Web Search:

	Groups
			Free Forum Hosting

Important Announcement The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
The History Page	[email protected]

What's New

Message Boards

For New Members

On This Day....

General

American History

Ancient History

British History

Current Events

European History

The Civil War

War

World History

Pictures

Links

Militaria Board

Cars/Motorcycles

Tools

War : Movies vs. History
Choose another message board

Message 1 of 54 in Discussion

From:

-TinCan (Original Message)

Sent: 9/10/2007 2:16 AM

The other night I watched a good movie about WWI aerial combat entitled,"Flyboys". It is loosly based on the exploits of the famed Lafayette Escadrille, a French unit of Americans who volunteered to fly for France. One of the characters was an African-American by the name of Eugene Skinner. This character was based on the real life Eugene Bullard who was probably the first African-American fighter pilot. However, Bullard never flew with the Lafayette Escadrille, as he was assigned to SPA 92 he fell under the group of Americans too numberous to fly in one Escadrille, who were spread out to other units but were loosly reconized as the Lafayette Flying Corps.

The Lafayette Flying Corps included all the Americans serving the French Air Service until they were disbanded in 1918 and taken into the American Air Service. It was never a offical unit, more of a designation. I had never heard of a African-American in the Escadrille and wanted to look into it further. Some histories list Bullard as serving with the Escadrille instead of rightly the Flying Corps. None the less Bullard was a very interesting man.

First

Previous 40-54 of 54 Next Last

Message 40 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/23/2007 11:35 PM

Like your self potrait. Don't hide behind Sunday. Take responsibility for your malice sometimes.

Message 41 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/24/2007 12:01 AM

?)about Officers' Detention Camps, any Officer deserving such treatment was reduced to the ranks first. Then served a sentence. Happy now?

NOW SEE THAT WASN'T SO HARD FLASH, WAS IT?

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF IT REALLY BEING DONE OR WAS IT USED MORE AS A THREAT TO TOE THE LINE TO JUNIOR OFFICERS?

I'VE SEEN GUYS WITH US DO 21 DAYS FOR 5 MINUTES LATE FOR PARADE.

Message 42 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/24/2007 12:13 AM

21 days for 5 minutes late? Boll*cks. Go back to dreamland. Unless there's a really bad history somewhere. But makes a nice story in the pub doesn't it?

21 days is beyond a Sqn/Coy punishment. CO's Court martial.

If those sort of punishments are flying around, some Colonel's going to be asking a few probing questions.

By the way, I've defended a lot of Courts martial in my time.

But of course you were in a different Army. Obviously with officers you could only dislike. Poor you. Even Arnie didn't have such a hard time.

Message 43 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/24/2007 12:29 AM

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF IT REALLY BEING DONE ?

I've never heard of Officers being shot. They were reduced to the ranks first.

The answer is yes of course. Every officer buys his badges with zips behind.

You might like to remember in your anti officer hysteria

Far fewer qualify educationally to be able to apply for officer training
They then have to be accepted for Army entry like any Private.
Far fewer qualified applicants pass the selection course for officer training (4 days at Westbury)
A high percentage fail to pass the first 2 basic terms of training.
Some fail the following probationary period.
Some are allowed to do Bn Pte soldier recruitment and can be accepted as Potential Officer candidates (local L/Cpl) these are often the best officers when they finally emerge
And then some YOs pass their officer training but fail their "Special to Arm" additional trg, e.g. Long Gunners', 1 year. Signals 2 years.

So it's a shame an officer is dismissed as a load of weak chinned rubbish.

Message 44 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/24/2007 3:31 AM

CORRECT, 21 AND OVER WAS HANDED OUT BY THE CO. UP TO THAT WAS SQN OC. IT WAS VERY COMMON IN OUR FORCES. IN THE ARMY, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR AIR FORCE OR NAVY.

I HAD A SGT/MAJ WHO ON RELEASE FOUND OUT THAT HE STILL OWED THEM 168 DAYS FOR TIME SPENT IN THE DIGGER.

BOTH PAY AND PENSIONABLE TIME STOP WHILE YOU ARE SERVING.

21 days for 5 minutes late? Boll*cks. Go back to dreamland. Unless there's a really bad history somewhere. But makes a nice story in the pub doesn't it?

ARE YOU CALLING ME A LIAR??

