Oh yes, Natalia, I am an old hippy, high school drop out, lived in a van, built a teepee (the whole hippy thing), even smuggled some grass across the Canadian border. I was in wonder to find myself working for the Canadian government and even more so to end up at DND. But I find a great deal in common with most military folks - and that is a true vocational calling to a higher goal than self-agrandizement. In the end this old hippy has a tremendous respect for 99% of the military people he encounters, their intelligence, altruism, and desire to make the world a better place. john
John Verdon Sr. Strategic HR Analyst Directorate Military Personnel Force Development Department of National Defence Major-General George R. Pearkes Building 101 Colonel By Drive. Ottawa Ontario K1A 0K2 voice: 992-6246 FAX: 995-5785 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Searching for the pattern which connects.... and to know the difference that makes a difference" Sapare Aude -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 27 October, 2007 00:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 23 Send Futurework mailing list submissions to futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit *http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Futurework digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 19 (Darryl or Natalia) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:28:14 -0700 From: Darryl or Natalia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Futurework] Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 19 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" John, You and Romeo Dellaire are the only two examples I can think of that speak to me of leadership within the Canadian army. Not to say there aren't many more like you in Canada, I know there are--much as I'm aware of many in the US, Great Britain, and elsewhere. Many wonderful people serve, but their good intentions are rarely implemented or heard by the masses--the will of the world's elite ensuring that military primarily pursue control of oil and the nations who have it. It is mostly their voice that we hear. Where is yours being broadcast? Upon the paid participants at global conferences for other soldiers? The UN is barely effective, and seemingly ignoring patent genocides. Where are vital peacekeeping actions for the Sudanese people who have been in dire need? Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon need help, not more combative troops. Those should be a priority today, not helping the US to build oil pipelines and ensure contracts for US oil related industries. Defending human rights is one thing, but our army is primarily helping oppressive US concerns. Canada has followed the US to Afghanistan to secure Unical's oil pipeline construction, which the US cannot complete because the Taliban, who it used to support enthusiastically, are disrupting its construction. They are disrupting it because they had originally given the contract to a S. American concern, and the US invaded because they were dissed and overlooked for the prize--they were not originally there to catch Bin Laden, nor to help suffering Afghans. I'm confident that once Unical's construction is complete, the US will withdraw most of its forces. Canada has been assisting the US with its hegemony and interference. Likely thousands of Afghans are dead because of Canadian participation in the US led war. We just haven't heard how many are casualties or injured due to Canadian involvement. It is a fact that 4/5 Cdn. soldiers there are involved in active combat, though I would speak highly of those involved in actually helping citizens. Neither US, British, nor Canadian forces care to make note of how many Afghans they kill. Only their own are significant. Perception amongst Afghans of Western forces is that they are unconcerned with and are a direct threat to civilian safety. Add to that their increasing starvation because of this imposed war. The problem is that the poppy crop, almost eliminated by previous groups, has become a full blown industry thanks to the US and Canadian interference. Burning the crops, rather than legalizing them for medicinal markets, hurts civilians, not Taliban. They need irrigation for other types of crops in order to diversify. Most Afghans want the Karzai gov't to negotiate with the Taliban, particularly in Kandahar. Afghanistan is destined to become another Iraq. DU is being used, and infrastructure, although partly rebuilt in key pipeline construction sites, is crumbling in most other parts of the country. War has overcome the Afghan economy. Tell me this is about defence. I feel compelled to address some points below, in italics: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Having worked in the Canadian Defence establishment for 10 years, the > overwhelming amount of effort and thinking and commitment of everyone I have > ever encountered in the Canadian Forces, is on defence!!!! > > In all of the international conferences that involved other militaries, the > US and perhaps Russia are an anomaly. The overwhelming number of recruits > (most NCMs) are high school educated (or less) and within their careers they > receive tremendous amounts of training, this makes the CF one of Canada's > pre-eminent human capital developers. /Training would be intrinsic to such a career. But this does not address concerns for recruitment amongst people psychologically unfit to handle weaponry. Selecting high school graduates (or less?) does not mean the same as carefully screening for psychological fitness. By the way, when recruiting, it would be nice to see some honesty around DU. One of the army's reps on the CBC was trying to tell the public there is no safety issue therein. Guess he's not part of your immediate team. The US, who gives me most concern, recruits country bumpkins with little future, many criminals and drug addicts. A couple of months training and they're shipped out, over and over again. You may consider them (and Russia) an anomaly, but they are the current world model, and the world military has chiefly been reacting to or following their lead. Canada crossed the peace keeping line to support them in Afghanistan, so, I don't know what you're discussing at these conferences, but it isn't what Rick Hillier is demonstrating. / > > > Yes there are exceptions - e.g. somalia, but let's be clear this was an > exception and reflected a failure of leadership. Having met General Dellaire > personally, (in fact it was only when I met him did I truly realize what a > 'leader' really was), I know in my bones that there is less thirst for blood > in the CF than there is in the general population. /Er, if you say so. After all, they do sign up for required killing. As well, no problems in the homes, where domestic abuse is higher than average. But we are taking about how soldiers behave once they go to an occupied country, not how they behave on home soil. And, apart from Afghanistan, Canadian forces haven't been all that active in international killing in recent decades, so I'm sure statistics would confirm your bone-deep belief. / > > > Natalia, you are a smart and extremely well informed person. But in this rant > you are wrong to generalize to all militaries (modern ones of established > states) the behavior of the US. /Yes, you're right. And to Iran, whose army has been chiefly defensive, I apologize. And to the Finns, and Swiss. Could you please inform me of any major invading armies stationed anywhere there are significant oil reserves conducting strictly defensive and peaceful activities? / > > > There is a conflict in the world and it is those who seek to control by > propagandizing fear and those who seek peace, order and good government. The > most fundamental rule of the a modern military in a democracy is to obey its > civil government and for this they are to be praised, the blame rests not on > them but on our governments. /I'm not certain who you consider to be propagandizing fear, and who you think is actually seeking peace. OK. We should praise the US military for killing hundreds of thousands unnecessarily in Iraq, displacing over four million more. Civilians dissed Bush, not Saddam. Soldiers are helpless pawns of government, and must make those immoral decisions because they'd all be shot by their commanding officers for refusing to kill innocents. Got it. I seem to remember something about international war crimes, but it's a distant memory because the urgency for oil overcomes such concerns, and government orders are what they're really following when decisions to needlessly kill, rape, or otherwise injure civilians are conducted in theater. Do Pentagon officials serve and obey the directions of their government in exempting themselves from financial accountability? Did democratic government ask them to lose $3.3 trillion by the eve before 9/11, and not even try to find it or make amends beyond the repositioning of Dov Zakheim? Enron, big problem, Pentagon, no problem! I found it unconscionable, and disturbing that Canada has followed this lawless organization nonetheless. What I'd hoped to discuss was your latter point, given that hearts and minds of occupied territories are never won these days. What future can there be for a military that does not reflect the will of the un-manipulated people, and only reflects the lawless will of the elite? / > That they have a difficulty resisting 'unlawful' command is true,but that > difficulty hits equally the entire public service, the executive, the > population and our elected representatives. > > In Canada we spend less tha 2% of GDP (one of the lowest in the G8 and Nato) > on our military and 55% of that budget, is spent on our personnel. > /Our $18 billion defence budget is 27% higher than pre-9/11, 6th highest in NATO, and higher than our cold war spending when adjusted for inflation. We are now 13th in the world for military spending, and somehow, under a defence-motivated military, $100 million a month is being spent on mostly combat in Afghanistan. By March of 2008, we will have spent 7.2 billion on it. 40% on any one country other than our own is too much. This is alleged *defence* spending on securing US oil industry control. You and I both know what $100 mil. per month could be doing for Canada, the Sudanese, or for civilians in Afghanistan. This waste would not have been possible without US elite's inspiration and meddling. What are the allegedly peaceful forces doing to stop the chief aggressor so peace can be