• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Ignorance of civvies...

Haggis said:
Not all civvies are ignorant or unappreciative.

Leaving the gym this morning, in uniform, a thirtysomething gent stops me and says "I just wanted to say that I really appreciate what you guys are doing in Afghanistan."

I thanked him and asked that he repeat those sentiments to his local Member of Parliament.

... and this was in Ottawa, at a civvy gym.

Agreed, this may be a case of the vocal minority being louder than the silent majority.

Cheers
 
Yeah, there are a lot of people who appreciate what we do. Here in Toronto last year, at the VE Day parade through the city, there were hundreds of people on the streets cheering as we marched by. Unfortunately, theres too many who dont. I figure that once the sh!t hits the fan, theyll realize they need us. But then, it might be too late...
 
I tend to get more cheers than jeers.
The other day a chum and myself were on the bus in uniform and a man gave us five bucks for coffee, I said we couldn't take it but he insisted, so I put it in the United Way jar at work the next day. I usually get a handshake from a stranger every few days...

A collegue of mine and I got into a long discussion with 2 girls at a local high school about our "involvement" in Iraq... the girls didn't get it but the other students who over heard us politely inform them of Canada's foreign policy though we did a fantastic job. A day or two later a girl at another high school gestured at me and said "I'd tap that"... I guess thats "public support".
 
Recon_Guardsman said:
Yeah, there are a lot of people who appreciate what we do. Here in Toronto last year, at the VE Day parade through the city, there were hundreds of people on the streets cheering as we marched by. Unfortunately, theres too many who dont. I figure that once the sh!t hits the fan, theyll realize they need us. But then, it might be too late...

This attitude of civilians is nothing new - Rudyard Kipling (30 December 1865 - 18 January 1936) said it best in his poem "Tommy":

Tommy

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
    O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
    But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
    The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
    O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
    For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
    But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
    The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
    O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
    Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
    But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
    The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
    O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
    While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
    But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
    There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
    O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
    For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
    But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
    An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
    An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!
 
Roy,

I am sitting here with half a smile and the other half a tear in my eye...
Thank-you for this poem...Hope more civvies read it today

Cheers
HL
 
Hot Lips said:
Roy,

I am sitting here with half a smile and the other half a tear in my eye...
Thank-you for this poem...Hope more ciccies read it today

Cheers
HL

I love the unintended irony of that typo.
 
LMAO...okay okay...I was on the way out the door for a run already...LMAO and obviously spell check didn't pick that one up...maybe it was a Freudian Slip on my part...never the less hope you had a chuckle.

HL
 
pbi said:
I think this sums it up very well. The child soldiers that we talk about are forced into service, treated like slaves, and generally have no say over their own affairs. They cannot voluntarily leave the service they are in.

The most common practice being to go into a village and kill the adults. The children then have the option of joining, or starving to death. Once in, militias use a number of tactics to keep their young fighters from leaving. In Sierra Leone and Liberia, they would get them addicted to drugs, and thus, as the only source of the children's drug supply, keep them from leaving. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, they would hold the families hostage, telling their young recruits that if they left, their families would die.

A 17 year old Canadian reservist is a completely different case. You cannot join without your parents' permission, you will not be required to serve (short of a general mobilization which has not happened in Canada since WWII), you cannot even be forced to attend training at your Res unit, and you can leave pretty well any time you feel like it. You will not go overseas until well after your 18th birthday, since it would take at least that long in the Res for you to reach a training level at which a right-minded CO would permit you to go overseas.

Very well put. The two cases aren't even remotely comparable. The problem that I see is that the legal age of majority and the point at which each person becomes mature enough to carry out military duties aren't necessarily the same. Most research shows that humans don't fully mature psychologically and socially until into their early 20s, so from a psychologist's perspective, they would still be children, although they're legally adults. So, at what point does a person become an adult? Legally, it's the age of 18, 19 or 21, depending on the situation. So technically, someone who joins the reserves at 17 (like I did) is a child soldier. However, the Canadian Army I believe provides enough structure and training for younger recruits to be able to adapt to military life and understand the implications of their choice before being required to deploy. And as an added safety net, they have to have parental consent. Their parents certainly understand what the Army does, and if they consent to letting their child join, they should (in theory) be effectively telling the Army, "My son / daughter is mature enough to perform their duties." I personally feel that there should be parental consent required until somewhere in the neighbourhood of 21 - simply because everybody develops at a different rate, and the parents are normally more in tune with their children's level of maturity than anybody else. But as far as the problem of child soldiers is concerned, and the movement to demobilise them, Canada's 17 year-old reservists don't even show up on the radar, as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather see more concentrated efforts on demobilising the 10 year-olds in Sierra Leone. Let's take care of the big problems first, and then worry about splitting hairs over the age of majority.

When I read over the dialogue with the teacher and fellow students, I don't think that it's ignorance, so much as oppertunism and happenstance. Simply put, it's easier to target 17 year-olds joining the reserves here than it is to do something about getting Kalashnikovs out of the hands of those seven years younger in Liberia (oppertunism). And you happened to be a 17 year-old reservist who was there when the video was shown (happenstance). Had you not been there, or over 18, I doubt that the question would have even been raised, but since you were, they looked over and saw someone who wasn't a legal adult yet, but who was in the Army. So if they continue to dog you over it, ask them what they're doing to help demobilise the tens of thousands of pre-adolescant children who are fighting in 21 of the world's ongoing conflicts right now. And if the answer equals less effort than they're expending to hassle you, then their priorities are out of line. And if they want to pursue it, send them to me - I've done my homework, and I'll sort them out.
 
