A new Army...The Future of the CF?

[Infanteer]

With Canada straining to send enough land forces to cover its NATO commitments to Bosnia, and now te Afgan situation, one has got to wonder what changes this is going to bring about to our Defence Policies and the way the military is viewed in Canadian society.
With ideas ranging from freeing up US soldiers in the Balkans by increasing our contingent there to sending in Peacekeepers to pick up the mess in Afgahnistan, and Bercuson's idea today of dedicating a CMBG to a war to oust Saddam Hussein, you gotta think that somewhere along the line the government is going to have its hand called.
Any thoughts on our future position....

 

[fortuncookie5084]

We‘re at a fork in the road. We can turn this emasculated force into the proud fighting Army that‘s still there but suppressed. Number one, we need to get rid of the peacekeeping label. Look to the US Marines, who proudly tell everyone "We are warfighters, we don‘t do peacekeeping." That line is official, right out of Quantico, VA. Secondly, we need public exposure. Lots of it. Don‘t hide us away. We‘re going in the right direction but we still have a ways to go---no more of this ban on wearing a uniform business. Win the hearts and minds of the Canadian people and the rest will follow.

 

[King]

A retired major wrote a letter to the editor of The National Post today. He said that during the Gulf War, when the army was looking at sending our brigade in Germany, it was determined that we would need 80% of our vehicles and equipment to field a proper brigade. It would be a one shot deal, we couldn‘t replace any loses.

It‘ll never happen.

 

[enfield]

I saw the same editorial and the same letter in response. To send a brigade overseas would be a huge efffort, and take up almost all Regular Army sources, and we‘d still need someone else to transport and supply it. Plus, in order to fight a real war you‘d have to call out the Reserves to make up for casualties.
I think sending units over as part of a Commonwealth Brigade/Division would be a good compromise.

A large, professional peacetime army is unCanadian. We have yet to send a standing peacetime military formation into a war.

 

[armybuck041]

Until we havew a way to supply ourselves at long distances, you will never see large cdn ground contingents anywhere but in established places. Look at the mess trying to get into east timor. Besides we have pretty much no way of moving large numbers of vehicles and equip. other than leasing a ship(look what happened last time) or begging the yanks for some room on their planes.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by fortuncookie5084:
[qb]Look to the US Marines, who proudly tell everyone "We are warfighters, we don‘t do peacekeeping." That line is official, right out of Quantico, VA. [/qb]

We‘re not the marines.

And there are a lot of people who take justifiable pride in the peacekeeper label.

 

[Jungle]

We are all proud of the "peacekeeper" label, but it should not be our only label... we should be seen as "warfighters" who are able to keep the peace after restoring it ! At this moment, this is not the case... we are seen as the ones who "mop up" after the battle, as we will probably do in Afghanistan... remember what our Prime Minister said ?

 

[Paul Gagnon]

Peacekeeping has been the downfall of the CF.

 

[Gordon Angus Mackinlay]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There should be only one label;
it is not peacekeeper,
it‘s definately not that ludercious American term "warfighter", but,
SOLDIER.
The well trained, well led, motivated professionals who can do anything.

The prime example being the British Army, which has immense problems, but, has in recent years; fought wars; enforced peace, has carried out peacekeeping, humaniterian aid, the training of nations to protect themselves etc etc, and still finds time to perform ceremonial duties of the highest degree!

The worse example would have to be the US Marine Corps whose basic military tactic seems never to have risen beond that of ‘bullet catcher".

Soldiers must be thinkers as well as doe‘rs.

Yours,
Jock in Sydney

 

[Art Johnson]

Do not sell the U.S. Marines short. During my service in Korea I interfaced with both the Marines and the Brits. The 1st Marine Division was very competent and proffessional in their approach to warfare. Unfortunately I could not say the same for all the British units. I found the Black Watch an exception they were in my opinion very good.
There is no doubt that the British are the best there is when it comes to ceremonial duties, the Guards, the Royal Marines are exceptional. The R.A.F. Regiment does a good job too but I have seen a County Regiment at the changing of the Guard at Buckinham Palace whos’ Drill and Deportment left much to be desired.
The R.A.R. were very good. A bit of Humour if I may. The Advance Party of, I believe it was 3 R.A.R., came up to prepare for taking over from us. At the first platoon “O” group we asked one of the Aussies were his Owen Gun was he said “The Company Commander wouldn’t let us bring them because you guys would probably steal them.”

