Topic: "Royalizing" Canada's Navy, Army & Air Force Names (merged)

[Excelsior]

Bring back Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force?

Yay or nay?

[Lone Wolf AT]

I thought the Navy still did have the royal in it?

[NFLD Sapper]

I thought the Navy still did have the royal in it?

I belive they lost it during unification

   

Bring back Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force?

Then why not bring it back for the Engineers and the Army as a whole.

Most arms of the CF lost the designation of royal upon unification.

[Ex-Dragoon]

We haven‘t been the RCN since unification nor has the air force been the RCAF. What would be the point it would only end up diverting funds from areas where we need it.

[Jason Jarvis]

Originally posted by Ex-Dragoon:
[qb] We haven‘t been the RCN since unification nor has the air force been the RCAF. What would be the point it would only end up diverting funds from areas where we need it. [/qb]

Changing the name -- not the underlying structure -- wouldn‘t necessarily cost very much, especially when phased in over several years.

The Australian services have retained their "Royal" designation, despite the fact they belong to the Australian Defence Forces (ADF).

Why would it need to be any different for the CF? I say bring ‘em back -- so long as we‘re not a republic, why shouldn‘t we celebrate this aspect of our military history?

[radiohead]

Its history, not reason to go back.  I think The CN and CAF are fine.  And they say we‘re Canadian, but some branch of British Monarhy.

[George Wallace]

Originally posted by RoyalHighlandFusilier:
[qb] Bring back Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force?

Yay or nay? [/qb]

KISS


YAY

GW

[RECON-MAN]

I would say NO. That would be a step backwards.It would opened old wounds with Quebec

[Infantry[banned]]

We need to bring back the royal. It make sense seeing as were part of the British commonwealth. All were asking for is the old respected name. Was the RCN in 2 world wars or was Maritime command.  Would you rather join Aircommand or the royal Canadian airforce. See what im saying. Yes theres point to this, why change the name why couldn't they jut leave things the way they were.

[paracowboy]

why waste the money? More cash spent on paint, engraving, re-doing ALL of our paperwork, etc. More time taken away from practical training, with troops doing useless prettification crap.

Never should have been done away with, but we got more pressing matters to attend to now. Little things like fight a war, rebuild the entire military, care for our wounded...

[Michael Dorosh]

Yes theres point to this, why change the name why couldn't they jut leave things the way they were.

Exactly. No need to change it then.

[Infantry[banned]]

I meant back in the day when they changed them there is a reason to change them back. To get back our traditions and rich history. I'm sure changing the name wouldn't cause that much paracowboy. It would take 2-3 months top. It wouldn't take away from the training and stuff.  I say we start a poll on who thinks we should change our names back or keep them im new so i don't no how to do that but ive seen them on here so someone start a pole and lets see what everyone thinks on army.ca. is the Australian defence force structured like the CF?

[CDN Aviator]

I meant back in the day when they changed them there is a reason to change them back. To get back our traditions and rich history. I'm sure changing the name wouldn't cause that much paracowboy. It would take 2-3 months top. It wouldn't take away from the training and stuff.  I say we start a poll on who thinks we should change our names back or keep them im new so i don't no how to do that but ive seen them on here so someone start a pole and lets see what everyone thinks on army.ca. is the Australian defence force structured like the CF?

 

[.....]

Here is my two cents:

As a young officer cadet, I disagree with the "Royal" designator for the "RCAF" and "RCN". Some older members or past members of the CF might like to prove me wrong, but this is my opinion: I am Canadian, not British. I would much rather serve my country than a monarch who has not been to Canada in over four years.

[Michael Dorosh]

Here is my two cents:

As a young officer cadet, I disagree with the "Royal" designator for the "RCAF" and "RCN". Some older members or past members of the CF might like to prove me wrong, but this is my opinion: I am Canadian, not British. I would much rather serve my country than a monarch who has not been to Canada in over four years.

I think most kingdoms in the world are rather discrete - and one would be forgiven for not even knowing they were kingdoms.  Does the Dutch Army have "Royal" in the title?

[TMM]

I meant back in the day when they changed them there is a reason to change them back. To get back our traditions and rich history. I'm sure changing the name wouldn't cause that much paracowboy. It would take 2-3 months top.

