A "First Nations" Unit Merged Thread.

[Pea]

Pte Pea good words. That seems to be the general consesis of others in your situation.

Leave the politics and vote buying out of the CF. Lets soldiers, Sailors and Airmen be eqaul among themsevles.

Thanks. I've spoken to a few others "like me" on this topic, and the general consensus from them seems to be what I have said.

 

[FastEddy]

K to start I'm not anything close to being Native Canadian.

I have on occasion thought of this.  We all make this out to be a form of Segregation.  You don't need to send only Natives to a unit like this but allow it to be prodominantly Native.  Are there no English people in the 22nd or on the HMCS Ville de Quebec??  It could be a Unit based on Native traditions and Native Warrior traditions (not unlike a highland regiment).  It could instill allot of pride in a people who are plagued with many many social issues. 

I can think of one unit of this type in the commonwealth.  Anyone think of the Gurkhas??  They were/are considered one of the Elite units in the UK.  It would take allot of work to build a unit like the Gurkhas but it could be done.

"Navy Blue" Just as a point of interest, during the Hayday of that Splendid Regt., weren't all the Officers British ?, along with all the Fine East Indian Regt.s . (of course I stand to be corrected on this).

If such was the case, in your opinion, what should the Officer Corps be made of in these newly formed Native Units ?. And should they have their own GHQ. And on that point, who and where would the General Staff come from ?.

I'm sure you have given this Idea a great deal of thought.

Cheers.

 

[Boxkicker]

  Okay I must ask if there is anyone else out there who is tired of trying to be a liberal social experiment. In  22 years I have heard a lot of dumbs things about us from the liberals, but this takes the cake government imposed racism.

The only time I think of Coderre or Dion is when I flush. God forbid they ever get elected to high office.

 

[CougarKing]

Quite an article that talks about the motivations behind creating one...without saying how it can be created or what has to be changed in the Defence Budget to make room for this unit.

Winnipeg Free Press

It's time to create a First Nations regiment
By: James Wilson
Posted: 02/26/2015 3:00 AM

My phone rang the other day, and on the end of the line was the familiar voice of a prominent Manitoba business leader. His request was simple. "I'm looking for Bold Eagles," he said, "and I'll hire every one of them."

Some would be shocked he was looking to recruit young aboriginal men and women who, so often, are unfairly maligned, but I was not one of them. As a former member of the military myself, I was well-aware of the Bold Eagle program, run by the Canadian Armed Forces, to help empower one of the fastest-growing segments of our population.

(...SNIPPED)

To help recruits learn about themselves and their history, they spend one week with Cree elders. Then, in a remarkable ceremony, they are handed over to Canadian Forces staff who take them through their basic military training.

The end game is to promote self-confidence, self-discipline, teamwork and physical fitness. And the Bold Eagle program does just that, and more.

For most, a summer in Wainwright is a game-changer that opens young peoples' eyes not only to what opportunities are out there within the military and beyond, but also to the strengths they discover within themselves.

Now, it should come as no surprise smart business people have woken up to the advantages of hiring Bold Eagles with their enduring and traditional signs of strength, leadership, wisdom and courage.

To honour these young people and the generations of soldiers before them, perhaps it is time Canada created a First Nations regiment, similar to the Irish regiment or one of our 16 Scottish regiments. As a nation, we should be equally indebted to all.

 

[dangerboy]

If this was to happen (I don't think it would ever happen, we already have more units than we can sustain) I think it would have the opposite effect than what we want it would end up almost segregating people, which is the last thing anyone wants.

 

[PuckChaser]

Sure. We could have HQ in Ontario, and a Coy each in Yukon, Alberta, Northern Quebec and Nova Scotia. That way we can efficiently burn as much money as possible without having any sort of use for the unit.

 

[cavalryman]

Aren't the Rangers mostly First Nation?  Grant the Rangers regimental status and voila: problem solved.

 

[PuckChaser]

What problem is solved? I don't buy that there's any problem here at all. Its a solution looking for a problem proposed by someone who knows very little of how the CAF operates, or how units are created/placed around the country.

 

[ballz]

In our more modern, nation-wide army, there's already debate about whether the regimental system is losing its purpose and in some ways detrimental to progress. Loyalty to the tribe instead of the nation and all that, I believe there are already threads about it... I also agree we have more units than we can sustain. Our 3 reg force brigades are currently working at about 1/3rd strength, if that.

This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation. I am more than happy with the First Nations soldiers we have in our battalion and they don't seem to mind being part of an organization that has white, black, red, yellow skinned hetero/homo/bisexual Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, etc that speak English, French, German, Spanish, Portugese, Pashtun, Cree, etc. Why would we want to take a step backwards?

 

[Jarnhamar]

In our more modern, nation-wide army, there's already debate about whether the regimental system is losing its purpose and in some ways detrimental to progress. Loyalty to the tribe instead of the nation and all that, I believe there are already threads about it... I also agree we have more units than we can sustain. Our 3 reg force brigades are currently working at about 1/3rd strength, if that.

This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation. I am more than happy with the First Nations soldiers we have in our battalion and they don't seem to mind being part of an organization that has white, black, red, yellow skinned hetero/homo/bisexual Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, etc that speak English, French, German, Spanish, Portugese, Pashtun, Cree, etc. Why would we want to take a step backwards?

I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.

The U.S. Army did that back in the late 60's/early 70's and from my understanding it was a complete disaster.

 

[Old Sweat]

The U.S. Army did that back in the late 60's/early 70's and from my understanding it was a complete disaster.

