Rename service commands?
Clogeroo @ Tue Feb 13, 2007 11:37 am
Just a question I know the Canadian forces were unified in 1968 but why do we have branches like Maritime Command, Air Command, and Land Force Command? Also would anyone support renaming these to their old names the Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air Force, and the Canadian Army?
bootlegga @ Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:23 pm
I have to admit RCAF is far better than Air Command. Most of the commands sound like names of 80s Video games.
weaponeer @ Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:27 pm
This sounds like a great idea.
george123 @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:11 pm
What? Rename everything again?! You want to confuse the troops?!
Oh, right, it has been a couple of years. Ok, time to change everything again. 
Clogeroo @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:54 pm
Most people including the government refer to then as the army, navy, and air force already. I'm not sure if it would confuse them or not or perhaps make it even easier for the soldiers.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/home_e.asp
SprCForr @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:58 pm
The troops have grasped the concept and (this was back in the day) they pretty much didn't care. The name changes are so not on the radar screen most don't even know that Land Force Command is a recent change. Can't see them caring about it now.
stratos @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:06 pm
as an outsider here I would think that having the word Royal would indicate that the troops were under the command of a King or Queen. Technically is Canadian troops still under the command of the English monarch?
Almighty1 @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:14 pm
NO
weaponeer @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:18 pm
Technically, through the Govenor General, we are under the command of the Soverign, The Queen...
That's why we wear the Queens crown on our cap badges and regimental & squadron crests....
stratos @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:19 pm
Ok then why have the Royal put back in? For tradition?
weaponeer @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:34 pm
We are still under Royal Command....
Wullu @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:44 pm
stratos stratos:
Ok then why have the Royal put back in? For tradition?
Basically yeah. I would love to retire in 4 years from the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and not Maritime Command.
grainfedprairieboy @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:56 pm
Wullu Wullu:
stratos stratos:
Ok then why have the Royal put back in? For tradition?
Basically yeah. I would love to retire in 4 years from the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and not Maritime Command.
The designation "Royal" to describe the Navy was created by an official Royal Proclamation that has never been revoked and as such, whenever the term "Canadian Navy" is officially used, both the military and government must use the term "Royal Canadian Navy"
Wada @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:03 pm
Nice idea but someone will lose in the cost and just in stationery alone the cost will be humungus. You know the government, eh! 
stratos @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:07 pm
grainfedprairieboy grainfedprairieboy:
Wullu Wullu:
stratos stratos:
Ok then why have the Royal put back in? For tradition?
Basically yeah. I would love to retire in 4 years from the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and not Maritime Command.
The designation "Royal" to describe the Navy was created by an official Royal Proclamation that has never been revoked and as such, whenever the term "Canadian Navy" is officially used, both the military and government must use the term "Royal Canadian Navy"
Interesting never knew that.