Topic: Pers Tempo, military life expectations, and the DART deployment

[9r domestic]

Well since this thread has already gone off topic I will now share my opinion.

Dearest Dianne,

I have only been a military wife/girlfriend for 7 years, so I guess I am a bit of a "newbie" compared to you. I must tell you that your comment regarding too much support for families and the troops is offensive to me. I feel that if anyone is being cold it is you. Maybe you can fill me in on how I am getting too much support, because I don't know of any support the military has given to me. There is not one program run at my local MFRC that would begin to cater to my needs as a military spouse. That is what my family is for, and most of the time I just suck it up. I knew full well what I was signing up for when I met my husband. I also feel that most spouses learn rather quickly what they are in for if they didn't know before.

I agree with bossi, you just don't get it.

Dawn

 

[my love my life]

Hello Dawn,

Thanks for your post and I'll try to answer as best I can.  I believe I said 'in some ways' there is too much support today.  For example, based on past experience when a unit deploys the rear party provides a drop off point for families to leave parcels to send to their partners in theatre,  quite often they provide the brown paper and string to wrap the parcels - and those parcels are sent at no cost to the sender.  I spoke to one military wife who thought the Rear Party should come around to the homes and collect these parcels.  That's absurd and I could write a volume on similar incidents.  I also worked for the military for many, many years and do feel that there are some avenues where too much is being done.  You don't have to agree with me but I am entitled to my opinion.

Our MFRCs provide needed services for SOME people and Dawn I have heard from many girlfriends who don't feel they fit in at the MFRCs.  In fact I've heard from so many that I devoted a whole chapter in my new book on girlfriends because I feel you have special issues that are not being addressed and I felt you needed to be acknowledged - which I have done.

During my time as a young military wife there was NO support.  You depended on your friends because that's all you had.  I am so pleased to see that there is more support for today's military spouses because they not only need it - they deserve it.  In my time I didn't have to deal with the dangerous tours you ladies do today but I stand by my comments based on my many years experience in this lifestyle whether others agree with them or not.

Dawn over the past 10 years I have talked to literally hundreds of military spouses all over Canada and Europe and I do know what I'm talking about.  So you and Bossi can continue to feel that I 'don't get' and that's ok because I know that I really do - and so do those hundreds of wives. 

Thank you for taking the time to comment and I hope we can chat further.  Cheers, Dianne

[whiskey601]

No chocolate chips, please, they go straight to my hips.

I'll take them,and start my diet next week.

[bossi]

Dawn,
Personally, I'd offer the opinion that the MFRC is an attempt to officially formalise the support network that used to exist "once upon a time" ... (i.e. neighbours would help each other, the unit "rear party" would go out of their way to help ... etc.)

This week while I was a liaison officer somewhere else, I personally overheard a senior officer promise to shovel the driveway of a young captain while he was in Sri Lanka ... returning the favour for when he, himself, was deployed previously ...

My friends have told me stories of the good old days when the Rear Party was kinda like a Big Brother - even shovelling snow, car-pooling the kids to the hockey arena/swimming pool, helping to buy a car when the family clunker rusted out, sharing teenaged kids as babysitters, and so on ...

My mother has told me about how the families would all get together during the Second World War, too ...

Oddly enough, I can still remember when I first enlisted and was welcomed to ... "The Regimental Family".

Best of luck to you - and don't forget the old saying:   "If you're not part of the solution ... ha!"

P.S. (I see that Dianne posted while I was typing ... so I can only guess that she and her hundreds of acquaintances are the only ones that "get it", while thousands of others don't ...)

[KevinB]

I must admit I read it like Bossi did.  I just chose to tune it out...

 I think Michael Dorosh hit the nail on the head, and I think that so soon people forget we still are still officially a party to a shooting war - Yeah you got it we signed on to the GWOT (even if we have slunk back under our rock at the moment)

 We have come a long ways as far as family supportgoes from the first tours days in Cyprus (albiet my parents have not gotten any better at sending care packages...)  And now we don't give 30days notice for PMQ eviction to deceased members families...

I would prefer to see a solution offered rather than just complaints - even if some of the complains are valid.


Cheers
Kevin
 

[MCG]

Now that the DART team has left Canada with no idea of when they will return home, Does anyone know if any deployed DART members were scheduled to go on a tour next month? Are there many who deployed who have only recently returned from a tour?

To me, this emergency is another example of how ill prepared we are to deal with such events. Many find it totally embarrassing that we have to depend on other countries for transportation. But what is of more concern to me is the families left behind. The uncertainty of how long their partners will be gone is always hard to deal with but if families have been still in the process of reuniting as a family after a tour, this adds much stress to families already overwhelmed with too many separations of too long a duration in too short a time.

I think the hardships related to the specific deployment of the DART are by far exaggerated.   However, I also think this post was made in the spirit of objecting to the overall level of pers tempo.   I think it is fair to say we have been sitting at a fairly high pers tempo since well before the war on terror, and that it has taken a toll on families.   At the moment, there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

The question would then become: what is an acceptable pers tempo for soldiers that can be sustained indefinitely?   Have we surpassed that?

When will Ottawa wake up to the fact that our families are hurting or do they even care?

It seems she would agree with most of us that the blame is primarily in the hands of politicians, and not in the hands of the military leadership.

The solution has already been pointed to: more soldiers.

[Infanteer]

Can we get angry with Pers Tempo?  As Michael D. has brought up on more then a few occasions, the Canadian Army deployed soldiers for 4 years (WWI) and 5-6 years (WWII) with no return to hearth and home what-so-ever.  Granted, we aren't in a total war situation, but the extremely dynamic nature of the world today should be more then enough to tell everyone in or waiting to get in that they should expect to be lobbed overseas quite frequently.

