Short-service Army
- Thread starter canuck101
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
pbi said:
I swear you're going to make me have a stroke ...
I don't think I can figure out a way of saying what I want to say without making even more enemies in high places.
However, I'll explode if I don't get this off my chest:
How about, instead of screwing over guys who've just returned from operational tours, we get rid of some deadwood who have NEVER volunteered for anything except buying a round at happy hour?
(i.e. the ones who "have never seen a paysheet they didn't sign" and are only sticking around to pad their pensions)
Worse, the system is not only letting these frauds survive, they're letting them give advice (and screwing over) guys with real operational experience.
To recap: Let's get rid of some drunken, vindictive, careerist frauds and let some others have a chance to percolate upwards.
S
Storm
Guest
Breathe bossi, breathe. 
I think pbi was referring to the potential situation in a conscript force, not any currently serving members.
735_Winnipeg: the saying that "professionals are predictable, it's the amateurs that are dangerous" isn't necessarily referring to the enemy, if you catch my drift. Especially in the current global situation, sacrificing quality for quantity is totally the wrong direction to be headed IMO. A few highly trained and dedicated people can do a job that thousands of others who don't give a crap, don't know how or both can't.
I think pbi was referring to the potential situation in a conscript force, not any currently serving members.
735_Winnipeg: the saying that "professionals are predictable, it's the amateurs that are dangerous" isn't necessarily referring to the enemy, if you catch my drift. Especially in the current global situation, sacrificing quality for quantity is totally the wrong direction to be headed IMO. A few highly trained and dedicated people can do a job that thousands of others who don't give a crap, don't know how or both can't.
- Reaction score
- 10,343
- Points
- 1,260
I had to dig to find this (man, I was on a Wehrmacht high at the time), but here is another article along the same vein (but in the American context) by Charles Moskos.
http://www.leavenworth.army.mil/milrev/download/English/MayJun05/moskos.pdf
There is something to be said for targeting the university graduate pool for recruits, even if it means shorter contract times.
http://www.leavenworth.army.mil/milrev/download/English/MayJun05/moskos.pdf
There is something to be said for targeting the university graduate pool for recruits, even if it means shorter contract times.
FormerHorseGuard
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 437
- Points
- 760
some of the pros and cons here are very valid, some are just down right scary.
US Forces do they not have a promotion or get out system?
I read about in some books but not exactly sure how it works.
US Forces used short term soldiers in a small war in the 60s to 70s found out that it did not work, you need the leadership, knowledge and the guts of a career soldier to fight a war.
You use to be able to take a person off the street and train in less a year and ship that person out by the boatload and have them fight in a war and win it.
Todays equipment and tools of war take longer then a year to learn how to turn it on or off. Some of the systems are so complex they take years to build. Do you trust some one who is going to be around up to 3 years to operate such a system with the skill level to make work and operate required to save lives and to take lives.
It use to take days to make a combat ready aircraft, 20 to 25 hours a pilot was flying on their own. within a year they were in combat flying real missions. how many hours does it take now before a pilot is ready to strap in to a Cf 18 or C130 and fly a real mission?
Short time NCOs would be the death of the ground forces. You can throw a young 2Lt into leading a platoon, but he / she needs the knowledge of the NCO to learn from. We cannot turn out a Sgt or WO in a few years to keep up with the ones they get rid of in the short term army plan.
For that matter a young army cook or supply tech needs more then a couple years to learn the trade. EME would never get out of the shop without techs who have seen , done it and faked it to get equipment ready to move for a mission. they need the knowledge only time will give them.
in my simple thoughts i do not see a short term service working for Canada.
Cut back oin the SSO positions, cut back on the Generals who command nothing but an office or a force on paper. Take some of the SNR NCOs and put them back in the units where they are needed and belong to teach and lead by example. NDHQ needs less staff in all departments.
US Forces do they not have a promotion or get out system?
I read about in some books but not exactly sure how it works.
US Forces used short term soldiers in a small war in the 60s to 70s found out that it did not work, you need the leadership, knowledge and the guts of a career soldier to fight a war.
You use to be able to take a person off the street and train in less a year and ship that person out by the boatload and have them fight in a war and win it.
Todays equipment and tools of war take longer then a year to learn how to turn it on or off. Some of the systems are so complex they take years to build. Do you trust some one who is going to be around up to 3 years to operate such a system with the skill level to make work and operate required to save lives and to take lives.
It use to take days to make a combat ready aircraft, 20 to 25 hours a pilot was flying on their own. within a year they were in combat flying real missions. how many hours does it take now before a pilot is ready to strap in to a Cf 18 or C130 and fly a real mission?
Short time NCOs would be the death of the ground forces. You can throw a young 2Lt into leading a platoon, but he / she needs the knowledge of the NCO to learn from. We cannot turn out a Sgt or WO in a few years to keep up with the ones they get rid of in the short term army plan.
For that matter a young army cook or supply tech needs more then a couple years to learn the trade. EME would never get out of the shop without techs who have seen , done it and faked it to get equipment ready to move for a mission. they need the knowledge only time will give them.
in my simple thoughts i do not see a short term service working for Canada.
