CSS Troops - Less "Deserving"?

[Roy Harding]

This thread is an offshoot of another, which you can find here:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33346.0.html

In the interest of NOT hijacking that thread, I've started this new one, as I think it's a subject which may generate some discussion.

I've quoted the following post, as it is germane to, and indeed started the discussion which threatened to hijack the UNDE thread.  So, if it seems that you've started in the middle of a previous discussion, it's because you have.

This is what I don't get though.
They will be performing the duties of cooks and such.....
why should they get the same benefits as those who are out patrolling etc?

Sitting by a stove does not qualify(in my eyes) as a dangerous job. I do that job everyday in my home.
Now if their base was under constant attack and such, then I could understand, but just because you are over there does not mean you should get those benefits.... JMO
...

To the subject at hand:

There is a tendency within any large organization for people to ascribe certain qualities to "their" particular part of it which tend to make them believe they as individuals are "different", or "better", or "more deserving" than members of OTHER sub-sets of the parent organization, sometimes these differences are real, often they are not.  The military, as the quintessential large organization, harbours these same tendencies amongst its members.

This quite natural human tendency, within the military context, gives rise to such rivalries as Army vs Air Force vs Navy, or Regulars vs Reserves, or Cbt Arms vs CS vs CSS, or PPCLI vs RCR vs R22eR, or Officers vs NCMs, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum.

Usually, as military members become more experienced (in the Army's case, in my experience, normally by the time a soldier is a seasoned MCpl, or Capt), they begin to realize the basic truth that ALL members of the organization are required for the effective functioning of that organization, and these rivalries become the good natured and jocular "ribbing" that is extremely commonplace and eagerly indulged in (to some extent) by all military personnel.

To suggest, however, that some members, by virtue of their MOC (or MOS ID, or trade, or branch) are "better", or more "deserving" than others, is absurd.

CSS soldiers are NOT inherently less of a "soldier" than their Cbt Arms brethren.  Was I a "good soldier" as an RMS Clk?  My superiors apparently thought so, my peers of all trades respected my abilities, and my subordinates gave me their respect as well.  Did this make me a good Infantryman?  Of course not - nor did it make an Infantryman of similar rank and experience a good RMC Clk.  We were both good soldiers - our specialties were different, we respected those differences, and we used and relied upon each other's skills as required to get the Bn's mission accomplished.

A little cold war history for you, to illustrate my point.

When I was a Pte Adm Clk with 1 CBG Sigs in the early '80s, who do you think stood stand-to and exercised the skill of fighting defensive battles in the hide?  Why ALL of us of course, CS troops, CSS troops, and Cbt Arms troops (there was a D&S Pl of Patricia's intrinsic to the unit's strength).

When I was a Cpl and MCpl in the Canadian Airborne Regiment, both with Svc Cdo and HQ & Sigs, who do you think did those same defensive tasks - why ALL of us, of course.  If the rifle commandos were (as they often were) engaged in offensive ops, who do you think "held the fort" so they'd have something to come home to (not to mention, something coordinating their movements - read Cdo and Regt HQ), why generally CSS and CS troops, with expert leadership by the Inf, of course.

A little "asymmetrical" war history for you.

When 3 PPCLI went forward on various ops, who went forward?  Why everyone REQUIRED, of course.  Aside from those you'd expect (Infantry, Armd, Comms, and Medics), there were also Mechanics, Supply Techs, Tfc Techs, MSE Ops and RMS Clks (amongst others - omissions are not intentional).  Why do you think that was?  Because the CO wanted it that way - he foresaw a need for these specialists for various functions.  He also saw a need for a "Rear Link", which is where my FUNCTION, not my personal ability required me personally to be.  There were some brave actions taken by some excellent soldiers on those operations - the submissions for various bravery and other awards included CSS soldiers amongst others.

I would invite you to peruse the history of Canadian VC winners - you can find those histories here:

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group01/cdn_vc

There are CSS troops amongst them.

You can also check out recipients of the US Congressional Medal of Honor here:

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/Moh1.htm

There are CSS troops amongst them, as well.

To further illustrate my point, I would invite you to pay attention to the current war in Iraq - there are CSS and CS troops fighting, being wounded, and unfortunately being killed alongside their Cbt Arms brethren on a daily basis.

Springroll:

Your original post citing personnel "sitting by a stove" as somehow less deserving would have been justification for my initial anger had you been a serving soldier, expected to know better.

Instead, it is an illustration of a lamentable ignorance amongst civilians, even more lamentable in your case because of your professed proximity to serving members.

