Would you enlist in the US Marines if it were open to Canadians?

[ROTP Applicant]

Finally, read my profile. Maybye you will then realise why I'm not a civvie contractor. Keep this thread un-stupid.

If you look at my posts in this thread, you will notice that I have not expressed ANY of personal opinions on OIF. So your statement that confidently articulates how I totally agree with Hack's opinion was pulled out of your a*s, and that is a fact. As to reading your profile and you not being a civi-contractor, well maybe you should read what I have previously written ("assuming he can't be a Canadian/US soldier serving there"). I'm truly hoping you weren't directing the "Keep this thread un-stupid" advice towards me, but if you are, then maybe you should take you own advice. My discussion with you is over as it does not relate to the thread's topic, but if you want to continue, feel free to PM me.

 

[DogOfWar]

If you look at my posts in this thread, you will notice that I have not expressed ANY of personal opinions on OIF. So your statement that confidently articulates how I totally agree with Hack's opinion was pulled out of your a*s, and that is a fact. As to reading your profile and you not being a civi-contractor, well maybe you should read what I have previously written ("assuming he can't be a Canadian/US soldier serving there"). I'm truly hoping you weren't directing the "Keep this thread un-stupid" advice towards me, but if you are, then maybe you should take you own advice. My discussion with you is over as it does not relate to the thread's topic, but if you want to continue, feel free to PM me.

Its not as easy as just becoming a civi contractor. If I knew where to stat I would.

 

[Infanteer]

PJ D-Dog is going to kick all your asses for wrecking his thread....

 

[scm77]

Split it off to a new thread?

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

So why has the US switched from the "we're going to eliminate the threat to the US national security" justification of the war, to the "we're going to bring democracy to Iraq" stance on the war??

Um, there were 3 reasons he gave on March 19, 2003 (you know, when Bush outlines his justification of the war, at the beginning of the speech in which the war was declared)?

President Bush Addresses the Nation
The Oval Office

10:16 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq {Reason #1 (enforce various UN Resolutions)}, to free its people {Reason #2 (democracy)} and to defend the world from grave danger {Reason #3 (unreported status of WMD programs)}. ...

We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people.

(etc., etc., etc.)  http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-17.html

Hack provided a rebuttal to the counter-arguments you made yesterday in reply to his post, so the best you could do to rebut his statement is â Å“Step one:..... Step two:.......â ?? Very mature.

There's a difference between "rebuttal" and ad hominem accusations!

 

[DogOfWar]

Could I ask why?

Because I believe the whole world has a responsibilty to rebuild Iraq and the Afghan. i want to do my part and the Canadian government wont let me go under there flag so id go under my own.

 

[48Highlander]

So why has the US switched from the "we're going to eliminate the threat to the US national security" justification of the war, to the "we're going to bring democracy to Iraq" stance on the war??

Just to add to John's explanation (not that yours wasn't good enough John! just adding a few more examples), take a look at this:

Excert from President Bush's speech to the UN on 12 September 2002:

Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. To suspend hostilities, to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear, to him and to all. And he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations.
In 1991, Security Council Resolution 688 demanded that the Iraqi regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the systematic repression of minorities -- which the Council said, threatened international peace and security in the region. This demand goes ignored. Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that Iraq continues to commit extremely grave violations of human rights, and that the regime's repression is all pervasive.
In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise.

Obviously, unlike you, president Bush understands that the 1991 war nver really ended.  Iraq was "on parole", a parole which Sadam continuously violated.

Moreover, if you take the time to do a few searches, you will see that the US administration listed multiple reasons for invading Iraq, and they did it before any soldiers hit the ground.  "WMD" were a convinient rallying-cry, which they fed to the media, and which the media happily bleeted on about for the next few months.  I'm sure it sold a lot of papers, and gave newscasters a lot to get excited about.  At the same time, Bush was talking about freedom for the Iraqi people, stability of the region, eliminating a source of funding for terrorist groups, reducing or at least focusing terrorism, etc, et al.  The media generaly ignored these things because they weren't very exciting; your average citizen is much more likely to tune in to a newscast featuring 3D full colour CGI graphics of cruise missiles and mushroom clouds, than they are for the president talking about democratic elections and tactics for curbing terrorism.  Those of us who actually bothered to listen knew that the motivations behind going into Iraq were quite complex, and could hardly be named in one sentence.  Those who only paid attention to short blurbs on CNN thought it was only about WMD.  And those who had no intention of listening to anything except Michael Moore are still convinced the whole thing is about oil.  So be it.  But before you go accusing Bush of flip-flopping, try doing a bit of research.  The man clearly stated his reasons; that you weren't listening is your own damn problem.

 

[PJ D-Dog]

This thread is intended to discuss whether or not you would join the US Marines if it were open to Canadians.  It is not here to debate the pros and cons of the war in Iraq.  Start a new topic is you want to discuss it but keep to the subject at hand.

