Jump to content

A few words from a retiring General


Army Guy

Recommended Posts

On 11/25/2022 at 6:37 PM, eyeball said:

So the military and the right-wing go together like peas and carrots? I knew it!

That's the best reason for starving the military there is.

What amazes me is you and the rest of the left are just figuring it out, after being on the planet for centuries, the left just does not have the character traits to do these jobs like the military, police force, any job that gets assigned unlimited liability. you know the ones, like courage, patriotism, honesty, bravery, honor. The fact is you need the right to keep those things that go bump in the middle of the night away from you, to allow you to sleep on top of your bed as suppose under it. 

Not sure why you are so afraid of those that protect the nation day and night, maybe someone stole your girlfriend, or maybe you failed or were rejected from one of those institutions, I'm sure there is a story with lots of tears and blubbering behind it. 

You starve whatever it is that scares you, or drives your nightmares, the fact will remain you need us more than we need you. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

image.jpeg

You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall -- you need me on that wall.

We use words like "honor," "code," "loyalty." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line.

FIFY. ?

 

 

Edited by eyeball
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Moonbox said:

It silly hyperbole, and there's no discussion to be had around his bogeyman exaggerated conjurations.  He's literally asking whether we want farm-raised, beef-fed huntin' and hockey lovin' manly men in our military, vs prancing drama queens - as if this is the binary choice we're faced with.  

and yet we can't find recruits, and only around 10% of the makeup of the CF is composed of minorities despite them  representing something like 40% of the population, or women who make up 50% of the population but only 15% of the forces.  Diversity in the forces is necessary to reflect our constantly changing demographics.  I can just imagine how eager all of the minorities, women and young people are going to be to join who read about or saw Michel Maisonneuve natter his culture war BS.  Fortunately hardly anyone is actually talking about it or cares.  As Army Guy said, this speech will be forgotten for what it was in short order - completely irrelevant.  

Your pissed becasue those are the people that are attracted to the military, and they don't fit the flow chart for the whole diversity nonsense. 

We can't find recruits because of the way Government and the people of Canada treats our military members to start with, lack of modern equipment, job opportunities, equal rights, promotions based on diversity factors, instead of merit. Not to mention they are not being paid to the same degree as those counter parts in the civilian world. 

Minorites come from countries that the military was used to oppress them, WTF would they be interested in joining our forces? they have other interests in life just as women do, they want employment in other professions. You cannot force them into joining to keep the flow charts balanced, maybe we should be forcing women into doing other jobs like garbagemen, where 90 % are represented by men, construction workers, farmers, fishermen, most manual labor jobs... NOPE we are fixated on the Military and nothing else matters right now it is a stupid, no absolutely stupid idea. it take s everything away from merit becasue you earned it, to give me the job i'm the right color, sex, race, creed, etc same as advancement or promotion thats why people are not joining, the organization is rif with leftist political wing nuts that want to preserve their jobs rather than the organization.  

Diversity is not working; you and all the experts are blowing hot wind out your asses. Do i believe the forces should be open to everyone certainly. everyone deserves a fair chance to serve this nation provided you can meet its standards, not becasue of your sex or color. .  And if you think that the general's speech is hurting the forces recruiting numbers your wrong, your way of thinking is done more damage than any 1000 speeches could. 

I don't want to sound rude, but you should stick to topics you know something about, you really suck at this one. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Your pissed becasue those are the people that are attracted to the military, and they don't fit the flow chart for the whole diversity nonsense. 

?

Stop projecting.  Your culture-war bullshit is exhausting.  It's all you seem to care about these days and somehow you manage to swing almost every topic back to cancel-culture and wokeness, whether or not it has anything to do with the debate. 

I don't have to have served in the military to know when you have no idea what you're talking about.  You didn't even know what the new dress rules were before you started bullshitting about purple-haired dandies giving away combat positions.  While you pretend to know why minorities aren't joining the military, those same minorities are joining in outsized numbers in the US military, a country with similar history and demographic trends. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2022 at 2:26 PM, Moonbox said:

No, the military is weighed down by a bloated bureaucracy and senior leadership, as well as 40-50 years of neglect from our governments. 

The few soldiers that will get to have a purple streak in their hair, or grow a longer beard than the dinosaurs deem appropriate is really not the problem.  

 

No?

Question: You're pinned down in a raging fire fight and you have a choice of 2 men to be pinned down with.

