"Getting the new money in the budget helped because I think we're on the cusp of doing something really important with the military."

In Graham, the defence department got a minister well-schooled in global issues â ” a former professor of international law, former chair of the Commons' foreign affairs committee and minister of foreign affairs for 2 1/2 years.

Ottawa sources say that's exactly the perspective that Martin, who envisages the military as the cornerstone of an activist foreign agenda, wanted to bring to defence when he shuffled his cabinet.

Knowing that the long-awaited international policy review would include a significant defence component, "we wanted that matched with political leadership that was equally adept and equally knowledgeable," one senior government source says.

"The logic behind the change was not that we didn't need him in foreign affairs but that we most certainly needed him in defence."

But just as important for the department, Graham was well-versed in the politics of Parliament Hill â ” and the art of arm-twisting for money.

Graham says it was no accident that the Feb. 23 budget contained the biggest funding hike for defence in 20 years â ” $12.8 billion in new spending over five years, although critics complain that just $500 million of that money will be spent this year.

The defence minister says the new cash was a result of a concerted campaign that began in November to reach decision-makers in the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council and finance department, a strategy that included "who we're going to have dinner with, who we're going to talk to.

"We made sure we got all those players and we worked with them to make our case. You've got to do that. You don't get it by just sitting there and saying you're worthy," Graham says.

Step one was getting the money. Step two, he says, is transforming the defence department, starting with the defence review expected within the coming weeks. Graham, unhappy with the tepid vision of the initial drafts, ordered it rewritten.

The revised review is now complete but Graham refuses to talk specifics. But he says the new vision will spell out a greater role for the military at home, especially to exercise Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, and new roles for the air force, navy and reserves. One key priority will be closer co-operation with the United States to keep tabs on the hundreds of ships plying the waters off both coasts.

"It is clear that since 9/11, we are going to have to put a greater focus on Canada and North America," he says. "Our armed forces in Canada today are here to protect Canada."

On the international stage, the focus is preparing the military for the so-called "three-block war" â ” fighting a battle in one part of a city, performing peacekeeping operations in another neighbourhood and providing humanitarian assistance in yet another.

"The object in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti has been to defeat whomever is there to destroy stability ... but it's not defeating an enemy in a traditional sense. And you have to do it a way that creates civil society," Graham says.

And Canadian troops in Afghanistan, he says, have proven themselves as an effective way to deliver development aid.

"There are those who would say that's not the warrior ethic. But I think that's exactly what the modern world needs. That's what these operations require and Canadians are damned good at these."

To lead the transformation, Graham set his sights on a plain-spoken army general, Rick Hillier, to take over as chief of the defence staff.

Martin reportedly had another candidate in mind for the top military job. But one Saturday before Christmas, Graham took Hillier to 24 Sussex Dr. so Martin could hear the general's ideas for reshaping Canada's fighting forces.

"He was able to explain to the Prime Minister what he wanted to do, how he would transform the forces," Graham says.

The sales pitch worked â ” Hillier got the job and has quietly begun to lay the groundwork for the changes to come.

"If the forces are to be changed, it must be done by the forces themselves. A defence minister can't wander in and say `I've got a nice theory about how to run your shop,'" Graham says.

"The navy, the air force and the army are all really different cultures and Gen. Hillier is talking about them working together in ways they haven't done before."

Hillier is quick to return the praise and jokingly refers to Graham as a "PGM" â ” a precision-guided minister.

"When you're on the receiving end of that precision-guided minister, there is an effect that does take place," Hillier told an Ottawa audience recently.

"We have a minister that is involved, that is energetic, that is focused and that understands, and is trying to move the Canadian Forces and the Department of Defence to be more effective, to be exactly what Canada will need in the future," Hillier said.

But Graham, who had won his department billions of dollars, wasn't so lucky at convincing his cabinet colleagues to sign on to the controversial U.S.-led missile defence scheme, despite his arguments that Canada should join to avoid upsetting relations with Washington.

He took that decision in stride.

"I lost the war. What the heck, you can't win them all," he said at the recent Liberal party convention.

Graham denies that the extra military funding in the budget was meant to take the sting out of the missile defence decision that followed the next day.

"The work to get this money in this budget was done and was already on its way down the pipe before any decision had been made about ballistic missile defence," Graham says.

