Re-think Our National Service Conscription
-
National service conscription was introduced in 1967 to basically produce a military defence force for the country. Later it was expanded to include the police and civil defence force. In the Enlistment Act, all male Singaporean citizens, upon reaching the age of 18, are required to serve two years of full-time national service in one of these forces. Which forces one is conscripted to is decided solely by the government without any recourse. Females are not required to do national service. I shall focus maily on military conscription.
Recently, draft dodger Melvin Tan, created a furore among ex and current national servicemen for the light punishment he received from the authorities. Unhappiness also started to surface about male foreigners who had obtained their PR and/or citizenship without having to serve a day of national service. Questions were raised about the value of citizenship, and the inconsistencies of national service liability.
National service is suppose to bond the nation, but instead it has inadvertently created divisions and frictions between citizens who are liable to be conscripted, and those who are not. Such division is compounded by the latter's lack of understanding and respect for national servicemen. Last year, a senior bureacrat and an ASTAR's female scholar passed unsavoury remarks on national servicemen, which causes much outrage and condemnation from ex and current national servicemen. This shows the underlying tension between both groups.
One of the most serious implication of national service conscription is that we are actually putting Singapore at risk. With conscription, we are just producing "reluctant soldiers". Many Singaporean male do not have the opportunity or finance to do what Melvin Tan did. They have no choice but to serve out their "liability", wishing for their 2 years of military service to be over as soon as possible. Realistically, in time of war, do you think these reluctant soldiers will actually carry their guns and put their life at stake for the country? Or do they readily offer to surrender to enemy forces battling in. During the US-Iraqi war, we witnessed conscripted Iraqi soldiers readily surrendering to the US army and chose to be POWs to preserve their lives. Will our NSmen do that? Yes if they are reluctant soldiers being conscripted to fight a war. Further, these reluctant soldiers could inevitably led to this problem of desertion. Our operational readiness in defence is dependent on the X number of soldiers that we have. During peace time, these X numbers are reassuring to our defensive needs. However in times of war, it could be much more lesser, crippling our defensive capability. This is because many reluctant NSmen and his family would have gone out of the country at the first sign of trouble. The government can closed all immigration point, but it wouldn't be of much use if soldiers are not willing to fight.
National service conscription for all its' noble purposes and objectives, is in fact counterproductive. It does not make our nation's defence stronger as previously thought. Instead of better bonding, it has divided our nation between those who are liable and those who are not. Conscription has put our male citizens at a disadvantage in the employment market as compared to the woman folks and incoming foreigners. This led to anguish and resentment. Conscription had also dented the creativeness of one-third of the nation's population. It has caused talents like Melvin Tan to migrate. NSmens' yearly duties has blunted the competitiveness of our companies and the economy. Resources committed to training conscripted reluctant soldiers are wasted and could be put to better use.
Therfore after 39 years, a re-think of our national service conscription is necessary, and not a moment too soon.
Think about it
Deen Lee -
talk so much no use..action speaks louder. and ns is not just about making you hold a gun its about brainwashing you..but apparently it didn't work for most of us but yes..everyone still fears the government.
-
Originally posted by Deen Lee:
If the government closed all the ports and the enemy is on Singapore island, the people will fight no matter what, that is if they want to survive, so where's the reluctant soldiers?
Our operational readiness in defence is dependent on the X number of soldiers that we have. During peace time, these X numbers are reassuring to our defensive needs. However in times of war, it could be much more lesser, crippling our defensive capability. This is because many reluctant NSmen and his family would have gone out of the country at the first sign of trouble. The government can closed all immigration point, but it wouldn't be of much use if soldiers are not willing to fight. -
So what's the alternative then? A fully professional army? We simply don't have enough manpower to create a professional army. The full strength of the SAF is to the order of 300000++ men. If you want a professional army of that size, not only is it going to cost lots, but it's going to drain massive manpower from the economy.Originally posted by Deen Lee:National service conscription was introduced in 1967 to basically produce a military defence force for the country. Later it was expanded to include the police and civil defence force. In the Enlistment Act, all male Singaporean citizens, upon reaching the age of 18, are required to serve two years of full-time national service in one of these forces. Which forces one is conscripted to is decided solely by the government without any recourse. Females are not required to do national service. I shall focus maily on military conscription.
Recently, draft dodger Melvin Tan, created a furore among ex and current national servicemen for the light punishment he received from the authorities. Unhappiness also started to surface about male foreigners who had obtained their PR and/or citizenship without having to serve a day of national service. Questions were raised about the value of citizenship, and the inconsistencies of national service liability.
