# Canadian Forces Ad - You Join To Fight.



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

No one can say the Canadian Armed Forces are not telling new recruits right up front that they join for one reason and that is to fight, and not peace keeping.

I saw their new recruiting ad entitled "Fight Fear" on TV last night, and it is here on there home page:

http://www.recruiting.forces.gc.ca/v3/engraph/home/home.aspx?bhcp=1


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sinc, I saw this ad on TV the other day. True, at least they are being honest, unlike the US Army ads which make service seem like a cross between paint ball and video games.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I loved Wolfman Jack's ads for Selective Service in the '80s.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Oh reallllly - fighting eh - lets take the top cycle of pictures from that site.




























...spare me the spin .......Red Cross - rescue, rebuilding............


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I'm partial to Picture_51.png myself.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

are you now?.......


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

The military does a lot of things and the ad is a good one. It is 'spin' in that it is trying to attract recruits (!!!), but it is well-done and doesn't just send a message of , "paint ball and video games". Note that if it were to "represent" the activities breakdown, much of it would be office work and training at bases.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I'm thinking you get to comfort beautiful women.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> Oh reallllly - fighting eh - lets take the top cycle of pictures from that site.
> 
> ...spare me the spin .......Red Cross - rescue, rebuilding............


I wondered how the anti war types would spin this.

I see it as honesty by the military. You do not join if peacekeeping is your intent. You join, you fight. Cold hard truth, hiding nothing.

Did you miss the photo where it specifically mentions Afghanistan and "fighting"?


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC said:


> I wondered how the anti war types would spin this.
> 
> I see it as honesty by the military. You do not join if peacekeeping is your intent. You join, you fight. Cold hard truth, hiding nothing.
> 
> Did you miss the photo where it specifically mentions Afghanistan and "fighting"?












Presenting one type of image with words that have a different meaning....


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Macfury said:


> I'm thinking you get to comfort beautiful women.


You mean rape and then kill the family if we take our cue from the Americans...


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Don't forget when Mel Lastman used the Armed Forces to fight the snow in 1999.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> You mean rape and then kill the family if we take our cue from the Americans...


Yeah, that's so far over the line you can't even see it any more.

I'm glad the new ads are closer to realistic. Of course they play up the best parts of the job. It's an ad. The job of advertising is to tread the fine line between simple overstatement and outright lying.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Yeah, that's so far over the line you can't even see it any more.
> 
> I'm glad the new ads are closer to realistic. Of course they play up the best parts of the job. It's an ad. The job of advertising is to tread the fine line between simple overstatement and outright lying.


I think we're agreeing or close to agreeing too much recently. Must not be enough business news going around.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Beej said:


> I think we're agreeing or close to agreeing too much recently. Must not be enough business news going around.


:lmao: :clap:


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

So a question ......would you agree with your child signing up for Afghanistan for this mission if they were younger than say 22 ?


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

MacDoc said:


> So a question ......would you agree with your child signing up for Afghanistan for this mission if they were younger than say 22 ?


I'd try to talk him out of it, but if he went and signed up I'm not going to let him go over there thinking his father wasn't supporting his decision.

If he was in Afghanistan, I'd worry about him getting killed by an IED or in a gunfight. If he was in Calgary (civilian), I'd worry about him getting killed in a car accident. If he was in Banff or Kananaskis (civilian), I'd worry about him falling off a cliff, drowning or getting mauled by grizzly.

Worry goes with parenting no matter where your kid is (or how old they are).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Good response but if you really felt strongly against it is it being honest and fair to your child in "supporting the decision" if you thought that honestly exposing your strong belief in it's wrongness might change their mind?

How would you feel if they were injured or killed and you had not made the strength of the feelings full blown? You might tolerate their approach as youthful folly but would you tolerate your own?

I purposefully chose a real transition age. 25 - it's their life - you're both adults.

Teens I think warrant a different approach. What IS the sign up age and what consent for parents?? Anyone know?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

25???!!!! I hope overweening parents of 25-year-olds let the kids choose their own brand of diapers.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

MacDoc said:


> Good response but if you really felt strongly against it is it being honest and fair to your child in "supporting the decision" if you thought that honestly exposing your strong belief in it's wrongness might change their mind?


He'd know how I honestly felt before he signed up. But you kind of have to be careful in how you express things to your kids (they like to rebel against your ideas).



