When Is A Soldier Not A Soldier?

[army]

When Is A Soldier Not A Soldier?





Posted by Rob Clarke Civilian from Orleans ON Canada on April 20, 1999 at 10:38:51:


In Reply to: Your post is much ado about nothing posted by Ken Newans on April 20, 1999 at 00:56:23:



Ken,

To summarize your philosophy: a private soldier referring to a general albeit retired by name in a public forum is not an indication of a problem. Have I got this correct? If so, then in your "vision" supported by your previous message of our military, you pick and choose when discipline is to be used, and now you indicate that what a soldier does on his or her own time" is his/her business. Do you have any military experience whatsoever? If so, have you been successful in this type of leadership?

As for regimental affiliation, keep guessing. By the way thanks for the compliment about the RCR. You seem to think it is a bad thing to fix problems - do you enjoy success with this type of philosophy?

Now for your research on general effectiveness in WWII. Try using some facts to support your arguments -I too can pull a lot of names out of a hat and make lots of unsubstantiated claims. I still dont understand how your research supports your argument.

You may not think rank is important in a forum such as this, but there are plenty of examples where contributors use their rank - they obviously think it is important to use it. Yes, they have a differing perspective on military life, but when they speak as a member of the CF, they speak as one - this is not my policy it is the policy of DND check the post about QRO. The easy way around this type of censorship is to use another name and this prevents challenges to their professionalism as soldiers. If they use their rank, then I think it is fair to challenge them - after all it is Canadas military and we deserve and in a lot of cases have the best.

Finally some common ground - I too want our soldiers to think for themselves, but within the bounds of the regulations of a professional and accountable organization. Posting a message on this site and making a small error in protocol is minor in comparison to the atrocities mentioned, but what was the root cause of these atrocities? People ignoring problems - both minor and major problems.

Thus I keep writing to you.

 

[army]

Re: When Is A Soldier Not A Soldier?





Posted by A PRIVATE from Ottawa Canada on April 20, 1999 at 11:57:35:


In Reply to: When Is A Soldier Not A Soldier? posted by Rob Clarke on April 20, 1999 at 10:38:51:



As the poor grunt whose unintended miscue started this string, I would like to offer a few points of clarification.

I do not advocate referring to our senior officers, past or present, in a casual manner.

However, I feel I have been unfairly depicted by Mr. Clarke as "unprofessional" and, perhaps, "not a soldier". I respect my superiors and always address them accordingly. To fail to do so on an Internet chat site is not, in my opinion, a chargable offence. Nor does it warrant the slew of invective thrown my way by Mr. Clarke.

In my opinion, CF members who adopt the U.S.-style automaton approach to soldiering do more harm to their cause than do those who occasionally make a mis-step.

Soldiers are paid to think, Mr. Clarke, not to operate as Pavlovian dogs in combats.