To be or not to be Royal...that is the question.

[Ex-Dragoon]

still see young sailors occasionally who have RCN tattooed on them.  There must be a reason for that.

You also see young sailors get the Union Jack, the British Bulldog, and the skull and crossbones tattooed on them as well. That does not mean they want to be British or pirates. It boils down to a name, a name that does not exist anymore but in history, that you hold very important to you and I do not.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

And yet we all have time to come here and argue about it....  Obviously the Service can afford the discussion without collapsing for lack of staff time and resources.

I don't really see your point...

 

[Neill McKay]

I don't really see your point...

So far your best argument has been that we have bigger things to worry about than the name of the navy or similar ceremonial issues.  As I've said before, it need not be an either/or situation: concern for the intangibles of the service doesn't come at the expense of the pointy end.

 

[RangerRay]

I believe it was Mark Steyn who said:

Canada is the only country that celebrates its heritage by dismantling it.

Or some such thing.

 

[Gino]

I believe it was Mark Steyn who said:

Or some such thing.

He also said about Canada, "there are arguments for a monarchy and there are arguments for a republic, but there are no arguments for a monarchy run by snide little republican twerps inflicting one dreary, boorish slight on the Crown after another".  Sad but true.

 

[Gino]

You also see young sailors get the Union Jack, the British Bulldog, and the skull and crossbones tattooed on them as well. That does not mean they want to be British or pirates. It boils down to a name, a name that does not exist anymore but in history, that you hold very important to you and I do not.

Two completely different things.  The point is that these young lads are looking for a name for their service they can take pride in and other Canadians will understand and recognize.  Maritime Command just doesn't cut it.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

So far your best argument has been that we have bigger things to worry about than the name of the navy or similar ceremonial issues.  As I've said before, it need not be an either/or situation: concern for the intangibles of the service doesn't come at the expense of the pointy end.

Again and yet again I don't see tradition as important as operational, capability and morale. I am at the low end of the spectrum so I do see the morale issues that too much tradition causes. Especially the more anal forms of tradition. We are at a work hard mode but we don't get to play hard anymore, sorry you folks on your high horses can't see that.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Two completely different things.  The point is that these young lads are looking for a name for their service they can take pride in and other Canadians will understand and recognize.  Maritime Command just doesn't cut it.

\
Being part of the CF and Navy is what I take pride in, sorry you cannot.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

If we become the RCN again I will neither oppose nor support it, its just one of those things that happen.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

He also said about Canada, "there are arguments for a monarchy and there are arguments for a republic, but there are no arguments for a monarchy run by snide little republican twerps inflicting one dreary, boorish slight on the Crown after another".  Sad but true.

Who is Mark Steyn?

 

[rnkelly]

I am personally oppose to going back to the old "Royal" titles.  While I'm immensely proud of our history when we had these titles I believe that Canada is now in a position where our military should not be associated with the British.  Also just because the majority of the Forces' members speak english, it doesn't mean that they are English.  I think that point was missed by Gino with the anglophone post.  Perhaps it has to do with being the son of an Irishman but I see having "Royal" in front of the titles as appearing like we are just a division of the British which could be a dangerous appearance for us.

 

[Neill McKay]

I am at the low end of the spectrum so I do see the morale issues that too much tradition causes. Especially the more anal forms of tradition.

Can you tell us more about that?

 

[Neill McKay]

I am personally oppose to going back to the old "Royal" titles.  While I'm immensely proud of our history when we had these titles I believe that Canada is now in a position where our military should not be associated with the British.  Also just because the majority of the Forces' members speak english, it doesn't mean that they are English.  I think that point was missed by Gino with the anglophone post.  Perhaps it has to do with being the son of an Irishman but I see having "Royal" in front of the titles as appearing like we are just a division of the British which could be a dangerous appearance for us.

To understand why we think Royal is a good thing in Canada you have to understand that there is such a thing as a Queen of Canada.  The Queen of the UK is not the same thing -- they're two separate offices.  While the same individual holds both jobs (and fourteen or so others), Canada is constitutionally separate from the UK.  Having a Queen doesn't make us a colony, and there's nothing British about being Royal Canadian any more than there is about being Royal Norwegian.

Nor is it a language issue -- the Queen speaks French as well as English, and the Crown's institutions are bilingual.

 

[Gino]

\
Being part of the CF and Navy is what I take pride in, sorry you cannot.

I didn't say that, but I note you use the term Navy.  Is that what you tell people when they ask what you do?  If so, you're misleading them.  The Canadian Navy does not exist as a name in any legal sense.  I would like to see that change, and having our status as the Queen's service reflected with a "Royal" would be icing on the cake.

 

[Gino]

Can you tell us more about that?

Yes, from up on my high horse here I'd like to hear more about these useless, anal traditions that are impeding the Navy's operational effectiveness.  Have you raised your concerns with the chain of command?

 

[RangerRay]

Who is Mark Steyn?

http://steynonline.com/

He used to have a column with the National Post before the Aspers took over.  In Canada, he now has a column in Western Standard and Maclean's magazines.  He also writes for a number of other newspapers around the world.

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.cfm?page=home
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/article.jsp?content=20060213_121138_121138

Edit to add a thread from this board with a Mark Steyn article:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/40489.0/topicseen.html

 

[Trinity]

Two completely different things.  The point is that these young lads are looking for a name for their service they can take pride in and other Canadians will understand and recognize.  Maritime Command just doesn't cut it.

Ok.. I just read this ENTIRE thread... wondering what was so important.

From an outside, third person point of view of everything I just read.

Gino.. you have shot down other people's thoughts as opinions... and yet you throw your
opinion around like its gold.  Its just your opinion, like its just their opinion.

These young lads are looking for a name to take pride in? Really?  Are you inside their
heads? How can you speak on behalf of every individual like that. You can't.  Its your
opinion on the situation.  And thats OK, but its not fact.

This entire thread.. ENTIRE THREAD seems to be based on my opinion, your opinion, his
opinion, her opinion. 

I'm sure some people would love to be RCN. I'm sure some people would hate it.

But I have seen a lot attacks on eachother that are personal, not factual or of the topic.
(on both sides)

My opinion is this has been the most boring thread I have ever read.. but
thats just my opinion. 

So some people need to lighten up cause there really will be no facts available that
can be tangible enough to make any headway.  Accept that you are on opposite sides
of the fence in matters of opinion.

Can i say opinion any more times....    ??? :

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Well I will have to agree to disagree with you folks, whether we have Royal or not does not make us a better Navy. Having the people there that take pride in their jobs is what makes us a good navy. Sorry but arguing for a name change when we should be worrying about other things is just a waste of time.

Agreed trinity, I was willing to drop this a month ago

 

[Neill McKay]

Agreed trinity, I was willing to drop this a month ago

Before you do, I would like to understand more about how tradition etc. is hindering morale, if you're up for it.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Before you do, I would like to understand more about how tradition etc. is hindering morale, if you're up for it.

Why bother Neil? You and Gino have done nothing but dismiss my opinions anyways, why give you more fodder? No, I am done expressing my viewpoint on why its not as important to me why we need or don't need a Royal designation. You just have to look at why naval numbers have been steadily falling. No and its not tradition just look over this thread and you will glean what info you need.