- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 10
and I was impressed with the Canadians I saw in Afghanistan. True professionals.
Canadian Reserve Forces Vs US Reserve Forces
- Thread starter George Wallace
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
"I do not think that Canada is ready to have a reserve or militia unit from Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver get wiped out by some suicide bomber, not that anyone is prepared for such a thing, but I do not think that our politicians have the courage to risk such a thing."
In fact several Canadian units have been wiped out on the battlefield by Canadian political decision, the Newfound Regt. for one. This practice was stopped thanks to some fine Generals like Crerear and the likes. Canadians under Canadian control, new tactics, etc. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of fine "generalship" at NDHQ these days. It is also another Canadian tradition that in time of crisis the youth of our nation flock to the colours. After all the militia bagged General Wolfe on the Plains of Abraham and two hundred years later stood up again in the Medak Pocket. The one difference I noticed when I was working with the 2/75 Rangers was Money. Several US buddies of mine received huge reenlistment bonus and university/college funding certainly had me green with envy.
In fact several Canadian units have been wiped out on the battlefield by Canadian political decision, the Newfound Regt. for one. This practice was stopped thanks to some fine Generals like Crerear and the likes. Canadians under Canadian control, new tactics, etc. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of fine "generalship" at NDHQ these days. It is also another Canadian tradition that in time of crisis the youth of our nation flock to the colours. After all the militia bagged General Wolfe on the Plains of Abraham and two hundred years later stood up again in the Medak Pocket. The one difference I noticed when I was working with the 2/75 Rangers was Money. Several US buddies of mine received huge reenlistment bonus and university/college funding certainly had me green with envy.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Newfoundland Regiment was part of the British Army when it was wiped out in WW1, as Newfoundland was part of the Empire, not Canada. I'd also suggest that some excellent British officers did some very good work building up and directing the Canadian Corps in WW1, and that the lack of trained Canadian senior/staff officers led to many problems in 1939-45.
I'm not sure if Canadians flock to the colours like we may want to believe - witness manpower shortages that led to the conscription crises in both world wars, as well as the problems with the "Zombies" in WW2. In neither case - especially WW2 - was a satisfactory solution found to shortages of troops.
But, to get back on topic...
American Reserves have serious money, a real mission, and the political/legislative support to carry it out.
Then again, that may describe the differences between US and Canadian forces in general....
I'm not sure if Canadians flock to the colours like we may want to believe - witness manpower shortages that led to the conscription crises in both world wars, as well as the problems with the "Zombies" in WW2. In neither case - especially WW2 - was a satisfactory solution found to shortages of troops.
But, to get back on topic...
American Reserves have serious money, a real mission, and the political/legislative support to carry it out.
Then again, that may describe the differences between US and Canadian forces in general....
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Enfield, you forgot the mutiny in Veron during WW2 and the mutiny of a certain Canadian ship. Yes the Newfies were commonwealth BUT until Canadian troops came under Canadian control it was line them up and mow them down. It has been a constant defence policy in Canada for the last 100 years to have a small reg forces and to relay on "patriotism" in time of crisis. This issues seems to get revisited about every 15 to 20 years( 1910, 1920,1936.....) but stays the same. The only caveat in this it seems has been in the last 20 years or so with the quality of troops in the militia being improved. This I would suspect is due to the amount of reg force vets who get out then get board and rejoin their local militia units. A practice that the US has been encouraging for years.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
3rd herd
Yes the Newfies were commonwealth BUT until Canadian troops came under Canadian control it was line them up and mow them down.
You have to take into account that the Brit Generals were treating their own UK troops the same way - Cdn troops were not the whipping boys of the Imperial army.
If you think about it, the fact that some of our Generals stood up to the Brit leadership - had an across the board effect on the whole Imperial Army. Troops were not to be thrown away as had been practice till then.
Yes the Newfies were commonwealth BUT until Canadian troops came under Canadian control it was line them up and mow them down.
You have to take into account that the Brit Generals were treating their own UK troops the same way - Cdn troops were not the whipping boys of the Imperial army.