1 has purple hair and a long beard...the other is clean shaven. Which would you rather have pinned down with you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2022 at 12:09 PM, I am Groot said:

Nine years ago. We didn't have trouble with recruitment back then for some reason.

True enough, but that was likely because of the media attention the military was getting more than anything else.  

On 11/27/2022 at 12:09 PM, I am Groot said:

Yes, it actually is. Women are not physically suited for most combat roles.

Debatable.  Though as a sweeping generalization there's some truth to that, I've played enough co-ed sports throughout my life to know that there are plenty of women out there with the strength and intensity for combat roles.  Nobody's suggesting we need 50% of our combat ranks filled with 100 lb waifs with no upper body strength though.  

On 11/27/2022 at 12:09 PM, I am Groot said:

On the contrary, the military's recruitment efforts have been focused on visible minorities and women since Trudeau came to power. Gee, I wonder if that isn't another factor in the recruitment crisis they're experiencing.

Gee, the military's recruitment efforts focusing on visible minorities and women started long before Trudeau came to power.  I wonder if that's because even the Harper Conservatives understood the changing times.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Moonbox said:

?

Stop projecting.  Your culture-war bullshit is exhausting.  It's all you seem to care about these days and somehow you manage to swing almost every topic back to cancel-culture and wokeness, whether or not it has anything to do with the debate. 

I don't have to have served in the military to know when you have no idea what you're talking about.  You didn't even know what the new dress rules were before you started bullshitting about purple-haired dandies giving away combat positions.  While you pretend to know why minorities aren't joining the military, those same minorities are joining in outsized numbers in the US military, a country with similar history and demographic trends. 

 

 

This is not about some culture war bullshit you seem to have imagined, and yet somehow cancel culture does play a role in everything in this country, it is just you're in denial, or playing a part in it.  

The dress regs are public knowledge, you can read them yourself if you like just to google it, the old ones are as well for you to compare, even explanation's on why they are dress regs. 

I've said this before you seem to have all the answers, but have yet answered any questions, or suggestions that prove any of my ideas are false just you are chirping in the wind that you're getting stupid posting back and forth with me, you must be a raging lunatic by now.  now that you got everyone's attention Einstein, tell us why people are not joining the forces, or why minorities still don't want a military career, The liberal government has been trying for over 8 years now with little to show for their effort, but you should be able to at least take a crack at it...nor have you been able to explain why we must have a balanced flow chart, when everyone in the flow chart has over a 8 year period shown no interest. and why merit-based hiring and promotions is such a bad thing. 

Comparing our recruiting problems with the us is apples and oranges, there may be some similarities but not many. maybe you can explain that. Don't worry we are not expecting an answer your more of a chirper than an answer guy. 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Debatable.  Though as a sweeping generalization there's some truth to that, I've played enough co-ed sports throughout my life to know that there are plenty of women out there with the strength and intensity for combat roles.  Nobody's suggesting we need 50% of our combat ranks filled with 100 lb waifs with no upper body strength though.  

Gee, the military's recruitment efforts focusing on visible minorities and women started long before Trudeau came to power.  I wonder if that's because even the Harper Conservatives understood the changing times.   

Thats a good analogy, I've played lots of cooed sports, that's a good comparison, becoming a Infantry soldiers takes more than playing a few games of badminton, or basketball, more like play full contact football without any gear, for 16 weeks with no break, The failure rate for males is starts at 40 %, thats after basic training have weeded out the real weak ones. 

If there are plenty of women that can make combat arm standards (that have been modified to allow more women to participate), why is there such a lack of numbers? Women represent on average only 16 % of the total in the CF and out of those numbers less than 2 percent are in the combat arms again why is that? 

The reason is simple there is not "plenty" of women that can meet or exceed those lowered standards, the numbers speak for themselves either there is not" plenty" that can meet the standards, or they just don't find those occupations attractive.

you presented a losing argument so let's blame harper, nothing wrong with trying to attract others into the military, but harpers quest was one based on merit, if you meet the standards, you were given a chance to become a member, it is not like that now, one is not based on merit but by color of skin and sex, and that translates to promotion and career opportunities as well. 

 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

This is not about some culture war bullshit you seem to have imagined, and yet somehow cancel culture does play a role in everything in this country, it is just you're in denial, or playing a part in it. 

Everything seems to be cancel-culture bullshit as far as your concerned.  If a thread goes on long enough, you're almost guaranteed to bring it up. 

