My Dad was the same - I was born in the FRG. He served from 68-95. I did nearly 25. I cant say it enough, he did his duty as I did mine. Place and time dictated tours and such. I attended Remembrance Day in Leduc a few years ago, and spoke with a Cold war Vet who had the same outlook as you. I had a few beers with him while we shot the sh$t. His concern he didn't "make the cut" made a mark on me. Folks like you are needed at Remembrance Day ceremonies.
Picture of the day
- Thread starter jwhc
- Start date
My Dad was the same - I was born in the FRG. He served from 68-95. I did nearly 25. I cant say it enough, he did his duty as I did mine. Place and time dictated tours and such. I attended Remembrance Day in Leduc a few years ago, and spoke with a Cold war Vet who had the same outlook as you. I had a few beers with him while we shot the sh$t. His concern he didn't "make the cut" made a mark on me. Folks like you are needed at Remembrance Day ceremonies.
This is an old chestnut and people should probably go with the VAC definition of a veteran.
Trying to sort out the worthiness of veterans based on time and place of service is a mug's game. Was a WW2 veteran who peeled potatoes in Camp Dundurn, SK any less a veteran than a guy who stormed ashore on Juno beach? Both the Govt and the Legion thought they were equal, and extended recognition and benefits accordingly. The common thread is that people in all eras volunteered for service without condition. It was the needs of the service that decided what they did and where they served.
In the modern era, is a person who did patrols outside the wire in Afghanistan more worthy than one who stayed inside? How about people who did peacekeeping tours in varying circumstances which ranged from a Roman holiday to getting shot at or skirting a minefield? There can be a pecking order among veterans, but that's the extent of it.
Nearly a million Canadians served in WW2. Only 33,000 are still alive and the average age is 94. I was happy that I knew and served with many of them. I learned a lot from them. The last one who I served with timed out in the mid 1980s. I met General John Vessey and received an award from him in 1983. He was a 2nd Lieutenant in 1945, and was the last WW2 veteran to serve as Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Trying to sort out the worthiness of veterans based on time and place of service is a mug's game. Was a WW2 veteran who peeled potatoes in Camp Dundurn, SK any less a veteran than a guy who stormed ashore on Juno beach? Both the Govt and the Legion thought they were equal, and extended recognition and benefits accordingly. The common thread is that people in all eras volunteered for service without condition. It was the needs of the service that decided what they did and where they served.
In the modern era, is a person who did patrols outside the wire in Afghanistan more worthy than one who stayed inside? How about people who did peacekeeping tours in varying circumstances which ranged from a Roman holiday to getting shot at or skirting a minefield? There can be a pecking order among veterans, but that's the extent of it.
Nearly a million Canadians served in WW2. Only 33,000 are still alive and the average age is 94. I was happy that I knew and served with many of them. I learned a lot from them. The last one who I served with timed out in the mid 1980s. I met General John Vessey and received an award from him in 1983. He was a 2nd Lieutenant in 1945, and was the last WW2 veteran to serve as Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Not much has changed. I've served nine years in the Army Reserve and continue to do so, but I have nothing to show for it except hearing damage the VAC refuses to believe is a result of my service. There are no tours coming, no jobs overseas for a combat arms soldier. They want female members from a purple trade to go forth and help the people of the world develop whatever skills it is we're paying for them to develop. Or you can go to Latvia and be on a glorified field training exercise for a year.
I was too late for Afghanistan and clearly too early for whatever comes next. My bare chest is a testament to an Army that gets shelved at the earliest convenience of a Government that doesn't care.
I don't regret my service, I just wish I'd be able to do the job I trained so hard to be good at.
The purpose of an army in peacetime is to train and maintain an acceptable degree of readiness. Some times it`s boring, sometimes its exciting. The Cold War certainly gave us a focus and a sense of purpose. Its a good thing that it didn`t go hot.
Most UN PK ops these days are in Africa and operations have a black face, which is how it should be because Africans should sort out African problems. Nowadays infantry is provided by third world countries, but there is a demand for specialists in logistics, medical, aviation, communications and staff operations. People don`t really like soldiers until the shooting starts.
There was once a very detailed US Army training publication that described the expected phases (and resulting Nato casualties) of a Soviet breakthrough attack in Europe...advance forces and vanguard etc as things 'escalated'.
