Program modifies building blocks of The Old Guard. The Regimental Orientation Program. Does a course curricula requirement to learn a Regimental catechism by rote serve as a Regimental indoctrination? The Regimental System – A. The army sports program. Frank Frenette was greeted by a familiar face one night during a 24-hour shift at the 3d U.S. Infantry Regiment’s (The Old Guard), regimental indoctrination program UNITED STATES MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY The Regimental Program. The Regimental Program at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy will be a vital part of your educational experience as a midshipman. This program has one aim—to. The Regimental System. By: Captain Michael M. O'Leary, CD, The RCRMany military authors have addressed the Regimental System, from many varying points of view. Most often these articles confuse the regimental system with the existence of a specific organizational or unit structure, such as the Canadian Army’s named regiments. Walton (1. 89. 4). It is likely that most officers in the CF have little or no comprehension of the context of the Regimental System. In fact, it is arguable that our current mechanism for progression and career development precludes any readily accessible means to acquire an understanding of the Regimental System except through intensive personal study well outside the normally offered curricula of Course Training Plans and OPDPs. While perhaps having done enough reading to achieve this degree of cognizance, this author would be hesitant to proclaim full awareness of every contextual facet of the Regimental System. Most observers, however, treat the Regimental System as the blind men did the elephant, assuming the small part they perceive, or choose to perceive, is representative of the whole. We are led, as young officers and soldiers, to believe in the sanctity and strength of the Regiment. The regiment is a key focus in the training of new soldiers of the combat arms, but that regiment lies within an Army, and that Army is part of the Canadian Forces. The regiment, while important to us from our own focussed viewpoint, is merely one of many small building blocks that make up the Army. The Canadian Forces, in its turn, is an institution of the Canadian people, mandated by the Canadian government, and entrusted with the military history, honour and capability of our nation. We must accept that to uphold the honour of one’s regiment requires that one ensures that no embarrassment accrues to the Army, the Government or the people of Canada by our actions. It is more proper to ignore an insult to one’s regiment than to risk embarrassment of those greater institutions for which we stand. If we look at some of the . This skewed sense of the importance and place of regimental ideals in the Army has resulted in some circles perceiving a threat to the Regimental System, through the possibility that some regiments may be disbanded, amalgamated or. Army reorganization. We hear these voices protest that to eliminate any regiment is to undermine its memory and to cast slight upon the past members and the honour of their service deeds. But is this truly so? Does the Association for the 5. Tank Transporter Company of the Royal Canadian Army Service Corps consider its unit’s wartime history to be less of a contribution to our nation’s history because the unit no longer exists in the Order of Battle? Yet their feelings of fraternal belonging remain so strong they continue to have reunions 5. What of the numbered battalions of the. CEF, raised for divisions that were not formed, then disbanded and their troops sent to other battalions? Were they less worthy, or merely the victims of consequence of service requirements? Many regiments of the Canadian Army have been disbanded. Were these based on the considered decisions of our Headquarters and political masters, or are they to be considered simple victims of less energetic Regimental associations? USMMA Alumni Association and Foundation - 14 Bond Street, #1000 - Great Neck, NY 11021 - 516-482-5274. Ranger Assessment and Selection Program. As of 2010, RASP replaced both the RIP (Ranger Indoctrination Program) for enlisted Soldiers and ROP (Ranger. In 1986, when the Regimental Headquarters was fully formed, a. Old Guard Soldier mentors younger brother through training program. RIP, a four-week training program. If I am assigned to the unit who do I contact first? The first person you contact is Regimental Indoctrination Program Duty NCO and then your sponsor if you have already been assigned one. What type of housing is. Should any regiment’s continued survival be primarily dependent on the degree of activism of its supporters? To enter the fray with the sole objective to save one’s own Regiment through an era of Army reorganization, perhaps at the expense of a stronger Army, is to set aside the soldier’s higher moral obligations. Regimental Orientation Program Instructors READY STEP: Past Events & Reunions: National Pathfinder Assn Reunion Black Hats: No need to be a member of the Assn to attend.The continuance of the regimental system, in and of itself, is not sufficient justification to defend the continued existence of any particular regiment. Disbandment, amalgamation, or re- roling of one or more regiments does not threaten the existence of the regimental system. The regimental system and regiments themselves are not, nor should they be, considered synonymous entities. Regiments are an organizational entity. The regimental system is a mutually supportive personnel management structure that emphasizes a sense of belonging (in our collective military experience, to a military unit structure) (iv). Though symbiotic in nature as we have become accustomed