Arm guards and we'll shut border: Mohawk Warriors

[loob job]

Canada has sucked the natives pipe long enough. The gov't needs to step up for F sakes.

[fredr123]

I sympathize with First Nations peoples who claim the right to traditional trade and whatnot that have been disrupted through the imposition of an arbitrary international border right through their own lands. However, the people orchestrating this standoff and other similar armed or violent protests are doing nothing for the cause and undermining all of the work done by those who would like to see a reasonable resolution to these issues.

[DESS]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yup, what people don't realize is the concept of peacekeeping and police actions really run counter to what a soldier is trained to do.

In the simplest words and thanks to J.L Granatstein soldiers are trained to kill people and blow stuff up. They're trained to enforce the will of the government and to an extension the peoples wills on enemies whether foreign or domestic, in a violent and assertive manner, whether in a offensive or defensive capacity.

Using soldiers to stand in a line and look menacing is a waste of materials, its a job for Law enforcement not a infantry man.

If you want a soldier to take down a barracade his first instinct is to shoot the hell out of it, call in artillary, then use the engineers to blow the debris off of the road.

If you want to call in a soldier to intimidate a unruly mob, then your calling in the wrong guy, a soldier would conceal himself try to find the leader and kill him, then roll up the rest of the mob.

Sure soldiers have been used for mob control before, but it never works out well.

Soldiers will proudly help out during a natural disaster, it makes them a good citizen and you can't shoot a hurricane.

Soldiers will lay out their lives to save your life . . . as long as your not a threat.

But using soldiers as cops, or peace makers and taking away the tools that make soldiers effective is the wrong use for good material.

You have a pretty romantic view of soldiers that I reject. A soldier's primary mission in fact is to stand in a line and look menacing. Most armies in the world have a primary function of defence/deterrence. Having them literally stand in a line and look menacing is a natural extension of their figurative role.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I must have missed Troutman's post

So modest =D

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I don't know why no one in the media is mentioning the smuggling (Tobacco, drugs, weapons, etc) that takes place regularily through these border crossings.

Because nobody in the media wants to be branded a racist for telling the truth.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by DESS

You have a pretty romantic view of soldiers that I reject. A soldier's primary mission in fact is to stand in a line and look menacing. Most armies in the world have a primary function of defence/deterrence. Having them literally stand in a line and look menacing is a natural extension of their figurative role.

Were/are you a soldier?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by DESS

You have a pretty romantic view of soldiers that I reject. A soldier's primary mission in fact is to stand in a line and look menacing. Most armies in the world have a primary function of defence/deterrence. Having them literally stand in a line and look menacing is a natural extension of their figurative role.

You can reject it all you want, but the role of the military is to show strength without revealing strength. If I stand up and look menacing to my enemy the last thing I'm going to feel is a bullet drilling into my vital organs or my head.

A poster boy military is inherantly ineffective in terms of a modern military and its ability to do its job.

As an example, does Canada have a military . . . yes it does, and while it is often jokingly referred to in the international community because of its lack of numbers and modern military equipment, it manages to get the job done, not by displaying its strength, but by using its strength, its training and its spirit.

You create order and menace when your not even there.

[DESS]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Were/are you a soldier?

I will answer that question when you can tell me how on god's green earth it's relevant to anything.

[DESS]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

You can reject it all you want, but the role of the military is to show strength without revealing strength. If I stand up and look menacing to my enemy the last thing I'm going to feel is a bullet drilling into my vital organs or my head.

A poster boy military is inherantly ineffective in terms of a modern military and its ability to do its job.

As an example, does Canada have a military . . . yes it does, and while it is often jokingly referred to in the international community because of its lack of numbers and modern military equipment, it manages to get the job done, not by displaying its strength, but by using its strength, its training and its spirit.

You create order and menace when your not even there.

We'll agree to disagree then.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by fredr123

I sympathize with First Nations peoples who claim the right to traditional trade and whatnot that have been disrupted through the imposition of an arbitrary international border right through their own lands. However, the people orchestrating this standoff and other similar armed or violent protests are doing nothing for the cause and undermining all of the work done by those who would like to see a reasonable resolution to these issues.

They lose my sympathy when they illegally profit on the basis that their land is located along an arbitrary international border by manufacturing and smuggling cigarettes, drugs, weapons, and people. This isn't about White man imposing his arbitrary rules on a subjected people. This is about organized crime (Both internal and external to the reserve) taking advantage of the strategic location of the reserve and the privledges granted to said reserve with regards to law enforcement.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Canada would be so much better of if we had gone the route that the Americans did when dealing with the natives

[Knalus]

Not only do I think that the idea of Native reserves should be disbanded, I also believe that internal border crossings between the US and Canada should also be disbanded. Not only do I support the Natives in keeping guns out of the hands of Border Guards, I would hope that ALL border guards would be disbanded, and traditional policing being done instead of lining up at the border. In addition, I also support the dropping of all Duty on every item, be they Cigarettes, Firearms, Liquor... ect. If everything is even, everything is fair. Kinda hard to "smuggle" crap like cigarettes when all the benefit of "smuggling" is gone. Why is it considered "smuggling"? Because Governments want their taxes, don't like to share, and don't like competition by business.