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The dress regs are public knowledge, you can read them yourself if you like just to google it, the old ones are as well for you to compare, even explanation's on why they are dress regs. 

Yes, they're public knowledge, which is why it was so awkward that you presented the bogeyman case of all of purple-haired ninnies giving away friendly positions, considering it wouldn't even be allowed in a combat zone.  

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I've said this before you seem to have all the answers, but have yet answered any questions,

because you're not asking intelligent questions?  Stuff like:

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

you should be able to at least take a crack at it...nor have you been able to explain why we must have a balanced flow chart, when everyone in the flow chart has over a 8 year period shown no interest. and why merit-based hiring and promotions is such a bad thing. 

I'm not really sure you're using the term flow-chart properly, but nobody's said merit-based hiring and promotion is bad.  You're making up stuff to debate against.  

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The liberal government has been trying for over 8 years now with little to show for their effort, but you should be able to at least take a crack at it...

The effort has been ongoing for 10+ years, and started long before the Liberals took over.  The Conservative administration understood the issue and where demographics were headed.  

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Comparing our recruiting problems with the us is apples and oranges, there may be some similarities but not many. maybe you can explain that. Don't worry we are not expecting an answer your more of a chirper than an answer guy. 

No doubt there are differences, but then your explanation that ethnic minorities just aren't interested in the military (as a symbol of ethnic repression/colonialism or whatever) falls flat on its face simply by examining the US forces and it's more diverse makeup.  Maybe you could explain why black people in the US join up in outsized numbers, but in Canada we somehow have more colonial baggage...or something?

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The reason is simple there is not "plenty" of women that can meet or exceed those lowered standards, the numbers speak for themselves either there is not" plenty" that can meet the standards, or they just don't find those occupations attractive.

We have the same problem across the board.  The occupations are not attractive for anyone right now.  I considered it after university (RCAF mainly), and the idea of spending years rotating through buttf*** nowhere places (like Cold Lake) turned me away.  I suspect a large part of the problem is millennial tendencies towards researching every decision they make and, like me, not liking what I was finding, not to mention hearing from people coming back how frustrating it was in general.  

They've also done studies on how poor the recruitment practices have been, sending out grey-haired sergeants  almost old enough to be the prospects' grandfathers to career fairs and expecting them to be able to communicate effectively with kids less than half their age. 

I don't have the answers for why recruitment has been failing.  I DO know that listening to dinosaurs like Michel Maisonneuve ramble is not going to attract the young people the military needs, because by and large they just don't share those attitudes.  

 

  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Moonbox said:

1...Everything seems to be cancel-culture bullshit as far as your concerned.  If a thread goes on long enough, you're almost guaranteed to bring it up. 

Yes, they're public knowledge, which is why it was so awkward that you presented the bogeyman case of all of purple-haired ninnies giving away friendly positions, considering it wouldn't even be allowed in a combat zone.  

because you're not asking intelligent questions?  Stuff like:

2...'m not really sure you're using the term flow-chart properly, but nobody's said merit-based hiring and promotion is bad.  You're making up stuff to debate against.  

3...The effort has been ongoing for 10+ years, and started long before the Liberals took over.  The Conservative administration understood the issue and where demographics were headed.  

4...No doubt there are differences, but then your explanation that ethnic minorities just aren't interested in the military (as a symbol of ethnic repression/colonialism or whatever) falls flat on its face simply by examining the US forces and it's more diverse makeup.  Maybe you could explain why black people in the US join up in outsized numbers, but in Canada we somehow have more colonial baggage...or something?

We have the same problem across the board.  The occupations are not attractive for anyone right now.  I considered it after university (RCAF mainly), and the idea of spending years rotating through buttf*** nowhere places (like Cold Lake) turned me away.  I suspect a large part of the problem is millennial tendencies towards researching every decision they make and, like me, not liking what I was finding, not to mention hearing from people coming back how frustrating it was in general.  

5...They've also done studies on how poor the recruitment practices have been, sending out grey-haired sergeants  almost old enough to be the prospects' grandfathers to career fairs and expecting them to be able to communicate effectively with kids less than half their age. 

I don't have the answers for why recruitment has been failing.  I DO know that listening to dinosaurs like Michel Maisonneuve ramble is not going to attract the young people the military needs, because by and large they just don't share those attitudes.  

 

  

1. Well it does play a role in pretty much every occupation, department, etc. 

2. Yes Merit based hiring and promotions have been set aside to balance someone chart. Personal with higher merit are being bypassed to hire or promote someone that the flow chart guys are looking for. So yes, it is a major factor.  

