AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to millions of articles from top publications available through your library.
Response to "Doctrine and Canada's Army--Seduction by Foreign Dogma: Coming to Terms with Who We Are" by Lieutenant-Colonel Roman J. Jarymowycz, Vol. 2, No. 3, August 1999.
Lieutenant-Colonel (Retired) Chuck Oliviero writes:
I read the recent article by the good Herr Doktor Lieutenant-Colonel Roman J. Jarymowycz, CD, Ph.D., as I have always read correspondence from my old friend and erstwhile cavalry confrere--with great enjoyment (and with a dictionary nearby). It is unfortunate, therefore, that the Dean of Militia Command and Staff Course (MCSC) did more to confuse and confound than he did to educate. As always, Herr Doktor has raised a plethora of issues in his fine article. I shall not, however, attempt to address them all for, as anyone knows who has entered into a meaningful debate with Colonel Jarymowycz, getting to the end of such a discussion could take the remainder of all of our natural lives. I shall, therefore, only touch upon the highlights.
Before going any further allow me, gentle reader, to add a disclaimer. Cavalry officers never argue in public. Such distasteful behavior can have the unwelcome side effect of having one tossed from the Mess. Thus, I want it understood that I am not disagreeing with my old chum; rather, just as Jomini supposedly saw into the mind of Napoleon, so shall I elucidate what Dean Jarymowycz meant to say.
Sadly, my old friend has once again confused the title "Manoeuvre" (as in Manoeuvre Warfare [MW]) with the term "manoeuvre" (as in fire and manoeuvre) or the expression "manoeuvre" (as in operational manoeuvre). Certainly the Dean must have …