Pro Patria

 

[fortuncookie5084]

My experience with the US Marines has been informal (i.e. visiting friends as a civvy), however I have spent some time with troops from the 1st Marine Division out of Camp Pendleton. They‘re good. They‘re not rednecks, they‘re not dummies like some people here believe. Their mil standards, unlike in Canada, do not leave things to be desired in areas like marksmanship and PT. Sure, they‘re not always the brightest soldiers out there, but they definitely get the job done. They are NOT, I say again NOT merely dumb bullet catchers. They are equipped with the latest gear, great helicopters (they would not ever end up with something like the Griffon), and their training is realistic, regular, and intense. Some people may not like their distinctly Yank attitudes but don‘t confuse their Americaness as being dumb or incapable.

As for the Brits...they‘re damn good. I like em a lot. If only we could have something like the Household Cavalry coupled with the willingness to use such a deadly outfit. They‘re better than the Yanks any day.

 

[USMCMatt]

Angus, how much real interaction with the United States Marines have you had, other than renting a copy of "Full Metal Jacket"?

Your line

"The worse example would have to be the US Marine Corps whose basic military tactic seems never to have risen beond {proper spelling is beyond} that of bullet catcher"

is rather misinformed.

As a former Canadian Forces Soldier and current serving US Marine I feel the need to educate you on some of the US Marines innovations to warfare:

The fireteam concept was pioneered by the US Marine Corps during the 1920‘s during its "peacekeeping operations" in Haiti and the Dominican republic. The Marines were the first armed force to reduce the basic tactical unit to the 4 man section centered around the automatic rifleman, with 3 riflemen.

Close Air Support was another Marine innovation. It was developed again during the "banana wars" during the 1920‘s and 30‘s by the Marines.

Airmobile (helicopter) Assault is yet another Marine Corps innovation. Marine Corps helicopter squadron HMX-1 was the first unit to deliver riflemen and their support units in cohesive packages. Additionally, HMX-1 was the first unit ever to conduct a night casualty evacuation in combat.

And lets not forget Amphibious Assault. Perhaps your fellow ANZACS should have studied this a bit further before embarking on your ill-fated adventure at Gallipoli. Ever heard of a place called Inchon, Korea? How about Guadalcanal? Iwo Jima?

Also, you might want to leaf through the "Small Wars Manual" which has been the groundwork for military planners conducting Operations Other Than War. It was written by the Marine Corps during the 1920‘s.

If the Marines are such stupid imbeciles, then why does such an organization as the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory exist? I suppose that you think that the creator of ths website:
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6453
The MOUT webpage. Seems to me like he‘s a Marine. But based on your comments, he must surely have paid somebody else (most definitely a non-Marine) to construct such an excellent military resource, since he‘s probably too busy catching bullets.

"In one moment, our service members will be feeding and clothing refugees - providing humanitarian assistance. In the next, they will be holding two warring tribes apart - conducting peacekeeping operations. Finally, they will be fighting a highly lethal mid-intensity battle. All on the same day, all within three city blocks. It will be what we call the three block war."

General Charles C. Krulak - 31st Commandant - United States Marine Corps

Yep, the United States Marine Corps...the worst possible example...nothing but bullet catchers.

 

[Gordon Angus Mackinlay]

To the Gentleman who has just posted the above,

Firstly Sir, may I say that having read your profile, it has given me the best laugh I have had on a trully stressful day.

Secondly, my christian name is Gordon Angus, not Angus, which, I did not give you permission to use, especially in a insulting manner.

Thirdly, I have never watched any American war movies on South Viet Nam. My war experience in SVN was totally different to that of the United States.