 

[Gunner98]

Retired CC I agree with many of your points.  I think the quote from Springroll was intended to target civilians and uniformed CSS, however, I agree that the underlying meaning is germane to your new thread.

For Springroll et al:  A cook, floor sweeper or pot scrubber inside an overseas military camp targeted by "evil-doers of whatever ilk" are in no less in danger than the patrol trudging through a minefield (or London commuter on their way to work or a T.O. toddler playing in the street, it would seem).  If your home has a big target on the roof and suspicious packages arriving at your doorstep then you might be in the same boat.  Constant attack, you say - how about the threat of attack - I don't think the rounds or suicide gatecrashers are discriminating in their destination - " Beep, beep, oh, I only seek to kill the highly skilled uniformed camp occupants.  Get out of the way you stove-hugging cook. You are not worthy of my destruction."

 

[Britney Spears]

You know what's ironic?  the word "team", and phrases like "work as a team" and "team building" are thrown around by the recruiting ads so much that they beging to resemble a cheesy old corporate motivation slogans, to the point that most people seem to think that "learn to work as a team" is being used because "learn to kill people" sounded too aggressive. At least, that's what I thought before I joined (it was so for both US and Canadian recruiting commercials).

Only after I joined, did I realize that this was the ONLY point where the commercials were actually being very realistic. Working as a team IS the most important skill you learn, and it's the reason why for the last 2000 years disciplined and organized armies defeat lesser disciplined and organized ones. A unit(of any size) which works as a team WILL defeat one that doesn't, regardless of weapons or individual ability. 

So, newbies: Teamwork seperates the wheat from the chaff. Sounds cliche as heck, but it's true. Remember that when the yelling and screaming starts, learn, and you'll be ready for when the shooting starts too.

 

[Armymedic]

A revelation on the relevance of all army trades was told to me recently;

Every soldier's role in the Army, regardless of rank or occupation, is to support the Infantry Sgt in Battle.

Taking that statement to effect, regardless of whether you are the Col J-3 directing the operations, or the Pte Cook peeling potatoes in the field kitchen, your role is essential to the success of the mission.

 

[Springroll]

Thank you for educating me on the error of my ways.

I still feel that civvie workers should not be going over, instead send over our own well trained personnel, even if it means taking them from units that are not utilizing them.

Now that I am past the initial hard hump of quitting smoking, things are sinking in better....

 

[Roy Harding]

...

Every soldier's role in the Army, regardless of rank or occupation, is to support the Infantry Sgt in Battle.
...

BINGO!

Although a slight oversimplification - that is the concept in a nutshell.

 

[54/102 CEF]

Thats a great initial post!

 

[wotan]

  Retired CC, an excellent post, no doubt of that.  And Armymedic's point is about as close to the truth as one is likely to get in a single sentence.

  That said, I'll risk venturing into the lion's den on this one, so here goes.

  Firstly, being a CSS soldier myself, I certainly don't see the "purple trades" as being in anyway less deserving of recognition or financial benefits than their Cbt Arms comrades in the same theatre of ops.  However, I am aware of a feeling of "discontent" for lack of a better word, on the part of some in the Cbt Arms regarding how the SWASM was issued. 

  Essentially, many of the folks I spoke with were a bit peeved that those outside Afghanistan received the same medal as the troops humping ruck, albeit they did not receive the bar.  For example, those on the ships or serving at the HQ in Florida recieved the SWASM, but not the bar.  Now, to a large part, this particular issue has been resolved for future ops with the establishment of the General Campaign Star and the General Service Medal and I had hoped that this issue would be put to rest.  However, it seems that this previous discontent is now manifesting itself in the form of a comparison of the "type" of service rendered within the theatre of ops.  Perhaps what is wanted or what would resolve this specific question is something akin to the US Combat Infantryman's Badge for Cbt Arms and CSS soldiers that participate in active patrolling vice being not venturing out from a camp.

  From my conversations with both CSS and Cbt Arms pers, I don't see this so much as a matter of CSS soldiers being deemed less deserving, but that there is a desire from pers engaged in active patrolling, etc to be recognized for these activities and the perceived increase danger of those activities.

 

[Roy Harding]

  Retired CC, an excellent post, no doubt of that.   And Armymedic's point is about as close to the truth as one is likely to get in a single sentence.

  That said, I'll risk venturing into the lion's den on this one, so here goes.

  Firstly, being a CSS soldier myself, I certainly don't see the "purple trades" as being in anyway less deserving of recognition or financial benefits than their Cbt Arms comrades in the same theatre of ops.   However, I am aware of a feeling of "discontent" for lack of a better word, on the part of some in the Cbt Arms regarding how the SWASM was issued.  

