What grade of veteran are you??????

"Once you put on the uniform, Navy , Army or Airforce we all belong to the same team"   It's called team Canada, our home and native land period. We all signed the same blank cheque. You may still be still serving, 80 years old in long-term care, or anywhere in between. Let's not discriminate... male, female, race, colour, creed, pigeons, grunts, hairy bags, officers, or fubar, ... same team.

   At the very least, let's help and support ourselves.   pinger.

Guest
I dont think so I think they do it for simple human reasons which are in error. Its an emotional thing and its a "my war" thing...so I feel more important. The commanders wanted to make a all important feeling around the war they were in so they could compete in PERs promotions and the medals parade with all those that did tours before them. It is and always will be innocent dick measuring contests warriors have with each other as they try to measure up to past conflicts. With so many years of Canada not seeing us in a war since WW2 and the overwhelming idea of the modern age that peace is good and we are the best at it we became Peace Keepers on UN missions in Canadas mind. Each mission since Gulf War 1 have had this pressure as most UN missions became or were wars so each group pushed the issue with the public....."holy crap yall we are fighting!"...... You could tell A Stan was going this way right from the start as so many medals for same mission were being issued, it was kinda getting silly. Much same way Yugo at end and Kosovo was going. There should be one medal for all of Yugo not a pile. One Medal that is YUGO and Bars for each country inside yugo thats it. But oh no out came the measuring stick and we got a pile of medals for same thing. Then A Stan same thing one medal for entire 10 years is all that should have been issued. Maybe a bar for being in theatre and no bar for the support elements outside....and that is it. It is just silly and makes us look like rookies. The saddest thing was when then they changed the wound strip to sacrifice medal. But that was full proof of the desire to measure ourselves.
I dont agree with treating Vets different but I do agree with upping the coverage for injured vets as we learn lessons in different conflicts. I can only say I understand why they have errored again and its too bad.

The reality is-

The First Peace Keeping mission ....Korea was a full up war against an enemy that had all the equipment of a war.
The Second Peace Keeping mission.....Egypt was a full up war that was stopped and it was a real enemy with all the equipment of a war.

We have come along way since then.

My definition of war does not matter nor does the generals. If soldiers deploy to stop an agression and either use or are prepare to use deadly force of arms then its a War to them. If the generals want to really get into a measuring contest of conflict in A Stan they just need to reflect on simple points of fact and answer a few questions like.....When did war end? What is the EN made up of and what weapons do they have. do they have a airforce, Army and Navy? Do they have formed units, do they wear uniforms, do they bring firepower of an army to bare on the other forces. If no to all above then they need to reflect on what they do when applying mission only benefits to just one mission.

In the end good ideas born out of other conflicts should apply to all soldiers who fought on all missions. A bullet does not have a medal citation attached to it defining why it was fired ......it is just made of metal.

I agrree with this statement. We all signed on the dotted line. leave no vet behind

The part that I have a problem with the most, besides the discrimination, is in Para 2, where it says "ONLY THOSE BENEFITS SPECIFIED AT REF B CAN BE REIMBURSED."

With reimbursed being the key word. Not many soldiers can afford to have these modifications made up front, unless they are forced to use their lump sum awards to do so, which can take months or years to be approved, long after the need for these improvements are required, and most likely after they've already been dumped into civilian life by the CF.

OK Folks lets play the "What's wrong with this CF plan?"
I'll start what benefit is in this message that VAC does not already offer.


UNCLAS CANFORGEN 125/11 CMP 062/11 SIC WAS SUBJECT: CBI 211 SVC BENEFITS
FOR ILL AND INJURED MBRS OF THE CF BILINGUAL MESSAGE / MESSAGE BILINGUE
REFS: A. (CANCELLED) CBI 211 MOBILITY ASSISTANCE B. (NEW) CBI 211 SVC
BENEFITS FOR ILL AND INJURED MBRS OF THE CF 1. REF A WAS CANCELLED BY
TREASURY BOARD EFFECTIVE 31 MAR 11 AND REF B WAS APPROVED BY TREASURY
BOARD EFFECTIVE 1 APR 11 2. REF B PROVIDES BENEFITS FOR CF MBRS WHO
SUFFER PHYSICAL OR MENTAL IMPAIRMENTS. SOME BENEFITS ARE AVAILABLE TO
ALL MBRS AND OTHERS, ONLY TO MBRS WHO SERVED IN AFGHANISTAN 3. THE
BENEFITS IN REF B ARE: A. HOME MODIFICATIONS BENEFIT (ALL MBRS) B. HOME
MODIFICATIONS MOVE BENEFIT (ALL MBRS) C. VEHICLE MODIFICATIONS BENEFIT
(ALL MBRS)

PAGE 2 RCCLHAV6009 UNCLAS D. HOME ASSISTANCE BENEFIT (ALL
MBRS) E. ATTENDANT CARE BENEFIT (AFGHANISTAN ONLY) F. CAREGIVER BENEFIT
(AFGHANISTAN ONLY) G. SPOUSAL EDUCATION UPGRADE BENEFIT (AFGHANISTAN
ONLY) 4. REF B SPECIFIES THE CONDITIONS THAT MUST BE SATISFIED TO BE
ENTITLED TO EACH BENEFIT AND THE SCOPE OF EACH BENEFIT. ONLY THOSE
BENEFITS SPECIFIED AT REF B CAN BE REIMBURSED 5. THE TAX IMPLICATIONS OF
THE BENEFITS IN REF B WILL BE INCLUDED IN A CMP MIL PERS INSTR TO FOLLOW
6. QUESTIONS MAY BE ADDRESSED TO DCSM AT 1-800-883-6094 7. SIGNED BY
RADM A. SMITH, CMP

djallin wrote:Where can I find a copy of this CANFORGEN?

in the news section on the bulletinboard.

Where can I find a copy of this CANFORGEN?

About that CANFORGEN it has nothing to do with VAC. Those are "extra" benefits from the Canadian Forces. It's part of that $2 Billion McKay/Blackburn presser made September 2010. I hope to have more info on the CANFORGEN soon.

That said I absolutely agree with you Navrat! It's utter BS for the CF to now start the "category" of military deployments! A lost leg in Canada on a CF base is just as tramatic as a lost leg in Afghanistan! Imagine having two soldiers as neighbours who work in the same unit and one guy is getting his vehicle, house and wife going to enhanced schooling while the other gets SFA from the CF.

You know i get sick and tired of the government giving benefits based on what type of veteran you r or where you served. A veteran should be entitled to all the same benefits or rights as any other veteran regardless of where one served. Once you put on the uniform, Navy , Army or Airforce we all belong to the same team and can be called at anytime anywhere. I ju st read the canforgen and it just turns my stomach that certain benefits are only available to afghan vets and others not. Not to take anything away from those brave veterans in Afganstan , believe me i think they deserve the world, but what about Croatia, Rwanda or Persian gulf etc. I truly believe the government does this to divide vets and also to save the allmighty dollar. This is my opinion and thought i would bitch
navrat out