It was assumed that nothing NATO had on the line in front of them (in both NORTHAG and CENTAG) was going to last under their attack .
What stuck with me was the assertion that the Soviets didnt bother conducting training in forward passage of lines .... because they expected operational attrition of their advance forces to make it unnecessary. I probably have that publication still somewhere ... wish I could dig it up.
It was assumed that nothing NATO had on the line in front of them (in both NORTHAG and CENTAG) was going to last under their attack .
What stuck with me was the assertion that the Soviets didnt bother conducting training in forward passage of lines .... because they expected operational attrition of their advance forces to make it unnecessary. I probably have that publication still somewhere ... wish I could dig it up.
I certainly appreciate that, and I suppose in a wider view of things it's great there hasn't been a need in the world for my skills, or at least not a need Canada is willing to fill. (Not Infantry by the way, I chose the Armoured life of traumatic brain injuries and diesel exhaust fumes)
I still wish I got to do the job at least once before I left. Perhaps things will kick off as I wait out my last couple years before CD then release.
But enough about me, this is a picture thread.
Soviets and East European does not atack because of the fear of nuclear holocaust. Without US nuclear capability for sure Soviet in 1950-60 overun West Europe very speedy, being at Paris, and making the dream of French Socialists became true. We in Romanian army in that time was in a disposition, if the war start off, we will desert to the Western Powers. A kind of general Vlasov atitude.
You are as much a vet as anyone who toured. Just as you are as much a vet as anyone who fought the Nazi. It's unfortunate that the Legion adopted a policy after Korea that everyone else was a "CF Retiree". That policy more combined with doing my generation vets out of tgeur VA benefits has doomed the "blue blazer sons of vets club" to a slow death. I don't attend remembrance anymore either. The country and the legion broke faith with me. Thank you for your Service.
Soviet doctrine was based on a continuous high tempo attack which would get them to the Rhine or beyond ASAP. Their organization and equipment were all based on this; tanks, APCs, self-propelled artillery,bridging and organic CW capabilities, tactical air support; all in big numbers. Logistics and reconstitution of units wasn't a big factor in their planning. As forward units were attrited and lost momentum, fresh formations would be passed through them to continue the advance, kind of like feeding fresh timber into a buzzsaw. Much of the Soviet capability was forward deployed in East Germany which meant rolling out the barracks gate and shaking out into assault formations using all available routes.
It was highly probable that NATO would have been forced to initiate the use of tactical nuclear strikes to stop them because our conventional capabilities would have been overwhelmed. The prize and the battleground was West Germany. The issue was when and where a tactical nuclear response would have been initiated. NATO started beefing up its conventional capabilities in the Ronald Reagan era leading to the hope that conventional forces could deal with Soviet forward echelons while follow on echelons were attacked in depth to prevent them from reaching the battlefield. Canada didn't participate in the conventional build up in a meaningful way.
Once tactical nuclear weapons were used by either side, a strategic response was inevitable. It was just a matter of the magnitude.
Soviet doctrine was based on a continuous high tempo attack which would get them to the Rhine or beyond ASAP. Their organization and equipment were all based on this; tanks, APCs, self-propelled artillery,bridging and organic CW capabilities, tactical air support; all in big numbers. Logistics and reconstitution of units wasn't a big factor in their planning. As forward units were attrited and lost momentum, fresh formations would be passed through them to continue the advance, kind of like feeding fresh timber into a buzzsaw. Much of the Soviet capability was forward deployed in East Germany which meant rolling out the barracks gate and shaking out into assault formations using all available routes.
It was highly probable that NATO would have been forced to initiate the use of tactical nuclear strikes to stop them because our conventional capabilities would have been overwhelmed. The prize and the battleground was West Germany. The issue was when and where a tactical nuclear response would have been initiated. NATO started beefing up its conventional capabilities in the Ronald Reagan era leading to the hope that conventional forces could deal with Soviet forward echelons while follow on echelons were attacked in depth to prevent them from reaching the battlefield. Canada didn't participate in the conventional build up in a meaningful way.
Once tactical nuclear weapons were used by either side, a strategic response was inevitable. It was just a matter of the magnitude.
