Army Guy

capricorn: Not able to obtain info does not mean it is not happening. CiDA

More fat to chew on. Are the liberals just chasing votes. Liberals

Sorry dancer, just getting back off leave and the mind is a little rusty.

BK59: I have no problem with any debate on the topic, my problem is the debate was started by the musuem and thier actions of putting someones opinion on a piece of history. It's not the musuems place or function to question or comment on history but to display it with just facts. It is the job and place of historians and other groups to comment or debate what they think happened, or was it right or wrong... This is not the first time the legion has corrected history or the museum or even contributed to the museum. What polictical reasons does the legion have to have this changed. Maybe it's just trying to clear up what some would call slander of the campaign, and of those that took part in it, and the meaning of it all. Yes it is incorrect, Again it is not offering fact but someones opinon. I think most vets would say, it's not something they are proud of, but something that had to be done. And don't give a rats ass if some object to thier actions, but rather want it displayed as facts not opinon pieces. But some veterans were adamant that the display effectively accuses them, and their dead wartime comrades, of committing war atrocities. Yes, it questions the value of the entire campiagn Yes it questions the morality of the campiagn. It did say it was bitterly contested, but it does not say by whom, nor why. The panel currently reads: "The value and morality of the strategic bomber offensive against Germany remains bitterly contested. Bomber Command's aim was to crush civilian morale and force Germany to surrender by destroying its cities and industrial installations. Although Bomber Command and American attacks left 600,000 Germans dead and more than five million homeless, the raids resulted in only small reductions in German war production until late in the war." Accompanying photographs show dead German corpses in rubble-strewn streets. I think your reply says it all, the largest War on this planet, that involved most of the globe, killed millions upon millions and all we learned is we could sit down and create rules of engagement for all future wars. even with these rules in place a full 1/3 of the world did not agree to follow them. As a pivot piont in mans history we should have been able to match that with a historical leasons learned , allowing man kind to live in a more peaceable enviroment. such is not the case, war has engulf more than a 1/3 of the planet ever since the end of WW II. Thats not what i get out of his memo, Churchill knows that the war is over, and is thinking ahead to when they will have to rebuild Germany, but most importantly England. The German army is all but defeated, and bombing german cities no long has the same effect nor benifit. hence why his request for a review. "It seems to me at the moment has come when the question of bombing of german cities simply for the sake of increasing terror, through other pretexts, should be reviewed." he states why he is concerned here, he's thinking of rebuilding England. "Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land. we shall not, for instance, be able to get housing materials out of german for our own needs because some temporary provision would have to be made for the germans themselfs" As for the destruction of dresden, at the time it was a valued military target as been proven here in other posts, a transportation hub, and safe haven. The military wanted it destroyed. "The destruction of the dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests rather than of the enemy" He is not calling the dresden destruction bad,"this was not the first time a german city was fire bombed, and it was not the first time dresden was bombed either". He is stating that "in this time of the war", Englands needs must be put first, rather than concentrating on destroying the enemy. And the destruction of dresden did not accomplish that in his opinion "The foreign secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and i feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives, such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle zone, rather than mere acts of terror and wanton destruction , however impresive" Again, he wants the massive bombings to stop, as the bombing of civilians no longer effects the battle or war, he also wants to limit the damage done to Germany to ensure England gets her share of materials to rebuild. You can't just pick out key sentences and base your opinion on that , you have to read the entire memo and then put it into context.

Not much is printed about Mudusa or for that matter what combat our soldiers are presently going thru, this is a good read and may give a back ground info of a little piece of ground in Afgan that many Canadians have paid a price for. legion