3.  Like i said before Conservatives had started to look at programs that provided some benefits for special interest groups like hiring bonus, free education, targeting indigenous kids through special camps and Finacial incentives provided them lived up to the standards all based on merit. 

The liberal program which we have today is not based on merit, but rather do you fit into those groups they are looking for, not sure why this is so difficult. 

4...You can't compare the two military's as they have different recruiting practices and offer much different bonus. like massive signing bonus, or higher education saving plans etc which are looked at by citizens that cannot afford such things, we don't have those and attract a much different recruit. Here in Canada the recruiting base is smaller, and the standards are higher, for instance no high school education, no service, now you have kids competing, those with university or collage schooling are being looked at first. those recruits are taking up most of the available recruiting spots. The issue is not enough people trying to join it is that standards are set to high, and for a lot less dollars. 

DND is not for everyone, it is not a job per say, but an adventure that is promised and with the lack of funding and Resouces people sit around a lot waiting for the adventure to happen. 

5... ya that's the problem the grey-haired SGT most likely the team leader, recruiting teams vary in all shapes, sizes, and ages for a reason, the typical 20-year-old has no experience to draw upon, or answer any questions that may pop up. you forget that perhaps the parents show up and want to confirm is this the right choice for my 17-year-old son, they don't want to talk to the 20-year-old who can't answer all the questions. One does not get picked for a recruiting team if you cannot communicate well. 

6.. Thats a cope out. you must have based your choices on something, enough to post on the topic, but you're not debating just commenting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/2022 at 1:56 PM, Moonbox said:

Debatable.  Though as a sweeping generalization there's some truth to that, I've played enough co-ed sports throughout my life to know that there are plenty of women out there with the strength and intensity for combat roles.  Nobody's suggesting we need 50% of our combat ranks filled with 100 lb waifs with no upper body strength though. 

Like this one?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/women-infantry-forget-about-it-says-female-marine-officer-flna878323

On 11/28/2022 at 1:56 PM, Moonbox said:

Gee, the military's recruitment efforts focusing on visible minorities and women started long before Trudeau came to power.  I wonder if that's because even the Harper Conservatives understood the changing times.   

The times haven't changed in regard to what kind of person would be most likely to be persuaded to join the military. And that type is predominantly male and born and raised in Canada to parents born and raised here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Army Guy said:

1. Well it does play a role in pretty much every occupation, department, etc. 

Not as much as you like to bogeyman it out to be, that's for certain.  

10 hours ago, Army Guy said:

2. Yes Merit based hiring and promotions have been set aside to balance someone chart. Personal with higher merit are being bypassed to hire or promote someone that the flow chart guys are looking for. So yes, it is a major factor.

but this wasn't what you were asking.  You were asking why merit-based hiring/promotion is bad, which nobody was arguing.  So, once again, you're making things up to debate against.  

10 hours ago, Army Guy said:

4...You can't compare the two military's as they have different recruiting practices and offer much different bonus.

Sure, but they don't have to be identical.  You offered up reasoning for why minorities don't join the Canadian forces, but they're obviously not true because those same minorities are joining in the US in outsized numbers.  Unless you can reasonably explain how American Asians are so much less scarred by colonialism etc than Canadian Asians, this theory falls on its face.  

10 hours ago, Army Guy said:

5... ya that's the problem the grey-haired SGT most likely the team leader, recruiting teams vary in all shapes, sizes, and ages for a reason, the typical 20-year-old has no experience to draw upon, or answer any questions that may pop up. 

This 20 year old you're talking about is yet another another straw man you've invented to argue against.

10 hours ago, Army Guy said:

6.. Thats a cope out. you must have based your choices on something, enough to post on the topic, but you're not debating just commenting. 

Cop out of what?  ?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Not as much as you like to bogeyman it out to be, that's for certain.  

but this wasn't what you were asking.  You were asking why merit-based hiring/promotion is bad, which nobody was arguing.  So, once again, you're making things up to debate against.  

Sure, but they don't have to be identical.  You offered up reasoning for why minorities don't join the Canadian forces, but they're obviously not true because those same minorities are joining in the US in outsized numbers.  Unless you can reasonably explain how American Asians are so much less scarred by colonialism etc than Canadian Asians, this theory falls on its face.  

This 20 year old you're talking about is yet another another straw man you've invented to argue against.