Cut back oin the SSO positions, cut back on the Generals who command nothing but an office or a force on paper. Take some of the SNR NCOs and put them back in the units where they are needed and belong to teach and lead by example. NDHQ needs less staff in all departments.
- Reaction score
- 16,933
- Points
- 1,010
Just to play devil's advocate for a second, if we do what you suggest, who runs all of the project offices to buy all of the new kit that we all seem to desperately need, like, yesterday?
Trinity
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
bossi said:
But Bossi...
Sounds like you're taking away my retirement!!!
;DUm.. too bad I came into this thread 5 pages in.
What I wanted to say has to do with 5 pages back and this thread has really changed from its original topic.. and i mean huge.
Its no longer supporting or hating the original topic but another argument of different problems in the CF.
The original idea sounds like what Israel does, but Israel has the entire country as service people. When ever they need to
do an offensive they can simply call up who ever from their civilian life for whatever periods of time.
Sounds like what English is saying is similar. Calling up people to augment 70% of the positions with a few career army people
in the leadership positions.
My fear.... if we call up people for a small period of time, abuse them on a few tours and then set them free they will be more
susceptible to PTSD and other stress illness because they lose their peer group of soldiers. This is still a problem today in the Israeli army
(or so I was recently taught) (watched a video with a LCol of their army talk about re-integration of short term soldiers)
So, simply from a mental health stand point, this will cause more casualties on the homefront trying to re-adjust without the proper
support systems, peers, and understanding from the general public.
(like Bossi.. I had to get that off my chest.. sorry)
Jungle
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 430
A short-term Soldier can have the guts to win a war, if he believes in it; for example: if his country is directly attacked, if his family is in danger. But it is difficult to convince a conscript, or an ordinary citizen, to go fight a war thousands of miles away, if he is not directly threatened.FormerHorseGuard said:
Monsoon
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 230
The problem with the "up or out" system is that it encourages promotion of people beyond their competence. Being a large organization, the US Army depends on a great deal on having a lot experienced officers to maintain the corporate memory. Threatening people to get promoted or get released really only holds the military itself hostage and forces it to promote people who are only capable at their current rank into the next one higher. This to say nothing of the perfectly capable people who get released because they don't look to be on the "fast track"...FormerHorseGuard said:
Bert
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 230
I wasn't able to find the article on the canada.com site or a reference while searching so my understanding
of the article is limited. However, I feel it is likely possible the reporter took alot out-of-context.
The idea of making a majority of the members only undertake short term contracts (I'm referring to the CF
in general and not just the army or the combat arms) is unworkable. Unless the CF wants to augment
the military with sizable versatile civilian support, there is no way to develop the skills, knowledge, and experience to
install, maintain, and repair operational equipment. The NCM QL3 in some MOCs takes 2 years, OJT, rotation,
and courses leading to QL4/5 takes a few more years. By the time the member is useful in MOC and non-MOC
circumstances, PUFF, off he goes. This applies to the officer cadre too. Doesn't make sense.
As said before, the experiences of some countries may show citizen-like militaries work well. Hard to say
how effective they would outside of their own country. Within the Canadian context of versatile international
deployability, the watering down of a professional cadre would work against us.
of the article is limited. However, I feel it is likely possible the reporter took alot out-of-context.
The idea of making a majority of the members only undertake short term contracts (I'm referring to the CF
in general and not just the army or the combat arms) is unworkable. Unless the CF wants to augment
the military with sizable versatile civilian support, there is no way to develop the skills, knowledge, and experience to
install, maintain, and repair operational equipment. The NCM QL3 in some MOCs takes 2 years, OJT, rotation,
and courses leading to QL4/5 takes a few more years. By the time the member is useful in MOC and non-MOC
circumstances, PUFF, off he goes. This applies to the officer cadre too. Doesn't make sense.
As said before, the experiences of some countries may show citizen-like militaries work well. Hard to say
how effective they would outside of their own country. Within the Canadian context of versatile international
deployability, the watering down of a professional cadre would work against us.
Trinity
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Bert...
it would have to be a two system army for this to work
People to plug in and play with / abuse for a few years...
and people who stay long term, take up leadership positions and grow
I don't agree or disagree. But thats how I think it would work if
they tried to implement this. And it would then be like the stupid
reg vs res or res vs cic attitudes we experience.
it would have to be a two system army for this to work
People to plug in and play with / abuse for a few years...
and people who stay long term, take up leadership positions and grow
I don't agree or disagree. But thats how I think it would work if
they tried to implement this. And it would then be like the stupid
reg vs res or res vs cic attitudes we experience.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
The one possible positive point about a conscript or draftee army is that people were socialized to a military standard from all walks of life. Of course, the primary value set has to be military, not just social engineering for the heck of it. From Chaos Manor
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail442.html
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail442.html
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,927
- Points
- 1,160
Intersting concepts. Kipling wrote about a simiular approach in "The Army of a Dream". Not too dissimilar from how many conscript armies operate. If we're fighting assymetric conflicts from now on, we'll need to think more assymetrically.
http://greatwarfiction.wordpress.com/2006/11/05/kiplings-military-utopia/
Kipling’s Military Utopia
A character in Kipling’s Boer War story The Captive calls that conflict “a dress-parade for Armageddon, ” and Kipling, like many others, considered it in some ways an unimpressive one. British military failures caused a great deal of national soul-searching and opinion-mongering in the war’s aftermath; notable literary products were books (like Mason’s The Four Feathers) that dealt with problems of courage and manliness, and future-war narratives imagining Britain’s response to an invasion.
