Silver said:
Hey Broke Cowboy, I did some checking to see if what you say is true about the size of our military / size of NYPD..... Heres what I get from the NYPD website: about 38,000. Canada's dept. Defense site: 62,000 regulars + 25000 reservists.
So while the comparison isn't totally inaccurate...... wait a minute, it's pretty inaccurate.
If you talk total bodies and manning you are correct.
My point was probably misleading as I re-read. I was talking (poorly it appears) about combat effectives. Specific numbers are discussed below.
What you are not aware of as you probably do not have access to DWAN - Defense Wide Area Network - is the shortages.
The numbers you read about are the TARGET numbers. I can assure you there are not 25K reservists actually in-situ. As for the 60+ K personnel? Not there yet - but planning to be.
As an example we are tying up ships. We are short riflemen. We have a huge shortage of doctors - $250K signing bonus for qualified docs of all types.
My trade - pilot - is +/- 20% short at present. Want to fly - please apply.
Despite numerous recruiting and retention efforts, a number of military occupations remain critically short of personnel. These include professional occupations such as: doctors and pharmacists, and operator occupations such as: naval electronics technicians, signal operators, fire control systems technicians, airborne electronic sensor operators, naval weapons technicians and intelligence operators. Indications are that intake estimates will not be sufficient to recover to the preferred manning level within two years.
The reason Canada does not have more troops in the field is because they simply do not have any additional combat effective troops available.
Period.
There are so many empty slots you could get a job tomorrow. Literally! If you are healthy and under - I think - 50 - you can take the Queen's shilling and wear the uniform of your choice. Absolutely no reason to be unemployed in this country.
Check out Workopolis and Monster - the Canuck military is hiring in EVERY trade - big time.
If there were truly 25K reservists and 60K serving members - do you not think we could field more than the following (info gleaned from army.forces.gc.ca search)?
----------------------------------------------------------
Q24. Is Army regeneration on target with the upcoming Defence Review?
A24. Understanding the impact of the Defence Statement, the Army is very confident that the Army Regeneration plan meets the objectives of the statement and sets the conditions for an effective Army Managed Readiness System. (My comment - very PC answer here)
Q25. How long will the Army be able to sustain its missions if new positions announced by the Government Speech of the Throne do no get filled by recruits? Or do not get filled as quickly as you would wish?
A25. The Army held a Structure Working Group, early in October 2004, and created its task forces. Those task forces will be sustainable for an indefinite period, although this will leave the Army with little flexibility. The structures arrived at did not take into consideration the new positions announced by the Government. Any additional positions will however be welcomed to relieve the anticipated pressures created after the regeneration period.
Q26. Are we moving away from the Regimental system by using “building blocks” for task force generation?
A26. The Army is not moving away from the Regimental system by using a “building blocks” approach to task force generation. In garrison, as in domestic operations, there will not be any change to the designation and make-up of our units. What may change is the origin of some of the task force elements, notably sub-units, to be deployed outside of country.
Depending on the operational requirement, a task force, based for example on 1 R22eR, may end up being made-up of sub-units (building blocks) coming from other units. The unit HQ and two infantry coys would come from 1R22eR for sure, however other capabilities would come from elsewhere: EW from LFDTS, direct fire capability from LFWA, PsyOps from SQFT, etc.
Under the Army’s new structures, it is possible, though not probable, that a Task Force deploying under one of our current unit’s name, for example RCD, may include more assets coming from other units than from RCD. In fact, in the most extreme scenario, depending on the operational requirement, it may occur that a RCD Task Force, only includes the Battalion HQ from that unit.
Q27. Why are we calling the deploying units “task forces” instead of battle groups as we used to?
A27. Task Force better reflects the reality in terms of various capabilities and capacity. The main element will consist of approximately 700-750 soldiers and the support elements will consist of approximately 250-300 soldiers, for a total of 1,000 soldiers.
Q28. Why are task forces based on 750 personnel and not more?
A28. One of the principles of the Managed Readiness plan is that, after the regeneration period, the task forces that the Army will field as part of its High-Readiness commitments, must be sustainable indefinitely. In the past, the Army fielded units of such size that they proved to be unsustainable. This lead to personnel shortages, to a rapid decline of Army equipment and stocks and to a reduction of the Army’s overall readiness. Fielding of smaller task forces, that are sustainable, will ensure that the Army’s efficiency and readiness levels are maintained while remaining relevant and decisive on operations.
Q29. Can the Army deploy more than two (2) task forces?
A29. On top of the two task forces that the Army will train every six months, the Army may be called upon to deploy a Brigade HQ and a Headquarters and Signal squadron during a one-year period. As well, a strategic reserve / surge capability will be identified that could be deployed for six months up to one year, in and out of rotations.
Q30. Can the support trades deploy enough troops to support the task force on a sustainable basis in deployed Operations?
A30. The Army will be able to field and sustain two National Support Elements (NSE) and National Command Elements (NCE) consisting of 250-300 personnel each. Each task force will deploy with an NSE. Should an additional task requiring the deployment of a Headquarters and Signal squadron or the strategic reserve / surge capability come up, a tailored NSE and NCE would also deploy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those are the folks I was talking about. Combat effectives. Not the support guys. Sorry if I sounded misleading.
I still believe I am correct in stating the NYC can field more street officers than the Canuck military can field combat soldiers for a sustained effort.
So you can refute me if you chose to do so - it will simply pull the thread even further off topic. Bottom line is the Canucks are - as I previously stated - punching well above their weight - and in danger of not being able to sustain the pace. THAT is why they need help.
Question 24 is a PC answer - behind the scenes things do not appear rosey at all.
The Canucks can and do come into contact on a daily basis - but are unable to hold the ground due to manning levels - so must retake it on a regular basis.
So unless the EuroTrash get off thier asses things are going south - and knowing my luck - probably with me there as well.
Task forces are simply folks who are rotated into theatre and then out - worked up for another trip to theatre and so on. A task force is not "new money" - it is re-cycled people. Lots of guys are on their 4/5 or 6'th trip to the sand box.
All of the above - including some additional - my opinion - is open source and not classified at all.
Have a good one,
BC