Cop out of what?  ?

I guess you would have to know what the diffidence's are between the two to really comment, try and compare the two and get back to me. Thats the problem with posting to you, you automatically know I'm wrong without any research on your part.

yes, my 20-year-old is a straw man, and your grey-haired Sgt is not.  got it...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

I guess you would have to know what the diffidence's are between the two to really comment, try and compare the two and get back to me.

Your claim is the one that needs proving, and I provided evidence suggesting it was wrong.  Typically, you've provided nothing.  

26 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Thats the problem with posting to you, you automatically know I'm wrong without any research on your part.

I know you're wrong when I can show that you're wrong.  You've a worrying tendency towards stubborn opinions with little backing them other than emotion or rhetoric.  You've already shown you didn't know what the dress/uniform reg updates were when you lobbed out your fantasy scenarios of blown combat ops (which the regs would still prevent), and you did it again here projecting assumptions about minorities that (for reasons unexplained) apply to Canada but not the US where the opposite observations are shown.   

That lack of curiosity and research is even more apparent when you're talking about things you know nothing about, like central banking and monetary policy.  

26 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

yes, my 20-year-old is a straw man, and your grey-haired Sgt is not.  got it...

The 20-year old as a recruitment officer is a make-believe straw-man.  The grey-haired sgt isn't, because he's real.  40+ non-comm officers trying to attract millennials who they couldn't relate to with brochures etc. was highlighted as a problem in the outdated recruitment process by RMC research papers from ~5 years ago even, which is really the tail end of the millennial generation as the coveted recruitment pool.  That the CAF was only starting to figure things out as this generation was aging out is a worrying sign considering we're already transitioning to Gen Z.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Your claim is the one that needs proving, and I provided evidence suggesting it was wrong.  Typically, you've provided nothing.  

I know you're wrong when I can show that you're wrong.  You've a worrying tendency towards stubborn opinions with little backing them other than emotion or rhetoric.  You've already shown you didn't know what the dress/uniform reg updates were when you lobbed out your fantasy scenarios of blown combat ops (which the regs would still prevent), and you did it again here projecting assumptions about minorities that (for reasons unexplained) apply to Canada but not the US where the opposite observations are shown.   

That lack of curiosity and research is even more apparent when you're talking about things you know nothing about, like central banking and monetary policy.  

The 20-year old as a recruitment officer is a make-believe straw-man.  The grey-haired sgt isn't, because he's real.  40+ non-comm officers trying to attract millennials who they couldn't relate to with brochures etc. was highlighted as a problem in the outdated recruitment process by RMC research papers from ~5 years ago even, which is really the tail end of the millennial generation as the coveted recruitment pool.  That the CAF was only starting to figure things out as this generation was aging out is a worrying sign considering we're already transitioning to Gen Z.  

Then show me where i'm wrong provide a source. I've read the dress regulations even talked to my comrades who are still serving, who'd jobs are knowing what the dress regulations are and how to interrupt them. 

There are no caveats regarding what can be worn during operations or not, with one exception that is beards, one can have a beard and maintain it in any environment with exception of NBCW training, or if the NBCW threat is above normal in a operational role. as far as hair color is concerned it does not matter, that person is instructed to wear some form of head gear like a hat, helmet. no formal restrictions, jewelry be in on face or body has no restrictions, although not recommended there is no restrictions. no fantasy's Just you not knowing what reality is, and what is not. 

If you want i can give you a few phone numbers of RSM's from the Infantry branch that could give you more details. 

Once again, you're either not reading what i wrote or choosing to ignore it. The US military has many different incentive programs to attract recruits regardless of race, color and creed, like getting a US citizenship for serving, exception Marine corp., signing bonuses, resigning bonus, education saving plans to which like our RSP programs they will match whatever you contribute. Canada does not have any of these, most of these programs are geared towards the working class, or those having problems making ends meet. So they are very attractive programs to immigrants or visible minority's looking for Citizenship, or assistance in helping to pay for higher education. 

Here in Canada all there is a quota once filled then they will take people that have merited with high test scores...Why would anyone new to Canada be incentivized to join our military, and for you to discount the fact that a lot of these people coming from countries of conflict say Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, etc Why would they want to join our military forces? when often they are used as police forces in most countries and are not liked or even hated in some cases what is the draw for them to become one of them. There is none. 