BK59: The museum in question was designed and built to display Canada's war history period. The good, Bad and ugly to lay it out as factual as possiable. It is not the musuem nor it's directing staff's job, nor right, to offer or place an opinion on a piece of history. It's main focus must be to layout each piece with just the facts. The layouts or exhibits may spark debates, by numerous groups, as they try to fill in the unanswered questions, or offer thier interputation on the events, but this function must be left to those whom view the displays not the museum or it's staff. This is how history gets rewritten. In this case the lobby group just wants the facts prsented not someones opinion that has not been proven as history or fact. It's easy to judge another without all the facts as Argus pionted out, it was a period of total war, and morality changes when man engages in war with very little rules. One must have all the facts, before one judges an entire generation for thier actions. Perhaps you can explain what leasons man took out of WWII and this era of total war, and have we put any of those leasons into practice today. just a quick look and and i'd say no,not really, instead we continued on developing better arms, improving our Wpns of mass destruction, to the piont now where one wpn could kill more people with one detention than was killed in both World wars combined. Wars continue, millions still die. I think if you read your own links a few times the answer is in there. The time is end March beginning Apr, allieds are well inside germany, the war is very close to the end, in fact Germany surrendered all it's forces on the 7 May...Allied commanders are now thinking about rebuilding Europe, and Britian..and are concerned with doing excessive damage in Germany as that would take away resources required to rebuild Britian. The question about Dresden was case in piont, the entire city was heavily damaged, and it would take a serious effort and serious resources to rebuild... perhaps you can piont out the text that leads you to think that Sir Winston Churchill says he thinks that the bombing Campiagn was a waste of effort. Actually the memo was seen only by Churchills chief of staff, and not bomber command, The language was changed, but again it was not explained for what reasons as Gen Ismay comments or minutes are left out " leaving us to Assume". And it does question the continuation of the bombing , but no where does it question the entire campaign.

Argus: Very Well said. History is written to record facts of that period of time as they happened, we have no right to change it with our interputations or thoughts, as they are not facts of history but rather one persons opinions.

ScottSA: Nope, just saying that we never seen any journalists at the pionty end, When a media type joins your section or plt everyone is made aware so there is no confusion as to whom there are, and there are provided an escort or tag along...to ensure we don't light him up by mistake... Just how much factual reporting can you do from the rear anyways. jdobbin: All the reporter had to do was look at the extensive defensive network these guys dugout, miles of trenches, bunkers, reinforced mudhuts by the 100's, And then ask the question could a couple 100 guys build it, and why build it if you were not going to man it... That first night we went in there most if not all the advancing companies came under heavy fire, along a couple of klicks of front, our lav plt recieve approx 100 RPG rounds in a few minutes, along with concentrated MG and small arms fire...it was total caus...the kind that is caused by more than a couple hundred bad guys and that was in our little area of the battle field... For the next 15 or so days fighting was intense, and we used every wpn at our disposal, from small arms to airstrikes, you don't put that much fire power down and not kill anyone. The Bad guys gave as much as they could, destroying a few Lav's, wounding plenty of my comrads...but this battle was one sided once we got moving forward. It may not of been the set piece battle everyone said it was , there was plenty of flaws, plenty of things that did go wrong, but at the end of over 15 days of continueous battle it was Canadian soldiers who had thrown the taliban out of town. How many did we kill that depends on which media outlet you read, any where from 600 to 1500...Although i can't speak for acuate numbers or any other companies lines of attack, but i will say hundrds died in our area of operations...i don't know how many times we were slowed up by dozens of taliban held up in huge bunkers, or mud huts, after airstrikes were called in those bunkers or mudhuts simply cease to exist... Talk to sniper crews who would spend days in one postion killing taliban trying to collect thier dead, talk to the Lav gunners who would snipe taliban across the river, with 25mm at ranges in excess of 1500 meters. If there is one thing i certain off is that the taliban died in large numbers, there were bodies every if you could'nt see them you could definitly smell them roting in the heat. Don't let a small number of Taliban convince you the area is not secure, that battle did hurt the taliban and it will be some time before they replace that many soldiers, regardless of what anyone say's...

Yes they are drawn to the lure of combat, adventure, and the romantic ideals that they have heard or read so much about, that makes up what we call war. But once anyone has seen, smelled, and heard combat they will quickly tell you another story, and the lure theat once drug them into the recruiting office is gone.. replaced with something else... What your explaining is the difference between a combat vet and one that has not experianced in combat as of yet. everyone talks shop, i don't think a vet will talk about his experiances with as much vigor or detail. To be honest, it was one of my carear goals to test the training i've recieved in actual combat, now that it has been tested, and proven, i no longer have that ambition or taste for combat, but rather changed my motivation to use that experiance to train others and to use my experiance in bringing some of these rookies back home in one piece. I don't think it is the militaries goal to make foreign policy, but rather have a seat at the table when these policies are being made. We are our the same team after all. I'm not sure where this came from, but since we are here. deploying our military any where should be a moral decission made by all Canadians including those in uniform that will soon find themselfs on the battle fields. But thats is not what happens in real life is it. atleast not here in Canada. I not sure of your piont here, but i'll take a swing at it anyways, and you can correct me if i'm wrong. If your concerned about our military gaining to much momentum within our country, and effecting the direction our country is going , then i think your opinon is misguided or misplaced. Our nations defense dept has never been nor never will be the focus of our countries direction. If your concerned over issues like the troops having to much support, again i think your wrong, supporting ones soldiers and caring for thier well being is a nations responsabilty and we are just starting to make a come back from the left side of the scale. this is a welcomed change and should not be viewed as a negative piont. before i could comment i'd have to know your reasoning behind this statement ?

