Would Mandatory National Service make the CF stronger?

[jmackenzie_15]

Let's look past the conscript thing for a minute. National Service doesn't mean just military. Any Federal job should be open, within reason. Postal, Fisheries, Resources, etc. 18 years old? Not going to school? Off you go. Already working? You get your job back when you finish NS. Low pay scale if you wait and get called, but a bonus if you volunteer. No NS, no benefits (welfare, medical, old age pension, etc). Germany had a similar system in the 70's (may still have). It seemed to work for them. It instilled national pride and a work ethic. Both sorely lacking in a lot of our youth.

I would be in favor of it, and its definately true that the younger generations and upcoming generations canadians seem to be lazier and less ambitious than the ones before.I think it could work.... some people just need a swift kick in the rear to get them going i guess.

 

[pbi]

Any Federal job should be open, within reason. Postal, Fisheries, Resources, etc.

Try running THAT one by CUPW! Cheers.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

They'd probably jump at the chance to collect those dues, etc, for the eighteen months, without having to pay out many benefits. It might even increase their bargaining power.

 

[R031button]

The other side benifit of a national service program is that it could help with Kid's physical health. Most jobs available would be out door, and physically demanding. Frankly I wouldn't have an issue with two years of national service; and most of the guys I graduated with wouldn't either...at least the intelligent ones.

 

[Infanteer]

The military is a profession, not a form of public service, a correctional institution, or a means for social engineering.  Any effort to force it on people as such will only result in the decline of our professionalism.

 

[oyaguy]

Would Mandatory National Service make the CF stronger?

Short answer, no.

First, the CF is a professional force, and conscripts would just dilute that professionalism.

Second, it can't be done. 214,623 men reach military age every year. Throw in a simlar number of women and the CF would have to deal with 400,000 recruits, every year.

Third, what would be the point? We don't have any forseeable military threats on the horizon, and the threats that are on the horizon {terrorism etc...} isn't going to be dealt with by a million half-trained soldiers.

As for the idea of trying to instill today's youth with civic duty, etc... blah blah, I see two options. Parents should parent. I don't care what anyone says about the state tying parents hands {corporal punishment}, if you're a good parent you need never lay a hand on your child, and still raise a perfectly decent human being.
The second option being, youth will grow up. Even if they don't hit the ballot box in droves, they still get jobs, and pay their taxes, really what else do people want?

 

[George Wallace]

Would Mandatory National Service make the CF stronger?

Short answer, no.

First, the CF is a professional force, and conscripts would just dilute that professionalism.

Would they really?   The Bundeswehr, although largely conscripted, still maintained professional soldiers.   Are you trying to tell me that the German military of today is not a force to be reckoned with?  We would keep our professionalism as we do today with the high turnover of young recruits.

Second, it can't be done. 214,623 men reach military age every year. Throw in a similar number of women and the CF would have to deal with 400,000 recruits, every year.

Let's not get tied up in knots here.   By National Service, we are not talking about all these kids joining the military.   We are talking about some sort of service that could include the RCMP, OPP, Fire Services, Paramedics, Hospital Orderlies, etc.   Yes the military would take up the majority, as it and the RCMP are probably the two largest such organizations in the country.   That would give these organizations bodies to fill their depleted ranks.

Third, what would be the point? We don't have any forseeable military threats on the horizon, and the threats that are on the horizon {terrorism etc...} isn't going to be dealt with by a million half-trained soldiers.

As an example that is current.....perhaps we could field a DART deployment to those 11 nations that just got hit by the Tsunamis.   Do we require troops to react only to military threats or do they also react to snow storms in Toronto and Ice Storms in Eastern Ontario/Western Quebec, or floods in Manitoba, or fires in BC and Newfoundland, etc.

As for the idea of trying to instill today's youth with civic duty, etc... blah blah, I see two options. Parents should parent. I don't care what anyone says about the state tying parents hands {corporal punishment}, if you're a good parent you need never lay a hand on your child, and still raise a perfectly decent human being.
The second option being, youth will grow up. Even if they don't hit the ballot box in droves, they still get jobs, and pay their taxes, really what else do people want?

Unfortunately todays parents have dropped the ball in many instances.   Canada's youth have, in the most part, lost any form of work ethic and may need something like this to open their eyes.   There are many kids today who don't want to work, but sit back and collect an allowance and live off their parents or other peoples labours.