5 years ago, The recruiting problem was just starting to become a problem, DND was making most of its recruiting numbers, and now you're dragging out some RMC study that says the problem may be generated by some grey hair SGT, you do know that the average age for SGT is 30 or younger if in the combat arms, and it is these core people that train those RMC recruits. The same men and women that beast these recruits in PT, and other training and have recruits crying for mommy... grant you there are some Sgts who do have grey hair, but these men pass the PT / and trades training standard every year. or face career consequences. 

I think DND has been doing recruiting for centuries now, and are well aware of what works and what does not, the people that are picked for recruiting are handpicked, for many reasons, I'm sure one of them is not to please a RMC study or for your generations mind set. That being said if you were interested in a career in the CF, and some grey-haired Sgt somehow turned you off well it most likely was not a career field for you. 

Most of the recruiting problems that are faced today are political made, not internal to DND. 

 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Then show me where i'm wrong provide a source. I've read the dress regulations even talked to my comrades who are still serving, who'd jobs are knowing what the dress regulations are and how to interrupt them. 

You've read them?  Really!?  ?

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

There are no caveats regarding what can be worn during operations or not, 

This would suggest you have, at best, only skimmed them, because there are probably at least a dozen caveats on this page alone: 

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/defence/caf/military-identity-system/dress-manual/changes-canadian-forces-dress-instructions.html

INCLUDING restrictions preventing the specific bullshit fantasy scenario you made up about bright-haired "attention-seekers" giving away combat positions:

"...the colouring of hair is permitted in all orders of dress unless it inhibits an operational duty. For example, bright coloured hair may have a negative operational impact during field operations or training. Leaders are invited to discuss with their members to find a simple, suitable accommodation, such as a scarf to cover the hair. Accessories do not have to match the colour of the member’s hair. However, all accessories shall meet safety and operational requirements and must not discredit the CAF."

 

I didn't serve in the military.  You did.  I shouldn't be able to do 2 minutes of Google research and show that you're BS'ing.  If your curiosity and willingness to research came even close to matching your emotional conviction, you'd be crushing this debate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You've read them?  Really!?  ?

This would suggest you have, at best, only skimmed them, because there are probably at least a dozen caveats on this page alone: 

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/defence/caf/military-identity-system/dress-manual/changes-canadian-forces-dress-instructions.html

INCLUDING restrictions preventing the specific bullshit fantasy scenario you made up about bright-haired "attention-seekers" giving away combat positions:

"...the colouring of hair is permitted in all orders of dress unless it inhibits an operational duty. For example, bright coloured hair may have a negative operational impact during field operations or training. Leaders are invited to discuss with their members to find a simple, suitable accommodation, such as a scarf to cover the hair. Accessories do not have to match the color of the member’s hair. However, all accessories shall meet safety and operational requirements and must not discredit the CAF."

 

I didn't serve in the military.  You did.  I shouldn't be able to do 2 minutes of Google research and show that you're BS'ing.  If your curiosity and willingness to research came even close to matching your emotional conviction, you'd be crushing this debate.  

Again, this is you problem and your ability to either not read or reading comprehension. I'll type slow so you can follow along. below is my quote...

Quote

as far as hair color is concerned it does not matter, that person is instructed to wear some form of head gear like a hat, helmet. no formal restrictions,

Below, This is a quote from your source. explain to me where this statement states you cannot wear any color of hair..."Leaders are invited to discuss with the member to find a suitable accommodation"....in what world does that state not to be worn in a combat theater. 

In other words, all accessories used to cover the hair must meet safety needs meaning helmet if required, operational requirements means if you required to wear gas mask, helmet etc... your accessory shall not inhabit that such as hat, beret, helmet, etc... The sentence is talking about "accessories" not hair color.

ONCE Again...Leaders are INVITED to discuss...

 

Quote

Leaders are invited to discuss with their members to find a simple, suitable accommodation, such as a scarf to cover the hair.

Just a question If an RCMP officer showed up to your door, with bright green hair, ring in his nose, and both ears, would you think it was professional, becoming of a RCMP officer, would you be distracted by the hair color, would you take the officer seriously. You can exchange the RCMP guy for say PM, MP, Mayor, investment banker, lawyer, doctor, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lt.-Gen. (retd) Maisonneuve: Clearing the air about my anti-woke speech before I'm completely 'cancelled'

I have faith that we can fix what ails Canada with leadership, service, unity and courage

"After spending five decades defending Canada’s security, democratic values, and its citizens’ right to free speech, I am astonished at how my remarks upon accepting the Vimy Award three weeks ago have been misrepresented and distorted. Some organizations I worked with have decided to cut ties with me as a result; so as my attempted cancellation continues, I take this opportunity to comment on the aftermath of an anti-woke speech."