KO2: I think alot of people get confused when talking about the"Rush" of combat and the term Courage. There are plenty of things that we do in the military during peace time or training that will provide adrenline rushes, flying a jet aircraft at full throtle 50 feet off the deck would be one i'm sure, jumping out of the back of a herc is another, approaching a LZ in a helo with black sabath playing over the huge speakers is another...It's a feeling in the pit of your stomach that grows and takes over everything you do that is addictive...your excited, your pumped up and full of adrenline, your the terminator on drugs.... That being said i never had those same feelings in combat, or they were clouded by other more powerful feelings...like fear, uncertainity, death to name a few. gone was the excitment, the feeling of being the terminator... Every soldier , sailor, airmen, have different experiances in combat, all are differnet for many reasons, pilots are still experiancing the same rush as they do in training, very few experiance war close and personal, same for the navy guys until war is brought to them, there ship is attacked and they are fighting for thier survival. So yes over a few beers they will gladly tell of thier experiances, and the rush combat was for them was...On the other hand for those of us on the ground things are a bit different. Those doing the fighting on the ground see the effects of every wpn we use be it from the air, or naval bombarments, not to mention the effects of our own wpns, it will quickly take away all that romantic feelings you once had in training that combat would be glories, that everyone would die the good death, and be counted as hero's, not so, the exact opposite is what happens... Courage is another term we use to describe incrediable acts done by soldiers everyday in combat. but if one was to look at those acts that soldiers do they are not brought on by bravery, or any other other noble act. I'll use your example of those soldiers getting out of thier trenchs, under muderous machine gun fire and running across no mans land. The common soldier does these things for many reasons, it is his job, what he is expected to do, failure to do so would mean discipline measures would be taken upon him, anything from being locked up and loss of wages, even death, but the biggest fear or most motivating factor for a soldier is letting down his peers, his section or platoon..his fear of being put out of that circle is what motivates him, it's not Queen , country, or our flag...but his comrads and what they will think, so to keep inside that circle, and from being label a coward he goes over the top when the whistle blows. A soldier will drink as much beer as your willing to buy, and you will get stories out of them, but i dought that you will get those intimate secrets of combat from them, those are his or hers to live with to be shared with one day by those closest to them... My piont is this My combat experiance was not a "big rush", yes there was plenty of adrinline, plenty of fear, plenty of uncertainity, and plenty of death, and when it was all over, your overwhelmed by new emotions such as pain,regret, mourning the losted,joy of being alive, and many more, and all at once... Not even close to my experiances i've had in training...

White doors: The salute dates back many years, used as a greeting, the empty hand showed you were unarmed, it was also a sign of respect for all who recieved it. Today our military uses it to pay thier respect to the Queens commision, or officers. and in rare circumstances i've seen non commision members salute other non commision members in a form of the highest respect, it is also customary for all members to salute flags, statues, and coffins or thier cars. Which comes down to your question, would it be good manners, Yes it would, would others who have served mind , No they should'nt, it is a sign of respect that is all. it would be a personal choice hand over heart or salute. it's the intention that counts.

I think i'd have to agree with August, how can the auto industry remain competive within the world market when paying out these wages...shit pay me 6 figures and i'd would give up a few benifits as well...come to think of it can any one send me an application. How many auto jobs disappeared from Canada last year alone, where are they going to ?

jdobbin: The media can report what ever it wants, and just because some key media types did not get to see the death and destruction that sells papers does not mean it did not happen. As a guy that was there and took part in the fighting i can say with conviction that there was plenty of death. Those sights and smell's still haunt many of those that took part, and we still re live that most night's. to imply there are a work of fiction is just wrong. I will say that there was journalist there during the operation, but i personal did not see any of them, unless we went to the rear, and if tim wanted to see blood stains and bodies perhaps he should have followed our section thru our journey from compound to compound...

Some more interesting reading My Webpage

I'd be curious to know what the avg car plant pays out in wages, from the guy on the floor to the guy sitting in the chair upstairs.

White Doors: Thanks for the links, they made for some interesting reading.