Needless to say, I think it would be a good thing.   I feel it may alleviate some of our unemployment problems by giving many an opportunity to gain some experience at work and life.

GE

 

[onecat]

"Third, what would be the point? We don't have any forseeable military threats on the horizon, and the threats that are on the horizon {terrorism etc...} "

That's why CF is in the state its in right now.  Way too many people in Gov't and the Liberal party believe that is no threats to Canada and so don't give the CF the money its needs to keep up and same current, or the manpower to meet the tasks handed by the Gov't of the day.

 

[Brad Sallows]

To compel young adults to perform National Service would be to turn the CF, the RCMP, the various emergency services, and anyone else whose turf you inflict them upon into a babysitting service.  How many of the affected professionals and employees do you think would look forward with joy to each year's new intake of reluctant know-nothings who require constant supervision?

 

[48Highlander]

To compel young adults to perform National Service would be to turn the CF, the RCMP, the various emergency services, and anyone else whose turf you inflict them upon into a babysitting service.  How many of the affected professionals and employees do you think would look forward with joy to each year's new intake of reluctant know-nothings who require constant supervision?

What was that starship troopers quote?  "That's why we make it so hard to join, and so easy to quit".  It's only a babysitting service if we allow it to become one.  Make the standards high, and the training harder.  Those who truly want to be there will perservere, and they're the only ones that count.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

What was that starship troopers quote?   "That's why we make it so hard to join, and so easy to quit".   It's only a babysitting service if we allow it to become one.   Make the standards high, and the training harder.   Those who truly want to be there will perservere, and they're the only ones that count.

So why bother conscripting then?

 

[48Highlander]

Uh.  Wow, that was a good brain fart.  My mind was on the whole can't-vote-unless-you-serve idea.  Ignore my last, over.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Uh.   Wow, that was a good brain fart.   My mind was on the whole can't-vote-unless-you-serve idea.   Ignore my last, over.

;D

 

[c4th]

The quickest way to build a strong army is to destroy the local economy.  Worked in '39 after the depression, and currently provides the CF with it's second largest demographic group who by and large are excellent soldiers.

Personally I am also a fan of the Gurkha recruiting process.  Recruit 30 a year but pay them approximately 40 times the average national salary.

 

[Radop]

"Third, what would be the point? We don't have any forseeable military threats on the horizon, and the threats that are on the horizon {terrorism etc...} "

That's why CF is in the state its in right now.  Way too many people in Gov't and the Liberal party believe that is no threats to Canada and so don't give the CF the money its needs to keep up and same current, or the manpower to meet the tasks handed by the Gov't of the day.

Who is to protect us from ddetonationof a dirty bomb, terrorist attacks, winter storms in TO (lol), ice storms, floods and fires?  We have a dedicated force who has responded to all our military requirements.  Conscription would have to be reserved to Canadian homeland tasks unless they sign on to do future service.  I would rather see people encouraged to join the reserves and get compatent trg for them.  Most of the reserves we get attached to us are lacking self-ddiscipline training and effectiveness under stressful situation.  The government does not protect reservists on call up like they do in the states (ie/ job protection).  This was stuff they were talking about in the 80s when I was in the reserves along with reserve contracts and terms of service.  Until they address all the issues, conscription would become a problematic adventure with more downside than upside.  We are cconsistentlygetting less and less disiplined soldiers and their rights to become insubordinate are getting greater.  Give us more powers to deal with these people don't take them away.  Some summery trial outcomes have really upset me and others as to the punishment or lack there of that were imposed upon these soldiers.

Note by Moderator - hit EDIT in error, original post restored.

 

[pbi]

We are cconsistentlygetting less and less disiplined soldiers and their rights to become insubordinate are getting greater.  Give us more powers to deal with these people don't take them away.  Some summery trial outcomes have really upset me and others as to the punishment or lack there of that were imposed upon these soldiers.

We may be "getting" less disciplined people coming in, but they have no "rights to be insubordinate". The Code of Service Discipline remains one of the most powerful in the Western world, giving a Candaian CO more powers than, for example his US counterpart. And, as far as I know, no significant powers to try people under the NDA have been taken away. In fact, with the addition of offences such as sexual assault  (which we normally didn't used to try...) you could argue that they have been increased. If some summary trial outcomes have upset you, that may say more about the officer trying the case or the quality of the charge that was laid in the first place, than about the powers we have to deal with offenders. Simply because a maximum penalty is available does not mean it is a good idea to apply it in every case.

