SF: Lower profile = easier funding cut target?
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Let's dis-spell something right now so there is no confusion.
JTF X is owned by the Int branch HOWEVER there is a selection and course for this unit and it is open to any trade in the CF should you wish to look into it, but is is not a SOF unit
JTF X is owned by the Int branch HOWEVER there is a selection and course for this unit and it is open to any trade in the CF should you wish to look into it, but is is not a SOF unit
George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 184
- Points
- 710
BulletMagnet said:
You aren't dis-spelling anything, nor clearing up any confusion. You have added to it. JTF X is NOT owned by the INT Branch as are not all the other Sources that INT has. Infantry Recce Platoons are not owned by the INT Branch and they provide a lot of information as do snipers. Recce Sqns of the Armour units are not part of the INT Branch and they provide a lot of information as a 'Source'. UAVs are not owned by the INT Branch and look how they are often used as a 'Source' to gather info. EW is not owned by the INT Branch and again, they are a 'Source' who provide quite a bit of info. JTF X is a 'Source' as well, who provide info to INT, but are not OWNED by the INT Branch. Like PSYOPs, they are open to any Trade, but they are not INT.
- Reaction score
- 4,712
- Points
- 1,160
I think BM means that they report to CDI as their chain, not that they are solely int cap badges.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
JTF X reports to the CDI for their CoC.....
As you can see I said in my post they are open to any trade in the CF and have a selection process and course. Nowhere did I say they were INT simply that they were owned by them, which the are!
As you can see I said in my post they are open to any trade in the CF and have a selection process and course. Nowhere did I say they were INT simply that they were owned by them, which the are!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Old Sweat said:
I would disagree with that - there's a high level of individual training that eats up a lot of money.
However, you are right in that it is a small expense compared to the rest of the military; and has fewer people in high places to defend their costs, which makes them more vulnerable to budget cuts.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Old Sweat said:
Oh, Im sure many of the people at the top of the food chain know what the SOF does - they just dont see it as being very important. No amount of education will fix that.
I would venture that the few people at the top of the food chain who do know also consider the SOF as very important. In many cases they could be the people who decide to employ that resource on various tasks in the first place. To say any more would be speculation on my part, especially as I have been retired for over 16 years.Greymatters said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Well we cant really prove whether youre right or Im right unless we get one of them to try and answer the question - and thats unlikely to happen...
- Reaction score
- 22,058
- Points
- 1,360
Greymatters said:
I'm not fussed whether you or anyone thinks that either I or you are right.
The salient issue is that senior CF leadership is quite aware of the capabilities that SOF bring to the table, and that they are more than capable of appropriately judging the proper allocation of resources to keep critical activities of conventional and non-conventional forces alike, funded and properly maintained.
Perhaps, sir, you can reflect on your past statements a wee bit before letting loose with any other missives that put into question senior leadership's motives, attitudes and education. You were the one who questioned whether the leadership cares about SOF, or not. No, correction, you stated that they just don't see it as being important. Further more, you imply that no matter how they are educated, they won't care about SOF.
Greymatters said:
I believe that your statements characterizing senior CF leadership on the SOF issue are unfair, unwarranted and inappropriate.
Regards
G2G
- Reaction score
- 10,349
- Points
- 1,260
I can probably count the GOFOs on my two hands that "control the purse strings" and have an important role in the generation and employment of SOF (and other capabilities) for Canada's defence needs. I'm willing to bet the farm that they do not view that capability as unimportant.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
George Wallace said:
So, if the public affairs people are too imcompetant to sell beer on a trroopship, etc etc its the fault of the audience??? :
Less smoke and mirrors and endless puffery from Fort Fumble and the public might start tro get back onside
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Kalatzi,
You're post make little sense and I don't feel as though they contribute positively to the thread. Please put a bit more structure into your comments and maybe we can all work together to dis-spell any rumours or misconceptions that not only you, but others may have as well.
Bear
You're post make little sense and I don't feel as though they contribute positively to the thread. Please put a bit more structure into your comments and maybe we can all work together to dis-spell any rumours or misconceptions that not only you, but others may have as well.
Bear
- Reaction score
- 2,849
- Points
- 940
shhhhhhhBearW said:
Have you not noticed that the majority of opinion-holders here:
1. Have never served anywhere near CANSOFCOM
AND/OR
2. never dealt with strategic-level planning, with associated budgeting?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Journeyman,
Be that as it may, I'm in no way, shape or form above answering serious questions on most matters if i'm capable. I understand most are unfamiliar with CANSOF, as if they were-they would probably ask their pals at work instead of facing ridicule by certain members or certain message boards-though outside the scope of this thread. If any members have any serious questions(exhausted all other resources) with regards to matters pertaining to CANSOF they are more than welcome to message me.
I'm not trying to patronize anyone as i'm sure most subject matter experts in other fields would be more than willing to provide advice to folks around here if posed with any questions pertaining to their specific fields... not that i probably needed to say that but...
Bear
Be that as it may, I'm in no way, shape or form above answering serious questions on most matters if i'm capable. I understand most are unfamiliar with CANSOF, as if they were-they would probably ask their pals at work instead of facing ridicule by certain members or certain message boards-though outside the scope of this thread. If any members have any serious questions(exhausted all other resources) with regards to matters pertaining to CANSOF they are more than welcome to message me.
I'm not trying to patronize anyone as i'm sure most subject matter experts in other fields would be more than willing to provide advice to folks around here if posed with any questions pertaining to their specific fields... not that i probably needed to say that but...
Bear
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
What I find interesting is that even if they cut CANSOF's budget at the individual level there would be little noticed change I am sure. I mean how many pointy end guys can there be?
I highly suspect that training would be little effected and things such as ammo and kit there would be no change. Might mean a few less jammy conferences for the brass and such but I doubt very much that at the troop level anyone would really notice that much.
That being said CANSOF's budget is rather black (ish) so who really knows how much money they get anyway....
I highly suspect that training would be little effected and things such as ammo and kit there would be no change. Might mean a few less jammy conferences for the brass and such but I doubt very much that at the troop level anyone would really notice that much.
That being said CANSOF's budget is rather black (ish) so who really knows how much money they get anyway....
Similar threads