realized? Natalia Kuzmyn / > John Verdon > Sr. Strategic HR Analyst > Directorate Military Personnel Force Development > Department of National Defence > Major-General George R. Pearkes Building > 101 Colonel By Drive. > Ottawa Ontario > K1A 0K2 > voice: 992-6246 > FAX: 995-5785 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Searching for the pattern which connects.... and to know the difference that > makes a difference" > Sapare Aude > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 26 October, 2007 15:15 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 19 > > > Send Futurework mailing list submissions to > futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > **http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Futurework digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Universal soldier? (Cordell, Arthur: ECOM) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:15:12 -0400 > From: "Cordell, Arthur: ECOM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Futurework] Universal soldier? > To: "Darryl or Natalia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "futurework" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > This article has no place on FW. What does it have to do with the > future of work? If you wish to slam armies and the concept of war then > go to another site. If you want to slam Israel then, again, go to > another site. > > Arthur > > ________________________________ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darryl or > Natalia > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:05 PM > To: futurework > Subject: [Futurework] Universal soldier? > > > What is the future of work in the military to be? Most now fail to see a > future force of peace keepers, since it's pretty obvious that > controlling the oil industry and acquiring oil for the US are the > reasons for most budget allocations. But where does that leave those who > would otherwise have enlisted for a career of defense training, when the > actual reason for their services is merely one of overcoming and > overpowering? > > Billions are spent on military technological improvements that result in > more destruction, deaths and displacement than conventional combat ever > did. An emphasis on killing, rather than actual defense, could account > for the most obvious failures. > > In World Wars I and II, soldiers and citizens alike believed they were > defending our freedom. Far fewer came back from these wars so damaged > psychologically. For Viet Nam, Korea, the Gulf and Iraq wars there has > been a deployment of so-called freedom fighters with little to defend > but the psychotic egos of the ruling elite. Add to it that the > instruments of destruction are now much more sophisticated, and far more > harmful to all life forms. Today's soldiers are alarmingly more > disassociated from the human targets upon whom misery is inflicted > because of this sophistication of weaponry. > > When an army recruits its troops, what checks are in place to prevent > Joe/Jill Psycho from joining the ranks of "defenders"? How many > different qualifying tests does he/she take? And once enlisted, what > restraints are ensuring that defense, rather than offense, be the > primary motivator for staying in the ranks? It's rather a silly > question, isn't it, because civilians aren't usually being protected in > these current wars, as evidenced by the high casualties, costly > mercenary protection for officials only, and Iraq's billion dollar > "Green Zone", isolated from any civilian interaction. > > My deduction, by the recent wars' outcomes and horror stories, is that > offense is the operative motivation in modern warfare. I realize the > military has some expenditures on personnel who generate beneficial > human resources studies and policies, but these outlays, retained > primarily for the sake of having public relations reps who can actually > field questions, are utterly dwarfed by egregious budgets directed at > wiping out the so-called enemy at any expense. With such a pervasive > attitude, it's no wonder we have soldiers who are either freshly > enlisted or grow to be wholly dangerous. > > An Israeli psychologist blames Israeli soldiers' immoral and criminal > behaviour on boredom and poor training. This is an insane explanation! > She's an apologist not only for incompetent army recruiters and top > command, but for sadistic individuals who must never be allowed to hide > behind the stress of boredom to justify relief at the expense of human > life or injury of any type. > > >From everything I've ever read about soldiers anywhere they're > stationed, there are always too many amongst them who believe in their > right to be brutal -- and most of them get away with it because of > commanding officers' implicit approval or fellow troops covering for > them. > > Israel boasts of having the most humane troops in the world in their > recruitment efforts. The article below certainly disputes that claim. > > How many armies of any global significance are left that can define > their jobs as being ones which consist strictly of defense? The > Pentagon's budget, the US's most crippling, undergoes scant approval, > checks or balances. It reaps the largest share of the treasury, thereby > establishing