'Demilitarization' of University Campus

[[RICE]]

I wasn't exactly sure where to put this, and I figured this was the safest place.

A student here at uOttawa who is running for BOA Social Sciences wants to 'demilitarize' the campus by barring Canadian Forces Recruiters, posters and any other such things. Having read his 'reasons' for this, I was immediately drawn to his weak argument and errors. http://cjsymons.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html

I wrote this response, but I would first like for you guys to suggest changes and perhaps correct misinformation on my own part. Also, feel free to post a comment on his blog.



My idea goes as follows:
"The amount of misinformation is disgusting; not to mention how you treat someone with a differing opinion. I wonder how you'd act if you did get elected.

Firstly, learn about the Armed Forces. Officer (those who hold UNIVERSITY degrees) DO NOT do the fighting. Sure, there are instances where they must defend themselves, but that is uncommon. 7 out of 108 causalities in Afghanistan were officers.

Second, training is done during the summer, and therefore, there is no training done during the summer. I see no reason why anyone would have to drop out of university.

Third, there is large variety of occupational positions within the officer ranks, and only 2 deal with combat; Armour and Infantry. Artillery is also a Combat Arms trade, but provides indirect fire support. All other trades provide support for the Combat Arms. Generally, these trades require much more education.

I would really like to know where you pull your examples from, as there are too many questionable examples you've provided."

 

[HItorMiss]

My idea goes as follows:
"The amount of misinformation is disgusting; not to mention how you treat someone with a differing opinion. I wonder how you'd act if you did get elected.

Firstly, learn about the Canadian Forces. The majority of officer do not participate in direct combat, there are howevere instances where they must defend themselves and there troops. 7 out of 108 causalities in Afghanistan were officers.

Second, training is done during the summer, and therefore, there is no training done during the school semester. I see no reason why anyone would have to drop out of university.

Third, there is large variety of occupational positions within the officer ranks, and only 3 deal with direct combat; Armour, Infantry and Combat Engineer. Artillery is also a Combat Arms trade, but provides indirect fire support to those in direct combat. All other trades provide logistics and support for the Combat Arms. Generally, these trades require much more education.

I would really like to know where you pull your examples from, as there are too many questionable examples you've provided."

I have changed your above reply to be more accurate in it's repressentation of the CF, Also some minor changes to statements.

 

[[RICE]]

Thank you kind sir, I appreciate your input.

 

[GDawg]

Good thing you ran it past us, your reply is rife with errors.

1. Officers do in fact fight.

2. Your third sentence makes no sense.

3. Combat Engineers are part of the combat arms. They have officers too.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I wasn't exactly sure where to put this, and I figured this was the safest place.

A student here at uOttawa who is running for BOA Social Sciences wants to 'demilitarize' the campus by barring Canadian Forces Recruiters, posters and any other such things. Having read his 'reasons' for this, I was immediately drawn to his weak argument and errors. http://cjsymons.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html

I wrote this response, but I would first like for you guys to suggest changes and perhaps correct misinformation on my own part. Also, feel free to post a comment on his blog.



My idea goes as follows:
"The amount of misinformation is disgusting; not to mention how you treat someone with a differing opinion. I wonder how you'd act if you did get elected.

Firstly, learn about the Armed Forces. Officer (those who hold UNIVERSITY degrees) DO NOT do the fighting.  incorrect, the reason there are fewer officer casualties is because there are proportionally fewer officers than ORs     Sure, there are instances where they must defend themselves, but that is uncommon. 7 out of 108 causalities in Afghanistan were officers.

Second, training is done during the summer, and therefore, there is no training done during the summer. I see no reason why anyone would have to drop out of university. huh?
 
Third, there is large variety of occupational positions within the officer ranks, and only 2 deal with combat; Armour and Infantry. Artillery is also a Combat Arms trade, but provides indirect fire support.and the engineers do what, other tham make sure the toilets are working and the AC in KAF can keep up?  All other trades provide support for the Combat Arms. Generally, these trades require much more education.

I would really like to know where you pull your examples from, as there are too many questionable examples you've provided."

 

[HItorMiss]

I am not a sir...just a dude like most people.

Kat, I would argue that even the majority of officers even combat arms one don't actually see direct combat, but they do and that statistically you are however correct there are more OR's then officers however that OR's do find themselves in more precarious situations then officers simply because they do the fighting (it's their job) and the Officers lead (that's their job) when the officer is sucked into the individual fight he is often no longer looking at the bigger picture and the whole battle space.

 

[kratz]

You are talking about the CF? I'm sure that pilots can shot and MARS Officers give the order to shot as well. So there are more than 2-3 trades on the pointy end. There are also a large number of NCMs who are university educated these days as well.

 

[George Wallace]

Combat Arms:  Armour and Infantry

Combat Support: Engineers and Artillery

Combat Service Support:  INT, LOG, EME, SIGs, MPs, etc.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I know BM, I was just simplifying, as the OP seemed under the impression that the Os don't get into the shit at all.