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/clearing-the-air-about-my-anti-woke-speech-before-im-completely-cancelled

Edited by Dougie93
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Then show me where i'm wrong provide a source. I've read the dress regulations even talked to my comrades who are still serving, who'd jobs are knowing what the dress regulations are and how to interrupt them.

the only operational imperative is conformity

so long as individuality is subjected to the group

which is necessary for the purposes of state sanctioned mass murder on behalf of the British Crown

since no individual can shoulder that burden without going insane

thus, it is not blue hair which is a problem per se

it's simply that if one soldier in the formation has blue hair

then all the soldiers in said formation should all have blue hair

tho I of course would prefer Maroon hair all round instead

Airborne

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Below, This is a quote from your source. explain to me where this statement states you cannot wear any color of hair..."Leaders are invited to discuss with the member to find a suitable accommodation"....in what world does that state not to be worn in a combat theater. 

It states right in the regs.  It's only permitted "unless it inhibits an operational duty."  That's the end of your line of reasoning, right there.  It goes no further.  

The language is very clear, and the potential accommodations are suggestions that the member and his/her commander try to find a compromise that removes the concern.  If it cannot be addressed, the item in question is not permitted.  THAT's how this is written. 

You don't have to worry that officers are only allowed to meekly request that the member fix his glow-in-the-dark hair dye and his jangly nose chain, and that member just can say, "Naw dawg, my purple hair helps with my anxiety." or whatever other goof scenario you've imagined.  Here's another quote for you, just as an example:

Can CAF members be asked to shave their facial hair?

Yes, Commanders of Commands, Task Force Commanders, Formation Commanders and Commanding Officers retain the right to order restrictions on the wearing of facial hair to meet safety and operational requirements. This instruction does not supersede Federal or National safety codes or regulations.

19 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Just a question If an RCMP officer showed up to your door, with bright green hair, ring in his nose, and both ears, would you think it was professional, becoming of a RCMP officer, would you be distracted by the hair color, would you take the officer seriously. You can exchange the RCMP guy for say PM, MP, Mayor, investment banker, lawyer, doctor, etc.

Why don't I answer with a quote from the CAF regs that you totally definitely read.  

  • Piercings: the only piercing jewellery authorized are single or single set of stud or single stone earrings (one in each ear) in the earlobe(s) only. Piercings are not permitted on the face. Earrings shall not exceed one centimetre square or diameter. Gauges/spacers shall not exceed 2.5 cm in diameter.

So we're really left with the green hair, which I'd probably think looks stupid, but I'm not sure how much it would affect me if the RCMP officer shows up at my house.  I'd probably be more worried about why he's there.  

A more interesting question, I think, is how many people you figure go through with police (let alone army) training intent on coloring their hair bright green.  From all the noise you're making about it, I'm certain to see crowds of these folk at the next military parade, right?  

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Moonbox said:

It states right in the regs.  It's only permitted "unless it inhibits an operational duty."  That's the end of your line of reasoning, right there.  It goes no further.  

The language is very clear, and the potential accommodations are suggestions that the member and his/her commander try to find a compromise that removes the concern.  If it cannot be addressed, the item in question is not permitted.  THAT's how this is written. 

You don't have to worry that officers are only allowed to meekly request that the member fix his glow-in-the-dark hair dye and his jangly nose chain, and that member just can say, "Naw dawg, my purple hair helps with my anxiety." or whatever other goof scenario you've imagined.  Here's another quote for you, just as an example:

Can CAF members be asked to shave their facial hair?

Yes, Commanders of Commands, Task Force Commanders, Formation Commanders and Commanding Officers retain the right to order restrictions on the wearing of facial hair to meet safety and operational requirements. This instruction does not supersede Federal or National safety codes or regulations.

Why don't I answer with a quote from the CAF regs that you totally definitely read.  

  • Piercings: the only piercing jewellery authorized are single or single set of stud or single stone earrings (one in each ear) in the earlobe(s) only. Piercings are not permitted on the face. Earrings shall not exceed one centimetre square or diameter. Gauges/spacers shall not exceed 2.5 cm in diameter.

So we're really left with the green hair, which I'd probably think looks stupid, but I'm not sure how much it would affect me if the RCMP officer shows up at my house.  I'd probably be more worried about why he's there.  