IF SO THEN GO FUCK YOUR SELF FLASH.

Message 45 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/24/2007 11:51 AM

Yes I am.

I've heard so many exaggerated stories .

Anyone who gives such a sentence for such a minor misdeed would be looked at harder than the criminal.

And as a Platoon Commander I would be treading the boards in defence of the man. Unless, as I said above, ". Unless there's a really bad history somewhere. "

Now, that is quite a reasonable comment. I suggest you re-read my post 41. you have acknowledged I am correct in the other points about powers of punishment.

But you've put yourself in such a position you can't back out now, such is your dislike of officers.

And I'll tell you now. I've had bad experiences with every rank, EXCEPT Officers.

And I don't go generalising and whining about them on site.

There is a language code on site.

Message 46 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/25/2007 2:28 AM

I STAND BY WHAT I HAVE SAID FLASH.

MOST CHARGED WOULD BE ACCOMPANIED

WITH OTHER CHARGES SUCH AS UNBECOMING OF A SERVICEMEN ETC. IT WAS CALLED THE SHOTGUN EFFECT. IT WAS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFEND ALL THE CHARGES AT ONCE. IT WAS ALSO VERY RARE TO HAVE A DEFENDING OFFICER PRESENT. MOST JUNIOR RANKS DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY HAD ANY RIGHTS OR WERE ENTITLED TO ONE.

IT COULD EVEN BE THEIR OWN TROOP SGT WHO MIGHT STAND IN AND SAY A FEW GOOD WORDS ON THEIR BEHALF. IT WAS STRICTLY A KANGEROO SYSTEM AT THE BEST OF TIMES WHICH WAS SELDOM IN FAVOUR OF THE ACCUSED. 7 AND 14 DAYS WAS VERY COMMON AND 21 WAS USED TO SET AN EXAMPLE TO THE REST OF THE REGT. 7 OR 14 WERE DONE ON THE PERSONS BASE. MANY TIMES AT THE REGTS GUARD HOUSE. FOR THE 21 OR MORE YOU WERE SHIPPED TO GAGETOWN NB OR LATER TO VALCARTIER QUE.

IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT MORE THAT 30 DAYS THEN THE MILITARY WAS USUALLY TRYING TO PUSH YOU OUT AND RELEASE USUALLY FOLLOWED YOUR DETENTION.

TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF THE KANGAROO SYSTEM, I WAS CHARGED IN BASIC TRAINING FOR NO SWEATER IN DRAW FOR CO'S INSPECTION. I WENT UP IN FRONT OF MY OC AND AS A DEFENDING OFFICER HAD THE SGT THAT HAD JUST FINISHED CHARGEING ME WITH IT..

THE OC READ THE CHARGES AND SAYS, NO SWEATER IN DRAW FOR CO'S INSPECTION. WHERE WAS YOUR SWEATER TROOPER? I SAID I HAD IT ON SIR, HE SAID, YOU HAD IT ON?? I SAID YES SIR I FIGURED THAT IF THE MILITARY ISSUED YOU A SWEATER AND IT WAS -25 BELOW OUT THAT I COULD WEAR IT UNDER MY CLOTHS. THE OC WAS A BIT LOST FOR WORDS SO THE SGT PIPES UP AND SAYS, OH, BY THE WAY SIR, HE ALSO HAD A DUSTY BEDSIDE LAMP. A DUSTY BEDSIDE LAMP THE OC SAYS, WELL I HAVE TO FIND YOU GUILTY AND CHARGE YOU 25 DOLLARS FOR THAT. MARCH HIM OUT SGT. NEARLY EVER MAN IN MY SQN DURING BASIC GOT CHARGED BEFORE THE COURSE WAS OVER. ALL 25 DOLLARS AND ALL FOR MICKEY MOUSE TRUMPED UP CHARGES LIKE THE LAST. (WE GOT PAID 100 BUCKS A MONTH)

WE ALSO DID A LOT OF EXTRA WORK AND DRILL FOR A PUNISHMENT AT THE REGT. FOR THIS YOU WERE CONFINED TO BARRACKS AND AFTER YOUR NORMAL DAYS WORK REPORTED AND WERE INSPECTED BY THE DUTY SGT. YOU ALSO HAD YOUR KIT INSPECTED AND DID CHANGE PARADES EACH HOUR UP UNTIL 12 AM.