National service is suppose to bond the nation, but instead it has inadvertently created divisions and frictions between citizens who are liable to be conscripted, and those who are not. Such division is compounded by the latter's lack of understanding and respect for national servicemen. Last year, a senior bureacrat and an ASTAR's female scholar passed unsavoury remarks on national servicemen, which causes much outrage and condemnation from ex and current national servicemen. This shows the underlying tension between both groups.
One of the most serious implication of national service conscription is that we are actually putting Singapore at risk. With conscription, we are just producing "reluctant soldiers". Many Singaporean male do not have the opportunity or finance to do what Melvin Tan did. They have no choice but to serve out their "liability", wishing for their 2 years of military service to be over as soon as possible. Realistically, in time of war, do you think these reluctant soldiers will actually carry their guns and put their life at stake for the country? Or do they readily offer to surrender to enemy forces battling in. During the US-Iraqi war, we witnessed conscripted Iraqi soldiers readily surrendering to the US army and chose to be POWs to preserve their lives. Will our NSmen do that? Yes if they are reluctant soldiers being conscripted to fight a war. Further, these reluctant soldiers could inevitably led to this problem of desertion. Our operational readiness in defence is dependent on the X number of soldiers that we have. During peace time, these X numbers are reassuring to our defensive needs. However in times of war, it could be much more lesser, crippling our defensive capability. This is because many reluctant NSmen and his family would have gone out of the country at the first sign of trouble. The government can closed all immigration point, but it wouldn't be of much use if soldiers are not willing to fight.
National service conscription for all its' noble purposes and objectives, is in fact counterproductive. It does not make our nation's defence stronger as previously thought. Instead of better bonding, it has divided our nation between those who are liable and those who are not. Conscription has put our male citizens at a disadvantage in the employment market as compared to the woman folks and incoming foreigners. This led to anguish and resentment. Conscription had also dented the creativeness of one-third of the nation's population. It has caused talents like Melvin Tan to migrate. NSmens' yearly duties has blunted the competitiveness of our companies and the economy. Resources committed to training conscripted reluctant soldiers are wasted and could be put to better use.
Therfore after 39 years, a re-think of our national service conscription is necessary, and not a moment too soon.
Think about it
Deen Lee
Some may say that technology nowadays allows wars to be fought with the push of a button. I say that's a very naive and short-sighted perception. With all the technology that we have, we still need the troops on the ground to fight and win the war. You still need sailors to man the ships. No war has ever been won by pressing a few buttons.
I won't deny that NS does have its share of problems. However, I see it as a necessary evil we must have in order for the greater good of keeping the peace and prosperity we have worked so hard for. The function of the SAF is not just to go to war if the need calls for it, but to also make any potential enemies piss in their pants and think twice about playing punk with us. Having a professional army is an alternative, but it is one we can't afford. -
yeah, when u force a dog to an alley with a wall u bet the dog will fight back.Originally posted by abao:If the government closed all the ports and the enemy is on Singapore island, the people will fight no matter what, that is if they want to survive, so where's the reluctant soldiers?
bei shui yi zhan -
The only other alternatives to conscription that I can think of are these: fully professional army, and mercenaries. I think we can discount the second, for even though we have a small contingent of Gurkhas, when it comes to defending the country, you cannot rely on mercenaries.
As for a fully professional army, I doubt that the majority of the personnel in that kind of army would really be serving for the sake of patriotism/honour/glory alone. Most people would rather do other jobs than soldiering. Army regulars are mostly people who lack the education and skills to survive in other jobs outside. So in the end mostly you'll still get reluctant and worse still, incompetent, soldiers in your army. -
If there is really a war, would you expect your NS men to be patriotic and defend the country ????
Most of the people are rich enough to book a ticket to get out of the country when there are any sign of crisis.
I really dun expect any one would stay back and defend Singapore.
Most of the people would be angry seeing the above sentence.
Please ask yourself whether you will stay or go and dun argue with a idealistic response.
The standard of NS have already been eroding with the reduction of training standard and NS years.
With the recent cases of NS men death, the demand for tougher training would be reduced greatly.
Dun give the lousy reasoning that having a range in a air-con range is more effective than the actual range.
Maybe next time your son can serve NS through playing strategic PC games in a air-con room. -
You mean they actually say that air con range is more effective??? So what next time, our 5 tonners and 3 tonners will be all air con?Originally posted by Medicated Oil:If there is really a war, would you expect your NS men to be patriotic and defend the country ????
