Post New Topic  
Edit Profile | Register | Search | FAQ | Forum Home
    next newest topic
» The War Diary   » General Discussions   » General   » human rights in the armed forces (Page 1)

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic is comprised of pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: human rights in the armed forces
reg1
Recruit
Member # 138

Rate Member

posted 08 August 2021 17:18      Profile for reg1   Email reg1   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
please let me know if this was hashed out already, i have a fealing it has. to enyone who can start,what is the quality of the soldier today compaired to the soldier of the old school? i think rca can relate to what i am talking about. please dont get me wrong its a good thing up to a point, but were is the disaplin? "ubique"



Posts: 30 | From: st.wilfred newbrunswick canada | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged
ender
Veteran
Member # 189

Member Rated:

posted 11 August 2021 07:34      Profile for ender   Email ender   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
well, the quality of spelling has obviously gone down.
Posts: 126 | From: toronto | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged
reg1
Recruit
Member # 138

Rate Member

posted 11 August 2021 15:28      Profile for reg1   Email reg1   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
well ender if you dont have enything good to say you should keep your mouth shut,veteran member or not. i did not join this forum to be insulted.



Posts: 30 | From: st.wilfred newbrunswick canada | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged
RCA
Veteran
Member # 74

Member Rated:

posted 12 August 2021 15:11      Profile for RCA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
reg1 - I think that you have just a concreate examplmle of the difference between today and yesterday.

more on this later

Remember all, if your not a gunner, your a target.


Ubique


Posts: 188 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged
reg1
Recruit
Member # 138

Rate Member

posted 12 August 2021 15:33      Profile for reg1   Email reg1   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
thanks RCA. A LITTLE RESPECT GOES A LONG WAY "UBIQUE"



Posts: 30 | From: st.wilfred newbrunswick canada | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged
Master Blaster
Veteran
Member # 60

Member Rated:

posted 12 August 2021 22:24      Profile for Master Blaster   Email Master Blaster   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
reg1;

You wanted an answer to your question and you got one from ender. If you didn't like it, tough. Get over it...or, you may try to learn the etiquette of the internet. When you start a sentence, capitalize the first letter of the first word. The end of a sentence usually ends with a period or a punctuation mark suitable to the intent implied. If you don't know how to spell something, look it up. You'll learn something and your professionalism will start to show through.

I never got past the 9th grade (officially) but I watched and learned.

By becoming more than what you are you grow and when you grow you change into what you want to become become.

You could benefit from doing the same.

Dileas Gu Brath



Posts: 61 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged
ender
Veteran
Member # 189

Member Rated:

posted 13 August 2021 14:07      Profile for ender   Email ender   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
to post an actual response to the message above:

Human rights in the armed forces exist for a reason. My unit just sent 20 people on a course and had 10 medically RTU'd. (I would elaborate why but I can't on a public forum. It is being dealt with through army channels) That's not on. If your objective is training, then you train troops, you don't break them.
"Cock" courses on teach you to tune it out, you don't learn the skills your unit sent you there to learn. Then soldiers go back to thier units untrained, unable to take thier place in a section. Also, it is entirely possible to have a very hard course without going overboard. Then you weed out the ones you don't want without hurting the ones you do.
I'm not saying the SHARP and the entire atmosphere of political correctness hasn't gone to far: it has. However, there needs to be legitimate army channels to address abuse.
A lot of it can go down to leadership. Most of the young people we are getting today really want to be good soldiers. It's up to the NCO's to get them there.


Posts: 126 | From: toronto | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged
reg1
Recruit
Member # 138

Rate Member

posted 13 August 2021 18:25      Profile for reg1   Email reg1   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
thank you for your response, i wish things could have started a little differant.



Posts: 30 | From: st.wilfred newbrunswick canada | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged
the patriot
Infantry Forum Moderator
Member # 144

Member Rated:

posted 17 August 2021 00:07      Profile for the patriot   Author's Homepage   Email the patriot   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ender,

Could you describe at all what the actual abuse was on the course your fellow troops went on?! Did they PT those 10 troops into the ground when they were injured?! That is abuse. Define what behaviour occurred to give me a better sense of what your troops went through.

-the patriot- [Canadian]


Posts: 281 | From: The Great White North | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
towhey
Veteran
Member # 146

Member Rated:

posted 17 August 2021 10:37      Profile for towhey   Author's Homepage   Email towhey   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Patriot, I think that Ender's point is this:

The CF runs courses for one reason: to train soldiers to develop specific competencies -- whether general military skills, leadership abilities, or specialist technical knowledge, etc.

Courses are not -- or at least should not -- be run to "weed out" perceived weakness. Nor, should they be run to provide "pay back time" for experienced instructors.

If 10 of 20 candidates are medically washed out of a course, one has to question the skill of the instructors. Does it mean instruction was poor? Not necessarily. But, it should prompt some investigation.

It could be that the candidates were simply unfit -- in fact, given the general state of fitness in Canadian youth today, I'm sure they were. In that case, the task for instructors is even more demanding: how to produce skilled, capable soldiers without hurting them.

At the end of the day, the Army needs skilled, capable soldiers -- not an opportunity to brag in the mess about "how hard" the course was, or "how many people we RTU'd."

The attitude that no course is a good course unless people get hurt and fail is/was/always has been/always will be simply asinine.