IN BETWEEN YOU WERE ALSO GIVEN DRILL WITH A WEIGHTED RUG SACK BY THE DUTY SGT AND USUALLY HAD TO DO OTHER SMALL TASKS LIKE SHINE THE SILVER IN THE OFFICERS MESS OR PAINT SOMETHING THAT REALLY DIDN'T NEED PAINTING.

SO FLASH PLEASE DON'T TELL ME ABOUT CANADIAN MILITARY DISCIPLE AND HOW IT WORKED.

I HAD VERY MANY GOOD OFFICERS FLASH AND WOULD HARDLY SAY THAT I'M ANTI OFFICER. WE NEVER SEEN TOO MANY BELOW THE RANK OF CAPTAIN AS I SAID MANY POSTS AGO.

ONE OF MY FIRST CORPORALS IN THE REGT WHO WAS A BIT OF A NOVELTY TO US BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK WENT ON TO BECOME A FULL COL IN THE ARMOURED CORP.

ON THE OTHER HAND I DID LIKE MOST, GET VOLINTEERS TO WORK MANY OFFICERS MESS FUNCTIONS AND FOUND OUT THAT EVERY LEVEL OF RANK HAD IT'S A** HOLES.

Message 47 of 54 in Discussion

From:

LewWetzel1

Sent: 10/25/2007 5:39 AM

A detention camp for Officers? Wasn't that called Stellenbosch?

Message 48 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/25/2007 11:47 AM

Lew,

Stellenbosch is I believe a University and like Potchefstroom, an Officer training academy during the good old days.

I believe during the Boer war officers were returned there for retraining, which obviously might not look too good on your record.

But during that war we did everything wrong, from type of horse to low velocity rifles (compared with the Boers' Mauser) The colonials did better.

Obviously while an Officer is under investigation he retains his rank.When found guilty, he is cashiered first then sentenced, if the crime is that serious. The loaded revolver is left in a room where the Officer cannot injure anyone else, and failure to use it is taken as admission of the crime and reflects on the Officer's relatives. The suicide is recorded as accidental death.

Lord Sean Hara O'Day's estate was charged for replacement grips after he'd carved a notch into the butt before the appeal was heard which resulted in his acquittal. That gave rise to the (curiously modern) expression "to jump the gun"

Message 49 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/25/2007 12:09 PM

PBA

"I'VE SEEN GUYS WITH US DO 21 DAYS FOR 5 MINUTES LATE FOR PARADE"

Contrasts with

MOST CHARGED WOULD BE ACCOMPANIED

WITH OTHER CHARGES SUCH AS UNBECOMING OF A SERVICEMEN ETC. IT WAS CALLED THE SHOTGUN EFFECT. IT WAS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFEND ALL THE CHARGES AT ONCE. IT WAS ALSO VERY RARE TO HAVE A DEFENDING OFFICER PRESENT. MOST JUNIOR RANKS DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY HAD ANY RIGHTS OR WERE ENTITLED TO ONE.

You must have had something wrong. As a YO if one of my lads was sentenced it reflected badly on me. CSM would give my sergeant a bad boot up the backside, and the Coy 2i/c would be having words with me on the subject of "You and your sergeant must get a grip" and "maybe a couple of extra duties might concentrate yoiur mind next time" I bloody well knew if one of my lads was coming up on orders. On a few occasions I cancelled leave to be there.

IT WAS ALSO VERY RARE TO HAVE A DEFENDING OFFICER PRESENT.

This I cannot believe see above.The first thing the sentencing officer wants to know is his performance. On the other hand you don't paint too rosy a picture of the lad to earn popularity.

Your case of the sweater and the bedside lamp. You were on a formal charge regarding the sweater. "Failure to follow Standing Orders inasmuch as........." Your Sgt cannot add a load of other complaints during the hearing.

In British Military Law if a procedure is followed which would be unacceptable in a Civilian court (and this would) it is void. Except for certain clearly defined charges like queering.

I retract calling you a liar, as you complain. But I certainly feel you have overstated the case, possibly throiugh lapse of time.

Message 50 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/25/2007 6:21 PM

In British Military Law if a procedure is followed which would be unacceptable in a Civilian court (and this would) it is void. Except for certain clearly defined charges like queering.

I retract calling you a liar, as you complain. But I certainly feel you have overstated the case, possibly throiugh lapse of time.