"While I don't think it's linked to (missile defence), I do think reinvesting in the forces is intimately linked to having a more credible posture with the United States."

Graham's performance hasn't won over all his critics.

"Still no fan," military historian Jack Granatstein says bluntly. He says the forces have made little progress in tackling systemic problems.

"What I look at is the inability to deploy anyone on short notice for tsunami relief, the fact we are ... less relevant in the world today than we were when he took over as defence minister," Granatstein says.

And he says Canadians should be "more than a bit wary" about the extra cash pledged to fund the revamp of the forces.

"I suppose I should be grateful for the budget but I'm not. Barely 10 per cent of the money will be delivered over the next two years. Does anybody really believe that a commitment for 2010 is going to stay intact?

"This is, to my mind, the continuation of the ruination of the armed forces," he says, adding that if the Liberals were serious about their commitment to the forces, "they would have put more money in now."

With files from Graham Fraser

 

[Infanteer]

Only in Canada is defence and effective responsibility for the state's military considered "a demotion".  Other places, it gets you into the highest councils of the Nation (ie: the National Security Council).

Ba-aa-aa-aa.....

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Only in Canada is defence and effective responsibility for the state's military considered "a demotion".   Other places, it gets you into the highest councils of the Nation (ie: the National Security Council).

Where you sit next to the Sec State, right?

 

[Infanteer]

Where you sit next to the Sec State, right?

Who do you think got a bigger chair, Colin Powell or Donald Rumsfeld?  

In a country with it priorities in the right order, both "State" and "Military" departments are recognized as strong and important Cabinet positions addressing the requirements of a solid Foreign and Defence Policy.   In Canada we've been sloughing it off onto a bunch of wieners for quite some time now - this is where I gathered the idea of "demotion" came from.

 

[Zipper]

But he dropped some hints. He said the threat facing Canada has changed "from the Bear" to a "ball of snakes" â ” terrorists and organized crime â ” and suggested that the country's military has been slow to react.

"We've got to be relevant to those threats that are real around the world," Hillier said.

He related how a former Afghan finance minister told an Ottawa conference recently that the Canadian troops serving in his country were a "powerful nation-building tool."

Since when is a military a "nation building" tool?

Defence officials have previously said that includes more sovereignty patrols of the Arctic and closer co-operation with the United States on maritime surveillance.

Sounds good. But what of the Coast Guard? New Ice breakers, etc?

The revised review is now complete but Graham refuses to talk specifics. But he says the new vision will spell out a greater role for the military at home, especially to exercise Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, and new roles for the air force, navy and reserves. One key priority will be closer co-operation with the United States to keep tabs on the hundreds of ships plying the waters off both coasts.

"It is clear that since 9/11, we are going to have to put a greater focus on Canada and North America," he says. "Our armed forces in Canada today are here to protect Canada."

Isn't all of these things the jobs of the Coast Guard, Police, and Intelligence agencies? As per the threat addressed in the first quote. Terrorist and organized crime fall under those agencies more so then the military.

On the international stage, the focus is preparing the military for the so-called "three-block war" â ” fighting a battle in one part of a city, performing peacekeeping operations in another neighbourhood and providing humanitarian assistance in yet another.

"The object in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Haiti has been to defeat whomever is there to destroy stability ... but it's not defeating an enemy in a traditional sense. And you have to do it a way that creates civil society," Graham says.

And Canadian troops in Afghanistan, he says, have proven themselves as an effective way to deliver development aid.

"There are those who would say that's not the warrior ethic. But I think that's exactly what the modern world needs. That's what these operations require and Canadians are damned good at these."

So we're not to defeat an "enemy" in the traditional sense? Does this mean in their minds, there will never be another war? Just small police actions?

I guess it sums up to say...                ...Welcome to the CAF. The worlds first constabulary.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here is the Globe and Mail’s Lawrence Martin again, reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060810.wxcomartin10/BNStory/specialComment/home

The perilous charms of Rick Hillier

LAWRENCE MARTIN

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

Unstoppable. Immensely persuasive. Steeped in Newfoundland charm. Magnetic leader. More impressive than any politician in Ottawa.

Ask about a soldier named Rick Hillier and the superlatives never cease. General Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff and author of our role in Afghanistan, has the facts at the ready -- and can make them dance. He is too good to be true. And, maybe, too good for our own good.

