Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Could the Red Ensign be Next?


One can only hope, but probably not. That being said - this is a good sign for Canada (and I say that as a small "r" republican).
The Liberals removed the "royal" designation in 1968 when they amalgamated the branches of service and called the military the Canadian Forces.

General Walter Natynczyk, chief of the defence staff, announced the decision to bring back the word "royal" for the official names of the two branches of the military in a memo posted on Monday on the military discussion site Milnet.ca.

The initiative to restore the names of Canada's former services "is aimed at restoring an important and recognisable part of Canada's military heritage," Gen Natynczyk said.

"These were the services that fought and emerged victorious from the Second World War and Korea and contributed to the defence of Europe and North America from the early days of the Cold War. These were also the services that paved the way in terms of international peacekeeping missions."
Your core is British; there's nothing wrong with that. Be proud, the British brought the modern world to us all, good and bad. Mostly good.

One final note; I don't know about you, but there are a lot of things picked up in the West circa 1968 I would love to throw away.

18 comments:

Halfempty said...

This information has been pushed to ninme who may very well beam.

Wstr said...

Congrats Canada! Politicians shouldn't play around with military traditions on a whim. I notice how the republican opponents of this reversal aren't saying how the RCMP or various army regiments like the Royal Canadian Regiment managed to remain proudly & independently Canadian since 1968, despite keeping 'Royal' in their own titles.

Outlaw Mike said...

Congrats Canada indeed, especially the Harper government. I hope Trudeau has migraine, wherever he is.

Rod said...

Congratulations Canada!  On the Red Ensign, historically it was only used on merchant ships. Ships of the Canadian government (RCMP patrol boats, weather ships) used the Blue Ensign. The Royal Canadian navy used the White Ensign (same as the British navy) and the Royal Canadian Airforce had its own ensign whcih looked basically similar to a red ensign but had a light blue background with a roundel with a maple leaf in place of the coat ot arms.
 Restoring the traditional names to the airforce and navy pays tribute to the brave men and women who fought and died under the "Royal" designation.
I very much doubt that the present Canadian Mapleleaf ensign will be changed though again I would never have thought that they would restore the "Royal" designations so who knows?

Salty Gator said...

Agreed.  Among the great many things that the British have given us:  a professional NCO corps.  Something that we took, AND MASTERED.

As the saying goes, the best military in the world would be British Officers, US NCOs and German troops.

Grandpa Bluewater. said...

Snort! Not bloody likely. IMAO, of course.

Grandpa Bluewater. said...

Snort! Not bloody likely. IMAO, of course.

Grandpa Bluewater. said...

RCN does have a nice ring to it.

Grandpa Bluewater. said...

Hmmm, two snorts, I may need a beer.

UltimaRatioRegis said...

British officers? 

Not hardly.

<span></span>
<pre>"The General ‘eard the firin’ on the flank,
An’ ‘e sent a mounted man to bring ‘im back
The silly, pushin’ person’s name an’ rank
‘Oo’d dared to answer Brother Boer’s attack:
For there might ‘ave been a serious engagement,
An’ ‘e might ‘ave wasted ‘alf a dozen men;
So ‘e ordered ‘im to stop ‘is operations round the kopjes,
An’ ‘e told ‘im off before the Staff at ten!

And it all goes into laundry,
But it never comes out in the wash,
‘Ow we’re sugared about by the old men
‘Eavy-sterned amateur old men,
That ‘amper an’ ‘inder an’ scold men
For fear o’ Stellenbosch."</pre>

Byron said...

Salty, Baron von Steuben...

West Point and Annapolis created the profession officer corps. War put seasoning to the metal.

Salty Gator said...

I'm quoting an unnamed Marine Corps general here.  But to each his own opinion.  As for Naval Officers, there remains none so finely trained and adept at seamanship as the Royal Navy Officer.  Period.  I will take to task anyone who disagrees.  The days of Halsey and Nimitz are long gone, yet the days of Nelson remain, even if they do not have the number or strength of ships.  As for Annapolis and West Point?  Where do ye think we got the idea?  Dartmouth and Sandhurst?  Portsmouth before that, and that goes back to 1730s...

Perhaps the Marine Corps is the exception to the rule.  The Marines have always excelled at making warrior officers, even when the Navy and Army have gotten side tracked.  So allow me to ammend my previous statement.  

Bubba Bob said...

Three Things to be proud of:

1. Trial by jury.

2. The execution of Charles I.

3.  The Bill of Rights.  “Our happiness then consists in this, that our princes are tied up to the law as well as we, and upon an especial account obliged to keep it up in full force, because if they destroyed the law, they destroyed at the same time themselves, by overthrowing the very foundation of their kingly grandeur and regal power. So that our government not being arbitrary, but legal, not absolute but political, our princes can never become arbitrary, absolute, or tyrants, without forfeiting at the same time their royal character, by the breach of the essential conditions of their regal power, which are to act according to the ancient customs and standing laws of the nation.”  John Somers, 1st Baron Somers, author of the Bill of Rights. 

James said...

Dont worry not everyone can be marines. And i think one of the things that has allowed the marines to excell (even with the uberPCcommisarate corps now put inplace to monitor your and our PC'ness) where others have suffered such problems is tradition and Knowledge.

You carry the banner of every single marine who has ever served.

That and the Marines train people to fling themselves into the pit of hell litteraly knowing that death is always waiting. When the marines deploy they go to "War" everyone else just goes on "deployment". That is what a buddy told me once.

Maybe instead of Political admirals and Multicultural captains we need Warrior Captains and Strategist Admirals.

Of course not sure if we can find 300 of those.....maybe just have 10 or so maybe? I know fucking crazy i am.

James said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCN_Series

Yes yes it does :)

Cap'n Bill said...

Good Show! I started to admire the Canadian Sailors  after working with then in winter ops off Korea, 'way back then. Good sailors, good ships, great beer!  

Gordon Dundas said...

I don't know what everyone is cheering about? What the Canadian Navy really needs is manpower We can'nt man the ships we have now .New destroyers (the current one are currently older the most of their crews.),actual updates to  our frigates( besdes the current felex ) Submarines  that actually can be used as submarines. AORs that are less then 40 years old would be nice.
 Oh and the Amphibious Warfare shipe we 've talking about for the past ten or fifteen years
 Basicilly we're almost at the point were we have to replace the entire Navy  what we are getting is  the victory of symbolism over substance. We wont be getting  any of the above  instead the Navy weill be getting shiny new buttons ,new shoulders flashes  and stationary .And It will have to come out of a all ready overstreached budget.

Casey Tompkins said...

What, murder by Parliament is something to be proud of?