PM's New Bde of Peacekeepers (5,000 new soldiers), could it be a SOC Light Force?

[paracowboy]

we have ships that don't float, planes that don't fly, tanks that aren't, and can't keep our line troops upmanned and trained, and these clowns are tellin' us we're gettin' an Airborne Regiment again?
Yeah.
We can't keep our trained personnel in conventional line units, and we're going to increase our "SpecOps" units?
Yeah.
We have helos that can't carry a section into battle, and we're gonna get an "Air Cav"?
Yeah.

Call me bitter and jaded, but I ain't buyin' into any of this. Howzabout we focus on re-building our conventional units, Air Force, and Navy to a level where they're effective for more than handin' out toothbrushes first. All this crap is doin', is puttin' a band-aid on a cancer patient.

 

[McG]

these clowns are tellin' us we're gettin' an Airborne Regiment again?

The only person that seems to have used the term â Å“Airborne Regimentâ ? is Scott Taylor.  Who are the clowns you've gotten so angry with?

It could be that this elite light battalion would be one of the existing light battalions.  I'd still like to see all the light battalions grouped together (as proposed earlier in this thread).  Such a  Cdo Bde would be able to support the SF pers and/or fill traditional light tasks.

 

[Infanteer]

Wouldn't a revived "Commando Unit" be Tier III, equivalent to the US Rangers?

 

[McG]

paracowboy,
You seem angry with the entire defence policy that was issued on 19 Apr 05.  Give it a quick read:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/reports/dps/main/toc_e.asp

Then post your thoughts with the rest of ours:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/29787.0.html

The rest of the CF's problems aside, this light force would be a positive step to our future.

 

[tomahawk6]

It wouldnt take alot to activate the CAR. There are already 3 airborne companies. You would need to stand up replacement companies as well as a CAR HHC and combat support company. If the new unit is to work with JTF then it would need to be based in Ontario. I think this is a positive development.

 

[paracowboy]

paracowboy,
You seem angry with the entire defence policy that was issued on 19 Apr 05.   Give it a quick read:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/reports/dps/main/toc_e.asp

I am.

Then post your thoughts with the rest of ours:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/29787.0.html

I haven't posted here, because I'd simply be reiterating a lot of other's posts.

The rest of the CF's problems aside, this light force would be a positive step to our future.

It certainly would, IF we had something to build on. It seems to me that we're trying to build a third story onto a house where the foundation is falling apart. Basement don't stay up, the whole house comes down.

And it finally sunk in. Did you think I was angry at any of the member's posts? If so (and this is for anyone who thought so, as well) I apologize. Lotta good stuff in both threads, and I wasn't calling any of the members here "clowns", by any stretch of the imagination. If anyone felt so, it wasn't intentional. That ain't the way I work.

 

[McG]

Did you think I was angry at any of the member's posts?

No.  Just with the Defence Policy.  I've addressed some of your points in that other thread.

 

[TCBF]

Okay troops, here we go again, for the umpteenth time, THERE WILL BE NO NEW PEACEKEEPING BRIGADE.

This info was released at the LFDTS Professional Development Seminar at Gagetown, Nov 2004.

We don't need new buildings with new office workers, we need to fill in the holes in the hollow units and formations that presently exist.  Ottawa realizes this. 

NO NEW BRIGADE!

OK?

 

[McG]

THERE WILL BE NO NEW PEACEKEEPING BRIGADE.

I think it is generally understood that this is the Army's position.  However, this does not mean there will be no new units.  It also does not mean that the creation of a new formation would be an inherently bad idea.

 

[TCBF]

If we stood down an old formation, and replaced it with a new one, that is one thing. But Canada is filled with cadres of people whose sole purpose in life is to ensure Defence spending does not mean Military spending. They would rather build new buildings than hire enough soldiers to fill out the hollow units we have garrisoned  in the buildings we already have.

 

[Haggis]

Ignore the poiticians and the media.  Anyone who's listened to what the CDS is saying will see exactly that.  No new units, enhanced (by numbers and equipment) exisiting units and more depth and breadth given to some units/elements (i.e Reserves).

THERE WILL BE NO NEW PEACEKEEPING BRIGADE.

Let's put this in perspective:  The "promise" of a peacekeeping brigade was an ELECTION PROMISE.  Regard this the same as promises from the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Great Pumpkin.

:'(

Apologies to anyone who still believes in The Bunny, Big Nick or a benevolent Thanksgiving dessert.

 

[McG]

I got the impression, from reading the Defence Policy, that we should expect new units and formations.   Okay, maybe I should not be writing in the plural, but it is in there (pg 13 holds an example).   However, some of this likely will be the re-organization of existing structures.

. . . and, an Army Bde is not one of the suggested new structures.

 

[Recce41]

OOOO to jump again, with a troop. I'd be one of the first fellos, to but their name in to be the Tp WO, if I can. Not too many of us around. I can only count 5  now WOs that have served in 1st Troop. 2 with JM, 1 with DZ/LZ.

:evil: :tank:

 

[TCBF]

Not to many of us around is right. And we ain't getting any younger either.;D

Tom

 

[Zipper]

Not to many of us around is right. And we ain't getting any younger either.;D

Tom

True. But you are getting crustier... :dontpanic:

 

[TCBF]

Guess they posted me to the right spot!

 

[Recce41]

5hit Tom
You looked so young in that bath, or may I say pool.
Dave :evil: :tank:

 

[TCBF]

Ah yes, the famous  6' diameter kiddie pool in the SW OP at Kandahar Airfield.  That photo haunts me still.

 

[McG]

Don't ya think that maybe, just maybe ... this [Trenton] might be an intriguing location for the campaign promise of a "new" 5,000 person Joint Brigade (... but, NEVER, EVER, EVER calling it the SSF ...)?

If the light battalions were grouped into a single bde that included all the elements necessary to support light and limited special forces ops, why not stick it in Pet where there is already infrastructure?

2 PPCLI could replace 3 PPCLI (which would move to Pet) in Edmonton, and 2 (or 3) CMBG would split itself between Shilo and Gagetown.  This would leave room for a "2 CLBG" or "SSF" in Pet.  2 RCHA would convert to a light regt to sp the light formation, and 1 RCHA would become responsible to sp 1 CMBG and 2 (or 3) CMBG (possible with the transfer of a sub unit + from 2 RCHA).  2 CER would convert to a light regt, and 4 ESR would be re-established as a CER.

 

[McG]

CANSOFCOM IS THE RECENTLY ANNOUNCED COMMAND WHICH WILL BRING TOGETHER EXISTING SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES UNDER A UNIFIED COMMAND AS WELL AS DEVELOP FUTURE SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES. ONE OF THESE FUTURE FORCES IS THE JOINT ACTION TASK FORCE. THIS HIGHLY TRAINED AND MOBILE BATTALION SIZED FORCE WILL SUPPORT SPECIAL OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES BOTH DOMESTICALLY AND ABROAD

This JATF would be an excellent 4th manouvre unit in the Li Bde described in this thread.  Additionally, such a grouping would allow for support to be attached from the li fd amb, li engr regt, etc.