If you think about it, the fact that some of our Generals stood up to the Brit leadership - had an across the board effect on the whole Imperial Army. Troops were not to be thrown away as had been practice till then.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
I'm not too sure about that. Hong Kong and Dieppe come to mind, during WWII by which time the doctrine of Canadian National Command was over two decades old. Hong Kong involved the destruction in battle of two Militia units: the Royal Rifles of Canada and the Winnipeg Grenadiers, who were not supposed to have been sent into a high-risk area of operations because they were deemed unready. And I am not certain that retaining Canadian National Command (which IIRC first happened during WWI not WWII) actually saved that many Canadian lives. I would want to see the casualty rates before and after. At any rate, I think we established this setup fairly early in WWI. Maybe some of resident WWI experts can refresh my memory.
I beg to differ. I have had the experience of serving under a range of Canadian general officers since 1974, and today (in the Army, at least) we enjoy a quality at this rank level that I have never seen before. Youth, extensive operational experience and better education characterize much of our Army's GOL today. I have seen us suffer for far too long under the exact reverse: individuals whose skills topped out at Platoon Commander or, if they were lucky, CO, but somehow got stars, much to the suffering of the rest of us.
Initially in WWI, yes, Less so in WWII, and very much less so in Korea. I tend to agree with Enfield here.
They did? How do we know today who shot General Wolfe? How do we know it wasn't a French Regular, or an Irish or Swiss mercenary, or an Indian? (This is a genuine question not a rhetorical one.) I never heard that the shooter had been identified as belonging to one component or another.
True, and did a fine job. Agreed.
True-we still have a way to go on some benefit areas, but I believe we are ahead in others such as travel costs and relocation expenses. Don't forget the reason for the "huge re-enlistment bonus": it is part of a strategy to deal with recruiting and retention shortfalls in the US Army (in particular). I do agree that we should have something equivalent if we need it, but we will never have the bottomless cookie jar that US forces get under a Republican Govt.
Cheers.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
there was a serious shortage of soldiers for WWII? I was under the impression that the population of Canada was 16 million at that time, and we had fielded a military of or close to 1 million members... that's a very significant portion of a population. if so that's not a failing of the youth in that day, just a lack of potential soldiers avalible.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
in the last couple of months of the war (WW2) many gunners were rerolled to infantry, given a short indoc session and pointed in the right direction.....
Not an ideal situation but, for political reasons, dispanding some Units/ Bdes/Divs would have resulted in the end of the 1st Cdn Army... which had several elements from the occupied countries (Poles, French & Dutch)
Not an ideal situation but, for political reasons, dispanding some Units/ Bdes/Divs would have resulted in the end of the 1st Cdn Army... which had several elements from the occupied countries (Poles, French & Dutch)
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
It began well before the last couple of months of the war. As an example, James Doohan, of Star Trek fame, was rerolled infantry with the Royal Winnipeg Rifles as was the former HCol of my former unit. Both were reroled gunners and both went ashore with the unit on D Day.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 10
How does the Canadian Militia work in terms of training a reserve soldier. Is basic and skills training done all at once or in different years? Does Canada ever deploy a militia unit as a unit?
The US guy in Calgary
The US guy in Calgary
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
easy answer 1st
Canada has not deployed Militia / Reserve units overseas since WW2
Reserve units have been kept small - usually about 150 to 200 per "Battalion" Though there has been recent developments allowing units to grow to 300 or 400
By tradition, Reserve/Militia units have reflected the same Trade Occupations as in the Regular forces. Members would act as augmentees to Regular formation - filling in the blank files. BUT
Over the last 10 to 15 years, they have periodicaly gathered together large numbers of Militia/Reserve personnel, cobbled them together into a Sqn or Troop sized formations for deployment as part a sub unit of a Regular formation.
New reserve units have been formed to provide services like Cimic, Psyops, NBCW and the like - some success, some dismal failures.
Reserve training?
Well - the CF does not have a unified thought on this matter.
Navy, Airforce & Comms send their Reserve personnel on the same courses as their Regular countreparts.
Army; they've decided to break things down into Must, Should & Could knows and give all the reservists training in the Must (and most of the "should") knows. They figure that the remainder can be taught in predeployment training.... it works most of the time.
Basic & Soldier qualifications = 40 days Trg in 2 x 20 day courses.
Basic trade/section member course follows; 35 days for Sapper
next year, Small party tasks - team leader course 20 - 35 days (changing)
Canada has not deployed Militia / Reserve units overseas since WW2
Reserve units have been kept small - usually about 150 to 200 per "Battalion" Though there has been recent developments allowing units to grow to 300 or 400
By tradition, Reserve/Militia units have reflected the same Trade Occupations as in the Regular forces. Members would act as augmentees to Regular formation - filling in the blank files. BUT
Over the last 10 to 15 years, they have periodicaly gathered together large numbers of Militia/Reserve personnel, cobbled them together into a Sqn or Troop sized formations for deployment as part a sub unit of a Regular formation.