A Canadian wanting to join the US military in order to have a better career and life opportunities should not be shat upon because of his choices.  Going south of the border to join the military does not make one less of a Canadian.  Those who do go south for these reasons should not be painted with the wide "war monger" brush as this is not the case.  I would hope that those contributing on this forum will show some respect to those of us who have made the move south and not just make outlandish statements of "the US war machine" etc...

Let's all dog gone get a dog gone grip and dog gone stick to the dog gone topic at hand.

PJ D-Dog

 

[Infanteer]

Let's all dog gone get a dog gone grip and dog gone stick to the dog gone topic at hand.

Prepping for Parris Island I see....  ;D

 

[danielbouchard]

I'm canadian, i serv canadians.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I'm canadian, i serv canadians.

I"m Canadian; I serve Canadian values.

 

[48Highlander]

The sad thing is that these days you can much more effectively "serve canadians" by being part of the US military.  It's one of the reasons I'd sign up in a second if given the opportunity.

 

[ROTP Applicant]

I"m Canadian; I serve Canadian values.

The sad thing is that these days you can much more effectively "serve canadians" by being part of the US military.  It's one of the reasons I'd sign up in a second if given the opportunity.

Because the 'US War Machine' actually gets sent to do its work. The 'Canadian War Machine' sits around gathering dust (with some notable exceptions, and the new CDS gives me hope...). And oh by the way, thats what the US is defending right now. If you have any idea as to what you think they are up to, don't hesitate to tell us.

Yeah, these days we [Canadians] stand for doing nothing.

  I've said this earlier and I'll say it again; I completely support anyone who joins the Marines as it is their choice, and freedom of choice is one of our greatest values. Nevertheless, I've noticed a few trends from reading this thread. It appears to me that many of you believe that in order to serve Canadian values one must be in the military and serve abroad so these values could be implemented to the citizens of another nation (i.e. bring democracy, free speech, freedom to a trial, etc). It is very easy to SAY that we as Canadians are not defending our values and that "these days we stand for doing nothing", but what have you DONE to defend these values? And if you have done something, then I thank you and please keep on doing it. This is very cliché, but actions speak louder than words.
  If you want to defend these Canadian values then go do something about it. Volunteer for an organization that supports bringing democracy to Iraq, Nigeria, etc.; donate money to a NGO/charity that supports the Canadian values by helping others around the world; go as a civilian to a nation that you feel needs the support of Canada and its values, etc. etc. etc.
    And yes many of you may think, what does he know, he's just some 19 year-old OCdt. But, what I do know is that a person does not need a rifle and a cap badge to serve the Canadian values and to serve the Canadian people. 

 

[Sh0rtbUs]

Well, if you're a soldier and good at it, why not offer your expertise to those who need it?

As far as Volunteering goes, Volunteer work is nice but it doesnt put food on the table for your family. Slightly ironic how you used the term "actions speak louder than words". Maybe we should send that up the line and see if our Politicians and brass catch wind...

I believe that a line needs to be drawn here. I'm not flaming the Canadian Military, i have the utmost respect for it and it's members. It's the beurocratic bench warmers and "live under a rock" citizens that get me hot under the collar.

 

[Tpr Parsons]

I for one, being Canadian, would consider the possibility of joining the USMC if I wereallowed. Even though the arguments at hand (that were in response to the original question/poll) were well thought out and expressed (in most cases), I would consider the USMC as a career choice. As it was once stated, the Marines physical conditioning is outstanding and well-known, plus the pride that is achieved and retained by a Marine is also outstanding. Don't get me wrong, being in the CF I am extremely proud to say I am a Soldier serving this country, and am very honoured by it.

The physical fitness or PT I believe should be raised a level or 2, and done more often if possible. Some people don't have the motivation to go to the gym or go out for a run, if it was in a days schedule more or done at a higher level, I believe the CF as a whole would benefit from it. I would, thats for sure! 

Back to the question at hand, Yes I would join the USMC if I were allowed to. As Sh0rtbUs said, "if you're a soldier and good at it, why not offer your expertise to those who need it?" I totally agree with you on that. 

Either way I'm proud to serve, we are on the same team anyways? And who knows... maybe in a few years we will be under new leadership that we voted on, and we could find ourselves over fighting along side the US Soldiers for the cause of freedom and anti-terrorism acts. They have aided us and we have aided them, time and time again... I say, why stop now?

 

[PJ D-Dog]

I think it can work both ways.  There are some things about the CF the Marines could take a lesson from and vice versa.

In the CF, the professional development at the individual soldier level is far better than what you have in the Marines.  Marines focus on individual skills in relation to collective training.  Professional development outside MOS training is secondary although that is changing quickly.  Up until recently, there were no formal schools requirement for promotion from Staff Sgt to Gunny.  Now they are begining to make it mandatory.  It is starting at the top and slowly flowing down to the bottom.  In the coming years, we will see many more PME requirements for promotions (professional military education).

PJ D-Dog