The General Hillier Years. The Merged Superthread
- Thread starter bossi
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
It's about time someone tipped the boat over and Let the Liberals know exactly what idiots they are!!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Well, I listened to Hillier's speech (as much as CTV covered that is) and certainly did not get a sense of the CDS being a Tory prop.
Perhaps it is our overall Canadian mentality of seeing our nation run by leaders who come from the safer environments of law, economics, business and finance as opposed to that of the USA, where for the most part, their leaders have served the country first through their military careers followed by their service to the public in politics. When our leaders speak, we are used to the cozy words of nation building, economic prosperity, equality and other warm fuzzy, make everyone feel good catch phrases. American leaders speak in terms of military doctrine, figthing the good fight, and draw upon the frontiership and independence that forged their nation. When we hear a leader such as Hillier in Canada, speak outside the cozy, warm fuzzy language of unity, mosaic and fiscal restraint and use language often seen in American leadership, we criticise. We criticise because we aren't used to our leadership coming from the position of leading men and women into combat. We, as a nation would rather have benign lawyers and economists as our leaders whose only inspiration to lead is the current Bank of Canada rate and where we are on the deficit scale.
Of course Hillier is going to be criticised by the mainstream politician, those same men and women who left the comfortable offices of Bay Street or the former careers as car salesmen, hockey players or shipping magnates. Those men and women, who have never had to ask a young kid to die for their country or the husband and father to come home broken and maimed because they asked him to fight a fight they themselves would never dream of doing. Those same men and women who after they tire of playing the "people's representative" can go safely back to their 44th floor office on Bay Street and never again have to think about what they asked of their fellow Canadians to sacrifice in the name of democracy.
Yes, it's easy to criticise a General who every day has to ask of the men and women who serve their country under his direction to step up to the plate and if need be, sacrifice themselves in the name of democracy. It's easy for those elected men and women who have no other concern except partisan politics, to call a leader of men and women - a prop. It's easy to lash out at the leader who, on his watch has lost men and women when one never has to face the grieving families and can remain safely absconded in a constituency office on the margin of reality.
I believe we as a nation, are the cusp of change in the way we see leadership. No longer are those who have traditionally lead our country, blindly followed. The constituents have tired of the bland, morally vacant, ethically bankrupt, talking heads we have elected to lead us in the past. Times have changed from when a golf pro could lead a province or a well connected, businessperson could just buy enough votes with promises. I believe we are a nation seeking a change to the style of leadership and Rick Hillier is the epitome of that vision for the moment. Those in power know it and fear it because they can't come within a fraction to what Hillier is doing and all they can do to respond is to criticise him and call him names. Hillier has unwittingly upped the ante of political leadership and the back benchers, hangers on and those who wistfully yearn for greater power don't like it one iota.
I believe that in the future, we will see more Rick Hilliers on the campaign trails, we'll see men and women who have served their country in uniform running for office and less of the vapid talking head. Like the States, I believe the our electorate wants to see proven leadership and that will show itself through military/police experience.
So yes, after listening to Hillier's speech I can see why people like Coderre have nothing to say except to name call. I mean do we really expect anything more these days from our politicians? Coderre is staring the new style of leadership in the face in Hillier, and Hillier is a tough act to follow.
Perhaps it is our overall Canadian mentality of seeing our nation run by leaders who come from the safer environments of law, economics, business and finance as opposed to that of the USA, where for the most part, their leaders have served the country first through their military careers followed by their service to the public in politics. When our leaders speak, we are used to the cozy words of nation building, economic prosperity, equality and other warm fuzzy, make everyone feel good catch phrases. American leaders speak in terms of military doctrine, figthing the good fight, and draw upon the frontiership and independence that forged their nation. When we hear a leader such as Hillier in Canada, speak outside the cozy, warm fuzzy language of unity, mosaic and fiscal restraint and use language often seen in American leadership, we criticise. We criticise because we aren't used to our leadership coming from the position of leading men and women into combat. We, as a nation would rather have benign lawyers and economists as our leaders whose only inspiration to lead is the current Bank of Canada rate and where we are on the deficit scale.