It is also my recollection that the human resources folks decided that the command sergeant major (CAM aka RSM) position need not be branch specific. Therefore the next available E9 (the highest non-commissioned rank) would be assigned as the CSM of the next battalion of any branch that need one. In other words the RSM slot in a unit would be in our terms ATR. Good luck with that!

 

[OldSolduer]

My two cents:

1. In Canadian society we have no need for a regiment based on the racial background of the members. It flys in the face of what we believe in. Besides, we have regiments that are barely surviving already.

2. Numbered battalions were tried in the First World War. After that war we went back to named regiments.

It is also my recollection that the human resources folks decided that the command sergeant major (CAM aka RSM) position need not be branch specific. Therefore the next available E9 (the highest non-commissioned rank) would be assigned as the CSM of the next battalion of any branch that need one. In other words the RSM slot in a unit would be in our terms ATR. Good luck with that!

I can just see a CWO from the RMS trade attempting to be the RSM of a combat arms unit. Good luck.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Let's recall that what we now know as the "Regimental System" began in the British and Indian Armies specifically to deal with and, later, exploit religious, ethnic and cultural differences. Soldiers from one group would not serve with those from another or, later, it was seen to be possible to use ethnic (including religious) differences for a positive (morale) effect. Think of Sikhs and Scots, Rajputs and county regiments, and so on ... the regimental system is a hodge-podge of ideas and practices, some very good, some of marginal utility, at  best, which make virtues of necessities.

Suppose we had nine numbered battalions in the Canadian Infantry Corps ~ does anyone really think that the French speaking 2nd, 5th and 8th battalions would be, in most ways, "the same" as the English speaking 1st, 3rd, 4th and so on battalions?

I think our official bilingual duality points us away from a clear, simple numbered units system and, if that's the case, the British style regimental system with all its "buttons and bows" issues is not all that bad.

 

[McG]

It's time to create a First Nations regiment

I suppose this would be a creation intended for the PRes?

This idea of a regiment based on race is definitely a policy of segregation.

1. In Canadian society we have no need for a regiment based on the racial background of the members. It flys in the face of what we believe in. Besides, we have regiments that are barely surviving already.

I gather you both are not supporters of similar suggestions to create a BC lower mainland Sheik Regiment.  What are your thoughts on Scottish and Irish regiments?

2. Numbered battalions were tried in the First World War. After that war we went back to named regiments.

That seemed to have been a fairly effective force.  I cannot see the CEF as having demonstrated inadequacy of a numbered system.

I'd like to move away from regiments completely and use a strict numbers system.

The current government has been more inclined to increase the number of regiments, having revived several in the PRes.  I don't see your proposal gaining much traction.  On the positive side, the current government has not created any new regiments and so we may not see the suggested native regiment.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Some armies can make a mix work.  Apparently at one time "The 3rd battalion of the 14th Punjabi Regiment has a Sikh company. a company of Punjabi Musselmen and two Hindu companies, one of Rajputs and one of Dogras." (From the script of a talk given long ago by a former HCol of 12 Med Coy in its pre-Fd Amb days; I have never researched to verify it.)  Imagine being the battalion cook.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Our Scottish and Irish regiments are anything but Scottish and Irish.  There are Kowalskis, Schmidts, Singhs, Changs, and Moussas standing beside the MacDonalds and Murphys.  A unit based on ethnic lines wouldn't stand a chance from either side of the spectrum.  Some will see segregation, others will see special treatment.  No thanks.

 

[ballz]

Suppose we had nine numbered battalions in the Canadian Infantry Corps ~ does anyone really think that the French speaking 2nd, 5th and 8th battalions would be, in most ways, "the same" as the English speaking 1st, 3rd, 4th and so on battalions?

I think our official bilingual duality points us away from a clear, simple numbered units system and, if that's the case, the British style regimental system with all its "buttons and bows" issues is not all that bad.

Those French-speaking battalions would still fall under the same French-speaking, numbered brigade they do now, just like the western battalions would stay under the same English-speaking, numbered brigade it does now, for geographic purposes.

It makes perfectly good sense to have things done geographically, and using "Quebec" as a region because of its language also makes sense.

2 CMBG is a bit weird with its random units in Gagetown but I'm not sure that would have to change (although its very impractical) if regiments ceased to exist.

What could be gotten rid of is all the hocus pocus behind regimental senates and regimental adjutants and regimental colonels and regimental sergeant majors etc, who push down direction that is not theirs to push down and make career-related decisions based on crystal balls and personal feelings.

Personally, instead of being organized into numbered battalions, I think it would make more sense to be numbered into numbered Battle Groups if possible, although I'm not sure how that would work.

 

[medicineman]

I gather you both are not supporters of similar suggestions to create a BC lower mainland Sheik Regiment.  What are your thoughts on Scottish and Irish regiments?

I seem to recall one sunny day in Calgary I was doing medical support for Her Majesty presenting a new Queen's Colour to the Calgary Highlanders - the subaltern that knelt in from of her was in full highland regalia with his Turban, Rifle Green on his head.

Does that help?

 

[Infanteer]

Calling for numbers instead of names for units fails to understand what the Regimental system is or how it operates.  Note we do have some numbered Regiments, such as the 12e Regiment Blinde while the R22eR simply added Royal to a numbered Regiment of the CEF.  What is  key is not the name/number - note the British Regimental system operated for the first 2/3 of its life under numbered Regiments of Foot - but how the Regimental system manages the service of its members.  Compare our "named" regiments of the infantry and how they manage manpower compared to, say, the "named" regiments of the Australian infantry that all serve under the same cap badge.