Fourth, after having this year completed 41 years continuous military service (Regular/Reserve/Full Time Duty Reservist) after joining as an apprentice, the majority of which being in Senior NCO/WO and commissioned rank, and just over twelve years of which has been spent on active service in either a operational situation or a peacekeeping one, I believe I do have a certain degree of credence.

Fifth, may I suggest to you that you read some of the back issues of the past five years or so of the USMC excellent magazine, The Marine Corps Gazette. In it you will find many articles and letters responding to such by USMC officers criticising the "bullet catcher" mentality of the Corps.

In 1999 evidence was presented to a US Congressional Committee on officer retention in the regular US military; part of that presented to committee being from ex-serving officers of the Corps. In this one of the major factors of the failure of the Corps to retain officers, was the inability of the Corps to change it‘s concepts of military operation, the sticking to traditional "shores of Iwo Jima" assault and the lack of lateral and logical thinking which existed at all levels of the Corps, this combined with the unthinking obedience of the non-commissioned ranks, left many well educated competent young officers with no option but to leave the service.

Finally, Sir, may I thank you for pointing out to me my typographical error of leaving the ‘y‘ out of beyond.

With my thanks for such an insightful message, and once again my appreciation of the laugh your profile gave me.

Yours,

G.A.Mackinlay

PS My last contact with the USMC was during Exercise Tandem Thrust held in Queensland, Australia in May-June 2001, as a umpire.

 

[USMCMatt]

Mr. MacKinlay:

I did not mean to personally insult you. I was simply rebutting the wrong image that you were putting forth of the United States Marines.

The congressional hearings that you cite are not Marine Corps specific. The entire US Armed Forces has experienced a loss of junior officers at a tremendous rate during the mid to late 1990‘s. A more plausible explanation is that they were lured by the greener pastures of a booming economy seeking to fill management positions in the civilian sector where they could make two to three times the amount of income.


The loss of Marine officers is not due to a widespread fear of Marines assaulting beachheads in Iwo Jima manners. The Marine Corps has been instrumental in the development of asymetrical warfare theory, military operations in urban terrain, and the pursuit of such technical and tactical programs as the V-22 Osprey, Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle, and Landing Craft Air Cushioned to diversify the avenues of approach that the Marines have of reaching their objectives so as to avoid assaulting the enemy on ground of their choosing.

I am somewhat familiar with this Marine Corps Gazette (?) to which you refer, since I receive it in my mailbox at the beginning of each month, since I am a member of the Marine Corps Association.

I would suggest that you note that through this private publication, it is encouraged strongly by the leadership of the Marine Corps to foster intellectual thought and discourse within the ranks of the Marine Corps, both officer and enlisted.

Does such a military journal exist in Australia?

Tandem Thrust, you say? My Marine unit participated in that exercise as a LAV Company (minus) for the Marine Air Ground Task Force.
They greatly enjoyed the hospitality that your fellow countrymen put forth to them, and enjoyed working with the Australian LAV community to the point which several Australians visited our battalion‘s headquarters in Camp Pendleton, California at the end of the Tandem Thrust Exercise.

If you find my profile humorous, then I am glad, as it was intended to give the reader chuckles in regard to the "blowing sh*t up in the name of Democracy, Justice, and the American Way" .

However, while I may hold the l rank of Lance Corporal after 1 1/2 years service in the Marine Corps, I had served within the Canadian Forces for 6 years prior to joining the Marine Corps as a junior NCO.

Despite your belief that I may be more of an "armchair general", and while your service is impressive, I find your comments towards the Marine Corps insulting and unprofessional. I have attempted to back up my statements with reason and fact. If you find myself so amateurish in my comments, then perhaps you would be better suited to retire to the Sergeant‘s Mess to discuss matters with your equals than to squabble with such braindead and brainwashed jarheads as myself. The last time I looked, this was a "public" forum.

The United States Marine Corps has, and always will be more than just "bullet catchers", and in the event of dire circumstances, I can count on one of my fellow Marines to "catch" a bullet for myself as I would do the same for him.