> How would you feel if they were injured or killed and you had not made the strength of the feelings full blown? You might tolerate their approach as youthful folly but would you tolerate your own?


If my son dies before me, my life will be ruined forever, no matter what the circumstances.




> I purposefully chose a real transition age. 25 - it's their life - you're both adults.


At 18 it isn't my decision...He is probably going to decide it is his life at 13 anyways and stop listening to the "old man".


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Still reading challenged I see MF. nothing new there....nothing on topic either.

•••

I picked an age of >>>>> 22 <<<<<<< - just about when many kids are finishing college/university and perhaps leaving home for the first time in a permanent way.

Anyone stepping up to encourage their kids to go.....???


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

zoz - speaks the real parent :clap:


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Anyone stepping up to encourage their kids to go.....???


I'm encouraging my oldest to think for herself and to question. This started early enough when we would look for "commercial plugs" in movies. 
If she finds value in the army life, I will encourage it. 

My partner was an officer in the army, she would be less encouraging of it.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I would not encourage for army/military - for public service of other sorts abroad or at home yes.

Given your partner's response how valid is "think for yourself" in the case where a life is at stake and you cannot "know" what you are getting into ahead of time. Is your partner not the more "valid" guide having been there.?

Death and injury are not the only consequences of military life.
Just as with medical doctors life quality stats there are a higher than normal degree of suicide and mental issues associated with combat experience.

I wonder what the sign up rate is for kids of military families - could go either way I suppose.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I asked my son this question about 1/2 hour ago. He is 20 and in his second year of university, but unsure of what he wants to major in at Memorial. He said that he had no interests in joining the armed forces. I asked him that if he did, and I tried to talk him out of joining, would he listen to me. He honestly told me "No". 

I recall one of the last conversations I had with my father, with him wanting me to drop out of university and join the US Army and go to Vietnam. The very last conversation I had with my father was when I was just about to graduate and I told him that I was applying for a Conscientious Objector Draft Status (which I received). 

So, sons not listening to their fathers runs deeply in our family.

Still, if he really did want to join, while I might want to try and talk him out of it, I would respect his decision. I might ask him why he wanted to join up, and unless he said something like "To have some fun" (which I can't see him saying), then I would tell him I love him and respect his decision.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc said:


> zoz - speaks the real parent :clap:


zoz speaks _A_ parent.

I'm surprised that your definition of a "real" parent involves only those who think as you do. Someone might have talked their kids out of fighting the Revolutionary War because it was too dangerous, or talked Allied soldiers out of fighting in WWII. The individual's personal goals are paramount and I would respect their vision for their lives--even if their decision resulted in an outcome I wouldn't have wanted for them.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Given your partner's response how valid is "think for yourself" in the case where a life is at stake and you cannot "know" what you are getting into ahead of time. Is your partner not the more "valid" guide having been there.?


I'd say that yes, my partner is the more valid one on this. 

She is more pragmatic than I am (I’d say opportunistic, less idealist). She does have some positive things to say about the army and would encourage joining the reserves as a summer job and the friendship ties.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

Macfury said:


> zoz speaks _A_ parent.


Can I at least get the "real" part added back...my son has been throwing up since 3 am last night and it sure feels (and smells) real.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

MF you are completely hopeless - you miss the obvious then over-analyse the straight forward to come up with some awkward anti-left comment.

zoz is actually in real life a parent - it's obvious from his comments - not a "theoretical one". Can you say the same?

I passed no comment on his agreeing or disagreeing with my approach or any ideological stand.
His comment and insight reflect the real world of kids and parenting.......and being a kid once as well.

You on the other hand - remind me of Harper.......shake that kids hand. Stiff as a board and with insight of a similar grainy nature.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

I'm not a parent but, from experience, let's not get into attacking each other's parenting skills, approaches and philosophies, please. It's just too ugly.

MD: "zoz is actually in real life a parent - it's obvious from his comments - not a "theoretical one". Can you say the same?"

MF: "The individual's personal goals are paramount and I would respect their vision for their lives--even if their decision resulted in an outcome I wouldn't have wanted for them."

So what's the problem?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Don't get "het up" Doc--the written word is an inexact medium. I thought you meant "the real parent" as in "the real thing." 

Yes, I'm a parent. I don't see this as a left/right thing at all, do you?


