[Gunnair]

Canadian_Mind wrote:

herbie wrote:

What a load of horseshit. The Navy and Air Force are OURS not the fucking Monarch's.

News buds, we serve the reigning monarch because he/she is our commander in chief. They, in turn, serve you. Or rather, allow the government selected by the Canadian people to serve you and represent your interests, with their oversight.

There is a reason for this, if all the Liberal die-hard prophecies come true and Harper establishes Auschwitz 2.0, Kristallnacht, etc. You wouldn't want the military following his marching orders. Consequently, the Queen (or Charles or William) would bitch slap his ass to the dark side of the moon so hard it'd speed up the earths rotation.

I know people bitch about a "foreign monarch who isn't selected and doesn't care about us" being in charge, but if something ever as fucked happens at the 1917 rebellion, or the 1933 vote, and we have a republican style system, kiss your freedom goodbye, you'll be missing the setup you have now.

Actually, Queen is head of state

GG is Commander in Chief.

[ccga3359]

raydan wrote:

If they can keep the "Royal" for a Québec based regiment, I wonder why it wasn't kept for the Navy and Air Force too.

Can't say if Hellyer was anti-monarchist or not but the reason behind the '68 renaming is to have all branches under one chief. In essence it was like demoting all three services. I don't disagree with the amalgamation, to me it does make sense rather than having your different services doing their own thing and overlapping duties, non-cooperation, etc. The '68 renaming casts aside strong traditions and pride of service and must've been demoralizing to all that served. The RCN fought the Nazi uboats and contributed significantly to winning the war, Maritime Command didn't. It had no history.

[Canadian_Mind]

Gunnair wrote:

Canadian_Mind wrote:

herbie wrote:

What a load of horseshit. The Navy and Air Force are OURS not the fucking Monarch's.

News buds, we serve the reigning monarch because he/she is our commander in chief. They, in turn, serve you. Or rather, allow the government selected by the Canadian people to serve you and represent your interests, with their oversight.

There is a reason for this, if all the Liberal die-hard prophecies come true and Harper establishes Auschwitz 2.0, Kristallnacht, etc. You wouldn't want the military following his marching orders. Consequently, the Queen (or Charles or William) would bitch slap his ass to the dark side of the moon so hard it'd speed up the earths rotation.

I know people bitch about a "foreign monarch who isn't selected and doesn't care about us" being in charge, but if something ever as fucked happens at the 1917 rebellion, or the 1933 vote, and we have a republican style system, kiss your freedom goodbye, you'll be missing the setup you have now.

Actually, Queen is head of state

GG is Commander in Chief.

Queen is still the GG's boss. Either way, my mix up, but it doesn't degrade my point.

[Gunnair]

Canadian_Mind wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Canadian_Mind wrote:

News buds, we serve the reigning monarch because he/she is our commander in chief. They, in turn, serve you. Or rather, allow the government selected by the Canadian people to serve you and represent your interests, with their oversight.

There is a reason for this, if all the Liberal die-hard prophecies come true and Harper establishes Auschwitz 2.0, Kristallnacht, etc. You wouldn't want the military following his marching orders. Consequently, the Queen (or Charles or William) would bitch slap his ass to the dark side of the moon so hard it'd speed up the earths rotation.

I know people bitch about a "foreign monarch who isn't selected and doesn't care about us" being in charge, but if something ever as fucked happens at the 1917 rebellion, or the 1933 vote, and we have a republican style system, kiss your freedom goodbye, you'll be missing the setup you have now.

Actually, Queen is head of state

GG is Commander in Chief.

Queen is still the GG's boss. Either way, my mix up, but it doesn't degrade my point.

Seen.

[saturn_656]

ccga3359 wrote:

raydan wrote:

If they can keep the "Royal" for a Québec based regiment, I wonder why it wasn't kept for the Navy and Air Force too.

Can't say if Hellyer was anti-monarchist or not but the reason behind the '68 renaming is to have all branches under one chief. In essence it was like demoting all three services. I don't disagree with the amalgamation, to me it does make sense rather than having your different services doing their own thing and overlapping duties, non-cooperation, etc. The '68 renaming casts aside strong traditions and pride of service and must've been demoralizing to all that served. The RCN fought the Nazi uboats and contributed significantly to winning the war, Maritime Command didn't. It had no history.

Each of the three services had pride. They had history. They had strong traditions. They could have unified the services without renaming them (or ditching their distinct uniforms and ranks), but that wouldn't have accomplished the goal. Hellyer wanted to destroy the three services and build a new organization from the leftovers.

No wonder serving members and veterans were so pissed off.

[ccga3359]

saturn_656 wrote:

Each of the three services had pride. They had history. They had strong traditions. They could have unified the services without renaming them (or ditching their distinct uniforms and ranks), but that wouldn't have accomplished the goal. Hellyer wanted to destroy the three services and build a new organization from the leftovers.

No wonder serving members and veterans were so pissed off.

Agreed, as a newly minted Canadian in 1979 I joined the RCA(air)C just as the cadet uniforms were being replaced. The older members still had their sky-blue wool WWII RCAF uniforms and looked proper, me I was issued a bottle green bus drivers uniform just like the sea cadets and the army cadets, we looked rediculous. Back then I noticed pride in the uniform. Perhaps the military was too top heavy back then ('68) or non-cooperation between services, sure something needed to be done. It must've been demoralizing for a soldier to take orders from an admiral too, let alone destructuring of one's service. It was also the start of a steady decline in support for the armed forces. Why every member of the forces at DND HQ needs a civilian counterpart has further hindered. The rebuilding of our forces was started by liberal Paul Martin and continues with Harper the return of RCAF, RCN & CA is long overdue to rebuilding a strong military. Anyone who's ever donned a uniform can understand.