New reserve units have been formed to provide services like Cimic, Psyops, NBCW and the like - some success, some dismal failures.
Reserve training?
Well - the CF does not have a unified thought on this matter.
Navy, Airforce & Comms send their Reserve personnel on the same courses as their Regular countreparts.
Army; they've decided to break things down into Must, Should & Could knows and give all the reservists training in the Must (and most of the "should") knows. They figure that the remainder can be taught in predeployment training.... it works most of the time.
Basic & Soldier qualifications = 40 days Trg in 2 x 20 day courses.
Basic trade/section member course follows; 35 days for Sapper
next year, Small party tasks - team leader course 20 - 35 days (changing)
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
BruceinAlberta said:
Bruce: Geo has given you a very good answer. It is tempting but not accurate to try to draw direct parallels between the USARNG/USAR and our Army Reserve (traditionally called "The Militia"). With the probable exception of some aspects of individual training, our land reserves will almost always come off a very distant and weak second to the US reserves. This is not to slag the people in it (often very dedicated) but just a reflection of our different political and military cultures.
Cheers
Cheers
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
My unit, the Voltigeurs de Quebec, started to tighten the pressure on reservists to show up for training (especially for recruit, they understand these changes can't be made in one year). You now require a proof of either school exams, death in the family, or any other event of that sort to absent yourself of training. Repeated offense to that rule will get you kicked out. Some may argue that getting kicked out is not a punishment, but I think it allows us to keep the more dedicated people and is as far as it can go in the actual state of mind. We also started boosting our numbers, recruitment efforts doubled the regiment numbers and we are now approaching two full companies, and starting a charlie company next year.
All that to say that there is some effort made to make reservist more deployment ready, and I don't think it should go further than that. Currently regular forces have no problem filling the rotos and the pre-deployment training seems sufficient to bring reservists filling holes to an acceptable preparation level.
As for the role of the reserve, it is a wonderful recruitment tool, many soldiers in my unit are currently transfering to regular forces. It allows them to try military life without binding themselves to a 3 year contract and decide wheter or not it was made for them. I would rather see that than someone joining the regs, finding he don't like that and train backward for 3 years. It also ensure that should the need arise, we have a sufficient number of people already familiar with what you must know, only needing a refresh on what you should know and training in what you could know for the best few (the must should and could know is based on a previous post, i just loved that way of seeing things).
All that to say that there is some effort made to make reservist more deployment ready, and I don't think it should go further than that. Currently regular forces have no problem filling the rotos and the pre-deployment training seems sufficient to bring reservists filling holes to an acceptable preparation level.
As for the role of the reserve, it is a wonderful recruitment tool, many soldiers in my unit are currently transfering to regular forces. It allows them to try military life without binding themselves to a 3 year contract and decide wheter or not it was made for them. I would rather see that than someone joining the regs, finding he don't like that and train backward for 3 years. It also ensure that should the need arise, we have a sufficient number of people already familiar with what you must know, only needing a refresh on what you should know and training in what you could know for the best few (the must should and could know is based on a previous post, i just loved that way of seeing things).
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
pbi,
"The USMCR is quite different from the USARNG/USAR. IIRC, all of its members are former Active Duty Marines: there are no "off the street" USMCR (unless things have changed since I attended Quantico 97/98). "
The current form of the USMCR is not composed of only prior service Active Duty Marines, I think what you were referring to was the process of augmentation for Marine Officers, where all Marine Officers once completed OCS were commissioned as Reserve Officers on active duty and within a couple of years of observations performing Officers had there commission augmented to Active duty status, while non-performing officers were dropped to Reserves. Continuing to paraphrase a Marine Corps article, I think congress now wants to the Marine Corps to change the augmentation process to allow for an all active duty Officer corps.