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Beej said:


> I'm not a parent but, from experience, let's not get into attacking each other's parenting skills, approaches and philosophies, please. It's just too ugly.
> 
> MD: "zoz is actually in real life a parent - it's obvious from his comments - not a "theoretical one". Can you say the same?"
> 
> ...


Obviously not a parent speaking - and does not understand the influence that parents have on the shaping of a child...

For your "punishement", you'll have to watch Jesus Camp....


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Obviously not a parent speaking - and does not understand the influence that parents have on the shaping of a child...
> 
> For your "punishement", you'll have to watch Jesus Camp....


Me or someone else? 

Either way, a huge presumption (should only people with "experience" be in a given debate? Well, that should be interesting). I'm actually quite serious about that all too common error in judgement which simply seeks to exclude. Experience is valuable when someone wants "proof" ("experience" carries weight) but people who don't have specific experience still have a say while still acknowledging gaps if non-political experience is in diametric opposition to their contentions. Enough seriousness (that topic is a personal pet peeve; I've done quite well exceeding the understanding of people with so-called "real" experience).


Still, I'll take the punishment.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Either way, a huge presumption (should only people with "experience" be in a given debate?

Of course not. Sometimes it’s the observations from “left field” that are the most pertinent. 
I think present that “gurus” call it “thinking outside the box”. 

That said, experience that is objective (that’s harder to define) should be taken into consideration. Leo Fender was able to take mass manufacturing techniques and apply them to an art. He then took feedback and was able to improve and produce the classic strat….

When it comes to child rearing, as parents, we all have certain biases.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Either way, a huge presumption (should only people with "experience" be in a given debate?
> 
> Of course not. Sometimes it’s the observations from “left field” that are the most pertinent.
> I think present that “gurus” call it “thinking outside the box”.
> ...


Good post, but still watch the presumptions. Some parents seem to isolate their information sources or dismiss input based upon parental-status. As with most topics in life, that is a bad idea. One only has to read a newspaper or recall their past to know that parents don't necessarily make the best decisions, despite others knowing "better". Experience matters, but it shouldn't override thought.

I understand quite a bit of the matter despite not agreeing with it. The agreement may come with experience, but the level (or lack of) should not be presumed without more information. Note post 31...that was what I was getting at regarding, "what's the problem."


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

MacDoc said:


> So a question ......would you agree with your child signing up for Afghanistan for this mission if they were younger than say 22 ?


First off--nobody signs up for Afghanistan, they sign up to join Canada's military. What happens after they complete training is up to those in charge--which means they could go anywhere.

But what difference would it make? They decide their own fate, not me. If my son _really_ wants to go into the army, then so be it. I would hope that he would apply to the RMC and work his way to become an officer and get a university education along the way.

Our military makes sure you have a very clear picture of what the possibilities lie ahead before you even step a foot onto a training course--that includes seeing graphic footage of war that is far worse than anything on YouTube. There are many a time when you are confronted and told bluntly what to expect with their chosen career; there are those who have served in places like Bosnia are more than willing to share their experiences with the hopes of changing the mind of a recruit. There is no mistaking.

I have many friends in the military who are stationed all over Canada and one who recently enlisted at the ripe age of 30, last autumn. He's now in Petawawa after completing basic training and expects to be active and shipped out in approx. five years. I have no opinion as to whether or not it's the right or wrong thing to do... it's his life, his choice and he's perfectly free to do as he wishes.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Good post Manny but you anedote on those already somewhat "mature" and not family.

Can you honestly say at 22 or younger you would not have serious reservations?

••••

My comment on "real parent" was to decloud MFs completely misconstruing what I meant by it. 
Of course opinion without experience counts look how well the RCs have done on family matters 

That said honestly examining "what would I do as a parent" I think illuminates the nature of THIS mission.

Can one say it's entirely worthwhile as say risking life in a SAR or firefighter role.
Can you look your child in the eye and say it's a good choice as you could easily for many other roles which are also risky.

This where I think the value lies and where "theory" has a hard time envisioning the emotional quandary.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

MacDoc said:


> Good post Manny but you anedote on those already somewhat "mature" and not family.
> 
> Can you honestly say at 22 or younger you would not have serious reservations?
> 
> ...