WHAT IF I TOLD YOU FLASH THAT I WAS COURT MARTIALED TWICE ON THE SAME CHARGE. THE FIRST TIME THE JUDGE AND PANEL FOUND ME NOT GUILTY. THE SECOND TIME I WAS FOUND GUILTY AND FINED 3 THOUSAND DOLLARS AND LOST 14 YEARS OF SENORITY. I GOT A CIVI LAWYER WHICH COST ME ANOTHER THREE THOUSAND AND AND WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY AND GOT MY THREE THOUSAND AND SENORITY RETURNED. THIS TOOK ALL OF THREE YEARS TO DO. THE CO WHO PASSED IT UP TO A COURT MARTIAL IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS REMOVED FROM HIS POSITION AND WAS NEVER ALLOWED TO COMMAND A UNIT IN THE FIELD AGAIN. I STILL HAVE THE COURT TRANSCRIPTS.THEY ARE BETWEEN 21/2 TO 3 INCHS THICK.

THE MAIN CHARGE WAS STRIKING AN OFFICER. I LATER FOUND OUT THAT THE CO KNEW THE YOUNG OFFICER WAS LIEING AND THOUGHT THAT IF IT WENT TO A COURT MARTIAL HE WOULD BE FOUND OUT. IT BACK FIRED ON THE CO AND I WAS LEFT DEFENDING MYSELF. I HAD AN AJAG LAWYER THAT TIME. I HAD CAUGHT THE YOUNG GENTLEMAN RED HANDED WITH HIS HAND IN THE SQN CANTEEN MONEY AND LATER EVEN THOUGH I HADN'T MENTIONED IT TO ANYONE THAT EVENING IN THE FIELD AFTER WE HAD BOTH BEEN DRINKING HE TRIED TO TAKE A ROUND OUT OF ME. I NEVER HIT HIM BUT ONLY RESTRAINED HIM IN A BEAR HUG TO STOP HIM FROM HITTING ME. A YOUNG SOLDIER COMES ALONE AND SEE US ON THE GROUND AND I'M THE ONE WHO TOOK THE CHARGE BEING THE LOWER RANK. THE YOUNG SOLDIER ALSO GOT CAUGHT LIEING IN COURT SAYING AT FIRST THAT HE HAD SEEN ME HIT THE OFFICER AND LATER ON CROSS EXAMINATION ADMITTED THAT HE HADN'T. THE OFFICE ALSO ADMITTED IN COURT THAT HE HAD NOT BEEN HIT.

HE ALSO HAD TO ADMIT THAT HE HAD GONE FLYING (HE WAS A PILOT) ONLY A FEW HOURS AFTER THIS HEAVY DRINKING .

I WAS STILL FOUND GUILTY AT THE SECOND COURT MARTIAL.

THIS SAME YOUNG OFFICER GOT CAUGHT USEING A MILITARY CREDIT CARD TO PURCHASE PERSONAL ITEMS LIKE 4 CAR TIRES IN THE STATES. WHEN ACCOUNTS AT THE PAY OFFICE QUESTIONED IT HE SAID OH YES, I WAS GOING TO DROP BY AND PAY YOU'S THAT BACK. HE WAS NEVER CHARGED.

BY THE WAY. DURING THE SECOND COURT MARTIAL WHILE MY LAWYER WAS GIVING HIS CLOSING STATEMENTS ONE OF THE THREE YOUNG OFFICERS THAT ARE THERE TO DECIDE YOUR FATE FELL FAST ASLEEP. MY OC AND TWO OTHER OFFICERS WITNESSED IT AND SIGNED A SWORE AVADAVITE TO THAT. IN THE END EVERYONE IN THE COURT WAS LOOKING AT HIM AND IT FINALLY CAUGHT THE JUDGES ATTENTION.

THE JUDGE SPENT 45 MINUTES GOING OVER EACH CHARGE AND TELLING THEM TO THE POINT I THOUGHT THAT THEY MUST BE STUPID NOT TO UNDERSTAND THAT HES TELLING THEM TO FIND ME NOT GUILTY, BUT THEY DID. NO ONE THAT SAT IN THROUGH THE TRAIL COULD BELIEVE IT, ALMOST ALL WERE OFFICERS.. LIKE I SAID I HAD TO TAKE IT TO A CIVI LAWYER IN THE END TO HAVE MY NAME CLEARED.