  Essentially, many of the folks I spoke with were a bit peeved that those outside Afghanistan received the same medal as the troops humping ruck, albeit they did not receive the bar.   For example, those on the ships or serving at the HQ in Florida recieved the SWASM, but not the bar.   Now, to a large part, this particular issue has been resolved for future ops with the establishment of the General Campaign Star and the General Service Medal and I had hoped that this issue would be put to rest.   However, it seems that this previous discontent is now manifesting itself in the form of a comparison of the "type" of service rendered within the theatre of ops.   Perhaps what is wanted or what would resolve this specific question is something akin to the US Combat Infantryman's Badge for Cbt Arms and CSS soldiers that participate in active patrolling vice being not venturing out from a camp.

  From my conversations with both CSS and Cbt Arms pers, I don't see this so much as a matter of CSS soldiers being deemed less deserving, but that there is a desire from pers engaged in active patrolling, etc to be recognized for these activities and the perceived increase danger of those activities.

Being a recipient of the SWASM, having served with 3 PPCLI BG in KANDAHAR, I can assure you that the issue of how the SWASM was issued is not a Cbt Arms/CSS issue - most of us, CSS, CS, and Cbt Arms who served at Kandahar felt the same way regarding those who were given the EXACT same medal for their service in air conditioned comfort.

Leaving that aside, however - I like the concept of something similar to the CIB.  This also has its' problems associated with it.  Because of my job, I worked fairly closely with the Rakassan S1.  The administrative hoops and reports required to document who was "in the box" and for how long were amazing. 

I think the Campaign Star and Medal may well meet the requirement, I guess we won't know for a couple years.

I didn't start the thread out of any sense of "injustice" - in fact, as I said in the original posting - these types of silly comparisons usually fade as soldiers gain experience and respect for each other's functions.  I did think it was worth bringing up, though, based on what I'd read in other threads.  In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't generated more interest from the multitude of junior soldiers present on the forum - who were my real intended "target".

 

[wotan]

Retired CC,

  Ack, I should have worded "However, I am aware of a feeling of "discontent" for lack of a better word, on the part of some in the Cbt Arms regarding how the SWASM was issued" more carefully.  It wasn't my intent to indicate that the supporting arms and services troops weren't miffed about the sit as well.  My bad.

  Something like a CIB might be workable, but I suppose no matter what system is developed there will be those that aren't completely happy with it.  But, I believe the GCS/GSM is a big step in the right direction and hopefully folks will see it as that.

 

[Cansky]

  Retired CC, an excellent post, no doubt of that.   And Armymedic's point is about as close to the truth as one is likely to get in a single sentence.

  That said, I'll risk venturing into the lion's den on this one, so here goes.

  Firstly, being a CSS soldier myself, I certainly don't see the "purple trades" as being in anyway less deserving of recognition or financial benefits than their Cbt Arms comrades in the same theatre of ops.   However, I am aware of a feeling of "discontent" for lack of a better word, on the part of some in the Cbt Arms regarding how the SWASM was issued.  

  Essentially, many of the folks I spoke with were a bit peeved that those outside Afghanistan received the same medal as the troops humping ruck, albeit they did not receive the bar.   For example, those on the ships or serving at the HQ in Florida recieved the SWASM, but not the bar.   Now, to a large part, this particular issue has been resolved for future ops with the establishment of the General Campaign Star and the General Service Medal and I had hoped that this issue would be put to rest.   However, it seems that this previous discontent is now manifesting itself in the form of a comparison of the "type" of service rendered within the theatre of ops.   Perhaps what is wanted or what would resolve this specific question is something akin to the US Combat Infantryman's Badge for Cbt Arms and CSS soldiers that participate in active patrolling vice being not venturing out from a camp.

  From my conversations with both CSS and Cbt Arms pers, I don't see this so much as a matter of CSS soldiers being deemed less deserving, but that there is a desire from pers engaged in active patrolling, etc to be recognized for these activities and the perceived increase danger of those activities.

Just to clarify this :  The only persons who did not qualify for the bar were those in Tampa Bay Florida.  All others that were in the theatre of Ops (this included Arabian Gulf, UAE and Kanadahar to name a few places) got the bar.  I think it wouldn't have been such a big issue if the bar reflected exactly where they were but they all say afghanistan. 
And yes I was in Kandahar, but am now to the point that I know I was there and if asked will tell but no longer get upset over this issue.  I think most of us have that same attitude now.

 

[Roy Harding]

Just to clarify this :   The only persons who did not qualify for the bar were those in Tampa Bay Florida.   All others that were in the theatre of Ops (this included Arabian Gulf, UAE and Kanadahar to name a few places) got the bar.   I think it wouldn't have been such a big issue if the bar reflected exactly where they were but they all say afghanistan.  
And yes I was in Kandahar, but am now to the point that I know I was there and if asked will tell but no longer get upset over this issue.   I think most of us have that same attitude now.

Thanks Kirsten - you said it better than I - and perfectly!

And I believe you are right regarding most BG folk's attitude - in my reply to wotan I was trying to downplay the issue as it wasn't germane to the subject, but you did it better!

How's the database goin' ?

 

[honestyrules]

Roy Harding,
Interesting post ,to say the least!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad you bring that up.
For people not understanding what's going on, imagine a cook going out to get supplies, a refrigeration mechanic getting air conditionning units for the camp or a clerk who put his name in to go on patrol with the 031 dudes, CSS troops volunteering to do some CIMIC stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(by the way, as seen on ops...)

As seen in Irak , CSS troops are targeted even more sometimes than infantry or tankers because the enemy want some dead bodies ,not a firefight or get their a## kicked by the well armed combat troops!

My two cents though...

 

[S McKee]

Come to think of it this medal thing was a issue in Roto 0 in Kosovo too. A rumour was circulating that those who served in Kosovo would get a different medal than those in FYROM. Anyway after it was all said and done everyone got their medal the "controversy" faded away. I like the idea of a CIB, if you go to the US Army web site they have now instituted the Combat Action Badge as I understand it, for CS/CSS trades. http://www.army.mil/symbols/combatbadges/Action.html?story_id_key=7285

 

[TheNomad]

It matters not what your job in the army is.  If you are in theatre and a gong is issued for turning up then you qualify for it.  Just because you are an infantryman does not mean you are seeing action.

What about those infantrymen that did not get a chance to shoot at anyone - does that mean that they should not get a gong?  How about the CO, after all he spends most of his tour in a CP?

Maybe gongs should be awarded on who fired the most rounds - if you fire less than 5 you are not really a soldier at all, so should stop pretending to be real infantrymen?

I have been an infantryman and an MP.  All jobs in the forces are equally deserving of the gongs. 

Personally I believe that anyone who thinks that a part of the forces is less deserving than another is both ignorant and arrogant.  I also think they should be invited to hand their gongs in, as unless they received a bravery award as an individual they too are less deserving.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

How about the CO, after all he spends most of his tour in a CP?

I am on my fourth tour - and have never seen a CO who "spends most of his tour in the CP" - maybe I have just been lucky.  Now if you said the pasty-faced COS, I would have to agree...but I'm guessing said COS would give his left testicle to be out and about.

Dave

 

[KaptKain]

I agree with most, but then the saying goes...
SOLDIER FIRST, TRADESMAN SECOND

Plain and simple, anytime if the going gets bad, CSS could have the role of replacements for the Cbt arms. The unfortunate part there is, the CSS does not have the same training detail as Cbt Arms for the true hazardous situation. So CSS would be unlucky there.

 

[S McKee]

I agree with most, but then the saying goes...
SOLDIER FIRST, TRADESMAN SECOND

Plain and simple, anytime if the going gets bad, CSS could have the role of replacements for the Cbt arms. The unfortunate part there is, the CSS does not have the same training detail as Cbt Arms for the true hazardous situation. So CSS would be unlucky there.

I've heard this saying before, but what does it mean? Should we all be able to become infmn/gnrs or crwmn at a moments notice? Or is it that members of the CS and CSS should embody the attributes of service before self. We are all soldiers within the areas of our responsibilities, dedicated, loyal, mission oriented and ready to fight,  but if you want to get paid, eat, get kit, have your vehicle fixed, your wpn repaired, get patched up if you get hurt or be flown or shipped to theatre, the primary job of CSS is to do just that: support.

 

[wongskc]

I agree with most, but then the saying goes...
SOLDIER FIRST, TRADESMAN SECOND

Plain and simple, anytime if the going gets bad, CSS could have the role of replacements for the Cbt arms. The unfortunate part there is, the CSS does not have the same training detail as Cbt Arms for the true hazardous situation. So CSS would be unlucky there.

Not to mention that CSS units usually are not equipped to act in anything more than a defensive role.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

I am on my fourth tour - and have never seen a CO who "spends most of his tour in the CP" - maybe I have just been lucky.   Now if you said the pasty-faced COS, I would have to agree...but I'm guessing said COS would give his left testicle to be out and about.

Dave

Naaa...  Aren't theatre PERs just about due?    ;D