its department (if we measure in terms of dollars) as the > most revered, above health and welfare, environment, education, etc. Yet > the department does nothing beneficially significant for anyone anywhere > (excepting the elites' portfolios) and generates more harm than could > ever be imagined. One might well conclude that waste by warring is what > Americans most value, and that the future expenditures of their nation > are assuredly focused upon continued psychotic activity, if not for the > painful fact that the immoral self-serving ruling elite actually have > control of how the treasury is spent. Same goes for Israel. > > The future of work, by reason of treasury allocations, is in killing or > overcoming, first and foremost. Yet there's no money in it but for the > elite and the mercenaries. So, national troops are either initially > misled into believing they are developing a career defending their > nation, are being recruited against their will, or are being selected > specifically because they possess criminal and immoral minds. You can't > train that many troops to become immoral, can you? But you can recruit > those who are potentially volatile, such as the many sickos and > criminals recruited thus far, and then expose them to stressors the > individuals might never have anticipated -- such as boredom, extreme > heat, extreme vigilance, DU, abhorrence by civilians, and realization of > the fact that their lives mean nothing to those really in command. This > is the state of the military today. Its future is even more bleak, with > projected urban wars. Perhaps that's where it will itself be overcome > and forever disbanded. > > Until voters recognize they are being chronically manipulated into > voting for yet another hawkish leader, the future of being a legal bully > looks just "Bully". > > Natalia Kuzmyn > > > Israel shaken by troops' tales of brutality against Palestinians > > > > A psychologist blames assaults on civilians in the 1990s on soldiers' > bad training, boredom and poor supervision > > Conal Urquhart in Jerusalem > Sunday October 21, 2007 > The Observer <**http://*www.observer.co.uk> > > > A study by an Israeli psychologist into the violent behaviour of the > country's soldiers is provoking bitter controversy and has awakened > urgent questions about the way the army conducts itself in the Gaza > Strip and West Bank. > > Nufar Yishai-Karin, a clinical psychologist at the Hebrew University in > Jerusalem, interviewed 21 Israeli soldiers and heard confessions of > frequent brutal assaults against Palestinians, aggravated by poor > training and discipline. In her recently published report, co-authored > by Professor Yoel Elizur, Yishai-Karin details a series of violent > incidents, including the beating of a four-year-old boy by an officer. > > The report, although dealing with the experience of soldiers in the > 1990s, has triggered an impassioned debate in Israel, where it was > published in an abbreviated form in the newspaper Haaretz last month. > According to Yishai Karin: 'At one point or another of their service, > the majority of the interviewees enjoyed violence. They enjoyed the > violence because it broke the routine and they liked the destruction and > the chaos. They also enjoyed the feeling of power in the violence and > the sense of danger.' > > In the words of one soldier: 'The truth? When there is chaos, I like it. > That's when I enjoy it. It's like a drug. If I don't go into Rafah, and > if there isn't some kind of riot once in some weeks, I go nuts.' > > Another explained: 'The most important thing is that it removes the > burden of the law from you. You feel that you are the law. You are the > law. You are the one who decides... As though from the moment you leave > the place that is called Eretz Yisrael [the Land of Israel] and go > through the Erez checkpoint into the Gaza Strip, you are the law. You > are God.' > > The soldiers described dozens of incidents of extreme violence. One > recalled an incident when a Palestinian was shot for no reason and left > on the street. 'We were in a weapons carrier when this guy, around 25, > passed by in the street and, just like that, for no reason - he didn't > throw a stone, did nothing - bang, a bullet in the stomach, he shot him > in the stomach and the guy is dying on the pavement and we keep going, > apathetic. No one gave him a second look,' he said. > > The soldiers developed a mentality in which they would use physical > violence to deter Palestinians from abusing them. One described beating > women. 