The whole thing is ridiculous.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Knalus

Not only do I think that the idea of Native reserves should be disbanded, I also believe that internal border crossings between the US and Canada should also be disbanded. Not only do I support the Natives in keeping guns out of the hands of Border Guards, I would hope that ALL border guards would be disbanded, and traditional policing being done instead of lining up at the border. In addition, I also support the dropping of all Duty on every item, be they Cigarettes, Firearms, Liquor... ect. If everything is even, everything is fair. Kinda hard to "smuggle" crap like cigarettes when all the benefit of "smuggling" is gone. Why is it considered "smuggling"? Because Governments want their taxes, don't like to share, and don't like competition by business.

The whole thing is ridiculous.

I am sorry but I think your post is ridiculous.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yup, what people don't realize is the concept of peacekeeping and police actions really run counter to what a soldier is trained to do.

In the simplest words and thanks to J.L Granatstein soldiers are trained to kill people and blow stuff up. They're trained to enforce the will of the government and to an extension the peoples wills on enemies whether foreign or domestic, in a violent and assertive manner, whether in a offensive or defensive capacity.

Using soldiers to stand in a line and look menacing is a waste of materials, its a job for Law enforcement not a infantry man.

If you want a soldier to take down a barracade his first instinct is to shoot the hell out of it, call in artillary, then use the engineers to blow the debris off of the road.

If you want to call in a soldier to intimidate a unruly mob, then your calling in the wrong guy, a soldier would conceal himself try to find the leader and kill him, then roll up the rest of the mob.

Sure soldiers have been used for mob control before, but it never works out well.

Soldiers will proudly help out during a natural disaster, it makes them a good citizen and you can't shoot a hurricane.

Soldiers will lay out their lives to save your life . . . as long as your not a threat.

But using soldiers as cops, or peace makers and taking away the tools that make soldiers effective is the wrong use for good material.

Just out of curiosity, and since it sounds like you were part of it, are Canadian soldiers trained to be peace keepers? Is the training, or focus of that training consistent with Canadian foreign relations initiatives?

Quite simply, since the 1960's, Canada has "branded" its self as the world's Peacekeeper. Theoretically, the military embodies that role and subsequently should be trained for it.

If the training is still aimed at creating soldiers, this is running counter to the reality of Canada's foreign policy for the last several decades.

[Titan]

Originally Posted by DESS

You have a pretty romantic view of soldiers that I reject. A soldier's primary mission in fact is to stand in a line and look menacing. Most armies in the world have a primary function of defence/deterrence. Having them literally stand in a line and look menacing is a natural extension of their figurative role.

And you mister dentist can't tell me how to take care of my teeth. And you mister lawyer man can't tell me anything about laws. O and you electrician guy, I can wire my house myself thank you very much.


You can certainly have an opinion even if it is completely misinformed in light of facts from experts. Ironically, your view is the romantic one.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by DESS

Having them literally stand in a line and look menacing is a natural extension of their figurative role.

Dess, dogs could do that too.

Cowperson

[DESS]

Originally Posted by Titan

And you mister dentist can't tell me how to take care of my teeth. And you mister lawyer man can't tell me anything about laws. O and you electrician guy, I can wire my house myself thank you very much.


You can certainly have an opinion even if it is completely misinformed in light of facts from experts. Ironically, your view is the romantic one.

Do you have any examples of my errors to back up your handi-capable post?

[DESS]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Dess, dogs could do that too.

Cowperson

That is a great use for dogs. Remember, I don't support exterminating dogs as I do bears; I merely want dogs banned from cities.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by llama64

Just out of curiosity, and since it sounds like you were part of it, are Canadian soldiers trained to be peace keepers? Is the training, or focus of that training consistent with Canadian foreign relations initiatives?

Quite simply, since the 1960's, Canada has "branded" its self as the world's Peacekeeper. Theoretically, the military embodies that role and subsequently should be trained for it.

If the training is still aimed at creating soldiers, this is running counter to the reality of Canada's foreign policy for the last several decades.

I was trained to be a soldier first. When I went through basic and through my infantry training school, we didn't even talk or think about peacekeeping. When I went out on field excercises, we trained to fight the Evil Red Hordes of communist Kaplakistan, not to stand in between warring factions of them.

We were taught military dicipline, we were taught the use of firearms, explosive devices, ambush sciences. Building a proper and secure encampment, day patrols and night patrols. We war gamed like mad. We were taught to fight wars first and foremost. For those of us that went on to peacekeeping, we would usually train for that specific peacekeeping machine before we deployed.

Foreign policy had nothing to do with it, a soldiers first job is to know how to soldier and to survive and suceed in a violent atmosphere, if we needed to peace keep, we learned how to do it.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am sorry but I think your post is ridiculous.

I understand that, most people do. Perhaps ridiculous is too strong a word, but I do have a point. Most people don't ever question what countries really are for, what they are supposed to do, and what they should instead be doing. Nationalism has been around for so long, most people don't know what things might look like if it didn't exist. I know this is a bit of hyperbole, but we really hated the communists for keeping their people within their own borders, imprisoning them and not letting them be "free" to come and go as they would. Now that this argument isn't needed, now we can arm the border, right? Now that someone elses wall no longer needs to be torn down, now we have the right to build our own? I once believed it was a point of pride that Canada and the US had the world's longest undefended border. Now we have guns on the border guards - I guess we can't say that anymore. Are we supposed to no longer be proud of that? It's now gone, does no one else find that a little sad? The freedoms of the free world are being eroded - and too many are cheering.