 

[GDawg]

Also, don't forget the FOOs. I'm not in the Artillery, but I sure as hell wouldn't slag 'em! Can't leave the patrol base without one of them!

 

[[RICE]]

Please excuse my own errors, as I have no experience in the forces and I wish to make sure I present factual information.

In my third sentence, I meant to say "Second, training is done during the summer, and therefore, there is no training done during the school year. I see no reason why anyone would have to drop out of university." In response to his claim that training could force you out of university.

I am not a sir...just a dude like most people.

I meant it in terms of respect rather than rank

I know BM, I was just simplifying, as the OP seemed under the impression that the Os don't get into the shit at all.

Not so much that they don't fight, but that they aren't the ones doing the bulk of the fighting

 

[HItorMiss]

Kat roger totaly tracking.


GW current classification of Combat arms includes Arty and Chimos

CS is now those like Int and Medic

 

[chris_log]

For one who is trying to correct incorrect information, your article is rife with errors to the extent that it in no way properly represents the CF.

- Officers do 'fight'
- Officers aren't the only ones with degrees (minus RMC, most of the CF members who are students are NCMs)
- Your use of casualty counts to show how 'safe' officer jobs are is insulting to those who died, both commissioned and non-commissioned

When trying to defend the CF to university students, as appealing as the argument may seem, trying to show how many people DON'T fight (in your view) is insulting (to those of us in your so called 'safe' jobs) at best and idiotic at worst.

I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I think you'd be better off sticking to what you know. In other words, talk about issues like freedom of information and speech, access to job opportunities, talk about how the CF can help pay for your schooling etc.

Are you a CF member yourself, or a 'concerned citizen'? If you are a CF member, for god's sake you should know better. If you aren't, good on you for coming here seeking a review of your letter.

 

[chris_log]

Looks like I got in a little late, had to hit 'post' five times before it would show up due to that 'warning, someone has replied etc etc' warning that pops up.

Also, for the original poster....this kind of stuff is 'old hat' on universities across Canada. It's heyday was a few years ago but every now and then it pops up, like on your campus.

 

[GDawg]

Combat Arms:  Armour and Infantry

Combat Support: Engineers and Artillery

Combat Service Support:  INT, LOG, EME, SIGs, MPs, etc.

Unless you're being sarcastic or boastful, my understanding was:

Combat Arms: Infantry, Armour, Engineers, Artillery
Combat Support: Medics, Sigs
CSS: The rest

 

[George Wallace]

I am not a sir...just a dude like most people.

Kat, I would argue that even the majority of officers even combat arms one don't actually see direct combat, ........

Armour officers command tanks in battle.  Infantry officers command Platoons and Coys in Battle.  Artillery and Engineer officers acting as FOO/FACs and Engr support operate in the battle zone.

 

[[RICE]]

For one who is trying to correct incorrect information, your article is rife with errors to the extent that it in no way properly represents the CF.

- Officers do 'fight'
- Officers aren't the only ones with degrees (minus RMC, most of the CF members who are students are NCMs)
- Your use of casualty counts to show how 'safe' officer jobs are is insulting to those who died, both commissioned and non-commissioned

When trying to defend the CF to university students, as appealing as the argument may seem, trying to show how many people DON'T fight (in your view) is insulting (to those of us in your so called 'safe' jobs) at best and idiotic at worst.

I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I think you'd be better off sticking to what you know. In other words, talk about issues like freedom of information and speech, access to job opportunities, talk about how the CF can help pay for your schooling etc.

Are you a CF member yourself, or a 'concerned citizen'? If you are a CF member, for god's sake you should know better. If you aren't, good on you for coming here seeking a review of your letter.

Thanks, and I must apologize as that is not what I indented (not just to you, but to all). Technically, I'm a concerned citizen with an application for the CF and I only have what's at my finger tips; I figured you guys would be my most powerful resource. And I don't think of you as a jerk by any mean, I understand my immense lack of CF knowledge.

 

[[RICE]]

Also, the reason why I stayed away from the arguments you suggested is because he condemns
the military entirely:


"Too often, they die far away from home for an oil pipeline.It's really no secret that recruiters come to campus entirely because we're so vulnerable, we so want a hand that will pull us out of this mess we didn't create. They come to campus to take advantage of us. It's called the poverty draft.So a viscious feedback loop emerges. Students live in poverty to get an education, accumulating debt the whole time, because there's not enough money going to them or to post-secondary education. There's not enough money going to post-secondary education because it's all going to the military. The military comes to campus where students are impoverished to recruit them. The military gets more money that's taken away from post-secondary education. All the while, people die in an unpopular imperialist adventure." -CJ Symons

 

[Michael OLeary]

It must be a graduate level misinformation degree he's pursuing.

 

[[RICE]]

"The reality, though, is that recruiters often omit important information - risk of exposure to depleted uranium, likelihood of deployment/death in Afghanistan, the interest on tuition subsidies paid by those who do not complete their four-year commitment. They do it, and they do it here to take advantage of our percarious economic circumstances."

Don't MARS officers tell you all these things?
Also, what are the 'risks of exposure to depleted uranium'?