Our Suffering Military

[Bonam]

The "truth" is what each person perceives to be the truth.

Not really. There is a considerable amount of objective truth out there (for example, math), not subject to individual opinions or perceptions. Similarly, there are many things that individual people believe, that are nevertheless objectively not true. Not to try to drift this thread and make it a discussion about the nature of truth, but reality is reality.

Edited August 13, 2014 by Bonam

[eyeball]

I wish there was an emoticon that represented a REALLY emphasized " ". Are you reading from Lenin's manifesto?

As for your lack of sympathy and your generally lousy understanding of the world, most soldiers don't enlist to impose the "West's Imperialism". They do it for all sorts of different reasons, and I highly doubt that Joe Grunt comes home to tell Ma and Pa that he enlisted for the Glory of the Great Western Empire.

The only thing I don't understand is how sycophancy became such a cherished Canadian value.

Is it people's parents?

[Moonbox]

It's pretty clear that's not the only thing you don't understand. They way you toss words like sycophancy and Imperialism around, especially in the context of dead/injured Canadian soldiers, makes it pretty clear you're not approaching the topic based on any sense of reason or understanding. Do you read a lot of blogs by any chance?

Edited August 14, 2014 by Moonbox

[The_Squid]

I'm glad the military is "suffering". We don't need to spend as much as we do on it. I just wish the Harper gov't was competent enough to spend what they do allocate to the military in the proper manner. They've completely botched the entire purchasing process over and over.

It would also be nice if they were actually honest about their spending. Too many Conservative voters fall for all the tough talk rather than looking at actual actions and outcomes.

[eyeball]

It's pretty clear that's not the only thing you don't understand. They way you toss words like sycophancy and Imperialism around, especially in the context of dead/injured Canadian soldiers, makes it pretty clear you're not approaching the topic based on any sense of reason or understanding. Do you read a lot of blogs by any chance?

Nope, no blogs. Most of my worst impressions of war hawks come from this forum. I use words like sycophancy and imperialism in the context of things like propped up dictators, economics trumping virtue, dead, displaced and dispossessed civilian populations. I approach the topic from a position of disgust and dismay at much of the behavior and complicity of western governments responsible and of course the sycophants who apologize for it.

[Big Guy]

Nope, no blogs. Most of my worst impressions of war hawks come from this forum. I use words like sycophancy and imperialism in the context of things like propped up dictators, economics trumping virtue, dead, displaced and dispossessed civilian populations. I approach the topic from a position of disgust and dismay at much of the behavior and complicity of western governments responsible and of course the sycophants who apologize for it.

You have certainly stated your position in very clear, detailed and precise language. I now better understand your positions. Thanks for the candor.

[Army Guy]

I'm glad the military is "suffering". We don't need to spend as much as we do on it. I just wish the Harper gov't was competent enough to spend what they do allocate to the military in the proper manner. They've completely botched the entire purchasing process over and over.

It would also be nice if they were actually honest about their spending. Too many Conservative voters fall for all the tough talk rather than looking at actual actions and outcomes.

Our nations military has been suffering for over 30 plus years, sure it was looking good for awhile the Libs and Cons got our hopes up a couple of times , but soon let us down in the end it is our Nations soldiers that do more with less but screw them too right........and while there are the cheer leaders in the back ground "citizens that do want a military, capable of atleast defending the Nation" most Canadians are happy to be free loading off the US and NATO and could not care two fiddles F***ks about anything military.....until something happens that is....

Canada needs to decide what they want in a military...and get it done....

You mentioned Harpers crew failing to get the most out of our tax money,on Defense projects and yet i think the liberals have to shoulder some of that pain as well. We as a nation have made purchasing equipment to politicalized, to complicated, everyone has their hands out, and wants a piece of the pie, i will agree with you it needs to be fixed....or we will continue to piss away good money after bad...It is a Canadian problem not just a Cons problem.

[Big Guy]

Our nations military has been suffering for over 30 plus years,...It is a Canadian problem not just a Cons problem.

Some who are critical of spending on the military argue that any engagement in which Canadian interests are in play will be one where the American interests are also in play. They contend that the Americans are a warrior nation with the strongest military force in the world and they are prepared to use that might to protect their interests. Therefore, if they are prepared to use their treasure and blood in battle then why should we jeopardize our troops and spend our money?

Another argument they have is that no matter the strength or size of our military, it will always be smaller, weaker and overshadowed and directed by the Americans. There are really no conditions where Canada would enter into a conflict without the USA – and the USA would be directing the battles. Those who use this argument then propose that any military equipment we commit to must be in support, filling the weaknesses of the USA military.