A more interesting question, I think, is how many people you figure go through with police (let alone army) training intent on coloring their hair bright green.  From all the noise you're making about it, I'm certain to see crowds of these folk at the next military parade, right?  

You should go back through the previous posts and find the one where you have said over and over that colored hair would not be allowed in an "operational theater". The dress regs cover all of that, stating it is allowed, providing that it is covered by scarf, hat, helmet, Touque, etc... Stop changing the goal posts...

The last number of posts have been about hair, but you go with the distractions, we already discussed beards, an jewelry. The problem is your reading comprehension, on the topic of hair, with you telling me numerous times it was not allowed. and now you're dancing around telling me what exactly? it is allowed, or it is not allowed. the dress regs are very clear. "That it is allowed, if they wear accessories to cover it."

Please do not respond as the post is growing old and you're not grasping the topic very well. Maybe another military guy can explain it to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 8:57 PM, Army Guy said:

I just want to know how wearing all of this in the field or on operations when showers are few and far between, how long hair won't become a problem, with lice, bugs, or plain greasy that it wreaks, or body jewelry will not become infected, and just how bright colors used in hair dye will not affect camouflage efforts. Nobody has asked why these rules were in effect in the first place...

How does this work for you? 

You're the one raising fears of bright hair affecting "camo efforts", when the new regs specifically address this fear:

"...the colouring of hair is permitted in all orders of dress unless it inhibits an operational duty. For example, bright coloured hair may have a negative operational impact during field operations or training.

So this ends up just being another post where you're ranting about things you haven't even bothered to read about or think about, preferring to be swept up in your own emotion and hyperbole instead.  


 

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Moonbox said:

How does this work for you? 

You're the one raising fears of bright hair affecting "camo efforts", when the new regs specifically address this fear:

"...the colouring of hair is permitted in all orders of dress unless it inhibits an operational duty. For example, bright coloured hair may have a negative operational impact during field operations or training.

So this ends up just being another post where you're ranting about things you haven't even bothered to read about or think about, preferring to be swept up in your own emotion and hyperbole instead.  


 

I bow to your superior intellect when it comes to all military matters, it that what you want to here, I've proven my case hundreds of times to you, but you just like to read your own posts.  I'm moving i hope you can do the same. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2022 at 5:49 PM, Army Guy said:

Your pissed becasue those are the people that are attracted to the military, and they don't fit the flow chart for the whole diversity nonsense. 

We can't find recruits because of the way Government and the people of Canada treats our military members to start with, lack of modern equipment, job opportunities, equal rights, promotions based on diversity factors, instead of merit. Not to mention they are not being paid to the same degree as those counter parts in the civilian world. 

Minorites come from countries that the military was used to oppress them, WTF would they be interested in joining our forces? they have other interests in life just as women do, they want employment in other professions. You cannot force them into joining to keep the flow charts balanced, maybe we should be forcing women into doing other jobs like garbagemen, where 90 % are represented by men, construction workers, farmers, fishermen, most manual labor jobs... NOPE we are fixated on the Military and nothing else matters right now it is a stupid, no absolutely stupid idea. it take s everything away from merit becasue you earned it, to give me the job i'm the right color, sex, race, creed, etc same as advancement or promotion thats why people are not joining, the organization is rif with leftist political wing nuts that want to preserve their jobs rather than the organization.  

Diversity is not working; you and all the experts are blowing hot wind out your asses. Do i believe the forces should be open to everyone certainly. everyone deserves a fair chance to serve this nation provided you can meet its standards, not becasue of your sex or color. .  And if you think that the general's speech is hurting the forces recruiting numbers your wrong, your way of thinking is done more damage than any 1000 speeches could. 

I don't want to sound rude, but you should stick to topics you know something about, you really suck at this one. 

 

When you have a leader that says veterans are asking for to much,and then goes on a major spending spree ,hurts big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Moonbox said:

How does this work for you? 

You're the one raising fears of bright hair affecting "camo efforts", when the new regs specifically address this fear:

"...the colouring of hair is permitted in all orders of dress unless it inhibits an operational duty. For example, bright coloured hair may have a negative operational impact during field operations or training.

So this ends up just being another post where you're ranting about things you haven't even bothered to read about or think about, preferring to be swept up in your own emotion and hyperbole instead.  


 

So a call comes in for a quick deployment and you need to change your hair colour first.  Come on, thats just silly. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...