Memorial Day in Canada

 

Vincent J. Curtis


5 June 2013

  

“When was the first day of remembrance of any kind celebrated in Canada?”

 

If you could get people even to answer the question, the likely answer would be, November 11^th, 1919; the first anniversary of the armistice which concluded the fighting of the First World War.  It was then called Armistice Day.

 

Though a good answer, it would be wrong.  The first time a day of remembrance was observed in Canada was on May 30^th, 1890, and it was for Canadian veterans of the American Civil War.  It is still observed in a small way today.

 

Over 40,000 Canadians are believed to have volunteered south of the border for the conflict, which raged from 1861 to 1865 and saw the deaths of some 600,000 men.  That staggering number was suffered by a country of only thirty million in population, the size of Canada today.  That casualty figure has yet to be exceeded by all the other wars that the United States has fought, before and since, combined.  In the 1890’s when one spoke of “the war,” the Civil War was the one meant.

 

Many Canadians volunteered to fight south of the border, in part because of the cause, the ending of slavery.  The adventure of it all drew many others.  But Canada was suffering an economic depression at the time, and American recruiters were offering a $100.00 bounty to sign up.  Aggressive recruiters for the Union even tried to get British soldiers stationed in Canada to desert.  The result was a large number of war veterans who lived in Canada.

 

The Grand Army of the Republic, the fraternal organization of Union veterans of the Civil War, in 1868 established “Decoration Day,” as May 30^th, a day on which flowers would be placed on the gravesites of Civil War casualties.  The name was later changed to “Memorial Day.”

 

A GAR Post, named after William Winer Cooke (of whom more later), was established in Hamilton in 1889 through the auspices of the U.S. Consul, Colonel Monahan, and the practice of holding a ceremony of honor at the gravesites of deceased Civil War veterans was begun the next year in Canada under the direction of Vice-Consul Colonel Richard Butler.  The Cooke Post continued the practice into the 1930s, when the last of its membership died.   The records of the Cooke Post were lost and the location of the specific gravesites were, in many cases, forgotten.

 

Interest in the location of the gravesites of Civil War veterans was revived through the activity of local historian Robin McKee.  McKee gave tours of the Hamilton Cemetery based upon certain themes, and one theme was of notable war veterans buried in the cemetery.  A veteran of note was William Winer Cooke.

 

Cooke was a veteran of the Civil War.  During the war, he happened to meet and befriend one General George Armstrong Custer.  Such good friends were they that Custer, on December 28^th, 1869, arrived in Hamilton to visit with Cooke’s family for several days.  Cook later served in Custer’s 7^th U.S. Cavalry, and was killed with Custer at the Battle of the Little Big Horn in 1876.  Cooke’s mother arranged to have her son’s remains disinterred from his burial site at the Little Big Horn battlefield, and reinterred at the family plot in Hamilton cemetery.  Because of his death with Custer, Cooke was the most prominent veteran of the Civil War from Hamilton, and the new GAR Post in Hamilton was named after him.

 

One of Robin McKee’s tour guests, an old gentlemen, happened to be the son of one of the veterans of the old GAR post, and got McKee started on mapping out the location of many more Civil War veterans.  Eventually, Civil War veterans became the theme of one of McKee’s tours.

 

The GAR was noteworthy for its endorsement of equal treatment for black veterans at a time when racial prejudice was strong in America.  McKee is most proud of having discovered the location, and of having a proper Civil War headstone from the United States government placed upon, the grave of Nelson Stevens, a veteran of the 25^th United States Colored Troops.  Stevens was an escaped slaved who found refuge in Canada, and who returned to fight for the freedom of his race.  He faced instant execution if he were captured by Southern troops.  Stevens returned to Canada, and died in poverty.  His grave was unmarked.  McKee knew of Stevens, and with a lot of detective work as well as the aid of ground penetrating radar, he located his remains.  A proper stone now marks the spot. 

 

McKee’s tours attracted the attention of American Legion Post 18, based in Burlington ON.  The members of Post 18 are either retired American servicemen who live in Canada, or are Canadians who served in the American forces, such as during the Vietnam War.  Post 18 arranged with McKee to perform Memorial Day honors at the gravesites of the veterans he found as part of his tour.  Since then, the remains of more Civil War veterans and of American veterans of other of her wars have been located, and Post 18 now conducts Memorial Day honors at three different cemeteries.