Most of the people are rich enough to book a ticket to get out of the country when there are any sign of crisis.
I really dun expect any one would stay back and defend Singapore.
Most of the people would be angry seeing the above sentence.
Please ask yourself whether you will stay or go and dun argue with a idealistic response.
The standard of NS have already been eroding with the reduction of training standard and NS years.
With the recent cases of NS men death, the demand for tougher training would be reduced greatly.
Dun give the lousy reasoning that having a range in a air-con range is more effective than the actual range.
Maybe next time your son can serve NS through playing strategic PC games in a air-con room. [/b] -
Ok ok let's do a poll here... who will stay behind and fight a war if it comes to our shores?
Since we are obscured behind our fire walls and fake nicks as well as clones, I do expect some real answers right?
As for me, I will stay and fight a war if it comes. Don't talk about the gahmen lah, talk about love for the country... -
few guys would disagree if ns were to be done away. however, it still has a purpose to serve. like it or not, if we take a pacifist approach to military matters, then we're done for.
not all potential invaders are like bush who gave saddam datelines... saddam sure didn't give kuwait any warning when they invaded. at the end of the day, when push comes to shove, the people will fight. to the potential invaders, the thought of 300,000 men able to use rifles will think twice.
i hated my time during ns and by no means am i alone. that said, nevertheless i am also relief to know that there are young men doing what i did to keep the country safe. -
This unsafe world needs a military solution to back up the peace.
No democracy will stand tall without a powerful but benign force behind the Republic to knock any invaders silly. -
Keep NS but expand it's scope. Women must serve NS too...in the civil service and hospitals as nursing assistants, etc. Those who dodge NS must be given severe punishments that include mandatory costodial sentences and caning for men.
-
More corporal punishment will not improve the innate will of a people to serve.
-
The question was asked almost 40 years ago when NS was established. Will the men stay to fight in a war? The answer: when the enemy arrives at your door an you are not amond the elite who can get away, you will fight. Most will not be able or want to to go away. Most will remain to fight. NS is necessary to train our men so they know how to fight.Originally posted by ndsef:Ok ok let's do a poll here... who will stay behind and fight a war if it comes to our shores?
Since we are obscured behind our fire walls and fake nicks as well as clones, I do expect some real answers right?
As for me, I will stay and fight a war if it comes. Don't talk about the gahmen lah, talk about love for the country...
As for those who would dodge NS, leave them and their families to be raped and killed....serves them right! -
Under the current conscription scheme, national service duties are imposed on only a section of the adult population. Like many, I feel that it is discriminatory and needs to be changed. In my opinion, all citizens and even permanent residents should perform "national service" in Singapore. It should be an obligation for all to contribute to the good of our society, and the nation. In order to impose that, we need to re-examine what "national service" meant to us, and re-evaluate our conscription policy.
In my opinion, "national service" is an obligation imposed on the residents of a country to perform a duty to the nation. National service should not be confined to services in the military, police or civil defence force. It should encompass the entire framework of public and social services to society, and the nation. Beside the defence forces, services in healthcare, education, welfare etc can be made to be part of the broader scope of national service. This will further extend and broaden the concept of "Total Defence".
After having re-defined "national service" to a broader concept, we need to re-evaluate our conscription policy. As the saying goes, you can bring the horse to the water, but you cannot force the animal to drink it. Having reluctant soldiers will put Singapore at a bigger risk. Having reluctant NS policemen will not make our society any safer from criminals. We should scrape our current conscription policy, and look for new ways where all the residents can perform their national service with motivation and commitment. This new national service scheme must be made flexible enough for all adult residents (male, female, PRs) to perform, as well as options available for them to undertake the services that they believe in and are committed to. With this form of "compulsory volunterism", national service will no longer be discriminatory, divisive and nonmeaningful to the people. -
I'll send my family abroad if war is imminent.I will defend them in any way I can, if it means staying with them, I will do so.
It's also about the guts to answer to your conscience and God at the defining moment.If it means I have to come back to fight, then so be it. -
Yes. I'm a "reluctant soldiers" being force to enter the Ns, have no choice. But come to think of it. Singapore is so small with so little population. Could we really can have a huge force of regular amry? If we did have a huge force of regular amry than how about the private sector? will we have enough people to run the econmy of the country? i Dun think so.