But I certainly feel you have overstated the case, possibly throiugh lapse of time.

SOME THINGS FLASH TIME DOESN'T ERASE THE MEMORIES, BUT ONLY HARDENS THEM.

Message 51 of 54 in Discussion

From:

Flashman8

Sent: 10/25/2007 10:09 PM

Harrowing story, but don't forget the expression "the exception doesn't prove the rule"

This is nothing to do with your first postulation 21 days for 5 minutes late.

Yes you did have a bad time but these are absolutely new facts in our discussion.

You start by saying 21 days for 5 minutes late. I say surely not, this cannot be common place. You then ask me if I'm calling you a liar.

You now relate incidents of assault, fraud, perjury, which are introduced by :

My answer is you hadn't told me.

Now, I will say something. I do believe there was a serious morale problem in the Canadian Forces in 1972-3 (I'll be as narrow as that) That is the time Capt Richard Cohen from the PPCLI transferred to us (3LI) in Germany. Told you this before. I was amazed by his rudeness and arrogance in a regiment were the only real rank gap is between the Colonel and the other officers. I'd go out boozing with Majors, Captains,, and the only distinction was really if you were a bachelor or not. I never knew what happened to him. He was not allowed to go to NI and when we returned he was gone.

But 25 days for 5 minutes late on parade. yes: it could happen but only as a cumulation of loads of other crimes, in the British Army.

Message 52 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/26/2007 8:23 PM

THE MAIN CHARGE AS I SAID WAS LATE FOR PARADE.

THEY ALWAYS THROW IN A GROUP OF KICKERS WITH IT SO THAT YOU WILL BE FOUND GUILTY OF SOMETHING. SECONDARY CHARGES. UNBECOMING, DISOBEYING A LAWFUL COMMAND, ETC.

I ENDED UP WITH EIGHT CHARGES FOR THE ONE INCIDENT. TO READ THE CHARGE REPORT YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT THE YOUNG OFFICER HAD BEEN HIT AT LEAST 8 TIMES.

IN A COURT MARTIAL YOU ARE TRYING TO DEFEND YOURSELF FROM EACH CHARGE. IN THE END IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO BEAT THE UNBECOMING OF A SERVICEMAN EVEN THOUGH THAT WASN'T THE MAIN CHARGE.

THE GUY WHO GOT THE 21 DAYS WAS A CLOSE FRIEND AND HIS WIFE AND MINE ALSO GOT ON WELL. YEARS LATER WE TOURED EUROPE A LOT AS A FOURSOME. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO HIM FOR ME TO PASS ON HIS NAME AND PHONE NUMBER TO VERIFY THE INCIDENT, DO YOU? I WILL SHARE THE REASON THAT HE WAS 5 MINUTES LATE THOUGH. IT WAS BECAUSE HIS GIRLFRIEND WHO WASN'T HIS WIFE YET WAS HAVING THEIR FIRST CHILD AND HE WENT HOME WHICH WAS IN THE NEXT PROVINCE TO SEE HER. HE HAD ASKED FOR PERMISSION AHEAD OF TIME BUT WAS REFUSED BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T MARRIED YET. HE HAD DRIVEN ALL NIGHT TO GET BACK IN TIME BUT DIDN'T MANAGE TO MAKE THE, FALL IN. THEY KNEW WHY HE WAS LATE BUT BECAUSE HE WAS, THAT'S WHY THEY CHARGED HIM. TO SET AN EXAMPLE TO THE REGT.

I HAVE TO PICK UP THE BOSS AT THE DOCTORS BUT WILL ADD MORE LATER.

Message 53 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/26/2007 9:50 PM

PMO rejects Hillier's timeline on Afghan mission

26/10/2007 1:54:58 PM

The PMO has reiterated the government's position, laid out in the throne speech, that it believes the Afghan people will be able to defend themselves by 2011 -- years ahead of the timeline Canada's top soldier gave Thursday.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier appear to have a different timeline for the Afghanistan mission.

Gen. Rick Hillier told reporters at the Kandahar airfield on Thursday that Afghanistan's army could need 10 years before it's in a position to fend for itself.

But in the recent throne speech, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said that objective could be accomplished by 2011.

