Re: DSII Question- Obstacles

Los spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> As an aside to the Canadian para thing, I thought it was ridiculous
that Canada
> would choose to disband a capability over that incident. Wouldn't
punishing the
> perpetrators have been enough? It sort of like us removing all A6
squadrons from the
> inventory because of what happened in Italy.

The fact is it was an entirely political move. 
 
> I know that the Canadians managed to get around the disbanding of the
para bn (or
> was it a regt.?) by creating independent para companies. Is that how
they did it?

Some trick like that. 

In counterpoint, the parachute regt has been a collecting place for 
(and I'm not saying all of them are, just a few percent) violent 
malcontents in the ranks and officers with discipline and 
drinking problems. They have a lot of 'elite' soldiers, but the whole 
Canadian military is riddled with a command crisis (pretty much 
anyone over Lt. Col). There isn't the leadership to handle the 
problems and when a problem is systemic, sometimes you have to cut to 
cure. Or apply massive radiation. The problem is, its NDHQ they 
should can moreso than the units.

The loss of the op cap isn't the issue (Canada? Operations? Only if 
the US lends us planes!). It's the fact that the political move was 
'disband!' and the actual result was 'change name!'. 

I get really annoyed that good soldiers get so screwed over by our 
poor and messed up senior command staff. I've met plenty of good 
junior officers (Major and below) who refuse to play politics, refuse 
to engage in petty behaviour, aren't totally self absorbed, and as a 
result get passed over so the paper pushing, smooth talking, self 
serving leeches can hob nob their way up the rank structure. But 
then, that's just our way up here I guess......

T.