One of Kipling’s responses to the question was an odder one; a short story (in two parts) called The Army of a Dream (collected in Traffics and Discoveries). Its narrator takes a seat in his Club smoking-room, and finds it “entirely natural” that he should be talking to “Boy Bayley”, whom he had last met twenty years before during the South African War (so setting this story in the 1920s, whereas Traffics and Discoveries was published in 1904).
Bayley tells him about the modern Army, and takes him to the barracks, where he meets several old friends. Together (This is one of Kipling’s polyvocal stories, with a whole community of narrators – is there any writer more dialogical than Kipling?) they describe not just an Army, but an entirely militarised nation:
All boys begin physical drill to music in the Board Schools when they’re six; squad-drill, one hour a week, when they’re eight; company drill when they’re ten, for an hour and a half each week. Between ten and twelve they get battalion drill of a sort. They take the rifle at twelve and record their first target-score at thirteen. That’s what the Code says. But it’s worked very loosely so long as a boy comes up to the standard of his age.
Once they become men, all citizens join territorial units which give them regular training. Fierce inter-unit rivalry keeps standards and morale immensely high, and military culture pervades all aspects of life. What happens to those who don’t want to be involved with the army?
http://greatwarfiction.wordpress.com/2006/11/05/kiplings-military-utopia/
Kipling’s Military Utopia
A character in Kipling’s Boer War story The Captive calls that conflict “a dress-parade for Armageddon, ” and Kipling, like many others, considered it in some ways an unimpressive one. British military failures caused a great deal of national soul-searching and opinion-mongering in the war’s aftermath; notable literary products were books (like Mason’s The Four Feathers) that dealt with problems of courage and manliness, and future-war narratives imagining Britain’s response to an invasion.
One of Kipling’s responses to the question was an odder one; a short story (in two parts) called The Army of a Dream (collected in Traffics and Discoveries). Its narrator takes a seat in his Club smoking-room, and finds it “entirely natural” that he should be talking to “Boy Bayley”, whom he had last met twenty years before during the South African War (so setting this story in the 1920s, whereas Traffics and Discoveries was published in 1904).
Bayley tells him about the modern Army, and takes him to the barracks, where he meets several old friends. Together (This is one of Kipling’s polyvocal stories, with a whole community of narrators – is there any writer more dialogical than Kipling?) they describe not just an Army, but an entirely militarised nation:
All boys begin physical drill to music in the Board Schools when they’re six; squad-drill, one hour a week, when they’re eight; company drill when they’re ten, for an hour and a half each week. Between ten and twelve they get battalion drill of a sort. They take the rifle at twelve and record their first target-score at thirteen. That’s what the Code says. But it’s worked very loosely so long as a boy comes up to the standard of his age.
Once they become men, all citizens join territorial units which give them regular training. Fierce inter-unit rivalry keeps standards and morale immensely high, and military culture pervades all aspects of life. What happens to those who don’t want to be involved with the army?
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
In the former USSR (and many communist nations, National Socialist Germany and many other nations) the system described by Kipling was partially or fully implemented, although probably not with the happy results described.
Switzerland has universal male conscription, and it seems (from anecdotal reports, I'm afraid) this is used as a form of socialization as well as a form of screening: people who are NCO and officer material in the Swiss military are also marked as up and comers in Swiss society, and this apparently gets reflected in hiring, promotions at work etc.
Most draftee armies which I am aware of do not meet either of these extremes, and I would venture to say that the underlying culture and political situation of the parent nation has much more to do with the successful/unsuccessful outcomes of their military forces than anything else. The Swiss know that their neutrality must be guarded; the Israelis know what will happen if they ever lose a war; an attempt to impose a draft on the Canadian Forces would run up against the "Militia Myth" and regional divisions, and so on.
Switzerland has universal male conscription, and it seems (from anecdotal reports, I'm afraid) this is used as a form of socialization as well as a form of screening: people who are NCO and officer material in the Swiss military are also marked as up and comers in Swiss society, and this apparently gets reflected in hiring, promotions at work etc.
Most draftee armies which I am aware of do not meet either of these extremes, and I would venture to say that the underlying culture and political situation of the parent nation has much more to do with the successful/unsuccessful outcomes of their military forces than anything else. The Swiss know that their neutrality must be guarded; the Israelis know what will happen if they ever lose a war; an attempt to impose a draft on the Canadian Forces would run up against the "Militia Myth" and regional divisions, and so on.
Similar threads
