- Reaction score
- 66
- Points
- 530
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1139871011272
" Whereas all operations until now have been run by the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff and his staff of 1,800, the new arrangement envisions one high-ranking officer running overseas missions, one overseeing missions at home, a third taking care of special forces, and a fourth providing logistical support to them all."
Less staff/headquarters should be the goal not more. Streamline the organization instead of adding more layers of bureaucracy. A joint logisitics command is a good idea and should be pursued. I don't think the CF needs an overseas command and is a waste of resources. A joint special operations command is also a good idea but should direct report to the CDS.
" Whereas all operations until now have been run by the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff and his staff of 1,800, the new arrangement envisions one high-ranking officer running overseas missions, one overseeing missions at home, a third taking care of special forces, and a fourth providing logistical support to them all."
Less staff/headquarters should be the goal not more. Streamline the organization instead of adding more layers of bureaucracy. A joint logisitics command is a good idea and should be pursued. I don't think the CF needs an overseas command and is a waste of resources. A joint special operations command is also a good idea but should direct report to the CDS.
