Canada's New Counterinsurgency Strategy Manual
- Thread starter gordjenkins
- Start date
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,932
- Points
- 1,160
My job as a federal inspector takes me far a field into remote areas and I have to deal with people with minimal social skills and a lot of anger about government in general. I also have to deal with First Nations quite a bit. Most are decent, but you do run into some less savory types. I recently pointed out at a OSH meeting that we and other government inspectors would make prime targets for any group that wants to make a statement against government polices either by kidnapping or attacking us. There was a lot of uncomfortable shuffling of feet and navel gazing going on. Another good reason to bring my buddy Mossberg along with me on my trips. Wish I could bring my friend Sig and his associate Sauer along also.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
This issue didn't show up on our media scan service here at CFC this morning, so it may be dying down.
While we could certainly argue about how effectively and fairly Canada deals with its aboriginal problems, and whether or not they are required to follow the same laws in the same manner as non-aboriginals, I can't really see the point in identifying specific threats (real or potential) in what is essentially a generic manual designed for application all over the place. It is not an intelligence survey nor a contingency plan, with a need to be specific. The principles of COIN ops are pretty well established and tend to hold true more or less, no matter what the exact circumstances. So not identifying specific groups (who may change with time anyway-would we still call the Jewish fighters of the 1940's "terrorist gangs"?) wouldn't hurt the usefulness of the manual much, and would probably keep it relevant longer.
The real question to me is: how did the journalist know where to look, and what to look for? Is all our doctrine development process to be held up to this kind of ill-informed, selective scare-mongering? Will every doctrine manual have to go in front of a govt committee to ensure it has no "nasty bits" that might conceivably offend someones sensibilities?
Cheers
While we could certainly argue about how effectively and fairly Canada deals with its aboriginal problems, and whether or not they are required to follow the same laws in the same manner as non-aboriginals, I can't really see the point in identifying specific threats (real or potential) in what is essentially a generic manual designed for application all over the place. It is not an intelligence survey nor a contingency plan, with a need to be specific. The principles of COIN ops are pretty well established and tend to hold true more or less, no matter what the exact circumstances. So not identifying specific groups (who may change with time anyway-would we still call the Jewish fighters of the 1940's "terrorist gangs"?) wouldn't hurt the usefulness of the manual much, and would probably keep it relevant longer.
The real question to me is: how did the journalist know where to look, and what to look for? Is all our doctrine development process to be held up to this kind of ill-informed, selective scare-mongering? Will every doctrine manual have to go in front of a govt committee to ensure it has no "nasty bits" that might conceivably offend someones sensibilities?
Cheers
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
There are reporters who are applying wide scale for access to information of all kinds. It's the same way they learned of the CO of a ship on operations who shuffled his duty free stuff around in order to help with his dwindling supplies of taxable stuff. They are basically trolling to try and find stuff they can sensationalize.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
IN HOC SIGNO: "sensationalize": +5. Indude. They are not reporting, they are creating "stories", often in pursuit of a certain agenda.
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/008676.html
They think they are Woodward and Bernstein when they are essentially supermarket tabloid hacks unwilling or unable to do real research. And knowing nothing about that upon which they are writing--for a public
that, sadly, in large measure shares both their ignorance and their attitude.
Mark
Ottawa
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/008676.html
They think they are Woodward and Bernstein when they are essentially supermarket tabloid hacks unwilling or unable to do real research. And knowing nothing about that upon which they are writing--for a public
that, sadly, in large measure shares both their ignorance and their attitude.
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
With regards to the press reports, it's all just hype.
I have known a few Aborigonal People, most of what I know of them, is that for the most part are honest people.
Experience has shown that if you don't want groups like the Mohawk Warrior Society to flourish, you arrest the leaders and outlaw the organization. Most of the Warriors in Oka, infiltrated from the United States, because they have "Treaty" rights to cross the border at will.
If you're going to have internal trouble, the first thing you should be doing is closing the bloody land border crossings. The second thing you should be doing is arresting every Aborigonal who's committed a violent offence. The Third thing that should be done is siezing every weapon, that an Aborigonal, or anyone else for that manner, has no business owning. Common sense tells me that an Indian wouldn't hunt with a .357 Magnum Revolver, .50 Snipers Rifle, or an M 16.
Finally they Govt. should get off it's arse and deal with Caledonia and other hotspots, with intensive negotiation, which will benifit both sides.
Cheerz
Paul
I have known a few Aborigonal People, most of what I know of them, is that for the most part are honest people.
Experience has shown that if you don't want groups like the Mohawk Warrior Society to flourish, you arrest the leaders and outlaw the organization. Most of the Warriors in Oka, infiltrated from the United States, because they have "Treaty" rights to cross the border at will.
If you're going to have internal trouble, the first thing you should be doing is closing the bloody land border crossings. The second thing you should be doing is arresting every Aborigonal who's committed a violent offence. The Third thing that should be done is siezing every weapon, that an Aborigonal, or anyone else for that manner, has no business owning. Common sense tells me that an Indian wouldn't hunt with a .357 Magnum Revolver, .50 Snipers Rifle, or an M 16.
Finally they Govt. should get off it's arse and deal with Caledonia and other hotspots, with intensive negotiation, which will benifit both sides.
Cheerz
Paul
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Kirkhill said:
Yeah but we always beat those Fantasians! They were ruthless too. One Fall when we were on exercise in Pet they blew up all the chip wagons in the Ottawa Valley thus denying our troops (especially 1 Commando) of Poutine! Imagine?? We taught them a lesson they'll not soon forget!! ;D