Of course Hillier is going to be criticised by the mainstream politician, those same men and women who left the comfortable offices of Bay Street or the former careers as car salesmen, hockey players or shipping magnates. Those men and women, who have never had to ask a young kid to die for their country or the husband and father to come home broken and maimed because they asked him to fight a fight they themselves would never dream of doing. Those same men and women who after they tire of playing the "people's representative" can go safely back to their 44th floor office on Bay Street and never again have to think about what they asked of their fellow Canadians to sacrifice in the name of democracy.
Yes, it's easy to criticise a General who every day has to ask of the men and women who serve their country under his direction to step up to the plate and if need be, sacrifice themselves in the name of democracy. It's easy for those elected men and women who have no other concern except partisan politics, to call a leader of men and women - a prop. It's easy to lash out at the leader who, on his watch has lost men and women when one never has to face the grieving families and can remain safely absconded in a constituency office on the margin of reality.
I believe we as a nation, are the cusp of change in the way we see leadership. No longer are those who have traditionally lead our country, blindly followed. The constituents have tired of the bland, morally vacant, ethically bankrupt, talking heads we have elected to lead us in the past. Times have changed from when a golf pro could lead a province or a well connected, businessperson could just buy enough votes with promises. I believe we are a nation seeking a change to the style of leadership and Rick Hillier is the epitome of that vision for the moment. Those in power know it and fear it because they can't come within a fraction to what Hillier is doing and all they can do to respond is to criticise him and call him names. Hillier has unwittingly upped the ante of political leadership and the back benchers, hangers on and those who wistfully yearn for greater power don't like it one iota.
I believe that in the future, we will see more Rick Hilliers on the campaign trails, we'll see men and women who have served their country in uniform running for office and less of the vapid talking head. Like the States, I believe the our electorate wants to see proven leadership and that will show itself through military/police experience.
So yes, after listening to Hillier's speech I can see why people like Coderre have nothing to say except to name call. I mean do we really expect anything more these days from our politicians? Coderre is staring the new style of leadership in the face in Hillier, and Hillier is a tough act to follow.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
A post at The Torch:
National Defence critic is Liberal with the truth/Feuding at Fort Ottawa?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/national-defence-critic-is-liberal-with.html
Mark
Ottawa
National Defence critic is Liberal with the truth/Feuding at Fort Ottawa?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/national-defence-critic-is-liberal-with.html
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
If anyone is interested in letting Dennis know he is offside, drop him a message. I did. Don't forget to mention that what General Hillier said is a matter of public record.
http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/comments.asp?lang=en
http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/comments.asp?lang=en
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Bob Terwilliger: Suggested he read the post at The Torch mentioned above. Thanks for tip.
Mark
Ottawa
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
Bob Terwilliger said:
Beat ya too it.
Sent a zinger his way yesterday, Boy I am beginning to hate that man.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
In addition to asking Codierre for a public apology, I asked him when exactly his party planned on paying back the Sponsonrship money.
A
aesop081
Guest
Bob Terwilliger said:
IF you get an answer to that one, i would love to see it
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
cdnaviator said:
I sent him one too and ended with "the only reason you are offended is because the truth hurts."
Think he'll read it??
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I'm weighing in a little late on this; I only saw the story on Yahoo Canada news about an hour ago. Anyway, I sent dear Denis my thoughts in a gentle missive as well. You know, when really all you want to say to someone is STFU, it really is a struggle to word things politely. I did however.
*****
the comments reported in today's news by Denis Coderre, regarding General Hillier, the CDS, are completely inappropriate and out of line.
The men and women of the Canadian Forces are performing a dangerous mission in Afghanistan. They have been forced to operate in a "catch-up" mode, because of decades of neglect by successive governments. Make no mistake about it, as a former soldier myself, I am all too aware of what party was in government during most of those years.
Gen. Hillier's comments did not directly name the Liberal government of the day, but the collective guilty conscience of your party prompted you to speak out against him. I suggest that--given the dismal failure of former liberal governments to maintain an even remotely adequate level of support for the Canadian Forces--you keep quiet.
Gen Hillier is the first CDS I have seen since JA Dextrase to work hard on behalf of his soldiers. Too many of Gen Hillier's predecessors have been more concerned about making political brownie points, at the expense of their soldiers. You, as the defence critic should appreciate that the CF as a whole is benefiting from the current "can-do" attitude of Gen Hillier.