Most of my friends who enlisted did so either via cadets, or when they turned of age (after high school.) Dave (the 30 year old I mentioned previously) is the only one who was over 22 during enlistment.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have reservations--every parent would if their child chose a (potentially) dangerous line of work... but I wouldn't try to persuade my son (or children as it will become) from ever serving the Armed Forces. I would question their intentions and try to get the bottom of their interest. If the reasons were questionable (inspired by romanticized images from television) then I would make sure they talk to my friends as well as others (such as my neighbor who also served in Bosnia) to get a much _clearer_ picture of what to expect before making such a commitment.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Now that's a great insight - to have a kid chat with an ex military with some combat experience. I would think the feedback from that friend would be invaluable to a parent as well

It's interesting and dismaying in reading Fiasco aobut how even the top political job holders on the planet in the world could have used a heart to heart with military leader with real world combat and post combat experience.......a heart to heart the pols LISTENED to.

It's so disheartening and saddening to read those experienced voices lost in the wind....and a catastrophe as result. 

Heck I'd enjoy listening to a "would I do it over again" tale.
I enjoyed D'Allaire's book for the insight and admire him ( tho I disagree often ).

Good point....good idea. :clap: ......talk to the real thing..not the recruiting officer.
One wonders what the sign up percentage might be?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Now THIS works for me.



> *Canada buying gear to equip Afghan police*
> Updated Sun. Oct. 29 2006 11:53 PM ET
> 
> Canadian Press
> ...


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe.../afghanpolice_gear_061029/20061029?hub=Canada


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

I think this thread started with the comment on the new Candian Armed Forces ads, not sure where it went from there. 

But anyhoo, I heard on the radio today that enrollment is up, I personally don't care for the ads, but I guess they're working for some.


----------



## Dick Hertz (Mar 29, 2007)

ArtistSeries said:


> You mean rape and then kill the family if we take our cue from the Americans...


Well, we've learned that the Canadians have their own version of extraordinary rendition with Afghan detainees. "We received assurances that they would not be tortured."

Right. Dry that one out and you could fertilize Manitoba with it.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Something I think all potential military recruits should consider very carefully is that a soldier is, by definition, an extension of someone else's will.

I think a lot of these kids get into the military out of an instinctive desire for power and order. In my opinion, it's a fantasy, but I've never personally served in the military (although many of my family have).

I'd rather be my own person, however, I'm willing to agree that there are cases where military intervention is the lesser evil, and for these situations, we still need our armed forces.

Cheers


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Were there pictures that showed "Fighting (as in with guns and, like, stuff) to Kill People" or were they all just coddling babies and widows?


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

JumboJones said:


> I think this thread started with the comment on the new Candian Armed Forces ads, not sure where it went from there.
> 
> But anyhoo, I heard on the radio today that enrollment is up, I personally don't care for the ads, but I guess they're working for some.



I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?

I think it is a misuse of military funding which is borderline propaganda.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

da_jonesy said:


> I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?
> 
> I think it is a misuse of military funding which is borderline propaganda.


The ads can help influence people. Those who may consider a career with the military may see these ads which may (or may not) help push them the rest of the way in terms of finally joining. Who knows.. to some, the ads may be inspirational. (which is the entire purpose of an advertisement in terms of those coming from the army.)


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Lars said:


> The ads can help influence people. Those who may consider a career with the military may see these ads which may (or may not) help push them the rest of the way in terms of finally joining. Who knows.. to some, the ads may be inspirational. (which is the entire purpose of an advertisement in terms of those coming from the army.)


Now wait a sec... so what you are saying is that these ads are designed for those sitting on the fence? Either you are in or you are out. I would hope that the military is looking for people to volunteer who actually want to be there and not someone who wasn't sure but the commercial pushed them over the fence.

Does the military need to advertise to recruit, sure I suppose they do at some level (ad in the paper, poster in the high school guidance office, etc...). Do they need to create a series of commercial which frankly scares the sh*t out of the rest of the population? I don't think so.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

da_jonesy said:


> Now wait a sec... so what you are saying is that these ads are designed for those sitting on the fence? Either you are in or you are out. I would hope that the military is looking for people to volunteer who actually want to be there and not someone who wasn't sure but the commercial pushed them over the fence.
> 
> Does the military need to advertise to recruit, sure I suppose they do at some level (ad in the paper, poster in the high school guidance office, etc...). Do they need to create a series of commercial which frankly scares the sh*t out of the rest of the population? I don't think so.


