An Ongoing Military Identity Crisis

[Swingline1984]

A brief history lesson on the CF via Conrad Black including an interesting spin on how to market force expansion to the public:

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/ongoing+military+identity+crisis/3893013/story.html

 

[Greymatters]

It all sounded good until he said that the expanded forces should draw from the ranks of the unemployed.  While there are willing workers in the unemployment line, I dont believe that the vast majority of them are suitable for military service.

 

[George Wallace]

It all sounded good until he said that the expanded forces should draw from the ranks of the unemployed.  While there are willing workers in the unemployment line, I dont believe that the vast majority of them are suitable for military service.

Brings back memories of Cyprus.  One morning on Canada AM a NDP candidate in a discussion on our ending our commitment to Cyprus came out and stated that all we had to do was land a plane in Toronto and load it with the unemployed and homeless and send them over to do Peacekeeping.  I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at his naivete.  Wonder if this is the same guy?

 

[Loachman]

It all sounded good until he said that the expanded forces should draw from the ranks of the unemployed.  While there are willing workers in the unemployment line, I dont believe that the vast majority of them are suitable for military service.

He did say "directly or indirectly". I interprete "indirectly" to mean that we take a lot of people from the ranks of the employed, which are then back-filled from the ranks of the unemployed.

 

[Michael OLeary]

He did say "directly or indirectly". I interprete "indirectly" to mean that we take a lot of people from the ranks of the employed, which are then back-filled from the ranks of the unemployed.

Does something different happen when other competitive hiring practices take place?  Is he suggesting this is new and, somehow, interesting because of that?  Send that man a Captain Obvious action figure. 

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Brings back memories of Cyprus.  One morning on Canada AM a NDP candidate in a discussion on our ending our commitment to Cyprus came out and stated that all we had to do was land a plane in Toronto and load it with the unemployed and homeless and send them over to do Peacekeeping.  I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at his naivete.  Wonder if this is the same guy?

Conrad Black?  An NDP Candidate?

Methinks not.

 

[IBM]

Conrad Black?  An NDP Candidate?

Methinks not.

IMO both Conrad and the NDP guy are both your typical civvies who have no clue what's involved with wearing the uniform, and therefore just talking out of their rear ends.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

IMO both Conrad and the NDP guy are both your typical civvies who have no clue what's involved with wearing the uniform, and therefore just talking out of their rear ends.

Wearing a uniform has nothing whatsoever to do with determining the means (or the size of the means) that will be used to attain national security ends.  Sadly, while Mr Conrad's analysis started out strong, he failed to identify the strategic objectives that would be served by a larger military, and merely went straight to the PIDOOMA figure of doubling our existing force.  It was a bit like reading some of the posts here...

 

[Nemo888]

Warriors need enemies to define themselves. Not nebulous government policies or elitist ex-cons op ed pieces. I sometimes miss the kill a Commie for mommy days. Much better enemy than the current one IMO. Trying to stomp a swarm sand fleas is just not the same as that great old Russian bear. A military with no enemy is a waste of resources. Policing is better left to police. Armies need to be good at blowing sh!^ up and hurting people IMO. I'd be interested to hearing the opinion of the more informed minds here.

Defining ourselves means defining our enemies and threats.

 

[George Wallace]

The problem with solving the nation's "unemployment" by filling up the military with them, is that you have now turned the military into another form of EI or Welfare.  This does not work. 

 

[Greymatters]

The problem with solving the nation's "unemployment" by filling up the military with them, is that you have now turned the military into another form of EI or Welfare.  This does not work.

'The problem' isnt getting the nations unwashed unemployed into a uniform - its that those of 'higher' education think that all of us who are (or were) already employed in the current CF are equally unskilled, unschooled, and unsuccessful, thus the nations unemployed masses would fit right in with us...

 

[gun runner]

Those of higher education are in my opinion not suitable for the work that is done in the trenches by us..the common soldier. They are much better off in hospitals,stitching us back together, or in Government..tellings us what we are doing,or where we are going next,etc..etc. Leave the trooping to the troops. As for the unemployed placed into the ranks of the CF..weren't we all unemployed before we joined? I know I was. That is what the aptitude testing is for isn`t it! My :2c:. Ubique

 

[George Wallace]

Those of higher education are in my opinion not suitable for the work that is done in the trenches by us..the common soldier. They are much better off in hospitals,stitching us back together, or in Government..tellings us what we are doing,or where we are going next,etc..etc. Leave the trooping to the troops. As for the unemployed placed into the ranks of the CF..weren't we all unemployed before we joined? I know I was. That is what the aptitude testing is for isn`t it! My :2c:. Ubique

Unfortunately, this is not true.  Greymatters point seems to be quite accurate, and lost on you as well.  Members of the CF on a whole have very high educations when compared to other militaries.  We also have 'older' soldiers, for the most part, when compared to other militaries.  This gives up us soldiers who often use their initiative more often, and show signs of maturity often not displayed elsewhere. 