Yes most of the soldiers has the thinking of serving and faRK off. But at least we did learn some basic military skill in which in time of war as least we know how to handle the weapon that is handle to us.. rather than not serving and not even knowing about basic military stuff. When the end is near, do we have a choice? We have no choice, either surrender or fight. Some will fight, some will surrender. But it better than having a whole population of men not knowing how to handle their weapon and basic military stuff. -
When you know that your enemy is going to kill you, basic human instinct is to fight.NS skills leverage on that instinct and make us lethal and more effective citizens.Originally posted by zheshi:Yes. I'm a "reluctant soldiers" being force to enter the Ns, have no choice. But come to think of it. Singapore is so small with so little population. Could we really can have a huge force of regular amry? If we did have a huge force of regular amry than how about the private sector? will we have enough people to run the econmy of the country? i Dun think so.
Yes most of the soldiers has the thinking of serving and faRK off. But at least we did learn some basic military skill in which in time of war as least we know how to handle the weapon that is handle to us.. rather than not serving and not even knowing about basic military stuff. When the end is near, do we have a choice? We have no choice, either surrender or fight. Some will fight, some will surrender. But it better than having a whole population of men not knowing how to handle their weapon and basic military stuff.
You canot own what you cannot defend.IF we had gun ownership here,I would have been the first to buy some for my personal use. -
Most religion encourages peace.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I'll send my family abroad if war is imminent.I will defend them in any way I can, if it means staying with them, I will do so.
It's also about the guts to answer to your conscience and God at the defining moment.If it means I have to come back to fight, then so be it.
If you are very religious, and believe that there is heaven after death, there is no need to fight.
Just surrender, and if you are killed when u surrender, so be it. You know you will get to heaven and enjoy a better life there.
Why waste your energy defending properties that you don't own (aka HDB flats)?
Even if you friends are being killed, just tell yourself that they are going to better places. -
Sadly my interpretation of my religion is that I must defend myself and my loved ones.Originally posted by Cindyfeh:Most religion encourages peace.
If you are very religious, and believe that there is heaven after death, there is no need to fight.
Just surrender, and if you are killed when u surrender, so be it. You know you will get to heaven and enjoy a better life there.
Why waste your energy defending properties that you don't own (aka HDB flats)?
Even if you friends are being killed, just tell yourself that they are going to better places.
I do the killing, God can sort them out later. -
the loss of NS would mean rise in income tax......just to support a regular army
-
In short, what you're telling us is:Originally posted by Cindyfeh:Most religion encourages peace.
If you are very religious, and believe that there is heaven after death, there is no need to fight.
Just surrender, and if you are killed when u surrender, so be it. You know you will get to heaven and enjoy a better life there.
Why waste your energy defending properties that you don't own (aka HDB flats)?
Even if you friends are being killed, just tell yourself that they are going to better places.
1. Just give up, don't bother fighting for what you have.
2. We don't own anything anyway, so why bother fighting for them?
3. The people we care about are going to a better place anyway, so why bother fighting for them?
My response to you: TOTAL HOGWASH.
Most, if not all religions, do encourage peace. However, what I do know is that we should fight if we really have to to defend ourselves, our properties and the ones we love and care for.
In addition, I don't care whether or not HDB flats have 99-year leases only, it's MY house, I've lived in it most of my life, and I will fight for it to prevent the enemies from tainting it with their presence! I will fight for my beautiful housing estate, and I will fight for this country I was born in!
You really think that I will stand and do nothing as I watch the people I care about being raped, tortured and killed? I will fight for them, and I will die for them if I have to! I'd die better knowing that I fought for the ones whom I care about rather than be the coward who stands aside and does nothing.
Sheesh man, I can't believe that in times of war, I'm expected to defend people like you with this sort of mentality. Even if your post is supposed to be some sort of joke, it's a really, really, sick joke which I don't find humorous at all. -
Either you leave or you fight.It's simple really.If you don't have the guts, don't get in the way.
-
ammo better spent distributed elsewhereOriginally posted by LazerLordz:Either you leave or you fight.It's simple really.If you don't have the guts, don't get in the way. -
Please preach that to my enemies so they won't resist when I kill their children, rape their wives, seize their properties and send them to a better life in heavenOriginally posted by Cindyfeh:Most religion encourages peace.
If you are very religious, and believe that there is heaven after death, there is no need to fight.
Just surrender, and if you are killed when u surrender, so be it. You know you will get to heaven and enjoy a better life there.
Why waste your energy defending properties that you don't own (aka HDB flats)?
Even if you friends are being killed, just tell yourself that they are going to better places.