'With women I have no problem. With women, one threw a clog at me > and I kicked her here [pointing to the crotch], I broke everything > there. She can't have children. Next time she won't throw clogs at me. > When one of them [a woman] spat at me, I gave her the rifle butt in the > face. She doesn't have what to spit with any more.' > > Yishai-Karin found that the soldiers were exposed to violence against > Palestinians from as early as their first weeks of basic training. On > one occasion, the soldiers were escorting some arrested Palestinians. > The arrested men were made to sit on the floor of the bus. They had been > taken from their beds and were barely clothed, even though the > temperature was below zero. The new recruits trampled on the > Palestinians and then proceeded to beat them for the whole of the > journey. They opened the bus windows and poured water on the arrested > men. > > The disclosure of the report in the Israeli media has occasioned a > remarkable response. In letters responding to the recollections, writers > have focused on both the present and past experience of Israeli soldiers > to ask troubling questions that have probed the legitimacy of the > actions of the Israeli Defence Forces. > > The study and the reactions to it have marked a sharp change in the way > Israelis regard their period of military service - particularly in the > occupied territories - which has been reflected in the increasing levels > of conscientious objection and draft-dodging. > > The debate has contrasted sharply with an Israeli army where new > recruits are taught that they are joining 'the most ethical army in the > world' - a refrain that is echoed throughout Israeli society. In its > doctrine, published on its website, the Israeli army emphasises human > dignity. 'The Israeli army and its soldiers are obligated to protect > human dignity. Every human being is of value regardless of his or her > origin, religion, nationality, gender, status or position.' > > However, the Israeli army, like other armies, has found it difficult to > maintain these values beyond the classroom. The first intifada, which > began in 1987, before the wave of suicide bombings, was markedly > different to the violence of the second intifada, and its main events > were popular demonstrations with stone-throwing. > > Yishai-Karin, in an interview with Haaretz, described how her research > came out of her own experience as a soldier at an army base in Rafah in > the Gaza Strip. She interviewed 18 ordinary soldiers and three officers > whom she had served with in Gaza. The soldiers described how the > violence was encouraged by some commanders. One soldier recalled: 'After > two months in Rafah, a [new] commanding officer arrived... So we do a > first patrol with him. It's 6am, Rafah is under curfew, there isn't so > much as a dog in the streets. Only a little boy of four playing in the > sand. He is building a castle in his yard. He [the officer] suddenly > starts running and we all run with him. He was from the combat > engineers. > > 'He grabbed the boy. I am a degenerate if I am not telling you the > truth. He broke his hand here at the wrist, broke his leg here. And > started to stomp on his stomach, three times, and left. We are all > there, jaws dropping, looking at him in shock... > > 'The next day I go out with him on another patrol, and the soldiers are > already starting to do the same thing." > > Yishai-Karin concluded that the main reason for the soldiers' violence > was a lack of training. She found that the soldiers did not know what > was expected of them and therefore were free to develop their own way of > behaviour. The longer a unit was left in the field, the more violent it > became. The Israeli soldiers, she concluded, had a level of violence > which is universal across all nations and cultures. If they are allowed > to operate in difficult circumstances, such as in Gaza and the West > Bank, without training and proper supervision, the violence is bound to > come out. > > A spokeswoman for the Israeli army said that, if a soldier deviates from > the army's norms, they could be investigated by the military police or > face criminal investigation. > > She said: 'It should be noted that since the events described in Nufar > Yishai-Karin's research the number of ethical violations by IDF soldiers > involving the Palestinian population has consistently dropped. This > trend has continued in the last few years.' > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > avast! Antivirus <**http://*www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean. > > Virus Database (VPS): 071025-1, 10/25/2007 > Tested on: 10/25/2007 6:05:23 PM > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > **http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/private/futurework/attachments/20071026/a6927c0a/attachment.html > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca > **http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > End of Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 19 > ****************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca > *http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > --- > avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. > Virus Database (VPS): 071025-1, 10/25/2007 > Tested on: 10/26/2007 1:05:12 PM > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. > *http://www.avast.com > > > > > --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 071026-0, 10/26/2007 Tested on: 10/26/2007 9:28:49 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. *http://www.avast.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: *http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/private/futurework/attachments/20071026/75af9df9/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca *http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework End of Futurework Digest, Vol 47, Issue 23 ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