to them, regiments or a variation of the regimental system can each exist without the other. Soldiers are taught to and many eventually come to believe that their regiment is the embodiment of the Regimental System. Perhaps that is an inverted view. Which came first, the regiment, or the regimental system? Does a regimental system propagate intense loyalty in regimental soldiers, or do soldiers, trained, perhaps fought, together, create a loyalty and collective honour which propagates a regimental system? What, in fact, is the regimental system? And does it apply only to named regiments of the combat arms? The essence of the regimental system is that no decision is taken except that it is for the good of the regiment. In a purely altruistic sense this approach protects the regiment from dishonour and, by extension, the army and the nation. One thing only is sure, any discussion of the regimental system will usually offend more readers or listeners than it will appease. The need to maintain . In the British case, this phenomenon appears to be related to the sense of belonging to the . Keep in mind, however, that this was the army that, through ignorance, nearly defeated itself logistically in the Crimea, and, through arrogance, saw a battalion of Regulars, with sundry reinforcements, be butchered by . And these are not necessarily unique blunders of an Army that we declare to be our basic model for Regimental proficiency. The most modern equivalent of Regimental Reading Rooms cannot protect our soldiers from a system that sold commissions and, after abolishment of the purchase system, also promoted officers solely on the merits of their father’s service. A central attribute of the Regimental System was a coordinated arrangement of regional affiliations (county regiments, etc) and internalized regimental structures for recruiting and training. It is generally ignored that these . Interestingly, there is no clearly defined alternative. If the military and social structure of Britain had chosen to thwart the evolution of the Regimental System, what was the alternative? We in the Canadian Army proclaim ourselves, perhaps not in such direct terms, to uphold the traditions and customs of the Victorian British Army and what we contend are historical precedents of the regimental system. I would contend however that there's never been a pure regimental system. Before and during the Victorian era, the honour of a regiment historically hinged upon that collective mirage of the individual personal honour of the regiment’s officers. Even, perhaps, the opulence of the regimental dress. Consider what might happen when an officer committed an ethical offence, which may or may not have been related to his military service. Colonels cashiered or transferred officers who had been perceived to have dishonoured themselves, not to protect the honour of the regiment, but to distance themselves and their other officers, some of whom may have had higher social standing than the Colonel himself, from any hint of contamination through association. This aspect of Regimental life, while it first appears to be for the good of the regiment, was often quite selfishly motivated. A very capable officer could as easily be transferred because of a perceived social slight, such as the social status of his mother, as for the actual commission of an ethical offence. The Regimental system was also marked, perhaps . Unscrupulous Colonels would enrich themselves at the cost of their men’s equipment, provisions and accommodation. But for many decades no official notice of such improprieties took place, for the . Officers took little notice of the daily life of the men, and the men simply never dared to intrude upon the social level of the officers. Once the refuge of petty tyrants playing at soldier and ordering their subordinates about, it evolved to a highly structured Army organization within which the Regiment dictated all aspects of the soldiers’ life except in which wars he fought. It is now the refuge of self- proclaimed Regimental soldiers attempting to thwart further erosion of their perception of the System. But when is this defence correct? Many writers presume that the alternative is a mass recruiting system and individual augmentation to units (regiments) without regard to prior affiliation. They envision the worst example of this available short of outright conscription – the US Army in Vietnam, a recognized, and subsequently corrected, flaw- ridden system. Perhaps the unspoken fear is that Scott Taylor (viii) and Peter Newman (ix) will arise as the Canadian Army’s Gabriel and Savage (x), compiling their no- doubt extensive notes into a Canadian Crisis in Command. And yet we conduct mass recruiting through anonymous Recruiting Centres with no vested interest or affiliation toward any Regiment, or even any Service. Most probably, the average recruit joins the CF, and may even proceed through their recruit training, without actually speaking with a member of the trade (or Regiment) for which they are destined. We no longer even have distinct Combat Arms depots, battle schools or training centres. The average young soldier or officer applicant knows nothing of a regimental system. An anonymous telephone call from a Recruiting Centre might tell him/her that he/she has been selected for service in a regiment thousands of miles from home, the name of which they have never heard. Unless his (or her) father served in the regiment, few recruits enlist to join any conception of an existing regimental family. In this day, the majority of recruits join for employment, not necessarily unlike their British antecedents. They learn of the Regiment after they are already in it.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |