Venandi

Explains why so many become suicidal at this time of the year eh?

Both sound painful but take heart, most army guys (at least those who haven't done the mountaineering course) aren't so good with knots.

As I recall, it goes: average, above average, high average, superior and outstanding. Bit of work to do yet, a good new-years resolution though.

Well, I'm rooting for ya but what about Dougie's mob?

Is Tim Hortens OK?

I think most of our differences could be resolved over a cup of coffee, that makes you one of the few (dare I say) liberal minded folks here that I could say that about... thanks.

Talking over someone on a written forum usually comes with challenges... thanks for making it easy. Things like using (gasp) terminology and trying to define parameters sometimes requires a few big words, clearly the domain of MAGA Hyenas... right? Should have known it wouldn't work. Since you're into videos, here' one you might be able to relate to:

Read the quote twice... it contains a clue as to why that debate is troublesome for you and less so for some of the others mentioned.

One of the natural laws of the universe that's routinely ignored with a patented "it doesn't apply to me shrug" because my opinion is right. It's a bit like the effect of velocity squared and coefficient of friction on stopping distance, or the difference between spin down speed with viscous / dynamic hydroplaning.... "it doesn't apply to me because I'm in a hurry." Anyone who drives a plow truck (or a tow truck) in the worst of snow storms will tell you that it's all wheel drive vehicles with good snow tires that are first ones into the ditch. Suffice it to say I've met a lot of Herbs on the side of the road, and when I do, it reminds me to be thankful that they only get one vote each. Reality is a funny thing, it exists whether you believe it or not and it doesn't actually care what you think. Failure to acknowledge its existence usually means that it automatically works against you. Based on tire pressure, you can actually calculate the approximate dynamic hydroplaning spin down speed. But don't bother telling Herb about it... one of two things will happen if you do: he will either assert that it's a colonial construct intended to harass people of colour who are late for work or he'll type "TLDR, WTF does REALITY have to do with political choices FFS" See ya next snow storm Herb...

That's what I'm afraid of. It takes experience to know (for sure) what you don't want, and mindfulness to recognize the symptoms of its approach. As a society we seem to lack both qualities and have embarked on a series of social experiments that will take a decade (or more) to repair. Police and military manning come instantly to mind as an example of the easiest things to fix... but even if we started today and worked hard at that, it can't be done in less than 7-10 years. And we won't be starting today...

I sure hope so but I wonder if it's too early to assert that in terms of a longterm view. I get the short term one but fear it's mostly driven by economic concerns and thus transient as a result. The woke crowd are only beginning to feel the impact of the policies they previously voted for and maybe it's just too early for that pain to translate into an appropriate cause and effect aversion. Lot's of economic and safety related examples but my favourite (and the most glaring one of all IMO) is that it took years and far too many deaths for them to realize that it isn't duck hunters shooting up their streets and grand fathers with pocket knives stabbing them on the bus. Good Lord, this took sooooooo much longer to hoist aboard than I thought it would and it's the reason I wonder if there's been a lasting change of heart or if the woke virus will simply mutate and return in full force 5 years from now. In short, I'd rather see the pain last another four years, create an indelible aversion and be completely done with it than usher in an era of ruinous oscillations of cyclical madness. I'd love to be wrong, but I fear people aren't truly over it yet... not that this forum is relevant in any way, but clearly Herb and a few others here still want more... what if they set up a breeding program? And not that it actually translates to seats, but some 40% (or so) of the popular vote will still go to Liberals, NDP, and the Bloc... it makes me wonder just what it will take. These guys haven't had a change of heart: They will ride a horse until it dies... then they'll eat it.

Now you've jumped to total incompetence and framed it in a manner that suggests people with contrary minded opinions here are equating incompetence with gender/skin colour. You're missing the point entirely and IMO, you're doing it deliberately and under the guise of "little ole me is just asking a question." Skin pigment doesn't make you incompetent by virtue of its presence any more than it makes your performance superior or outstanding because of it.... that's the point being made here. If you are doing the promoting, hiring, firing (or whatever), allotting extra points in a ranked merit system for skin colour and what happens to exist between your legs only serves to elevate individuals above their peer group by using a random criteria that has nothing to do with merit. You could just as easily use eye colour, even/odd birth years, or cat person/dog person criteria... and if I were suggest that, you would immediately (and quite rightly) brand it as madness. And when you did, I'd ask you to prove that cat people were incompetent by virtue of not liking dogs. I could stand your argument on its head and ask if you have any evidence to suggest that the performance of women and people of colour is, by virtue of the gender/colour difference, superior to that of white males. The reason I haven't done that is because the proposition is ludicrous on its face. No one is saying that... and you know it. If you were to suggest that any merit list position should be elevated based on being male and being white, I would argue against it for the exact same reason I'm opposed to applying the formula in reverse. And ironically, if you were actually to do stuff like that it would immediately be obvious to everyone and it would have the exact opposite effect of that intended.. What do you suppose that would do to attrition? What merit list group do you suppose that attrition would most heavily impact? The answer is it would increase and the demographic that increased it would all be higher performers than the folks you actually promoted... over time, you can easily guess what happens. I think you're actually getting a taste of it right now and I don't think it's working out too well. Doubling down on it might not be the best plan but it is entertaining to watch once you're retired. When considering some of the LSD induced policy decisions of late, the question most often asked by veterans in the locker room is "WTF did you think was going to happen?"

BTW Beav, that tends to be something of a sore point (with some) in the special forces community where everyone who walks through the door is superior or outstanding. In that context, maybe it should be us asking what YOUR point is and whether you really do want what you seem to be asking for. You're on track to do some lasting damage here so you should (at least) have one doozy of a compelling point.

Answered above... better read it twice, I might have been too subtle. I would also add that government mandated efforts to reach quota driven targets usually carry a soonest imperative. In an environment where careers are measured in decades it can have lasting implications, particularly in slow moving low turn over occupations like series 500 trades. Then again, I'm retired now and other than contract operational gigs like UAV/UAS I won't be back... so fill your boots. Best of luck with it.

FWIW, I would question their general competence and depth of experience in such things. Cultural topography, and its impact on interactions are usually part of pre-deployment training.... often reinforced in a myriad of scenario driven exercises and sometimes videoed for (potentially embarrassing) classroom analysis after the fact. Actors (if I can call them that) are routinely hired for realism... might be a reason for that eh? From what I've seen, real life, native speaking cultural advisors in the form of educated, thoughtful and articulate immigrants are usually recruited for such things. Never have I seen it delegated to white women with attitude and a degree in woke. Ya, a bit sarcastic maybe but factually correct based on my experience. For me, talking to some of those advisors was sometimes the most enjoyable (and enlightening) part of the training and I still remember a couple of them fondly... same with some of the interpreters.

A good video for anyone inclined to say "wait a minute now, let's just think about this for a second." https://www.rebelnews.com/gun_violence_surges_as_liberals_aim_at_the_wrong_target_rod_giltaca The sort of easy, strait forward discussion that could have taken place anytime, on any network or news outlet... but never did. Through painful, often deadly experience, it's become obvious to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear that innocent people are getting hurt simply because of a systemic failure to address real issues. It's also obvious that the issues which are being addressed are nothing more than cynical political expediency designed to create wedge issues. I think people are beginning to resent being duped and the more liberals double down on nonsense, the more people (with a kitchen window to look out of) begin to resent it. As an aside, I'd like to see a similar discussion about the deliberate statistical manipulations that went into the "domestically sourced crime gun" scam a few years back and the police collusion that enabled and supported it. The fact that more people aren't utterly appalled and outraged by all this is a testament to the information management techniques that were deployed against them. For those interested in such things, it's been a truly fascinating journey.

Being qualified for a job doesn't make you qualified for a leadership position. In addition, there are many jobs that women, by nature, aren't terribly interested in... if you take stock of the number of women that you know who would want to join the infantry or spend 6 months of the year at sea you can begin to appreciate the challenge. I don't know any who aren't currently serving. You? A better question might be is it wise to promote based on competency or would you rather see skin colour, gender, and religion be heavily weighted as criteria in merit listings. Would you apply that same criteria when selecting a mechanic, plumber, or the contractor who renovates your kitchen? If you use word of mouth to find a good tradesman, is your first consideration (and question) about gender and colour or is it about competency/reliability? I've worked in the industry and I've offered numerous recommendations... not once has it come up and not once has it "coloured" my recommendation. My reputation is tied to those recommendations and I don't take that lightly (I can't afford to)... would you prefer that I did? I've also acted as a reference for pilots seeking airline jobs (even though they never knew it because it was the company that called me). And they called me because they trust my judgement. Not once has that come up... NOT ONCE. In fact, if my endorsement of a candidate was ever seen to be based on such a frivolous quality and not on competence (and the ability to play well with others) the phone would have stoped ringing. I don't think you really want what you seem to be asking for, and if I actually gave it to you you'd be annoyed with me for doing it.... so let's not snow the snow queen.

Agreed, but only for the moment... they're working hard at it. I'm a bit staggered by the amount of damage, polarization, and bogus wedge issues they have created in a short period of time. The NDP scares me too. I absolutely cringe at the idea of safe supply, trans gender aggressiveness, immigration in excess of capacity, deliberately bogus constructs around the gun control issue, attacks on freedom of speech, and a bunch of other things that would fill an entire thread. I think it's bad enough now... I absolutely don't want to see where they take it in the future. And to thwart those efforts the next time around, I want a bunch of the things I previously supported walked back and utterly crushed now. And considering that the only thing required to avoid my (admittedly) visceral reaction to all this was taking yes for an answer and extended the same courtesies being demanded to those who provided them... I think this was the greatest political (and tactical) blunder of a lifetime. To get along with me, all ya had to do was nothing. The inability to accept yes as an answer and do nothing is (to me) what the Brits call gobsmacking.' So, I'll ask a simple question here, when it comes to my change of heart and lack of future support, I'd like to know what you thought was going to happen? Done for the next few days BTW, Merry Christmas and best wishes for 2025. Cheers

Which is why liberal/NDP voters scare me now, you had to work very hard to make that the case. I actually used to vote liberal back when they weren't crazy and their values actually aligned with my own. Something changed though... and it wasn't me. If you read the story below and can actually relate to it then your coping skills are hugely lacking, you're part of the problem but don't realize it, there's no negotiating with you, no reasoning with you and I wouldn't go even if I were invited. None of the leftists I know are this bat sh%$ crazy... is it truly a thing or is FOX just on one of their rants here? https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-five-absurd-tips-from-liberal-pundits-surviving-holidays-trump-voting-family

Maybe, but I'm guessing it affects the quality of applicant though, and even if that's not the case, good applicants will in turn, and very quickly IMO, become part of the very attrition cycle you mention... that makes regeneration extremely difficult. You quickly end up with people you can't train and money you can't spend because of a shortage of trainers and mentors... operational tempo then trashes all attempts to fix it whilst simultaneously increasing attrition. It ends up shining a light on those DEI promotions... just when you need the best of the best to help with regeneration you find them gonzo. When you have long training times in occupations where experience is king, the balance between retention, recruitment and tempo requires binoculars... careful analysis of future requirements and a firm hand on the tiller. Throw one of those parameters out of balance for too long and it can be hard to fix. By way of example, I think manning the future UAV/UAS acquisition will be problematic. Maybe maintenance and training will be farmed out to civilians meaning retired RCAF pilots (with Heron or extensive ISR experience) and ex military maintainers. Even so, finding the operational cadre will prove challenging simply because there's already a shortage of them. Finding the trainers may be a challenge as well, speaking personally, I have the background and experience to do that but simply wouldn't return to take up a training role... it would be operational flying only and I doubt that would happen. I'm not alone in that sentiment either and it's a small club unless you want to start from scratch... again, or should I say AGAIN.

Ready, willing and able has a profound effect on those numbers. So does the intake you're actually (structurally) capable, or not capable of dealing with. But never mind all of that... you seem inclined to ignore it anyway. Just for fun, put them in combat boots, run them a few miles in deep sand and see how many are left. When I taught basic training I was always surprised at the number of people who had never been out on the land from the first glow of a pending sunrise to broad daylight... I'm just cynical enough to think there are even more of them around today. I don't know what else to say here in terms of raw numbers vs acceptable candidates (and the capacity to train them). The raw numbers aren't as important as factors mentioned. By way of example, there's show called (if memory serves) Hard North on Prime and there's a girl on it (one of the participants) who's in the Yukon. I love this girl, she's a powerhouse... I doubt she even knows what rare commodity she is. Where can we find a bunch just like her? If you want an army that's 50% women, reality suggests that you better hope she has like minded sisters. I would urge you to search your memory banks, of all the women you've ever known, including friends, relatives acquaintances etc (I mean all of them). How many do you know who actually want to join the infantry and are ready willing and able to roll right now (like today). Don't know about you but I got nothing...

Fair enough... stay the course and best of luck with it. Regeneration is problematic. You may find you get to deal with a vexing problem you never anticipated: money you can't spend on people you can't train in equipment you can't man... oooops better say person eh? Let me know how it works for ya... if you want to laugh at my opinion in 5 years time you better start hauling a$$ today.

Attrition is a huge deal here, one of three key personnel factors... especially if you accept the fact that many of the best recruits already have familial ties to the military and those who left are telling their kids, grandkids and friends to "look elsewhere.... just as I do. It becomes a double edged sword, fewer quality recruits, less experienced pros to train them, less operational mentors when entry level training is complete... all at the same time and all whilst trying to maintain a semblance of operational tempo and repairing the equipment to do it with duct tape. Woke came at the worst possible time, the thinking behind it was deluded, and since careers are measured in decades, the effects will be with us for a while. I would argue they don't but admittedly, I'm a bit dated now. At best I'd say the window is small and closing incrementally with time and rust out. The attrition you mentioned hurts, tempo hurts too and it leaves more attrition in its wake, training capacity is decreasing in terms of available resources, trainers, and operational level mentors. The fact that it works at all is a credit to the efforts of the very people you can ill afford to lose. Circling the drain is never a function of a single issue... If you had actually planned to accomplish this feat, you couldn't have implemented the plan more effectively.

Exactly how I see it too... and that's just one side of the retention, recruiting, operational tempo equation that's eating our lunch. Trouble is, there's a perfect storm here, a confluence of circumstance, rust out and bad ideas all at the same time. Herb has articulated one of those ideas above, trouble is, you could write a book about each of the following paragraphs (there are lots more paragraphs BTW) but Herb wouldn't even bother to read them... he'll write TLDR and advance his own theory instead. The traditional recruiting pool is (actually was) pretty small to begin with and it's a whole bunch smaller now. And of that small group, the folks who are ready willing and able to join reduce it even further. People should take a moment and ponder the idea of ready, willing, and able as being separate entities worthy of separate consideration, then they should examine the motivations of most young people considering that first trip to the CFRC Det. Maybe Herb could chair a focus group comparing the utility of a JTF2 recruiting video vs that USN drag queen one that was "floating" around last year before it got trashed. Maybe the group could even ponder the spike in pilot applicants following a Top Gun movie or in combat arms applicants after the latest Rambo flick.. Recruiting wait times are too long (even for retreads), the best of the best are too often lost to the civilian side (policing, pilot training, technical trades, scholarships, that expat airline job, etc) due to ridiculously long intake delays.... not to mention the training delays once accepted. About 70% of the traditional recruiting pool have family members or close family friends who are veterans or currently serving... and they are saying stay clear. This is a way bigger problem than Herb thinks. Attrition is and will continue to be a factor in force generation and sustainability... tempo only serves to erode it further. Rebuilding will be a slow, laborious, uphill slog. Growing experienced, combat ready F18 pilots or infantry Sgt's for that matter is the equivalent of solving Canada's doctor shortage now, just on a smaller scale....and doing it isn't cheap. Read that last sentence again Herb... And to top it all off, on the personnel supply side (recruiting) there simply are not enough purple haired Wiccans interested in joining to make up the recruiting deficit. Turns out, they didn't stay away because of a prohibition on purple hair... they were never fuc&^%$ interested in joining in the first place. There's a bigger and even easier question attached to all of this... What did you think was going to happen? Here's an off topic example of what I mean as it pertains to homelessness, the people who created the problem are now the ones tearing down the tents... almost as if they were expecting some other outcome to the homeless problem they created. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/encampment-ruling-1.7418184 Where did you think these folks were going to go? What other options did you think they had? WTF did you think was going to happen?

I now know you don't volunteer at a food bank or distribute grocery store gift cards on behalf of charitable organizations. There is no need to abolish money to prove that people will take advantage of any system to the point that it becomes untenable... without the supervision of people you would likely object to that is. I'm rooting for ya, but it's just not what I see in the real world. In fact, I'm always surprised that the people trying to run scams don't realize that we all know each other... Sometimes it's actually funny.