I'd be the first one to admit i know nothing of the navy or how it operates. So i need some of you navy wogs "LOL" to sort me out.. DND NAVY I read the medias version, then DND annoucment but i'm confused and have a few questions... 1) What class will these new ships be, Patrol class, corvettes what ? 2) Are they Ice breakers or just ice harden? 3) Is these ships intended to replace the covettes they intended to purchase, to assist in fishery patrols ? I'm like everyone else excited that the navy is getting some more ships, but i'm concerned that perhaps it might not be on one of the navies priority list. As one of the poor cousin elements which does'nt get much in the way of funding are we making the right choice here or comprimising to fill someone's grand vision of what a Navy should look like. The Navy has some serious shortfalls and little cash to fix them, for instance AOR replacement, destroyer replacement, Frig refit, subs refit, lack of sub capability, using counter mine ves as patrol ves, no corvettes, some of these are being addressed but they are long term projects... Are we putting our cash in the right basket ? what is it that we are trying to accomplish. assert our right's of northern sovereignty, are these small little ships up to that task, or are we just fooling ourselfs and keeping the honest guy out of our waters, could they take on Danish frigs that routinly operate in our waters, let me rephase that would they cause the captian of said frig concern...what about a sub, would they cause a sub skipper concern, or would they be brushed off as a minor threat. if not then really it is a flag waving exericise on that could be carried out by two men in a rubber boat... We used to have the Airbourne regt covering our artic soveriegnty, which when you think about is alittle more flexiable than say 2 guys in a rubber boat, but like everything in the military that option was gutted...don't get me wrong, i don't want to be freezing my army ass off in the artic, i'd much rather the navy be doing that...but if we are going to do something i say go big or stay at home... the Danes have shown us that they can operate thier Ice Harden frigas in the north with some effect, they offer fire power, air defense capibilites, and ASW all on one platform, plus they also offer a platform for spec ops or small army formations to operate off of. For that matter our own frigs have operated in the north with some effect.

Peter F: One also has to remember that the prime concern when taking a POW is the safety of your men, and taking POW's is done with speed and brute force to avoid them changing thier minds, and not giving them a chance to think. One also has to keep in mind we are not dealing with regular german soldiers, but fanical religious types, who would be extremily happy to go to the promised land, and take a few infidels with them...Operation mudusa proved that they were willing to die in place...those few POW's we did take were not fanical but rather liked life here on the planet..those are few and far between. As for thier treatment once in our control is second to none, they are treated well above what the convention provides for. Every Canadian soldier is well aware of what the convention states in regards to Whats expected of them according to the convention...but i don't think there would be to many sheding any tears over what the Afganis did to them...I've seen first hand the talibans handy work when they deal with the Afganis population so i understand what motivates the Afgan police to return the favour so to speak. Although it is not right, and would not knowily take part in those activities, i understand why they happen...

Every thing in war is designed to kill, maim, and destroy something, on todays battle field thier are thousands of ways to die, IED's is just one of them...no differnent than say an arty barrage, rocket attack, or air strike or mine, when these wpns are deployed there is no "fighting back" no taking a few down with you..And while that is fustrating not to be able to reach out and kill something to avenge your death. It does not make that death any less important or wasteful than the guy that died charging a machine gun postion... Just our being here is a deterant to tha taliban, and if they are concentrating thier efforts on us and leaving the population alone then we have suceeded in doing some good. As for it being painless, i've heard that alot, "if i'm going to die, let it be a bullet in the head"...or let it be quick...but it rarely happens that way..I've given death some serious thought, and while speaking to others in my section or plt i've manged to put up the tough army guy act on, and told them "That shit does'nt happen in my section" (Like i had any control over it) but it does and did happen...Dying is painful, for both sides the dead and the living... is it to be feared, to a certain degree, Can it be avoided, not in combat...

True, enough but they are still manufactured in Canada are they not , and part of our defense industry. You mean like tanks, Leo's purchased from germany, or helo's such as our new SAR ones purchased from europe, or LAV's designed by the swiss, or bv206 designed by the swedes, or our Frigs designed and built in Canada, Most of our SMP vehs are designed by the europeans. I don't think they are concerned with control , as much as they inter operabilty with thier own equipment. Most of the US allies in europe, operate there own designed or built equipment, form ground equipment to aircraft, to ships...not much us designed or built items in thier inventory, such as britian, Germany, france, italy and list goes on. Someone should talk to the CDS then, he's been looking at Big honkin ships like US built San Antonio class amphib ships, or WASP class helo ass ships.