Only 2-3 months? I run a business and we had to change our name once. It took longer than 2-3 months and far more time and money than it was worth. We had to get new paaperwork, legal work, notify everyone we had a contract with. It's a lot of work.

What do you suggest be done with the reams and reams of papers already printed? What about the uniforms? The bank accounts and credit cards?

I'm not in the CF but as a civi I would prefer my tax dollars be spent in hands on support for the troops not name changes.

When I hear Royal I think British not Canadian; I think the CF branches and those serving know the history and are proud of it. Keep it as is.

[Nemo888]

I'd rather enjoy it. I still talk of joining as, "Taking the Queens shilling," and like to think of my kit as on loan from the Queen. I guess I am a bit romantic. Me mum was a Royalist and passed when I was 18, she never saw me in uniform.

[CDN Aviator]

being sentimetal and nostalgic is one thing, but as mentioned before we have bigger fish to fry.  In cases you missed it, we have a war to fight. The title "Royal" isnt going to motivate me more....a new airplane would.

[Teddy Ruxpin]

might like to prove me wrong, but this is my opinion: I am Canadian, not British. I would much rather serve my country than a monarch who has not been to Canada in over four years.

And you swore your oath to whom?

Does the Dutch Army have "Royal" in the title?

Yes.

I agree we have more important things to tackle right now.  However, eliminating the original titles was, IMHO, one of the worst excesses of 1960s political correctness - done for entirely the wrong reasons.

[.....]

Yes, the Dutch and the Australians have the "Royal" title, but I am still in disagreement with using the designator "Royal" for the Air Force or Navy. I swore my allegiance to the Queen, but that does not mean that I serve in the Royal Canadian Air Force.

Also, a "Quote" is a verb and a "Quotation" is a noun... I wish people on this site could use proper English...

[Kirkhill]

I think most kingdoms in the world are rather discrete - and one would be forgiven for not even knowing they were kingdoms.  Does the Dutch Army have "Royal" in the title?

Yes as do the Dutch Navy and Air Force as well as their Marechaussee constabulary.

The Norwegians have a Royal Navy and a Royal Air Force.  The Swedes and the Danes still call their ships Their Majesties' Ships.

"Fighting Republicanism, Tooth and Nail"  

I see Teddy beat me to it.  And I agree with him.

[GAP]

And you swore your oath to whom?
 

Yes.

I agree we have more important things to tackle right now.  However, eliminating the original titles was, IMHO, one of the worst excesses of 1960s political correctness - done for entirely the wrong reasons.

Shhhh...you'll get them all excited, the politicians will get all excited, then everybody will scurry around like they did in the sixties changing everything, they'll forget about buying equipment, 6 month tours will languish about Kandahar, etc., etc......

[Michael Dorosh]

Yes as do the Dutch Navy and Air Force as well as their Marechaussee constabulary.

The Norwegians have a Royal Navy and a Royal Air Force.  The Swedes and the Danes still call their ships Their Majesties' Ships.

"Fighting Republicanism, Tooth and Nail" 

I see Teddy beat me to it.  And I agree with him.

Next questions - does anybody but the Dutch or Norwegians use those terms when talking about them?  

[George Wallace]

Yes, the Dutch and the Australians have the "Royal" title, but I am still in disagreement with using the designator "Royal" for the Air Force or Navy. I swore my allegiance to the Queen, but that does not mean that I serve in the Royal Canadian Air Force.

Also, a "Quote" is a verb and a "Quotation" is a noun... I wish people on this site could use proper English...

Well another Cadet out to leave a mark on the pavement.   

First off:  Many of us are serving, or have served, in a Royal designated Unit.  The Army is full of them.  The Reserves are full of them.  So you defence is very weak.

Second:  Don't try to make a play on words as to who or what you swore your allegiance to. 

Third:  What is your problem with "Quote"?  When someone quotes you, it is not a noun, but a verb.  What are you getting on about?  I am sure that we can go back and review all your past posts for syntax errors and find many.......So what?

This topic has been dead for over two years, until some twit resurrected it today, without reading it.  Now we have you contributing to the fun and games.  I am sure it would be best to let this dead horse lie.........Move along.......Nothing to see here.

[.....]

I said that a "quote" is a verb, and I only referred to the Air Force and Navy about the "Royal" title... I don't see why I have to be called a "twit" about it.