Year of the Veteran Commercial

[armyvern]

:sniper: Get your Helmets on.....Its a Logistic Officer to the rescue... :soldier: The two medal she is wear are, the SSM for her time in Germany and the other is the CPSM..Funny thing Germany does not qualify for the CPSM ( http://www.forces.gc.ca/dhh/downloads/honours/cpsm_noneligible.pdf ) it falls into the " Non- Eligible Missions " ..Because they do not meet the the approved definition of "PeaceKeeping ".... So why the UN Beret ????..It sounds like from her little video that she did spend some time in Croatia ..hence her "10 days.. under fire "   To receive the UNPROFOR medal you need "ELIGIBILITY & CRITERIA -- Awarded for 90 days consecutive service from 01 March 1992 to 19 December 1995." SO take Off the blue Beret....

There is always the "Peace Bar" to the SSM. Awarded for 180 cumulative total days in peacekeeping missions, not necessarily consecutively. Perhaps she has both the "NATO" bar to her SSM as well as the "Peace" bar. The bio only reads 10 days under fire. It does not state that she didn't serve more time there (obviously less than the 90 required for the UNPROFOR though). Being an officer, and a zoomie, it's quite possible that in her career she spent 180 days in various theatres as part of short term TAV/TATs/liaison etc that did not qualify for individual medals but did for the "Peace" Bar. I would think that is the case, as entitlement to this bar would also qualify her for the CPSM as well.

http://www.forces.ca/hr/dhh/honours_awards/images/ribbons/bar_ssm_peace.jpg

As a side note, I have many medals but have a good friend with only 4, the CD, the CPSM, UNDOF, and the SSM with the NATO, PEACE and ALERT bars. And...for his one Alert bar he's been to Alert 3 times. The number of medals does not a veteran make.

 

[Armymedic]

is her service any less?

So you agree then, that she is a vet, and rightfully deserves to be there?

Sorry, you lost me brother.

dileas

tess

Yes, Sorry, I don't sound so clear in there to myself either......She served so yes, she is a vet, and yes she deserves to be on the commercial. My "uncomfort" is that of her place, being highlighted on the commercial and the coin just doesn't sit well with me.

Of all the veterans we have, why did they chose her to be on the coin when there is so many other people to be in that place. Is it because they specifically wanted a woman to profile along side the older male veteran? And then why not one currently serving? Like the Signaller they show in the commercial talking to Mr Pike?

Edit:
Thinking about this, I do think it unfair that I point my discomfort with the commercial at the person herself. It is the same discomfort I felt about having the woman peacekeeper on the back of the $10 bill, and the concerted effort by the mint to ensure political correctness. Obviously, it is not a feeling unique to myself.

It is a memorial to the veterans who have served this country with honour for the last 130+ yrs, and in that, it is a good thing.

 

[GDawg]

Indeed. I vote for the Signaller. ;D

 

[Old Ranger]

But the best thing...

Positive Military Image!!!

Yes, it can be nitpicked by those who are in the know.

The average civi won't pick up on those things.

Yes, the earings drove me nuts as well, and what ever that look on her face was going for.

But, positive image for Veterans.....

Regards,

Ben

 

[Infanteer]

Guys, why the heck are we trashing Ms Mondou's service on this site; are we really that petty?

Trash the mint if you don't like the coin (and the ten dollar bill), but I think this friendly fire on a fellow service member who agreed to step up to represent the CF and what it has done for Canada is beneath what we are aiming for on this site.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Well said Infanteer..

dileas

tess

 

[ZipperHead]

I get it (finally)!!!!!! If you agree with everyone here, you are "in". If you don't, you aren't!!

Wow, it only took me 200+ posts to figure it out. Which again reaffirms my theory that the army is just high school with guns.

I vaguely recall that people are allowed to agree to disagree with one another (lord knows I do it enough).

As mentioned, the Mint is but another cog in the great machine that is the government, and they will do whatever they want to put their spin on a given situation. Patronage is also the name of the game, so I don't doubt that somebody in the corridor's of power want to help out a friend, who happens to make a living doing speaking engagements, and they get some free publicity at the expense of taxpayer's, why not!!

I won't weigh in on what constitutes being a "veteran" other than saying that I feel that I am not one. There's a thread for that ad nauseum discussion already, so we'll leave the arguing of that there.

On the whole, though, I agree with the idea of the coin (along with the Terry Fox coin, and the poppy coin). It is meant to honour those that served in the defence of freedom, so that we can freely argue over things such as this, without worrying about The Man coming down on those that are opposed to unpopular concepts (maybe some people should remember that in their posts/replies.....)

Al

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm just glad we're getting some good press for a change. Quit looking a gift horse up the anus.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I get it (finally)!!!!!! If you agree with everyone here, you are "in". If you don't, you aren't!!

Wow, it only took me 200+ posts to figure it out. Which again reaffirms my theory that the army is just high school with guns.

I vaguely recall that people are allowed to agree to disagree with one another (lord knows I do it enough).

As mentioned, the Mint is but another cog in the great machine that is the government, and they will do whatever they want to put their spin on a given situation. Patronage is also the name of the game, so I don't doubt that somebody in the corridor's of power want to help out a friend, who happens to make a living doing speaking engagements, and they get some free publicity at the expense of taxpayer's, why not!!

I won't weigh in on what constitutes being a "veteran" other than saying that I feel that I am not one. There's a thread for that ad nauseum discussion already, so we'll leave the arguing of that there.

On the whole, though, I agree with the idea of the coin (along with the Terry Fox coin, and the poppy coin). It is meant to honour those that served in the defence of freedom, so that we can freely argue over things such as this, without worrying about The Man coming down on those that are opposed to unpopular concepts (maybe some people should remember that in their posts/replies.....)

