Army Guy

You might be on to something here kimmy...perhaps a deeper plot is waiting in the wings...who else is getting bribes...and who is next on thier list, ...stayed tune as our resident conspiracy theorists examine all the possiablities, and they answer the questions that everyone really wants answered " Are aliens really in control of our government" LOL

There is already such a plan it is called SSIP, it's military /government sponsored life insurance policy, and like any insurance policy it's pay out depends on what you pay into it. All members are reminded before heading out on a mission to update thier policy ie pay more into it so the payout is greater, providing more for your loved ones if something does happen. At the max whom ever is on your will and last testiment will get approx 250k depending on injuries or if death occurs... Although it is not convertiable when you leave , members can opt to continue the program after retirement. it is available to whom ever has served, past or present. No, it does not. what it creates is piece of mind for the member that has family responsabilities, that his family will be looked after when he can not be there to do that...remember you have to die to qualify. This benifit comes from Veterns affairs, a separate dept, with it's own funding, designed to specifically look after our vet's, not our current employed soldiers, not to fund the military in any way. Any surplus in thier funding goes back into the government coffers, not DND's and becomes part of the countries surplus at the end of the year...but lets take a look at what they have paid out to date, in our worse year with the most deaths they may have payed out 5 mil, which works out to a pay raise of almost 90 dollars per soldier, could purchase 3/4 of a Leo tank, basically a drop in the bucket. and we are still left with the orginal problem. What it does provide with these funds is another benifit package for a soldiers family, orginally designed and offered because there was military families that were stuck, the members SSIP coverage was used to pay off mortage and other family debts, most military spouses are forced into taking jobs that do not have alot of benifits, or coverages, because they are forced to move regularily, child care is not always available , so when the military member deploys the spouses end up at home looking after the kids...climbing up the corporate ladder is just not an opition. "most families not all". So when the military member is killed and they have to defend for themselfs , is an added stressor to an already stressful event. This VA benifit helps with all that. It solved one issue that was a problem, it was not intended to make one life more valued over another. Could not be said the same, as having a grieving widow, placed onto the streets with her children to fend for themselfs. collecting other social benifits..this benifit would go along way into making a new furture for them would it not. The system is not inflexable, and is changing daily, and like i said with a matter as serious as this i'm sure a MP would atleast hear it. And with national coverage of such matters i don't think it would take long to have it amended. And if i think my job is as relevant as say a mechanics do i have a case to appeal, or is it that i do not qualify for those bonus because they have decided that it's not that the job is more relevant, but just short staffed. and this was away to attract more recruits...is that fair that my job or speciality is left out just because they have enough of them already...again one must qualify to collect , just like the VA bonus to qualify you must have dependants.. Perhaps it is just people with military experiance whom see this benift as a plus, as the military and civilian life are full of examples of having to qualify for certain bonuses and benifits. I'm certain if one picks it apart long enough there is some unfairness to all these benifits, laws, and governmental policies.

The military death benifit is free burial , one years wages to the surviving spouse or as stated on the will. thats it and this has been upgraded just recently. Most life insurances are not available to military members because of a war clause, (exception now being mortage insurance which is new) so to offer something the military thru the Canex offered SSIP. i think the most it pays out is 250,000 upon death in a duty zone. Not much when taking into account a mortage, kids education etc...This is available if a service person decides to pay into it, and pays out only if you've paid into it...most do but some don't... Now this new death benifit comes from veterns affairs, because there was cases of soldiers with no coverage or very little coverage, to ensure the families or members as stated on the will got some finanical assistance they offered this benifit...It's intention was to assist not to place more value on any soldiers life but to assist those left behind...and like everything in life it is available only if you qualify... Much like school taxes, everyone pays them, kids or no kids, but we all pay them. Much like unemployment insurance i pay into it but can not collect it, there are millions of examples of all things not being equal and subject to being qualified for. This is one of them. If a single member has his parents listed as dependants then i'm sure there might be a case for this death benifit to be payed out. but that would be the exception would it not, the average single soldier does not require additional money added to his estate just because...this benifit was intended to help out widows that were stuck and really needed the help. Just the military is doing this, come on this is global, everything is based on do you qualify, yes or no...very little is based on fairness. So what is next, stop offering recruiting bonuses to doctors, lawyers, mechanics, because not everyone qualifies for them...is it fair to all perhaps not, is it fair that my garbage man earns more money than i for less risk, are we ready to rip apart the whole system because a few think that helping out a widow, of a dead soldier is unfair to the single soldier... Stop placing a money value on thier lives, and consider to whom this benifit was really for and it's intention.

I think we are losing sight of the orginal intention of the verterns affairs death benifit, It's intention was to further assist the a soldiers immediate family, the financial means to carry out a some what normal life after the primary wage earner is disabled or killed. below is a discription of who the benifit is paid to, you either fit into that catogory or you don't...It's not something all soldiers pay into, it is a benfit to assist those left behind that are considered imediate family. Not all our benifits can be slotted into nice neat holes and declared for "ALL" serving members... There are many examples of benifits married or single service members are entitled to, for example the military will pay for a single soldier one almost free trip home to vist his next of kin, married personal are not entitle to this benifit. while married pers are entitled to separation allowance, while deployed away from spouse and family. I think some members are confusing it with an issurance plan which it is not, it is not paid into by a member like SSIP is ( a military life insurance plan). it's not an issurance plan but a benifit from the veterns affairs dept that is payed out if you qualify... Death Benefit The death benefit is a tax-free, lump sum payment. It is paid to a spouse or common-law partner, and dependent children, if a CF member is: killed while in service; or injured while in service and dies within 30 days of the injury. vet affairs.

Numbers right now thier are more than 30,000 reg Afgan troops, they graduate over 1200 troops a week. There is many problems with thier army, lack of pay, which they recently got a raised but they need to go futher, lack of benifits, they just implimented a leave policy, allowing troops to go home for holidays etc. Capabilities, other than small arms the Afgan army has none, no tanks, aircraft, arty, the list goes on. One has to remember if one gets into a fight one has to ensure he has a bigger stick to have the advantage and keep your cas down. Western support, again western forces are providing everything that the Afgans are missing, tanks, aircraft, arty...plus logistical support, ammo, rations, etc.. Training. Like i said anyone can be an insurgent, it does not take a whole lot of training, or equipment. but to fight as a cohesive group, where nobody fights as an indiv but plays a small part in a collective group with a common goal...that takes training and time. without it , it would be like watching a paintball game, lots of indivs running around getting shot very few actually left alive at the end of the game...the tactics we use, we suffer few cas, and all the bad guys are done.

rogue state; Nice post, very informed, very well put together, Nice argument...head of your debate class, very nice. Yes rogue state thanks for the support, but unlike you, soldiers do not have a chioce on whom and what we support "we" stand on gaurd for thee" that includes the red necks and tree huggers, the smart and the mentally challanged it includes every Canadian.

Sorry should have explained it better, there is more involved in military operations then there is involved with insurgent warfare, for example most insurgent groups operate in section or plt size 12 to 30 troops. while fighting insurgents by regular army troops most of operations involve company levels 100 to 150 people, there is a big differnce in tactics used, logistical matters get very complicated, plus the support ie air support, arty support gets very complicated. 2 different animals. In some cases they are, most of the time a small group of NATO pers tag along such as omlet ops, the last canadain killed was with the omlet.

Keepitsimple: Good post, I think you've uncovered the frustration that most of Canadian soldiers feel about this mission. the frustration of being unheard, the furstration of our government and media doing a piss poor job in explaining this mission to Canadains. Rue: There may be some truth to this, but in the rare case of this, they've earned the trust in those soldiers , not an easy task considering soldiers don't really trust the media for alot of reasons...and the results is not so much of them bending the trurth or building up those soldiers but telling the truth something the media does not always want. a good example of this is christie (i can't remember her last name) She did many articles with the PPCLI battle group, and just a few with us. Any way she was removed , i think shes working out west now for a different paper. The rest of them are junk, how someone can write a full article on an event that happend and never leave the camp, the same event covered by many reporters each with a different tale told...and none of them actually where there or talked to anyone that was, they got thier info from the military press brief..

Yes the Afganis are very good at insurgent warfare, where they operate in small numbers with very limited support such as from the air, or ground based arty, etc etc. and without taking anything away from the Afgan insurgents, but anyone can be effective at insurgent warfare. the odds are in thier favour. The afgan army are by no means losers, what they lack is modern equipment. part of the the problem is education, every done the math on a arty strike or calling in fast air, there is more to soldiering than just firing your wpn and hoping you hit something. thier is leadership, wpns training, equipment capabilities, offensive and defensive drills, the list goes on forever...all made harder to teach or learn when you can't read or write. It is these skills that NATO is teaching and they take years to develope capable soldiers.

hiti: Most Canadians don't know what the typical Afganis wants nor do they care, perhaps you can give us an example of "we" are building afgan in our image, or is giving them a elected government , clean water, irrigation ditchs for thier crops, new schools, hospitals or new paved hyways to improve commerance to much for the average Canadian to wrap thier minds around. And what are you basing this on, Are you experianced in these type of missions, do you have another solution that has not been tried. How many soldiers has Canada lost already doing reconstruction work? Have you been following the news , any NATO soldier is a target in Afgan, it does not matter if your doing construction or directing traffic, you will be targeted. It's actually kind of disturbing that the only ones complaining about our combat role is civilians , and not the soldiers actually doing the job. Nor do you make a compelling case for us to pull out. Now this comment is typical of the old Liberal Canadians, who would be quite happy with 3 soldiers in our military one in each element, who's sole job would be on rememberance day in Ottawa. You make it sound like your proud of the fact that as one of the largest nations in the western world we only have a small amount of tanks. the result of to many years of neglect , most of which where at the hands of the liberals. Yes leaving our nation defenseless is something to be proud of. I'm just curious how many tanks the swiss have, and for a neutral country why would they need so many ? That is a very bold statement, one could expect something like that out of Catchme, perhaps it's all the rave at the liberal conventions, or peace rallies, i'm not sure... but it's insulting to our soldiers and thier level of commitment to this mission the same mission that are nation gave us on day one...it also speaks volumes of your support for our soldiers, don't give me that crap that you support them by wanting them home, and then talking out of the side of your month "liberal style" and make false accusations about them... but then again you have proof that this is actually going on , that our soldiers are actually threatening civilians with death, and burning of crops , which you failed to mention is opium.... Not every Canadian has to support this mission or for that matter our soldiers, but don't sit there and insult them for having the conviction to carry out orders given to them by the majority of Canadians. You do know that history is recorded right, The liberals would love for Canadians to believe they had nothing to do with Canadians in combat, and distant themselfs that they actually ordered our military into using our wpns to kill with...I'm curious to know who first sent the PPCLI battle group into the Kanadar. years before the Harper government was elected. My piont is i call bullshit, provide me a source, one that clearly states that it was the cons who changed the mission, that it was the cons that sent us into the Kanadar region, and how they manged to do that when they were not even elected yet. jdobbin: It is true the Average soldier can not hold a press conferance of his own to express his opinion, but thier other ways to make his opinion heard, In afgan with so many reporters around any off the wall comment will be heard and will be reported, a good example of this is the officers comments to soldiers during the PM 's vist, "the PM is still here, and so are we get back in there". Soldiers are very vocal and when asked they will provide you a very colorful opinion, one that is not programed or rehersed, but the truth as they see it. As for Scott Taylor , yes he was a soldier, for a couple of years, i don't even think he got out of the country. don't get me wrong atleast he served, and he has done many things for us since his retirement. but how many soldiers have given negative remarks about the mission since it's inception....not very many...I think the proof is in the pudding , The Afgan mission is strickly volunteer, most are on thier second or third tour.

The main focus is in establishing a secure enviroment for the Afganis people, most of the combat media attention has been on big visable military sweeps and operations, which target anyone bent on preventing us from establishing this secure enviroment. However what is not so widely reported is our spec ops missions, our other intel gathering missions, and they do target the leaders of every organization that is a threat, Taliban, Al Quida, various war lords, Merc groups, other terrorist org, groups from Pakistan, groups from inside former russia states. basically everyone with an axe to grind. they are all tracked, some have been targeted, and killed...all behind the scenes but it goes on 24 and 7 365 days a year... As for actually looking for specific people , Yes they do, NATO publishes wanted pictures of main players, put up in most NATO control pionts or check pionts, along with intel updates, so and so was spoted in the area keep an eye out...All leads are followed and confirmed or disproved... I personal think Bin Ladin is long dead and buried in some cave, of course thier is no proof of this but nobody can stay hidden this long , and in todays world with todays tech impossiable...

This seems to be a common theme in Canada, let us stick our heads in the sand and not worry about anything until it reaches our shores. lets not forget that almost 30 Canadians died in those 9/11 attacks, lets not forget about our defense treaties we have signed and depend on. lets not forget that Canada is part of the evil western infidel empire and we will always be a target. Lets not forget even if we go to Dafur we will be on someones target list. Do we allow them to dictate to us thier terms, and conditions so that we are allowed to remain in the sand untouched. Canada has been a haven for terrorist and thier activities for to long, we are good at bashing others except those that need a good bashing, those like terrorist we only talk about in whispers, and in dark secluded bars, because those guys we don't want to offend. A good example of this is the Khadrs, proven terrorists, and what makes the headlines "them damn americans are holding him in gitmo". We need to stand up for our own rights and freedoms, and not be afraid of tell the world this is what we believe in as a nation... don't like it, to bad it is who we are.

GC1765: Serveral reasons, The first is we have already choosen our cause, that being Afgan, with our limited resources we can not help everyone, nor does it make sense to drop everything and run to the next project or mission because it is a more worthy cause. If that was the case that is all we would be doing is running around not really accomplishing anything. We have already invested a huge price in the Afgan mission, both in dollars and lives. and are just now seeing the fruit of those labours, does it make sense it just give up on all that when the outcome is still uncertain. It takes huge amounts of cash to restart a mission any where, not only to build new infra structure, clean water sources, air strips, fuel and ammo dumps the list is endless, this monies are always taken out of DND's budget and although it is growing it can not afford to be set back by hundrds of millions just to set up a new operating base. For the military, we already know the enemy and how they operate, we are finally getting the equipment we need to effectivily fight them. yes it is true some of this equipment can be used in Sudan, but jungle or savana type terrain requires different tactics and equipment, which would put us back to square one, giving the bad guys a huge advantage. something you don't want when your outnumbered in a very hostile enviroment. Darfur will only happen if Sudan agrees to it, And that is not going to happen, they are quit aware that western militaries are very busy and occupied at this time, and could not mount a suffient force to make a regime change. and with only 3000 UN troops there now, in a area the size of france they can operate as they please. This will force the UN to sit and watch thier actions as they know any force will be a toothless one, unable to back up and threat of use of force... It might have a better chance under NATO, they may even be able to get more numbers from the Euro's, that part is uncertain. And finally in Afgan we have a numerical advantage over the enemy, plus we have all the tools of war already assembled. it makes a big difference in sucess or failure.

Why do you perfer Darfur over afgan.

Do you really think Canadians would agree to that, remember these are the same people who insisted on a national inquiry because some Afganis terrorist were found with bruises on them....These killers you talk of are mostly child soldiers, that would make for some good media, Canadian soldiers standing over a few 10 year olds killed in a gun battle... What is happening over there is a very bad thing but we can not help everyone, nor can we help both...

No it's a Canadian commitment, not belonging to one party or another, but to all of us as a nation. we signed onto that once we agreed to help. Thats part of the problem Canadians don't want to take ownership and solve this thing....they just want to piont fingers. Does anyone out there really think that if Afgan turns out to be succesful that they would change thier vote, or thier minds about the mission or harper.... And if Harper agreed to pull out today, and move to Darfur, who's war would that be...

Keepitsimple: Polls are suggesting that Canadians are in favour of pulling out of Afgan and starting a new mission in Darfur. And like Afgan it would be an honorable mission that could save thousands of lives. But before Canadian citizens start jumping up and down raising thier hands in support of this new idea, much like they did for Afgan they should atleast do thier research, and ask all those questions and have all those debates before we enter into any deployments. I think that the below article addresses some of the problems in doing that. Darfur. Some of the problems that were not fully addressed in the article. With all that is going on in the world right now, and only 3000 UN peacekeepers on the ground now even with a huge Canadian commitment those numbers might be able to double, where are they going to get the additional troops from , most reliable militaries are already stretched as thin as we are. so that leaves us outnumbered in a huge area of operations without the additional support we enjoy in Afgan like Fighter aircraft, Hvy arty support, recon assets like air, and land, Attack helos etc etc ...not a very tenable postion. Un missions have a completly different setup, it's HQ is based in New York, not on the ground as NATO has in Afgan, It's chief players ( civilians) are only available during working hours, (8am to 4pm ) after that time you get a junior civilian who can not take action without contacting someone else first...How does that translate into a bad set up, imagine your self under fire talking on the radio, asking permission to return fire, or stop a serious crime ie murder from taking place, you finally get thru only to find out it's past 4 pm new york time and the rockie on the phone say's you have to wait until he can get ahold of someone more senior....even then nobody wants to make a decision in fear of making a bad one or slighting another country... Rules of engagement differ greatly, are far to restrictive, to the piont they put soldiers lives indanger. some will say this is good, but they forget the bad guys know the rules as well and by the time you get permission to stop a rape or murder the crimes done and they have moved onto something else. And those UN soldiers are force to watch it all unfold before them helpless... Not to mention the building of a new camp, purchasing new types of equipment more suited to jungle and desert warfare. Change of training and tactics. it will all cost large... Starting all over again on a new mission , just so we can escape Afgan is not a smart thing to do. Canadians have already proven they do not have the patients for a long term mission, so one would have to ask what we could accomplish in a short time, from scratch, in an eviroment similar to Afgan, out manned and out gunned. Darfur would cost Canada alot more than it's paying out in Afgan in equipment, soldiers, and aid.

Perhaps Canadian should do some research before we commit to another mission. Darfur

Why is it time to move on, and to what are we moving towards, And if it is so important to tadays people why is there not a drive to remove any and all traces of our connection to royality. Perhaps because todays Canadians really don't care, and if that is true why would anyone stand or block this drive to restore some of our old history. That is the piont that these depts are steep in history and tradition, and draw from that to inspire todays people that are serving more pride, moral, and the fact that when it is thier turn, thier sacrifice and service will not be forgotten. I'll give you an example how many Canadians remember Vimy and what it means to our nation. And in saying that the past must never be changed or rewritten but remmebered as it is and how it happened. This example of going back to oplace Royal in front of our elements has not grown outdated or has nothing to be replaced by. I think the fact that our military has taken pride in everything it has done proves that that is not true. as for meaniless monicker not to those depts whom most of thier history is written with. Who would you blame, it was the public that demanded it be changed...And it does set the tone of thier mind set towards the military at the time. The oath i took was over 25 years ago, i'm not sure of the exact wording of the oath today but it is still to the Queen. Hence why the GG is the commander and chief. It's been that why since the start of our history, something that a canadians don't care about, or to lazy to change it. which one is it..so why is it now objectionable

Perhaps i made a piss poor choice of words, in trying to explain myself. And should have been more explicted when using the word inspire...It would inspire more pride, in thier unit and the Royal family, and that translates into a better unit, better soldiers. And No they would not want to divest thier Royal titles earned by past serving members on the battle field.

Actually there is not a great argument to be made, one would have to understand that history and tradition plays a big role in the RCMP and military. To a member with unlimited liabilty ( may be asked to give thier life in the course of thier jobs) that member would like to know that thier sacrafice would not be forgotten. As for the Royal title it is a major part of that history, one that most of Canada's history is written under, and it would be another way for it's members to preserve history and the memory of fallen comrads, and past serving members alive. As for inspiring people to fight for the Queen, your right, but then again ask any soldier whom he is fighting for and he'll piont to his comrads, not queen or country. One might be intially drawn into the recruiting center to serve his country, or the adventure, or on some idea that combat is romantic, and cool. But when thier on the battle field, he's fighting to stay alive, for him and his comrads first, then the cause , then for his country or Queen. Like i said before, it's not about inspiring anyone, just keeping our history and tradition alive, it's a solution that will not cost anything but a few gals of paint. As for surveys and scientific evidence i don't think there is none, other than the fact that the Queen still effects Canadian lives, they still flock to see her when she comes, we still swear allegence to her, our money etc etc. although we consider ourselfs a seperate country with little ties to mother England, we have not cut all our ties, either because where lazy, or we are not ready to just yet.

Stretched beyond belief.

Most of those depts that are effected, RCMP, and the military, are steep in history, dating back when Royal meant alot to all Canadians. History and tradition as M Dancer explains does mean alot to those units, it is what conects us with our past, another way to ensure "we never forget" as the poem goes. It's another way for us to share in the sacrifices of those that went before us. Do Canadians really care what we call our ships, or aircraft or elements. Not really so why all the fuss. After unification we changed it to Canadian armed forces, which lasted for some time until believe it or not the word ARMED was considered to offensive by the public, and it was changed to simply Canadian forces... RCMP and the Military do swear an oath to the Queen, nobody else, no other country or institution. Although it is very highly unlikely that the Queen calls upon our services, or they come to conflict that piont is still there. Perhaps it has never changed all these years is there is some philoophical substance there.

Who told you that, perhaps you can provide a source....your pretty quick on telling everyone they are spinning the topic at hand. when you have done nothing to prove them wrong nor have you provided any ref or sources....Your the Queen of spin....in fact i get dizzy just reading all your posts... neg Anyone that thinks that anything is going to be different in Darfur has not done any research into the Dafur problem. And like Afgan will be screaming thier bloody heads off "bring our troops home" but not of course until we have lost 40 or 50 good soldiers....And once again the soldiers will by screaming give us the time to complete our jobs .....and once again we will be reminded who we work for, and who's tax dollars we are spending and it's an unwinniable mission.... And why so armchair critics can feel good about atleast we tried... I say get off your armchair and sign your ass up, want to make a difference then put on some boots and join me on the tarmac when we carry our comrads to the herc in a metal coffin...if you can't do that then stop opening your gobs about something you ethier refuse to do any research on, or know anything about... As it is already been mentioned on this forum most canadians could not find Darfur on a map drawn on thier arse ....they agree on darfur because they want anything but Afgan...

Yes you've caught me, I'm a military propagandist hidden deep inside the confines of NDHQ, locked in a vault so i can spread evil military propaganda. my goals are to lengthen the mission in Afgan, endanger the lives of my comrads, spend as much as the tax payers dollars as i can, and keep soldiers away from thier families and loved ones....My piont is that you and many Canadians don't have a clue why soldiers are putting so much into this mission, nor do you care, either why they think that way or do you care anything about the Afgan people. Actually, i did want to hear what they had to say, my comments are correcting some info that they have provided , as it may give them some more incite other than what is printed in the media. Perhaps you can provide some proof that the Afgans want us out. but then again you've already made up your mind, that the Afgan people don't deserve what our nation has to offer. AFgan