You owe the man an apology for your remarks, just as your party generally owes an apology to every soldier who served during those "dark years"--myself included.
*****
As an aside, I'm not even sure I can entirely rate JADex as a "great" CDS, but considering the likes of others, (and I won't mention any names, but we all know I'm talking about the guy who single-handedly disarmed the IRA), he was a prince. Come to think of it, the guy did a pretty good job of disarming the CF too.
*****
the comments reported in today's news by Denis Coderre, regarding General Hillier, the CDS, are completely inappropriate and out of line.
The men and women of the Canadian Forces are performing a dangerous mission in Afghanistan. They have been forced to operate in a "catch-up" mode, because of decades of neglect by successive governments. Make no mistake about it, as a former soldier myself, I am all too aware of what party was in government during most of those years.
Gen. Hillier's comments did not directly name the Liberal government of the day, but the collective guilty conscience of your party prompted you to speak out against him. I suggest that--given the dismal failure of former liberal governments to maintain an even remotely adequate level of support for the Canadian Forces--you keep quiet.
Gen Hillier is the first CDS I have seen since JA Dextrase to work hard on behalf of his soldiers. Too many of Gen Hillier's predecessors have been more concerned about making political brownie points, at the expense of their soldiers. You, as the defence critic should appreciate that the CF as a whole is benefiting from the current "can-do" attitude of Gen Hillier.
You owe the man an apology for your remarks, just as your party generally owes an apology to every soldier who served during those "dark years"--myself included.
*****
As an aside, I'm not even sure I can entirely rate JADex as a "great" CDS, but considering the likes of others, (and I won't mention any names, but we all know I'm talking about the guy who single-handedly disarmed the IRA), he was a prince. Come to think of it, the guy did a pretty good job of disarming the CF too.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I sent him a polite snotgram, if he even reads them..
Mr. Coderre, after reading your comments on our CDS, Gen Hillier i must say you probably have never served in uniform, have you? Because if you had, you would have a much different view on what he said. I'm a former soldier, 23 years i spent in the forces and i can say without hesitation that from 1993 to when i retired in 2001, was the bleakest, darkest time for the CF. This as you know when the Liberals were in power. Your party had no qualms about taking hundred's on millions of our dollars and squandering it on a wistfull sponsorship fiasco, and keeping it a secret from the Canadian people. So i don't think your qualified morally or ethically to criticise Gen Hillier's character, because by no means do you ever hope to be in the same league as the CDS.
I was once a Liberal supporter. But when they were elected into power in 1993 and promised the military a better future and then suddenly did a complete about face and forgot about us, well my support as well as many others went to other parties.
As you may know there is a large retired military population in this country and we all have very long memories. We are tickled pink that the truth is finally getting out to the public on what the Liberal party did to our once proud military. So i hope you enjoy your seat on the opposition side of the house because, that's were the Liberal party will be for the for seeable future. As for Gen Hilliers comments, they are a matter of public record and he was just stating the obvious.
Mr. Coderre, after reading your comments on our CDS, Gen Hillier i must say you probably have never served in uniform, have you? Because if you had, you would have a much different view on what he said. I'm a former soldier, 23 years i spent in the forces and i can say without hesitation that from 1993 to when i retired in 2001, was the bleakest, darkest time for the CF. This as you know when the Liberals were in power. Your party had no qualms about taking hundred's on millions of our dollars and squandering it on a wistfull sponsorship fiasco, and keeping it a secret from the Canadian people. So i don't think your qualified morally or ethically to criticise Gen Hillier's character, because by no means do you ever hope to be in the same league as the CDS.
I was once a Liberal supporter. But when they were elected into power in 1993 and promised the military a better future and then suddenly did a complete about face and forgot about us, well my support as well as many others went to other parties.
As you may know there is a large retired military population in this country and we all have very long memories. We are tickled pink that the truth is finally getting out to the public on what the Liberal party did to our once proud military. So i hope you enjoy your seat on the opposition side of the house because, that's were the Liberal party will be for the for seeable future. As for Gen Hilliers comments, they are a matter of public record and he was just stating the obvious.