There is yet another group that feel that our foreign policy should be one of diplomacy and “the honest broker” who can work as a neutral conciliator, trusted by all nations to mediate international conflicts – and maintain the appropriate military for that purpose.

What do you feel is the purpose and future for our military?

[Big Guy]

I

And the Legion will continue to wither….

....but atleast we tried....

You may both be interested in some recent information;

http://www.legion.ca/article/time-for-change/

[Army Guy]

Alot of people think this way, they question the WHY we need a military, who is going to threaten Canada, it's a waste of money...but the military is not the only Dept in charge of defense of this country...there is CSIS, RCMP, Immigration, border services, Coast Gaurd, all of them are tied into the security of this nation do we cut them all....And what about Sovereignity , what do we do with that huge problem. even the swiss have a military....who would ever attack or threaten them ? i think the experts have figured it out and we as a nation need a military....just no one wants to pay the bill

Once again do we just say screw it because we will never be in charge, the US military does not have any weaknesses...again what do we do about sovereignity, if we are willing to give this up why not join our two nations....

as for the last reason, we have tried that in the past, under the UN, Canada does not have the military might to ensure any mediation of conflicts....if there is no consquences to breaking an agreement then why bother, look at Bosina under the UN it was a disaster, until NATO took over and siad they would use military force if nessicary to keep the peace....

What do you feel is the purpose and future for our military?

I've watched our military get eroded for over a long period of time, going from a once 103,000 troops to a mere 58,000 of which more than 1/3 are not deployable.....eroded to the piont it would take more than 100 bil to just to keep existing capabilities....a price tag that Canadians do not have the will to pay....I personally think it is going to get alot worse, to the piont where it may not be repairable without a very serious bill to be paid...perhaps not as bad as it was before WWI but bad enough that history will repeat itself and alot of good Canadian men and women will pay that bill with there lives....i just hope it is not my kids or grand kids....

[Derek 2.0]

You may both be interested in some recent information;

http://www.legion.ca/article/time-for-change/

Too little, too late.........

[PIK]

Some who are critical of spending on the military argue that any engagement in which Canadian interests are in play will be one where the American interests are also in play. They contend that the Americans are a warrior nation with the strongest military force in the world and they are prepared to use that might to protect their interests. Therefore, if they are prepared to use their treasure and blood in battle then why should we jeopardize our troops and spend our money?

Another argument they have is that no matter the strength or size of our military, it will always be smaller, weaker and overshadowed and directed by the Americans. There are really no conditions where Canada would enter into a conflict without the USA – and the USA would be directing the battles. Those who use this argument then propose that any military equipment we commit to must be in support, filling the weaknesses of the USA military.

There is yet another group that feel that our foreign policy should be one of diplomacy and “the honest broker” who can work as a neutral conciliator, trusted by all nations to mediate international conflicts – and maintain the appropriate military for that purpose.

What do you feel is the purpose and future for our military?

We are a warrior nation, but for some reason people are in denial about that.

[jacee]

feds-boost-support-for-vets

Ottawa will boost spending for mental health support for Canadian soldiers and veterans by $200 million, the government said Sunday days before what could be a critical report on the Conservatives handling of the file.

The Harper government has come under frequent fire for not doing enough to help veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, especially in the wake of Canadas 12-year combat mission in Afghanistan.

...

Weve lost more Afghanistan veterans to suicide than we have to the enemy, said Michael Blais, president and founder of The Canadian Veterans Advocacy

manitoba-vet-critical-of-feds-200m-mental-health-pledge-

For the conservative government now to say, 'We're going to give them $200 million for mental health,' it's a slap in the face," said Kirkland, who served in Afghanistan."Why hasn't this been going on before? Is it because there's an election coming up? I think so."

Edited November 24, 2014 by jacee

[PrimeNumber]

I agree that the military people should be getting better benefits. Good to see our PM doing something to help them. People who serve in the military should have good benefits for life imo. They have given more to Canada than many of us ever could dream of. God Bless Canada!

The only reason old Harps is doing anything about it now is because it's getting media attention that he has been cutting funding and the Veterns are pissed off about it. Haha yes let's applaud his efforts way to go Harper for fixing your own mistakes only because you got caught not because you actually care, here's a hero cookie and a salute!

A co-worker of mine whom is ex-military and has been a staunch conservative supporter for the last few decades told me today that he will not be voting conservative come just about this time next year because they have made it pretty clear they do not care about the veterans and have made numerous broken promises to the military. They really are shooting themselves in the foot. What should be automatic votes from current and ex-military personnel are now being questioned.