"This really set off the Prime Minister's Office, they were completely caught off guard by this (and) they have now put out a statement officially rebuking Gen. Hillier," CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife reported Friday.

"What you have here is the government making policy and then being outflanked by the general who says in fact the government isn't telling the truth, that it can't be done by 2011, that it would take a decade."

Statement from Harper spokesperson

In a statement to CTV, Harper's director of communications Sandra Buckler did not directly address Hillier's comments.

"Building up the capacity of the Afghan people so that they can defend their own sovereignty has always been our goal and we know this will not happen overnight," said Buckler.

"However, our Government believes that this objective should be achievable by 2011, the end of the period covered by the Afghanistan Compact."

The Afghanistan Compact is a plan adopted last year by the international community to stabilize the war-torn country.

Buckler said the government would have the final decision on the matter.

"While we do look forward to receiving the report from the Manley Panel, we have said so many times before and will continue to emphasize, it will be Parliament that will ultimately decide how long our Canadian Forces will remain in Afghanistan," she said.

Hillier said Thursday that Afghanistan is only about halfway to the 70,000 soldiers it needs to maintain peace in the country.

He said the Afghan troops trained by Canadians and other NATO nations are "top-notch." But he noted it takes three years to build a battalion, which consists of about 500 to 600 soldiers.

"It's going to take 10 years or so just to work through and build an army to whatever the final number that Afghanistan will have, and make them professional and let them meet their security demands here," Hillier said.

Public policy dispute

The difference in timeframes wasn't easily dismissed by other parties who demanded answers.

"Now we've got a situation where the chief of defence staff is saying one thing. The prime minister and his spinmeisters are saying another. It raises serious questions about whether we have adequate civilian control of this mission, Deputy Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said Friday after question period.

"The soldiers deserve better. They deserve effective leadership by the civilian elected government of this country and they are not getting it."

On Thursday, NDP Leader Jack Layton called the discrepancy "very serious" while speaking to reporters.

"If it's true, as General Hillier is suggesting, that Canada could be involved in the combat effort as the effort to train soldiers and police in Afghanistan takes 10 years, then we're talking about something very different than what Mr. Harper has told Canadians," he said.

Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre told reporters that Canadians shouldn't have to decide who's telling the truth.

"We have to come clean once and for all," he said. "You have Harper who plays with numbers like crazy and now he's saying that it's going to take four years. So, you know, you can understand why Canadians are confused sometimes about the mission."

Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe said, "I think General Hillier is telling the truth and Harper is playing politics, period. He knows Hillier is right on that."

Since 2002, 71 Canadian soldiers and one diplomat have been killed in Afghanistan.

Canada and its 2,500 troops are only committed to the Afghan mission until February 2009, although Harper has appointed a blue-ribbon panel to make recommendations on the mission's future.

With files from The Canadian Press

THE CHIEF OF DEFENSE STAFF GENERAL HILLIER WAS ONE OF MY TROOP OFFICERS WHEN HE WAS A LT. HE'S FROM NEWFOUNDLAND AND I ALWAYS CONSIDERED HIM A VERY GOOD OFFICER FLASH.

NOT THAT THIS ARTICLE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BUT TO SHOW YOU THAT WE ALSO HAD MANY GOOD OFFICERS.

Message 54 of 54 in Discussion

From:

MOREREPETES

Sent: 10/26/2007 10:10 PM

I HOPE YOU WERE ABLE TO VIEW THE VIDEO FLASH.

RICK WAS ALWAYS KNOWN FOR CALLING A SPADE A SPADE BUT I THINK EVEN THOUGH HIS THOUGHTS ARE CORRECT ON AFGANISTAN THE GOVERNMENT TO SHUTE HIM UP, WILL REPLACING HIM.

THIS WILL DO NOTHING FOR MORAL IN AFGANISTAN AS HE IS VERY WELL LIKED BY ANY THAT HAVE SERVED UNDER HIM.

HE WAS ALWAYS THE TYPE TO ASK YOU WHAT YOU NEEDED TO DO YOUR JOB BETTER AND WOULD DO HIS BEST TO MAKE CHANGES WERE EVER POSSIBLE. IT WAS HIM THAT PUSHED FOR EVERYTHING FROM PROPER UNIFORMS TO TANK SUPPORT IN AFGANISTAN.

First

Previous 40-54 of 54 Next Last

Return to War