 

Between the work of historian McKee and the members of American Legion Post 18, Memorial Day continues to be observed in Canada, and remains Canada’s oldest service of remembrance.  Canada’s Civil War veterans are honored on that day.

-30-

 

 

It’s all over but the paying

 

 

Vincent J. Curtis


1 May 2013

 

Canada isn’t committed to buying the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, Canada is condemned to buying it.

 

Condemned by a combination of factors.  The first is a complete lack of rigor in the analysis of strategic needs:  What threats will North American air space face between now and 2030, and between now and 2040, that will necessitate stealth technology?

 

What are the likely kinds of overseas deployments that will the RCAF have to undertake between now and 2040, given that any such deployment will be voluntary on Canada’s part?  Can tactics substitute for stealth?

 

Is the investment in stealth technology going to hold good for forty years, given the rapid advances in electronic technology?  (Stealth is derived from the shape of the aircraft and the materials of construction, and together these prevent the reflection of radar and other signals back to the enemy’s detectors.)

 

Will UAV technology overtake the requirement for manned aircraft?

 

What about investments in other CF capabilities, such as fighting ships?

 

In other words, is $85 million US times 65 copies a worthwhile investment of defense dollars?

 

The recent webcast conference sponsored by Lockheed-Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35, made it clear that Canada’s fighter pilots are convinced that the stealth fighter is the way to go.  The way to go in the same way that, if you like driving fast cars, an Italian sports car is the way to go over a Ford Mustang - when you don’t have to pay for either one.

 

Having the F-35 to fly will enable our fighter jocks to to sit across the Mess table from their peers from other countries and be able to thump their chests and say, “We’ve got the stealth fighter, too!”

 

Canadian fighter jocks won’t be “penalized” as they were in Kosovo because their jets had non-standard refueling nozzles.  Canadian fighter jocks won’t be left out of the fight because their jets will have all the same data sharing electronics and spare parts as those of our NATO allies.  The embarrassments of the Libya campaign won’t happen again.

 

There is no doubt the F-35 is a capable flying machine, and 80 of the estimated 3100 production aircraft have already been delivered.  However, not one of these aircraft is presently able to fight because the weapons systems for them are still being tested.  As racehorses go, these fighter aircraft are geldings.  They are a terrific flying platform with nothing on them except makeweights.  The electronics in them will be great, also.

 

Canada will be taking delivery of its first F-35 in 2017.  By then, one hopes, that Canadian aircraft will be a little more manly.

 

During the webcast, a remarkable claim was made that the cost of a Gen-4 fighter like the F-16 E will be the same as the Gen-5 F-35 in 2017.  Implication: there is no point in looking to scrimp on stealth because the costs will be the same.  The new, advanced electronics make the Gen-5 fighter far more capable in every respect to a Gen-4 fighter and so why not buy better for the same cost?  If you believe the premise.

 

The US Navy and the Australian government are not placing their faith in stealth technology, which is unalterable.  Instead, they are investing in tactics and in electronics.

 

The US Navy commissioned and has in service the EA-18G Growler aircraft, which is based on the “Super Hornet” airframe.  This aircraft has one purpose: to be the platform for all the superior electronics a fighter squadron needs.  It is capable of jamming radars, employing radars, and doing the data sharing among the individual jets of a fighter squadron.  The fighter squadron does not rely on stealth technology to remain undetected, but on blinding the enemy’s electronic detectors with the gear carried by the Growler.  The flyaway cost of one of these is $68.2 million, less than the F-35; and it can be employed with Canada’s current fleet of CF-18s immediately.

 

The F/A 18 Super Hornet is a new aircraft that presently is in service, (Flyaway cost: $67 million) and is considered to be a Gen-4.5 aircraft because it is not completely stealthy.  However, as a fighter/bomber it is as capable as the F-35.  The last time I checked, the Mark I human eyeball is capable of detecting a stealth fighter.

 

Canada’s fighter-jock mentality is of individual aircraft doing individual missions, just like World War I.  Consequently, no one is shaping the thinking of fighter tactics such that other than stealth technology is admissible to the discussion.

-          XXX –