[Topaz]

Remember when Harper said after the Senate scandal, that if anyone was here to profit, there's the door.... well, in my view, every single one of them has profited. The cut backs are for THEM to spend in their ridings, at election time, which the PC, Libs have done in the past but the Conservatives, were going to be different, well, different they may be but its for the worst. The minister should be replaced, maybe he could be a security guard on the Hill. I heard he on his way back to his mother land, Italy, I guess he was too young to experience WW2.

[Smallc]

The cut backs are for THEM

This is the difference between a Conservative and someone else. The cut backs are for US. We benefit from them through lower taxation.

[Bryan]

manitoba-vet-critical-of-feds-200m-mental-health-pledge-

For the conservative government now to say, 'We're going to give them $200 million for mental health,' it's a slap in the face," said Kirkland, who served in Afghanistan."Why hasn't this been going on before? Is it because there's an election coming up? I think so."

So he doesn't want it then? Put him on a black list. Idiot.

There is always an election "coming up" eventually. A year is a long time.

[Derek 2.0]

They really are shooting themselves in the foot. What should be automatic votes from current and ex-military personnel are now being questioned.

And who will they vote for? The new Veterans Charter was tabled by the Liberals, and supported by both the Tories and NDP........

[Argus]

This is the difference between a Conservative and someone else. The cut backs are for US. We benefit from them through lower taxation.

Not if the government simply spends the money on something else which they figure will gain them votes from certain segments of the population.

Basically, they figure those who support the military will vote for them regardless of what they do because the opposition will be even worse for the military (which they will). So they figure they can use the money to prop up support among other groups.

[Argus]

And who will they vote for? The new Veterans Charter was tabled by the Liberals, and supported by both the Tories and NDP........

They might simply choose not to bother voting...

[Smallc]

Not if the government simply spends the money on something else which they figure will gain them votes from certain segments of the population.

Basically, they figure those who support the military will vote for them regardless of what they do because the opposition will be even worse for the military (which they will). So they figure they can use the money to prop up support among other groups.

Don't get me wrong, I'm with you on the military. I wish we were spending 2% of GDP. But the Conservatives aren't spending it anywhere else.

[hitops]

The current Harper government has been under fire for not adequately supporting our soldiers and spending too much on military photo ops. There was a recent report on the mental state of Canadian soldiers. The surprising result was that 1 in 6 soldiers report symptoms of mental disorders or alcohol abuse;

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/1-in-6-soldiers-report-symptoms-of-mental-disorders-or-alcohol-abuse-statscan-1.1954573

These figures are way out of proportion for the Canadian population.

I understand that soldiering is a stressful occupation but those figures are concerning.

Will pouring more money into the system satisfy these challenges?

Did 16% of Canadians coming home after WWII suffer the same?

Is this an example of some trying to scam the system to get more money from the government?

Did some of these soldiers bring these problems with them when they enlisted?

I hope there is some resolution to the questions that these numbers pose. Do we have to change the screening techniques for our recruits?

It's not really that different from mental illness in general.

I'll give you my experience as a doc. We all did training in psychiatry at some point during our training. Basically my impressions from that are that we really have no clue what most mental disorders are caused by. We know very little about the brain. There are a few disorders where there are clear chemical imbalances. Most others, you would never know if not for the person telling you. 90% of the discipline is based on trial and error. Tons of people start meds, almost nobody ever gets off them.

That said, war is a tough experience. Dealing with that can have varying results. I think our grandparents generation just had a different attitude about it as well, and attitude is a HUGE part of dealing with anything. They accepted that life isn't perfect, and you will endure hardship as part of it, and that this is normal and part of development. They were mentally prepared to encounter and process it. Today we see hardship as an anomaly, to be avoided at all costs. We believe that any form of discomfort or dissatisfaction should be immediately dealt with my somebody else on our behalf. Any form for less than perfect mental state, is a mental illness.

Despite the fact that my grandparents dealt with far harsher life conditions, wars, lack of government programming, and various injustices, they are far more mentality intact and healthy than my own siblings who have dealt with nothing even close. War is very hard, but like going through a life threatening cancer treatment, ultimately you are the only one with final control over your own experience.

[Big Guy]

Good news - The Harper government declares that it has committed $200 million to mental health care for soldiers and veterans.

Bad News - it is over 50 years.

What are those pin heads in Ottawa thinking? Rather than addressing the needs I wonder who is in charge? Who is making these decisions and who is doing the communicating? The boss goes out of town and the building starts to fall apart. Veteran Affairs in confusion? so the Minister Fantino runs out of town.

The Mayor of an aboriginal community complains about lack of food and the Minister responsible threatens to sue him?

Time to come back to town boss, crack the whip and get this boat going in the right direction.

[Topaz]

No, the cut backs produce surpluses and therefore the surpluses go to the seating party, which are the Tories and ended up to Tory riding not to all taxpayers, when elections come around.