Now in practical application, for my unit I can not think of any Marine above the rank Sergeant who has not done a tour on active duty, and this is unique in that we are on Camp Pendleton (home of 35,000 Marines) that we have excellent recruitment base for our Officer and NCO corps. The biggest advantage of the Marine Corps Reserve over the our Army counterparts (correct me if I am wrong) but when new equipment is fielded to the Corps, equipment is alloted to the Marine Forces Reserve, though we are last in line, we will see the equipment within 2 years of the Active duty force. Take for the example 2 1/2 ton trucks that the USR/ NG operate rather than being fully fielded the FMTV, while we have had our full complement of the 7 ton trucks for quite some time now, and everything equipment fielding plan I have seen, every piece of equipment fielded to the Marine Corps has always had allocations for the Marine Corps Reserves. Having equipment and training commonality with our active duty counterparts, allows for easy transistions for individual augmentations, and complete unit deployments.
"The USMCR is quite different from the USARNG/USAR. IIRC, all of its members are former Active Duty Marines: there are no "off the street" USMCR (unless things have changed since I attended Quantico 97/98). "
The current form of the USMCR is not composed of only prior service Active Duty Marines, I think what you were referring to was the process of augmentation for Marine Officers, where all Marine Officers once completed OCS were commissioned as Reserve Officers on active duty and within a couple of years of observations performing Officers had there commission augmented to Active duty status, while non-performing officers were dropped to Reserves. Continuing to paraphrase a Marine Corps article, I think congress now wants to the Marine Corps to change the augmentation process to allow for an all active duty Officer corps.
Now in practical application, for my unit I can not think of any Marine above the rank Sergeant who has not done a tour on active duty, and this is unique in that we are on Camp Pendleton (home of 35,000 Marines) that we have excellent recruitment base for our Officer and NCO corps. The biggest advantage of the Marine Corps Reserve over the our Army counterparts (correct me if I am wrong) but when new equipment is fielded to the Corps, equipment is alloted to the Marine Forces Reserve, though we are last in line, we will see the equipment within 2 years of the Active duty force. Take for the example 2 1/2 ton trucks that the USR/ NG operate rather than being fully fielded the FMTV, while we have had our full complement of the 7 ton trucks for quite some time now, and everything equipment fielding plan I have seen, every piece of equipment fielded to the Marine Corps has always had allocations for the Marine Corps Reserves. Having equipment and training commonality with our active duty counterparts, allows for easy transistions for individual augmentations, and complete unit deployments.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
sounds about right to me.
Cda, not having been at war for a long time; our politicians and our CF leaders and budget considerations have resulted in the Reserves having to deal with (pooling of kit) and doing without some of the bells and whistles needed to get the job done.
Cda, not having been at war for a long time; our politicians and our CF leaders and budget considerations have resulted in the Reserves having to deal with (pooling of kit) and doing without some of the bells and whistles needed to get the job done.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
The Canadian Reserve system is not very well advertised.
The USNG has a better advertising campaign going on in Canada right now than the CF. Pick up a Popular Science or Popular Mechanics magazine and there are a half dozen adds for the US military. I hear adds on the US radio stations and see them on TV a couple of times an hour for all branches. These adds are selling the benefits of joining, not a multi cultural group holding hands without a weapon in sight.
I remember the last Radio spot my Brigade paid for, well actually I don't because like most people young enough to be soldiers I do not listen to AM Talk Radio so I missed it. They were concerned about the public perception if they advertised on a rock station. If the Regs want fleshed out Reserve Units to draw troops from they really need to take the handcuffs of of our recruiting efforts and push funds down to the Unit level where there some boots on the ground.
Just my two cents
The USNG has a better advertising campaign going on in Canada right now than the CF. Pick up a Popular Science or Popular Mechanics magazine and there are a half dozen adds for the US military. I hear adds on the US radio stations and see them on TV a couple of times an hour for all branches. These adds are selling the benefits of joining, not a multi cultural group holding hands without a weapon in sight.
I remember the last Radio spot my Brigade paid for, well actually I don't because like most people young enough to be soldiers I do not listen to AM Talk Radio so I missed it. They were concerned about the public perception if they advertised on a rock station. If the Regs want fleshed out Reserve Units to draw troops from they really need to take the handcuffs of of our recruiting efforts and push funds down to the Unit level where there some boots on the ground.
Just my two cents
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
Gunnerlove said:
I heard a Canadian Reserve commerical on the radio a few months back, as I was driving through St Catherines. Honestly, if more people just came to the schools and explained what its all about.. It works at my school.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
ShawnSmith said:
I agree they need more people comming in to schools i know that when they did send people in they had more students apply
Similar threads