Gen. Hillier has owned Ottawa since taking over as Canada's top soldier 18 months ago. Everything falls in his wake, including half a century of more moderate military tradition. Paul Martin couldn't resist his convictions, and neither could Stephen Harper and the editorial boards of newspapers across the country.

Eugene Lang, the chief of staff to Liberal defence ministers John McCallum and Bill Graham, watched as Gen. Hillier bent the nation's capital to his will. "He's remarkable," said Mr. Lang. "The problem is, there isn't anyone who can take him on with a counter world view. He blows them away."

"Kind of like of Robert McNamara, you mean?"

Pause.

"Well, maybe."

Mr. McNamara, the secretary of defence under John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson and the principal architect of the Vietnam War, had a similar kind of silver-tongued magnetism. Commandingly articulate, he cast a spell. Regrettably, Mr. Kennedy and, to a greater degree, Mr. Johnson fell under it.

Paul Martin may be having second thoughts about coming under Mr. Hillier's sway. The last time I talked to him, the former prime minister recalled how he had received assurances from Gen. Hillier that our Afghan role would be limited enough so as to leave sufficient military resources for a peacekeeping mission in Darfur, or Haiti or the Middle East. "That was what we agreed on," Mr. Martin emphatically noted. So much for the agreement. The Department of National Defence now says there isn't the capability.

Another commitment was made in 2005: The combat part of the Afghan mission was to last only a year. Gen. Hillier was okay with that Liberal cabinet decision. But this pledge, too, would be discarded. The good general became gung-ho about making the mission a long-term one. Mr. Harper got quickly on board and rushed a motion through Parliament for an extension.

Gen. Hillier hasn't been pressed to explain the changes in his position. The casualties mount, meanwhile, and the Taliban gain strength. And Canadians start turning against this mini-war.

Appearing undaunted, he invokes the great wartime cliché: "We must support our troops." But who doesn't support our troops? It's a given that we back them. It's also true that a noble form of support might be in brandishing truths that will lead to their returning home -- alive.

Some of our soldiers might appreciate that kind of support. In the face of the daily horrors of Iraq, many Americans are now displaying that kind of support. They wished they had done so earlier.

It is not to say we should pack up and leave Afghanistan. Our democratically elected Parliament has made a commitment. The mission's goals are admirable. It is not to say that any mini-Vietnam is in the making or that Gen. Hillier will be blinded to the realities on the ground like a Robert McNamara -- or like the Bush administration in Iraq.

Canadians would do well, however, to hear from Gen. Hillier and Mr. Harper and those analysts who supported the Iraq war. What lessons might they have learned? Undeterred, unembarrassed, they continue to avidly support the war option in other places.

Like the more than 100,000 soldiers in Iraq, Canadian troops in Afghanistan are fighting a terror insurgency. The seeming futility of the U.S. effort raises questions as to whether traditional methods of warfare work when the nature of the enemy, no longer a nation-state, has changed so much.

A lesson of the quagmire of the 1960s and of Iraq is to beware the word of the military. Be skeptical of the black and white pictures they draw. As Gen. Hillier continues to cast his spell, we should hope that he and his political overseers have taken note.

We're on the treadmill now. When the military starts to gain control of the terms of the debate, when the clichés of war start pounding the psyche, an inevitability sets in.

[email protected]

Martin is wrong.

He is not wrong about Robert McNamara.  He and Paul Martin may not be wrong about what General Hillier did or did not promise under one specific set of circumstances – although Paul Martin strikes me, as a result of this tale, as being a terribly naive ditherer.

What he is wrong about is: ” Canadians would do well, however, to hear from Gen. Hillier …”  Rubbish!  Arrant nonsense!  Crap, from a so-called political specialist.  Our admirals and generals are supposed to be apolitical – that is one of the foundation stones of a modern, liberal, Westminster style democracy; General Hillier (like all admirals and generals) needs to be silent.  He needs to give his best military advice to the government of the day – in private.  He may talk, off the record, to his sailors, soldiers and aviators.  He may not defend himself when attacked from the cheap seats – the ones occupied by stupid journalists.

This is worse that rubbish, it is propaganda: ” We're on the treadmill now. When the military starts to gain control of the terms of the debate, when the clichés of war start pounding the psyche, an inevitability sets in.”

I don’t know what Martin’s agenda is but I do know it stinks – to high heaven.