Would they, you stated yourself getting killed in a fire fight was acceptable to you something you could understand. If the media reported another soldier was killed in combat in Afgan you would not be going thru this thought process, or claiming it a wateful death...he died for nothing.. When in fact the result is the same wether you die from a bullet or IED dead is dead... War is wasteful and needless most of the time, that does not mean that soldier was not carryout his duties. boots on the ground is what you said was needed right.... August, your one of the most intelligent people on this board (in my opinion), what i'm giving you is a soldiers piont of veiw and how it looks like from our side of the fence...We've been given a job, and expected to carry out that job in true Canadian fashion...no excuses for failure, just get that job done... But we are also expected to get that job done without the majority of support from our support struture... waging war is a team sport, the military fight, and the home front support, it's simple ...but thats not what is happening now is it...with out the people's support at home there will be no additional troops to help fight, there will be no additional funding, there will be no increase in aid, the list go's on and on.....all tools that we require to win this fight... So to the soldier over thier right now, who's only link to home is the media, here is what we get... - we are not accomplishing anything... - this war can not be won... -Inquiry into possiable mistreatment of POW's. -inquiry into handing over POW's to tortured. - calls from most polictical parties to bring home the troops, by 2009. - This is the wrong mission, WE want out NOW... - bring an end to the bombing. - NATO troops killing to many civ's etc etc.. approx 1/3 of all the stories run, actually have anything good to say about the mission, why is that only a 1/3 of the media outlets mange to run postive stories about the mission. could it be they don't sell as well. You've already been effected by public opinion and the taliban efforts to undermine that. they know for certain they can not defeat us on the battle field....they do know that they can influence the public, our public and they will preasure our government into leaving... god forbid but what if another 6 troops die tommorrow, and the next day...would we be waiting until 2009 to come home or do you believe we would be packing up tommorow....and if the public has that much control why would it be unreasonable for the taliban to try to influence that...And who makes up that public opinion "Canadian citizens do", you and me... The soviet union went beyond brutal, wiping out entire villages and towns men, women and children suspected of assisting the insurgents, they even designed an anti pers mine to look like a toy so it would be pickup by children... And on our side, remember that up roar cause by the accusation of one professor, who accused Canadian soldiers of mistreating POW's while in there care although proven false in the end, the damage was done, new POW handling measures were put out, POW's had to be handed over in pristine condition, better than when they were captured...to the piont nobody wants to handle a POW any more, in case your charged or accused of something...Nobody is avocating kicking the crap out of them, or abusing them but we are at war, and POW's are handling roughly (in comparison to say common criminals in Canada) that is a fact of war.

Although true our defense industry did suffer a blow with the arrow, it's still there as much as tolerated by Canadians, i think the frigs are good example, along with Canada's version of the M-16 manufactured by diemaco Canada, or the ADDATS system by oerlikon canada. As for all of it's allies operating US arms not true, even in Canada we operate a mish mash of equipment from across the globe... The products are available right now, or in the very near future, and i'm sure the US would be more than happy to build us a few ships if it meant we would be actually be using them to assist in our own defense.

I'd be curious to know if upgrading our existing frigs is the way to go, there seems to be alot of progress and advancements in terms of frigs and destroyers out there now , The French, british, and US have some very good products.

Don't sell the home front short, if we had the 100 % support of the people this thing would already be in the bag...more troops, more funding, more aid....a solid unity front at home the taliban would be setting up shop in Pakistan , and would be there problem...not ours.

I think this is the direction we are heading right now, with the stand-up of the CSOR Bn ( ranger type LT inf) which will have a JTF componet to it, it will also have a a Spec op's avaition unit attached to it ( not a true Spec Op Avaition unit in comparrison to the US or UK version) but it still is trained for Spec ops operations, even with Griffon helo's.... Aside for giving Canada an expanded Spec op's capabilty it has other benifits attached with it as well. Since the dismissal of the A/B regt the army has been missing a couple of links in the chain in regards to progression of our soldiers into spec ops warriors.. Now a soldier has opitions of progressing from say a regular Inf soldier, to a CSOR member, training is tougher and requires more skills, and after they are trained to this level the next step could be JTF, making this transition much more easy, in regards to mental and physical conditioning...producing a much better canidate for spec ops units... The CSOR bn will maintain our airbourne capabilites, and tactics that differ from say us mechanized bound warriors. The CSOR Bn will also allow greater support to JTF ops, allowing operations to get larger, even spare JTF operators for other tasks. The draw backs are spec op's units are very costly to equip, train, and maintain....and money is always an issue...