The same doctrine that was used starting from 1943 to 45 to broke German army.
Not to beat this to death but ....
During the Czech Crisis we pulled into our jump off positions just short of the start line. All that was needed was the issuance of detailed maps and final instructions. I was attached to Brigade HQ Signal Squadron.
We made sure that our personal vehicles were gassed up with two Jerrycans in the trunk, kissed out families good-bye, grabbed our "Bug Out" gear, mounted up and went into "hide".
Then the West backed down and the tension was over. Nobody was more disgusted than the guys of Hungarian origin who had fought the Soviets during their Revolution.
There was a generation of us that never fired a shot in anger, but we sure as hell were prepared to.
The guys who really got the shaft were the Airborne Regiment following their Somalia deployment. I just finished reading "Somalia Cover-Up" by Peter Desbarats, Chairman of "The Report Of The Commission Of Inquiry Into The Deployment Of Canadian Forces To Somalia".
Reading this will further your disgust and distrust of the Liberal government when it comes to the Canadian Military.
During the Czech Crisis we pulled into our jump off positions just short of the start line. All that was needed was the issuance of detailed maps and final instructions. I was attached to Brigade HQ Signal Squadron.
We made sure that our personal vehicles were gassed up with two Jerrycans in the trunk, kissed out families good-bye, grabbed our "Bug Out" gear, mounted up and went into "hide".
Then the West backed down and the tension was over. Nobody was more disgusted than the guys of Hungarian origin who had fought the Soviets during their Revolution.
There was a generation of us that never fired a shot in anger, but we sure as hell were prepared to.
The guys who really got the shaft were the Airborne Regiment following their Somalia deployment. I just finished reading "Somalia Cover-Up" by Peter Desbarats, Chairman of "The Report Of The Commission Of Inquiry Into The Deployment Of Canadian Forces To Somalia".
Reading this will further your disgust and distrust of the Liberal government when it comes to the Canadian Military.
It should be realized that just being there is doing something. A good analogy would be a security guard. He is not there to take on criminals but his very presence is a deterrent . In the time I was in in the 60s and 70s, we were doing a lot of wandering about the arctic. It was to show the Russians and Americans that the north was not up for grabs. Just being the guard at the city gate keeps the dark at bay.
The CDS - Boyle ... did nothing to help though ... and demonstrated that peculiar Liberal trait of leaders who avoid taking any responsibility .. and pointing fingers at subordinates instead.
to add .. it wasnt just Somalia that caused the Airborne to be disbanded .... Somalia started the ball rolling .... the CAR had become a dumping ground for problem children certainly by the RCR, R22R and maybe to a lesser extent the PPCLI. Some of the Sr NCO's should have been released long before the whole thing blew up. And there were officers who didnt help by overlooking the fundamental issues of good order and discipline by playing popularity games. Their CO (who wasnt exactly the strongest commanding officer) pointed out before the deployment that they 'werent ready' ... it wasnt the lack of training .... it was a basic disciplinary issue.
Last edited:
to add .. it wasnt just Somalia that caused the Airborne to be disbanded .... Somalia started the ball rolling .... the CAR had become a dumping ground for problem children certainly by the RCR, R22R and maybe to a lesser extent the PPCLI. Some of the Sr NCO's should have been released long before the whole thing blew up. And there were officers who didnt help by overlooking the fundamental issues of good order and discipline by playing popularity games. Their CO (who wasnt exactly the strongest commanding officer) pointed out before the deployment that they 'werent ready' ... it wasnt the lack of training .... it was a basic disciplinary issue.
This sadly, was true. I was in the Airborne early 70s. A good friend stayed with them till the early 90s and said exactly what you just stated. There were a lot of ongoing discipline issues that were not being handled. I was proud to have served in the Airborne but it was becoming a problem so I was told.
This sadly, was true. I was in the Airborne early 70s. A good friend stayed with them till the early 90s and said exactly what you just stated. There were a lot of ongoing discipline issues that were not being handled. I was proud to have served in the Airborne but it was becoming a problem so I was told.
Dark Alley Dan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Darkest Edmonton
Picture thread, lads.
1st Canadian Parachute Battalion in happier days:
1st Canadian Parachute Battalion in happier days:
