- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
insert posted under fair dealings preamble here...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060905.AFGHANSOLDIERS05/TPStory
Came across the article above and wondered if there was any merit to it?... In policing, there has always been endless debate on who has the best shift schedules. (ie 4on 4off vs Continentals type shifts etc) There are tons of studies on pros/cons for any type to increase work performance or health.
In reading the above, it states the "Some" have been trying to find a better system for deployments. This is the first I've heard of this type of discussion and I had thought that the current system was considered a good balance from what other nations use for deployments. Is it possible to shorten things further as the article suggests? Initially, in thinking about it I can see more cons against shortening it further and a convenience argument just doesn't outweigh the need for competent skill levels gained with the current or longer system. no?
Cheers
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060905.AFGHANSOLDIERS05/TPStory
THE AFGHAN MISSION: TACTICS
Six-month postings questioned
OMAR EL AKKAD
The decision to send Canadian troops to Afghanistan for six-month rotations is both a reflection of the great toll such deployments take on soldiers and their families, and an indication of how short-staffed the military is, Canadian historians say.
The tradition of sending soldiers oversees for six-month periods began with Canadian involvement in Bosnia more than a decade ago. During Canada's military role in Korea, soldiers were stationed for one-year stints.
"I think in part it's a reflection of the short-staffed nature of the military," historian Jack Granatstein, a professor emeritus at York University in Toronto, said of the current six-month rotation. However, he added that the length of deployment also factors in the "terrible impact" that longer periods in a war zone can have on a soldier's family life, especially when there is a chance that soldier may be deployed multiple times in a relatively short number of years.
For most reservists, a six-month deployment translates to a one-year commitment because there is six months of preparation beforehand. About one in five Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan is a reservist.
Conventional wisdom suggests that the riskiest part of a soldier's deployment is the earliest, when the battlefield is still new. But while initial rounds of fighting tend to be severe, University of Calgary historian David Bercuson said, "There's still a very large chance element" in combat, meaning it is difficult to predict which periods are likely to be the bloodiest.
Some have suggested the military drop its six-month rotation schedule and try a different approach. For example, Dr. Bercuson said, troops tend to get a three-week leave toward the end of their deployment, cutting down on the number of soldiers in the field. That has led some to suggest that troops be deployed for only four months, but not be given leaves, he said.
Since Canada's initial involvement in Afghanistan, the military has been applying lessons at home that it learned abroad, especially in training facilities in Wainwright, Alta., for soldiers about to be deployed. However, as the number of Canadian casualties in Afghanistan inches up -- 32 Canadians have died since the troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2002 -- the next major challenge may well be the launch of a troop-reinforcement strategy. That may be difficult to face for a force that has come to rely heavily on technology, Dr. Bercuson said.
"It's not like exercises. When you get on the ground you realize it's the same grind as any other war," he said. "That tends to knock you back on your heels a bit."
Came across the article above and wondered if there was any merit to it?... In policing, there has always been endless debate on who has the best shift schedules. (ie 4on 4off vs Continentals type shifts etc) There are tons of studies on pros/cons for any type to increase work performance or health.
In reading the above, it states the "Some" have been trying to find a better system for deployments. This is the first I've heard of this type of discussion and I had thought that the current system was considered a good balance from what other nations use for deployments. Is it possible to shorten things further as the article suggests? Initially, in thinking about it I can see more cons against shortening it further and a convenience argument just doesn't outweigh the need for competent skill levels gained with the current or longer system. no?
Cheers