Yrys
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 430
Biography of D. Coderre and infos for contact :
http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/biography.asp?lang=en
http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/ProfileMP.aspx?Key=79018&Language=E
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Coderre
No army. He doesn't seem to have do anything except study, works in radio,
works in poloitics.
http://www.deniscoderre.parl.gc.ca/biography.asp?lang=en
http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/ProfileMP.aspx?Key=79018&Language=E
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Coderre
No army. He doesn't seem to have do anything except study, works in radio,
works in pol
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Having read those well worded and articulated emails that have been sent to Mr.Coderre, I thought of what impact these emails would have on the Canadian public if they were sent to " Letters to the Editor" section of the Ottawa newspapers.
This would leave no doubt in anyones mind that the CF(former,present and future) is totally behind their CDS.
This would leave no doubt in anyones mind that the CF(former,present and future) is totally behind their CDS.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I did just that, I sent a copy of the letter I wrote Coderre to the editors of the Ottawa citizen and Globe and mail.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
A letter sent to the National Post on Saturday:
'Denis Coderre certainly does not seem up to the job as Liberal National Defence critic. According to this story, "Coderre labels Hillier a Tory party 'prop'" (Feb. 17):
"Mr. Coderre...pointed out the Liberals had a comprehensive plan to replace military aircraft and other equipment, including the Hercules air transport fleet...
The only difference between the Liberal and Conservative plans, he said, was that the Liberal plan did not include a $3.4 billion purchase of four C-17 Globemaster long-distance transport planes..."
M. Coderre does not appear to know either what the Liberal government--of which he was part--did, or what the Conservative government has announced it will do.
In November, 2005, then Minister of National Defence Bill Graham proposed the acquisition of tactical transport aircraft (Hercules replacement), heavy-lift helicopters, and fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft. The government however only agreed to the acquisition of the Hercules replacement.
On the other hand, last year the Conservative government announced it would purchase strategic transport aircraft (C-17s, now CC-177 for Canadian service--M. Coderre take note), the Hercules replacement, heavy-lift helicopters, Joint Supply Ships, and trucks for the army.
So, pace M. Coderre, there is a vast difference between what the Liberals in fact were planning to buy and what the Conservatives are doing. Indeed there are also very significant differences between Mr Graham's larger (rejected) plan and the Conservatives'. The only common elements are the Hercules replacement and heavy-lift helicopters.
Meanwhile, Don Martin writes the same day in "War among generals a deadly distraction" that "Retired general O'Connor used to be Hillier's boss, but fell just short in his dream of reaching the top spot in the military's command..."
Hardly. MInister O'Connor's highest rank was Brigadier-General. After that the ranks of Major-General and Lieutenant-General must be achieved before one gets to Canada's only full General position, Chief of the Defence Staff.'
Pity about Mark Martin, no pity for Phil.
Mark
Ottawa
'Denis Coderre certainly does not seem up to the job as Liberal National Defence critic. According to this story, "Coderre labels Hillier a Tory party 'prop'" (Feb. 17):
"Mr. Coderre...pointed out the Liberals had a comprehensive plan to replace military aircraft and other equipment, including the Hercules air transport fleet...
The only difference between the Liberal and Conservative plans, he said, was that the Liberal plan did not include a $3.4 billion purchase of four C-17 Globemaster long-distance transport planes..."
M. Coderre does not appear to know either what the Liberal government--of which he was part--did, or what the Conservative government has announced it will do.
In November, 2005, then Minister of National Defence Bill Graham proposed the acquisition of tactical transport aircraft (Hercules replacement), heavy-lift helicopters, and fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft. The government however only agreed to the acquisition of the Hercules replacement.
On the other hand, last year the Conservative government announced it would purchase strategic transport aircraft (C-17s, now CC-177 for Canadian service--M. Coderre take note), the Hercules replacement, heavy-lift helicopters, Joint Supply Ships, and trucks for the army.
So, pace M. Coderre, there is a vast difference between what the Liberals in fact were planning to buy and what the Conservatives are doing. Indeed there are also very significant differences between Mr Graham's larger (rejected) plan and the Conservatives'. The only common elements are the Hercules replacement and heavy-lift helicopters.