The real problem IMHO is not the system: it is fine, and is greased and ready to go if we want to bother finding out how to use it properly. The real problem is that we are afraid to use it, or feel that even if we use it there will be no useful result. On top of that, we have become infected with the same "blame/entitlement" culture that permeates civvy street:  nothing is ever my fault, oh and by the way its my right to be compensated for blah blah blah. This type of thinking is totally at variance with military values but IMHO contributes to an atmosphere in which leaders are no longer sure if they will be able to effect discipline or not. Of course, the whiners, skivers and malcontents exploit this to the hilt. Hopefully the recent move to include RSMs in Presiding Officer training will permeate a better sense of confidence through the WO/NCO ranks about laying charges, and hopefully more officers wil live up to their responsibility to dispense discipline in an effective and fair manner. Cheers.

 

[bgreen]

Everytime I hear about being a professional army I get this picture in my head of a play by the rules, politically correct soldier armed with a staff book and a lap top in a briefcase wearing a DEU raincoat and forage cap.

I joined in 68 and at that time it was common for judges when dealing with youth to offer them a chance at mil reserve service.  Granted it was a suggestion offered in the sentence but we got a lot of guys that today would never be looked at as they would never pass the CFRC screening process.  These guys weren't team sport players, they didn't participate in social clubs and they weren't Valedictorians.

They were rough, fit, great fun to hang with and they sure added sparks to whatever they undertook.  They responded to the discipline, became NCOs and some even officers.  They were adopted and they adapted.  They would get charged from time to time but were never considered an administrative burden.  They became the prodigal sons in a regimental family and then later the fathers.

While I welcome the very bright and elite athletic types I think there is also a place for those from a rougher background.  I often had District Commanders and then Bde Comds tell me if there was a war they would want these less professional guys at their side but in our peace time army they wanted them weeded out.  I tended to agree with the war part but kept them because they were usually the most passionate about the army.  And while I am not suggesting we create and army of deviants I do think there is room for some recruits from the darker side.

I believe they will respond well to army culture as we know it if given the chance.

BG

 

[Michael Dorosh]

bgreen, to further your point, just about every regimental history tells us that in WW II "the best ones in action were the hellers in England." 

I rather suspect that most of those "hellers" - the party boys, as you call them, probably would see little about the military in peacetime that would suit them, so the feeling of those brigade commanders you speak of that wanted them weeded out is likely mutual.  Few of my friends growing up had any interest in army cadets and later the Militia, though would probably have done well in it.  They needed a war to get their interest, I think.

 

[The Bread Guy]

http://www.ccs21.org/articles/boisvert/2005/boisvert_nationa-service_nov05.htm

"Tweaking the existing model of reserve restructuring will not produce the order of numbers required to meet all of the challenges.  Perhaps the key to real reform lies in taking to its logical conclusion the assertion of Prime Minister Martin that the defence of Canada is his first priority.  In so many other areas of national economy where supply does not meet demand, the government does not hesitate to intervene with some form of compulsion.  Maybe it is time to consider national service."

And if you believe the media....

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2005/11/07/pf-1296238.html

"Hey kid, wanna go to war?  Maybe you'd have to - if you got caught in a draft.  It hasn't happened in Canada since the Second World War, when a political furor over conscription nearly tore the country apart. But if an idea man with the Calgary-based Council for Canadian Security in the 21st Century has his way, it might happen again."

Anyone, anyone?

 

[Big Foot]

To be honest, I have to say that I would like to see some form of compulsary service. I feel that the German model is a model we should follow, although there is the issue that conscription in Germany is rooted in history. While there would be initial resistance to this idea, I feel it would be beneficial to the CF and Canadian society on the whole as it would help to eleviate feelings of apathy toward the military, feelings which currently run rampant in mainstream Canadian society. Compulsary service would serve as an excellent means of changing this unfortunate fact of Canadian society. It would also serve as an excellent means of developing teens and young adults into responsible citizens, citizens with a good sense of duty and what it means to serve. IMHO, it would do Canada a great deal of good to impliment the German model of service, or a model based on the German system. I realize Canada isn't Germany, however, I see no problem with placing the onous for security on the average citizen. Just my thoughts...