Anybody see the U.S. Army commercials? Now *that* is what a marketing firm does to influence people into joining. Get a Michael Bay-type director to do quick-cuts of various imagery that really have no relevance to what the military actually does, and back it up with a thumping "ass-kicking" metal song to get the kids excited.

And then make a video game...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?


Yesterday. The Edmonton Police Service has a very aggressive recruiting campaign on TV. They also visit major events with a recruiting team year round.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

da_jonesy said:


> I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?
> 
> I think it is a misuse of military funding which is borderline propaganda.


If you go to a movie theatre this weekend you will likely see a recruitment ad for the RCMP. Not sure if they are limiting this to Alberta or the whole country.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

bryanc said:


> I think a lot of these kids get into the military out of an instinctive desire for power and order. In my opinion, it's a fantasy, but I've never personally served in the military (although many of my family have).


Many also get in because _it's a job_. Coming from communities with little to no opportunity or prospects. Also, having little opportunity for higher education. They see it as a way out. Unfortunately for some that becomes quite literal.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?


You're crazy! I know around the GTA they don't advertise because they are plenty of applicants, I know several people that have been turned down because of over enrollment.



da_jonesy said:


> I think it is a misuse of military funding which is borderline propaganda.


I don't think so, I think it is more patriotic, I feel proud when I see those commercials, all the people selflessly risking their lives for our country and others. While the rest of us only have excuses not to join, good thing it is a choice we have, for now. Just think if there were no recruits, it may not be a choice for us to make.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

JumboJones said:


> You're crazy! I know around the GTA they don't advertise because they are plenty of applicants, I know several people that have been turned down because of over enrollment.


I guess so, but clearly we don't hang around the same people.



JumboJones said:


> I don't think so, I think it is more patriotic, I feel proud when I see those commercials.


I think your and mine definition of patriotism differ substantially.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

da_jonesy said:


> I think your and mine definition of patriotism differ substantially.


And others as well.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

MannyP Design said:


> And others as well.


A different time... a well defined enemy, a clear understanding of the goals and what success means. There's the enemy... go get them.

Just not applicable in this day and age.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

da_jonesy said:


> A different time... a well defined enemy, a clear understanding of the goals and what success means. There's the enemy... go get them.
> 
> Just not applicable in this day and age.


Absolutely it's applicable.

You believe that because there was a "well defined" enemy, that in itself justifies using taxdollars for recruitment purposes?  

So how do we go about advertising for today's armed forces? Wait until we have a clear enemy? That'd be really tough when we were in Bosnia.

What about peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts? Do we only legislate marketing dollars for those types of positions or missions until a clear and defined enemy emerges? :lmao:


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> I guess so, but clearly we don't hang around the same people.


We must, who's hiring? I'll pass it along.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

da_jonesy said:


> I don't know... call me crazy but to advertise to get people serve in the military is all wrong. When was the last time you saw ads on TV for serving on Police or Fire Department?
> 
> I think it is a misuse of military funding which is borderline propaganda.


Last time I checked we didn't have problems getting enough recruits for Police and Fire departments. People seem to be standing in line for those jobs. 

Maybe we need ads for Doctors and Nurses!


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

JumboJones said:


> I don't think so, I think it is more patriotic, I feel proud when I see those commercials, all the people selflessly risking their lives for our country and others. While the rest of us only have excuses not to join, good thing it is a choice we have, for now. Just think if there were no recruits, it may not be a choice for us to make.


I have to say I find the same thing, especially with the shots of the military helping with the Manitoba Flood of 1997, but then again, I used to live in Manitoba.

The army does alot of GOOD work. Of course you have to take the bad with the good.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

MannyP Design said:


> Absolutely it's applicable.
> 
> You believe that because there was a "well defined" enemy, that in itself justifies using taxdollars for recruitment purposes?
> 
> So how do we go about advertising for today's armed forces? Wait until we have a clear enemy? That'd be really tough when we were in Bosnia.


No it's not applicable. WW2 represented a conflict well beyond the scale of what we are talking about here. You show me how a bunch of militant extremists are planning to march over to Canada and invade us and then maybe you have a point. That isn't happening is it?

This recruitment drive isn't about patriotism... it isn't about looking for SAR tech guys to jump out of a helicopter to save the damsel in distress. This drive is about getting enough troops so our existing troops don't have to be constantly rotated in and out of Afghanistan.