As for them being better placed in hospitals and government, well, many are currently serving to save lives in hospitls and many move into politics later in their lives. 

Unemployed.  Yes we were 'unemployed', but some of us chose not to be after we graduated.  Thanks, anyway, for perpetuating the myth.  Greymatters' points are indeed facing a long uphill fight.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

IMO both Conrad and the NDP guy are both your typical civvies who have no clue what's involved with wearing the uniform, and therefore just talking out of their rear ends.

Actually, if I remember correctly, I believe Black has spent time studying military history and at one time he was also into miniature wargaming. And, again if my memory serves me, he was at one time a Honorary Colonel with one of the Ottawa militia regiments. I know that doesn't make him a military expert, but at the same time he's not necessary totally ignorant of military matters.

Wearing a uniform has nothing whatsoever to do with determining the means (or the size of the means) that will be used to attain national security ends.  Sadly, while Mr Conrad's analysis started out strong, he failed to identify the strategic objectives that would be served by a larger military, and merely went straight to the PIDOOMA figure of doubling our existing force.  It was a bit like reading some of the posts here...

The reason that he cut to chase, so-to-speak, may be because he was running out of space. You can only write so much in a paper.

 

[Journeyman]

Those of higher education are in my opinion not suitable for the work that is done in the trenches by us..the common soldier.

Wow, I guess I'm sufficiently uneducated, or at least adequately stupid, not to work in hospitals or government. I'm pretty lucky the Infantry took me.


Perhaps Kenora has a problem with too much intellect in their fighting trenches Cadet community? :

 

[The Bread Guy]

Those of higher education are in my opinion not suitable for the work that is done in the trenches by us..the common soldier. They are much better off in hospitals,stitching us back together, or in Government..tellings us what we are doing,or where we are going next,etc..etc. Leave the trooping to the troops.

To state the blindingly obvious:  Way to offend the "common soldiers" who, indeed, have LOADS of education - in some cases, more than the officer types.

And from my limited experience in government (or life, for that matter), more education =/= (necessarily) more common sense.

 

[IBM]

Actually, if I remember correctly, I believe Black has spent time studying military history and at one time he was also into miniature wargaming. And, again if my memory serves me, he was at one time a Honorary Colonel with one of the Ottawa militia regiments. I know that doesn't make him a military expert, but at the same time he's not necessary totally ignorant of military matters.

The reason that he cut to chase, so-to-speak, may be because he was running out of space. You can only write so much in a paper.

I realize that Black may not be totally ignorant on the topic, but my point was exactly how much faith can you put in someone's thoughts on a topic who is NOT a subject-matter expert on it? Would you take cooking tips from Don Cherry? Or bets on who will win the Cup from Martha Stewart?

If you are not a SME on a topic, then in my book you opinion on the topic has as much weight as the rest of John Q. Public. Same rule applies to myself; if I'm not an SME then my own thoughts really isn't worth that as someone who is.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I agree, but my point is that very few military personnel are experts on what the appropriate size of our military is, given that the size and capability MUST be linked to our National Security Strategy, which must in turn serve the nation's vital interests.  These must be determined by our elected officials and their advisors, few of whom are uniformed.  Mr Black has, in the past, had the ear of various elected officials in the capacity of informal advisor, and so his opinion matters, even if it is not wholly thought through.

 

[Greymatters]

I agree, but my point is that very few military personnel are experts on what the appropriate size of our military is, given that the size and capability MUST be linked to our National Security Strategy, which must in turn serve the nation's vital interests.  These must be determined by our elected officials and their advisors, few of whom are uniformed.  Mr Black has, in the past, had the ear of various elected officials in the capacity of informal advisor, and so his opinion matters, even if it is not wholly thought through.

However, very very few of our elected officials or even their advisors actually know what they are talking about when it comes to National Security Strategy.  They are however very good at knowing what size of a military will make our allied commitments happy and at the same time not upset the general public too much, all while keeping expenses as low as possible.

 

 

[Greymatters]

Those of higher education are in my opinion not suitable for the work that is done in the trenches by us..the common soldier.

And yes, I agree with George here, this type of talk tends to propogate the myth that your average CF NCM is a by-blow squaddie trying to ape their betters...