[MCG]

Can we get angry with Pers Tempo?

"Angry" would be silly, but we can be concerned.

The world wars are not appropriate comparisons (as you said, they are the closest this country has ever come to total war and they even required the draft).   We are not at peace either (and I think this is the single factor that would suggest that our pers tempo could legitimately rise above the indefinitely sustainable level), but our pers tempo & op tempo are arguably very similar to where they were in the "post Cold War" years when we were at "peace."   So is our current tempo that of the limited war that is on going (in which case our tempo during the '90s was too high) or is our current tempo still that of a nation "at peace" (in which case we are grossly under manned to maintain the tempo indefinitely).

[MCG]

Maybe Korea (which overlapped with our redeployment to western Europe) would be a better comparison for where we should be on the pers tempo spectrum?

[Infanteer]

We are not at peace either (and I think this is the single factor that would suggest that our pers tempo could legitimately rise above the indefinitely sustainable level), but our pers tempo & op tempo are arguably very similar to where they were in the "post Cold War" years when we were at "peace."

I think this is the crux here.   As long as the international arena is rife with war and conflict, soldiers as professionals have to be content with whatever tempo ends on their lap.   I don't think I'd be willing to sit back on the couch and watch Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Kosovo, and the Persian Gulf on CNN, even if it meant over-committal (let me try to say this again after being in the Regs and having 3 tours in 4 years.... ).

Anyways, despite the fact that the Pers tempo is the same now as it was in the bad-times (early '90's), I think this period of stress can be better justified.   UNPROFOR and Somalia were vague missions that were ignored by the public, failed operationally, and had one end in another decade of commitment and the other end in shame and humiliation due to the actions of a few.

Now, we have soldiers engaged in a real mission that is right infront of our eyes and an enemy who is as real as the goosesteping Germans or Communist hordes we faced a half a century ago.   It would have been easy (but ill-advised) to say "who cares" back in '93, but now, we have no choice but to accept the high strain that we do for we are involved on a murky Cabinet War which for some is Total in nature (ie: our civilians are legitimate targets of the terrorists).

Anyways, enough philosophizing from me tonight.

Cheers,
Infanteer

[MCG]

Anyways, despite the fact that the Pers tempo is the same now as it was in the bad-times (early '90's), I think this period of stress can be better justified.

Personally, I think we had a good Op Tempo in the '90s, but that we needed a larger force in order to have reduced the Pers Tempo to something appropriate to a "peacetime."   That same larger force would allow for a greater Op Tempo in times of greater conflict and war.

[Infanteer]

Personally, I think we had a good Op Tempo in the '90s, but that we needed a larger force in order to have reduced the Pers Tempo to something appropriate to a "peacetime."  That same larger force would allow for a greater Op Tempo in times of greater conflict and war.

Agreed, now offer that on the alter of Healthcare, universal Daycare, and Sponsership programs....

[Rider Pride]

Only if polls would show that its where the vast majority of Cdns want their money to go...

Personally, if given the choice to put money towards only one of the big 5 issues, I would have to go with health care, because it affects not only my immediate family, but siblings, parents and out-laws as well.

Perstempo is a personal inconvenience(each mbr and his family deal with it differently), and considering the financial gain we are now getting while deployed, not one without some benefit.

[Infanteer]

Personally, I would avoid more healthcare money until a serious public debate takes place to reform a system that is heaving under its own antiquated weight.  Pumping more water into a leaky hose won't help a thing.

[bossi]

Perstempo is a personal inconvenience(each mbr and his family deal with it differently), and considering the financial gain we are now getting while deployed, not one without some benefit.

As an aside, I'm noticing a "new" enthusiasm to deploy amongst some people ...
(i.e. now that it's tax-free, "suddenly" some people who never volunteered before are rushing to the bank ... this includes people who've never deployed in their career, and even those who'd previously said "they'd never deploy again" ...)

But - shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth - if it helps take the pressure off all the troops who've been getting burnt out up to now ... then they're simply a hitherto untapped pool ...

[Rider Pride]

As an aside, I'm noticing a "new" enthusiasm to deploy amongst some people ...
(i.e. now that it's tax-free, "suddenly" some people who never volunteered before are rushing to the bank ... this includes people who've never deployed in their career, and even those who'd previously said "they'd never deploy again" ...)

People who (I have first person contact with this) turn down a tour to Bosnia, because they won't make enough money and that tours don't help your career as much as staying back, now jumping at the chance to go on thier first tour, to Afghanistan, no less....go figure.

[SeaKingTacco]

People who (I have first person contact with this) turn down a tour to Bosnia, because they won't make enough money and that tours don't help your career as much as staying back, now jumping at the chance to go on thier first tour, to Afghanistan, no less....go figure.

I'm not really sure that I am all that comfortable about deploying with people whose primary consideration is monetary.  When people start chucking ordnance in your general direction, no amount of money is worth it.  It is nice to have some other motivating factor to keep you going in times like that.

[KevinB]

I'm not really sure that I am all that comfortable about deploying with people whose primary consideration is monetary.  .

Welcome to the CF 
I dont think altruistic reasoning is behind 90% of those deployed - especially whne you listen to comments made by other when we are overseas...

[Rider Pride]

Kev,
you mean like those people the ombudsmans spoke to in Kabul when he was there recently?

[KevinB]

I got some worse stuff than that...

[Rider Pride]

curiosity peaked...

oh do tell.