Look I'm pretty pragmatic when it comes to the use of force, sometimes it is required, however in the case of Afghanistan, Canada has found itself in the middle of a civil war and nothing that our soldiers are doing are making you, me or themselves any safer at this point.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Kosh said:


> Last time I checked we didn't have problems getting enough recruits for Police and Fire departments. People seem to be standing in line for those jobs.


So instead of advertising why don't we pay soldiers what Policemen and Firemen make... sure their lives are worth just as much?


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

I don't know at what point we say we've made enough of an effort, but the conflict in Afghanistan is also about looking for the group who killed 25 Canadians in 2001 and those who harboured/funded them.

Which doesn't explain why we haven't declared war on Saudi Arabia or Tunisia etc. ... 




da_jonesy said:


> No it's not applicable. WW2 represented a conflict well beyond the scale of what we are talking about here. You show me how a bunch of militant extremists are planning to march over to Canada and invade us and then maybe you have a point. That isn't happening is it?
> 
> This recruitment drive isn't about patriotism... it isn't about looking for SAR tech guys to jump out of a helicopter to save the damsel in distress. This drive is about getting enough troops so our existing troops don't have to be constantly rotated in and out of Afghanistan.
> 
> Look I'm pretty pragmatic when it comes to the use of force, sometimes it is required, however in the case of Afghanistan, Canada has found itself in the middle of a civil war and nothing that our soldiers are doing are making you, me or themselves any safer at this point.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

HowEver said:


> I don't know at what point we say we've made enough of an effort, but the conflict in Afghanistan is also about looking for the group who killed 25 Canadians in 2001 and those who harboured/funded them.


If it is about retaliation and body count I think we have them beat at this point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Medusa

In just this one operation we apparently have killed over 500. How many is good enough?




HowEver said:


> Which doesn't explain why we haven't declared war on Saudi Arabia or Tunisia etc. ...


Exactly.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Retaliation and body count? Isn't it about making sure it doesn't happen over and over again.



da_jonesy said:


> If it is about retaliation and body count I think we have them beat at this point.
> 
> Operation Medusa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

HowEver said:


> Retaliation and body count? Isn't it about making sure it doesn't happen over and over again.


So isn't that about understanding, diplomacy and dialogue? I don't see much of that involved here.

If you are then going to argue that it is about defeating extremists then it is about body count isn't it? Because you aren't going to change their minds without a bullet.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> So instead of advertising why don't we pay soldiers what Policemen and Firemen make... sure their lives are worth just as much?


Aren't they regulated by different gov't? And isn't there a union for one and not the other?

I have a few friends and family in the armed forces, they don't seen to complain about the pay too much. I'm sure the high ranking officers are making similar pay to police sgts. If they are that alarmed about it they can always go to the police academy, they should have the qualifications.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

JumboJones said:


> Aren't they regulated by different gov't? And isn't there a union for one and not the other?


You missed the point.

_"The Canadian Forces recruitment Web site reports the base monthly pay for a private is $2,421, a corporal earns $4,069, while a sergeant can make $4,675."_

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1690390/posts

And I looked up what Police get paid...

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/careers/salaryandbenefits.php

Sorry but that doesn't even sound close to what firemen and police officers get paid. On top of that, these guys are asked to literally get shot at. I think a pay raise is in order for our soldiers and money wasted on stupid recruitment ads is insulting to the value we place on Canadian Soldiers.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

I don't think I missed the point, the armed forces is a National position as opposed to a regional position. I'm sure regional police advertise accordingly in local newspapers and television isn't necessary. But to get the attention of a national audience you need to be more aggressive and far reaching.

Sure, I wouldn't be against a pay raise, but the cost of living in TO is a lot different than that of any base area, and they get a lot of benefits to go along with living in an army base, so I think it is all relative.

Yes they _could_ get shot at, so _could_ police, so _could_ fire fighters for that matter, it's all risky business, I don't think one has it easier than the other.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

da_jonesy said:


> You missed the point.
> 
> _"The Canadian Forces recruitment Web site reports the base monthly pay for a private is $2,421, a corporal earns $4,069, while a sergeant can make $4,675."_
> 
> ...


What they don't talk about is what soldiers get for danger pay--the wages you mention are base salaries that do not reflect whether or not the person in question is on a mission or not. It's not cut and dry as you believe it to be. It's all dependant on what you are doing and where you are.


----------