I don't understand why the legal drinking age keeps being brought up in conjunction with the age of admission to military service (not you, Kyle, per se) .  Alcohol, among other things, impairs your judgement.  In this country, for the most part, someone has decided that 19 is the age at which life experience could potentially offset the judgement impairment of alcohol consumption (although, could not be farther from the reality).  Presumably, while training or while deployed, soldiers are not intoxicated on duty, so it doesn't really matter what the drinking age is.  Driving age is 16.  Voting age is 18.  Car rental age is 25.  Drinking in the USA is 21.  My kids gymnastics classes start at 2 years old.  Different situations have different tests and limits as to when the administrating organization will accept a person based on their age.  If anything, I could live with the age of military admission going to 16, and putting the drinking age up to 21 (although that would crush our bars here in Windsor). 
Without really knowing, it would seem to me that if you take on a new troop at 17, it would take about a year before they are much good to anyone anyway, so by the time they are trained, they are deployable.  Sound reasonable?
 
hey man...i too am a 17 year old reservist and all i get from my buddies is "are u stupid your going to get shot"..i say wtf...theres an example of ignorance..it takes me a wile to explain it to everyone and i tell them that its what i want to do..u just cant let them get to u...
 
zipperhead_cop said:
Alcohol, among other things, impairs your judgement. 

No kidding, I've got a good friend who has the unfortunate distinction of being able to say he joined the army while drunk... *twice* (First the res, then the regs).

(Nothing to do with the thread, just had to mention it :) )
 
FightingIrish said:
hey man...i too am a 17 year old reservist and all i get from my buddies is "are u stupid your going to get shot"..i say wtf...theres an example of ignorance..it takes me a wile to explain it to everyone and i tell them that its what i want to do..u just cant let them get to u...

You want to get shot?
 
I joined on my 17th birthday in 1973 - the dying days of Vietnam. If you think that civilians are ignorant now, you should have seen them then.

I've not received a single Nazi salute or been called "babykiller" for a couple of decades now.
 
I had the pleasure of attending a first year programme a university in Halifax, Nova Scotia that is well known as a "bastion of free thought and liberal education" (or as a pleasant MCpl put it once 'tree hugging, granola eating, rainbow jumping....')
The school is Kings and it is far from free and the education far from liberal (using my definition of the word)

I have been called:
A babykiller
Monster
Facist
A modern colonialist

I have been targeted (wearing uniform on way to unit) with pamphlets with pictures of dead African children
I have had prof's tell me "yes" they would "absolutely" flunk me if they thought they could get away with it
I have had a prof refuse to extend a paper 12 hours because I was on a weekend exercise.
I was the target of a full pitcher of beer (which I had paid for) at my birthday in the school pub because I said "it was a great decision" to join the military and that I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
I had actually managed to chat up a girl for a full 3 hours one night to a point where she was absolutely in love with me before her friend came over and said "he's one of those part-time killer assholes" and the girl suddenly changed her mind about everything she'd said the entire evening based on that fact.


But I won't bitch about civvies ever, it's a weird thing being in the military in that you have to deal with the fact that what you're doing is unappreciated, misunderstood and sometimes hated by the people you do it for and as such you have to approach it with a degree of humility and ignore much of it otherwise you start to dislike the bosses (the CDN public like it or not) more than the enemy.
Bitching about them only makes it worse and drives that wedge between "us and them".
 
Find anyone else who knows King's and they'll say the same.
I was the only reservist on a campus of 800 transplanted kids from Toronto who had a dislike for the military, and profs who have literally spent their whole academic careers on that very campus.

I shit you not.
 
mover1 said:
I am calling Bullshit!!!

Me too.  Who would waste a whole pitcher of beer?!?! ;D :cheers:

The funny things about people like the ones Che is describing is that they fancy themselves higher intellectuals than us "part time killers" (or full time killers for that matter) and if asked would purport to be "open minded".  However, try to engage them in a debate, and they shrink like mist in the morning sun.  Common sense and socialism are irreconcilable.
 
It was my pitcher they were wasting,

Part of the problem I found is that they spend most of their time practicing their arguments over and over again, while the rest of us are busy working and studying to have the spare time to memorise 20 different references for an argument over the Canadian involvement in Afghanistan..or what is a better recipe for lentil soup.
 
Che said:
It was my pitcher they were wasting,

Extra rude and unacceptable :threat:

Che said:
Part of the problem I found is that they spend most of their time practicing their arguments over and over again, while the rest of us are busy working and studying to have the spare time to memorise 20 different references for an argument over the Canadian involvement in Afghanistan..or what is a better recipe for lentil soup.

And yet, with all the practice, the arguments still fall appart.  I'm sure they think it is terribly clever to scream "shameshameshameshame" or "no justice, no peace" over and over, but to most people they just look like retards. 

...........


Actually, that is unfair to retards.  They don't deserve to be compared to hippies.
 
Did you sort out the person who dumped the beer on you??  :threat:
 
Back
Top