I have seen instructors who were abusive, and who knew it. I have been abused by instructors on course who were subsequently charged and convicted. I have seen instructors who were abusive, but didn't realize they were -- they were just "doing what had been done to them". This, particularly, happens a lot on leadership courses.

Fortunately, the vast majority of instructors I have seen are hard-working, caring and work damned hard to make sure their students learn what they're supposed to learn and develop the competencies they're there to develop in a way that maximizes their usefulness to the CF. Does this mean the coddle troops and run "soft" courses? No. It means they're smart enough to develop strong, skilled, fit soldiers without killing, hurting or abusing them.

And, for the "Bonafide" counters out there, I've instructed, developed, supervised, and been a candidate on dozens of serials of courses, reg and reserve, including: GMT, QL2/3 Inf, QL4 Dvr wheel, dvr track, MG, Comms, Recce, JLC/Infantry ISCC, BOT, Pre-RESO, RESO Ph I, II, BIOC Ph III, IV, CFSS, NBCW Offr/Supvr, Unit NBCW, RCMP ERT field trg, Search and Rescue Management, Cliff Rescue Team Leader, Basic Financial Advisor, yada, yada, yada.



Posts: 35 | From: toronto, on, canada | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy Atkins
Recruit
Member # 448

Member Rated:

posted 17 August 2021 19:22      Profile for Tommy Atkins   Email Tommy Atkins   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The major problem with training todays recruit is that they are soft.I can guarentee that they can tell you all of the secret levels in Diablo 2 but have never had a blister in their life.I have trained both Reg and Res recruits and simply put most of what slips through the recruiting centers in a word is JUNK.It saddens me to see the state that the Infantry has been allowed to sink and the other trades are even worse. To quote CSM Don Purdy (USA Ret)" if things don't change,yu will have the blood of soldiers on your hands.There is an enemy out there who is determined,and is not concerned about individual feelings or time outs...Be hard on them nowor watch them die or worse RUN."
'NUFF SAID.

Posts: 16 | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gunner
Artillery Forum Moderator
Member # 39

Member Rated:

posted 17 August 2021 20:44      Profile for Gunner   Email Gunner   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I would be very surprised if an instructor on Tommy Aitkens basic military training course didn't think the exact same thing about young recruit Tommy as he now feels about the candidates today.

It seems to be a common trait amongst junior NCOs and some senior NCOs to look upon the "next generation" of soldiers as weak and the CFRCs "scrapped the bottom of the barrel" with candidates for this course. I've been around long enough to realize this isn't true. Luckily the days of course standards being at the whim of an instructor/course WO/course Offr are hopefully gone forever. The days of kicking people off course because you don't like what they look like, don't like their attitude, etc are over.

Are standards low today. Yeah, they probably are but until we (the army) show that we require a soldier to do a task at a certain standard we probably won't get it raised. Standards are based on Fact..not a leaders personal whim.


Posts: 150 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Infanteer
Veteran
Member # 349

posted 28 August 2021 23:14      Profile for Infanteer        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
All I know is the Canadian government considers 16 year old kids who are falling on the ground crying during a 2km withdrawl with rucks to be trained soldiers that can "perform their duties outdoors, by day or by night, exposed to all weather conditions."

[ 28 August 2001: Message edited by: Infanteer ]


Posts: 50 | From: Vancouver, Canada | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
towhey
Veteran
Member # 146

Member Rated:

posted 29 August 2021 10:09      Profile for towhey   Author's Homepage   Email towhey   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Gunner: I agree.

I'm sure that training standards today are unrealistic. How can I be so sure? Because, they've always been unrealistic.

When it comes to training, we've always made it up as we went along. Is a soldier who can carry a 50kg pack 10 miles in 1.5 hours really more combat-ready than one who can carry a 45kg pack 9 miles in 1 hour? Or, a 30kg pack 20 miles in 3 hours? Who knows?

Certainly, I expect that soldiers should be fit. How fit? I don't know. The toughest, most combat-experienced soldiers I knew never seemed very fit. They smoked, were overweight and couldn't run fast. But they were battle-proven and combat-tested.

I also know that there is a tendency among young officers and NCO's to take the "granite" philosophy to heart when training recruits and junior leaders.

The "Granite" philosophy????

Here's my analogy: Picture two artists at work. One is a sculptor who works in Granite. The other is a sculptor who works with clay. The Granite sculptor creates art by chiseling away everything that isn't a beautiful statue. The Clay sculptor builds his statue from scratch, using raw materials to create something wonderful from base clay.

Too many military instructors think like Granite sculptors: they believe their role is to take a platoon of recruits and "weed out" those who aren't soldiers. That, frankly, is a pretty simple one-day job and requires zero instructional skill.

In fact, military instructors should be Clay sculptors. Their task is to take a platoon of raw recruits and, using ingenuity, creativity, intelligence, skill, knowledge and perseverance, to build soldiers out of them.



Posts: 35 | From: toronto, on, canada | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged
Andyboy
Veteran
Member # 3

Rate Member

posted 30 August 2021 14:37      Profile for Andyboy   Email Andyboy   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Towhey, What if you don't have enough clay?



Posts: 42 | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged

All times are ET
This topic is comprised of pages: 1  2  3 
 

Post New Topic   Close Topic    Move Topic      next newest topic
Jump To:

Contact Us | CdnArmy.ca | Privacy Statement

2001 CdnArmy.ca. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0 Public Beta 1.5-pre2