Meanwhile, Don Martin writes the same day in "War among generals a deadly distraction" that "Retired general O'Connor used to be Hillier's boss, but fell just short in his dream of reaching the top spot in the military's command..."
Hardly. MInister O'Connor's highest rank was Brigadier-General. After that the ranks of Major-General and Lieutenant-General must be achieved before one gets to Canada's only full General position, Chief of the Defence Staff.'
Pity about Mark Martin, no pity for Phil.
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
good letter...BZ 
Is Hillier out of line?
February 20, 2007 Michael Byers TheStar.com
Article Link
Chief of defence is playing a highly unusual public role in promoting the mission in Afghanistan, even bypassing the defence minister to deal directly with the Prime Minister
Canada's mission in Afghanistan is failing and Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier deserves much of the blame.
Since becoming Canada's top soldier two years ago, Hillier has pushed the politicians hard. At his own swearing-in ceremony, he criticized Paul Martin for underfunding the military; one month later, he browbeat the Liberal cabinet into volunteering troops for a combat mission to Kandahar.
Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited. So far, 44 soldiers have lost their lives. Hillier, the professional upon whose expertise the politicians relied, should have explained the real risks to them.
The Martin government also assumed Canada would contribute to the combat mission for a limited time only. But Hillier changed his tune shortly after Stephen Harper was elected: "From NATO's perspective, they look at this as a 10-year mission, right? Minimum. There's going to be a huge demand for Canada to contribute over the longer period of time."
Hillier promised Martin that the combat mission would not preclude Canadian participation in UN peacekeeping missions elsewhere. He's since broken that promise, ruling out troops for Lebanon and Darfur on the basis that Canada is fully committed in Afghanistan.
We're experiencing a serious case of "mission creep."
Under Hillier's leadership, Canada's role in Kandahar has morphed from a "provincial reconstruction team" made up of soldiers, diplomats and development personnel, into a "battle group" supported by Leopard tanks.
More on link
February 20, 2007 Michael Byers TheStar.com
Article Link
Chief of defence is playing a highly unusual public role in promoting the mission in Afghanistan, even bypassing the defence minister to deal directly with the Prime Minister
Canada's mission in Afghanistan is failing and Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier deserves much of the blame.
Since becoming Canada's top soldier two years ago, Hillier has pushed the politicians hard. At his own swearing-in ceremony, he criticized Paul Martin for underfunding the military; one month later, he browbeat the Liberal cabinet into volunteering troops for a combat mission to Kandahar.
Then-prime minister Martin and his ministers assumed Canadian casualties would be limited. So far, 44 soldiers have lost their lives. Hillier, the professional upon whose expertise the politicians relied, should have explained the real risks to them.
The Martin government also assumed Canada would contribute to the combat mission for a limited time only. But Hillier changed his tune shortly after Stephen Harper was elected: "From NATO's perspective, they look at this as a 10-year mission, right? Minimum. There's going to be a huge demand for Canada to contribute over the longer period of time."
Hillier promised Martin that the combat mission would not preclude Canadian participation in UN peacekeeping missions elsewhere. He's since broken that promise, ruling out troops for Lebanon and Darfur on the basis that Canada is fully committed in Afghanistan.
We're experiencing a serious case of "mission creep."
Under Hillier's leadership, Canada's role in Kandahar has morphed from a "provincial reconstruction team" made up of soldiers, diplomats and development personnel, into a "battle group" supported by Leopard tanks.
More on link
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,346
- Points
- 1,010
He supposively browbeat the liberals into the current combat mission? Is this going to be the liberals excuse when people point out that they started this mission in A-stan?
I highly doubt there has ever been a Primie Minister that cringed and did what the CDS wants.
This complete left wing bullsh*t.
General Hillier is da man 
I highly doubt there has ever been a Primie Minister that cringed and did what the CDS wants.
This complete left wing bullsh*t.
General Hillier is da man
1
17thRecceSgt
Guest
+1.
Hopefully the CDS will ignore crap like this in print and soldier on.
Hopefully the CDS will ignore crap like this in print and soldier on.
Similar threads