Al

No Al,

You don't get it.  What gives you the right to criticize other who feel they are a vet?  You don't feel you are one??  Then you deal with your inner issues.  You want to post in a thread just to be heard? Then choose the right one to do that.  Hey need some help?? Let me point you in the right way.  In fact let's start with one I posted, after hearing ad nauseum why people have such a hate on being considered veterans.

I think it will take a heck of a lot more than 200 post, to make you realize what you say ain't on mate.

dileas

tess

 

[ZipperHead]

PM sent to avoid having our little spat derail thread (any more than it already is).

 

[the 48th regulator]

PM sent to avoid having our little spat derail thread (any more than it already is).

pm returned

dileas

tess

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

i saw the coin today, kind of cool if you ask me,  does it really matter that  she served, she worn earrrings,  she worn the uniform same the as the old guy  did and  hundreds of others, thousands of people worn the uniform. they  picked 2 get over it and spend your darn quarters.

nice to see something postive said about the men and yes women who served their country.

some people here would find something bash no matter the topic. move on , it is just a quarter, 25 cents. and your wasting how much time on it?

 

[ZipperHead]

I see that I have become the whipping boy for this particular love-in.

nice to see something postive said about the men and yes women who served their country.

some people here would find something bash no matter the topic. move on , it is just a quarter, 25 cents. and your wasting how much time on it?

If it were an independent body saying something nice about our servicmen-women, I would probably less critical, but as it is a government agency, who I doubt are going to cast us in a negative light (in what may turn out to be an election year, thanks to Mr Layton). I have never been a fan of "cheerleading" types of ads, and if I am wrong to be critical of something that our fair government churns out for it's own gains, sue me.

As I have been pilloried, I will retreat to a neutral corner. Continue the self-congratulations (and self aggrandizations) without me, or any others that may have a contrary opinion.....

Al

 

[the 48th regulator]

I see that I have become the whipping boy for this particular love-in.

If it were an independent body saying something nice about our servicmen-women, I would probably less critical, but as it is a government agency, who I doubt are going to cast us in a negative light (in what may turn out to be an election year, thanks to Mr Layton). I have never been a fan of "cheerleading" types of ads, and if I am wrong to be critical of something that our fair government churns out for it's own gains, sue me.

As I have been pilloried, I will retreat to a neutral corner. Continue the self-congratulations (and self aggrandizations) without me, or any others that may have a contrary opinion.....

Al

Hey Crusader,

What part of my post above, and the PM exchange we had did you not under stand.

Troll elsewhere.  You have had your fifteen minutes of internet grandstanding now go away.

dileas

tess

 

[ZipperHead]

After my drive in, and a morning coffee (and notwithstanding the taunts), I have reflected somewhat on the whole issue at hand: the commercial. My impression (and many others, I suspect) is that Ms Mondou was a serving member (i.e. in CF uniform for the commercial). That's what got me started with the dangly ear-rings, and the blue-beret (my personal feeling is that there is no need to wear the blue-beret on Rememberance Day. Rather, wear your unit head-dress, to remember the members of your unit/regiment that fell in battle.) After a few viewings though, it is apparent she is a civilian now. So, in reality Ms Mondou (more or less) fits my personal description of a veteran: one who SERVED in the military, but no longer does. Again, personally, I think that the only true veterans are those that fought for our freedoms in wartime (WWI, WWII, Korea). I know that is not a popular opinion here, but again, it is my opinion. Live with it. Move on.

Al

 

[043]

Well said!

The only day that Blue or Orange berets are authorized is on UN Day. And the dangly, non-regulation earings must go!

As for veteran status.........I think that if anyone has served on a overseas Mission, they should be granted Veteran Status.

Chimo!

 

[Gramps]

All I ask about this whole argument is WHO CARES? Why such a petty little argument about someones earrings, beret, medals or service? I can find about a dozen other things in life right now that worry, interest or concern me a lot more that most of the points brought up on this forum. As usual, someone here tries to show people something they find interesting or were involved in and the "Military Trekkies" hell bent for leather on pointing out miniscule details that no one in the real world will care about ot even notice for that matter.

 

[ZipperHead]

One thing that always makes me shake my head, is people who take the time to type in "Who cares??!!!" or similar things when they read things like this. If you don't care, don't post. It's like complaining about things that you don't like on TV or the radio. If you don't like it, change the channel/station. Or disregard.

BTW, spell check your signature-block. My Trekkie-senses compute many spelling errors. I don't think Greg Ginn wants to go down in history misquoted. Oddly enough, I was raised to never pass a fault, aka pay attention to detail. Not trendy anymore, with MSN-speak, and gangsta rap, I suppose.

Al

 

[043]

All I ask about this whole argument is WHO CARES? Why such a petty little argument about someones earrings, beret, medals or service? I can find about a dozen other things in life right now that worry, interest or concern me a lot more that most of the points brought up on this forum. As usual, someone here tries to show people something they find interesting or were involved in and the "Military Trekkies" heck bent for leather on pointing out miniscule details that no one in the real world will care about ot even notice for that matter.

You are quite right Gramps! Thanks for redirecting my focus!

 

[Gramps]

From Allan Luomala "BTW, spell check your signature-block. My Trekkie-senses compute many spelling errors. I don't think Greg Ginn wants to go down in history misquoted."

Done,I would not want to misquote my favorite band. I Will take that constructively and maybe not have many drinks the next time I change the signature block. As for the other comments I have seen on this topic (and I am not directing this at just one person) I will dismiss the vast majority of them.