Let those who intend to emigrate opt out of NS
-
I am proud to be of Straits Chinese. We Straits Chinese dominate almost the entire Southeast Asian economy as an ethical groupOriginally posted by will4:I think the Chinese in Malaysia is better treated than in Indonesia.
Since his parents have decided in place of him when he is not an adult legally, the choice is law-binding. He must serve national service.Originally posted by depressed:But according to what I heard, one is unable to renounce Singapore citizenship until he hits 21 years of age. I dont think the authorities in charge will let him give up his Singapore passport. And my guess is that his parents applied Singapore citizenship when he was young, not his own personal choice.
However, I do know someone personally who gave up his Singapore citizenship halfway during National Service. Once he finished his SISPEC training, this friend of mine rejected his Singapore citizenship/passport and went to Canada. He holds a Canadian citizenship. He left Singapore for good 6mth into national service.
I think there is some degree of freedom whereby people with dual citizenship can avoid National Service. Looking from another angle, it is a security problem to let non-Singapore citizens to be part of our citizen army. -
Originally posted by will4:
At least the Chinese population in Malaysia is assured of their right to a Malaysian Citizenship - which cannot be taken away just because you are out of the Country for more then TEN Years.
I think the Chinese in Malaysia is better treated than in Indonesia.
Chinese Malaysian in majority case hoped to stay here but majority I seen always go back to stay in Malaysia.
I asked some Chinese Malaysian in here how come they will not renounced their citizenship, they said they still prefer Malaysia.
Although racial politics exist in Malaysia, due to the economic disparity and disadvantage of the different communities dating back to pre-independence, the Malaysian Chinese still could not complain much, as discrimination is not financially administered but only in the form of government services.
However, the Malaysian Chinese had shown their resillience and intelligence by adapting to the changing circumstance, and have strived to overcome the initial handicap that was politically imposed. The Malaysian Chinese had beaten the odds and had bettered their own lot and won the race with a heavy handicap weighing on them.
The Malaysians prefer to work in Singapore to earn the Singapore Dollar, which when exchanged into Malaysian Ringgit allow them to earn two to four times what they can earn in Malaysia.
The Malaysians need the jobs that we can offer, and our businesses and industries need the Malaysian workforce.
Where does this leave the average Singaporean ?
We will need to change our POLITICS that affect our entire political, economic, cultural and social psychic and competitiveness.
We have to have a more open system that allow Singaporeans to take charge of our own political process, much like the Japanese citizens are participating in the Government decisions that affect the future of its Citizens.
The Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Party need to learn from small countries such as Switzerland, Israel, Ireland, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and even Finland, that the Citizens must be involved in the decision making process that affects our own Future.
Decisions that affect our own Future cannot be left to Politicians, and Politics cannot be the exclusive business of Politicians only.
Politics is about the Singapore Citizenry, about our present and future.
It is not the exclusive monopoly of the Ruling Party, but the Citizens. -
without intending to continue the needless argument which might get too irrelevant, i have here a post from someone and you decide abt it:
During my time as a medical officer, I met many people like Pavin. They had great difficulties coming to terms with serving in the SAF. Some threatened suicide. Many said exactly what Pavin had said. Many a time I told them it was the law that they had to serve. No amount of reasoning should change that. Many of these boys said they never had a say, and it was all their parent's decision to come to Singapore, yet their father's never had to serve NS and thus did not know exactly what they were talking about when they ask their sons to serve NS.
I recall very clearly one Indonesian Singapore PR (2nd generation) who told me "If Singapore and Indonesia go to war, I will run to the Indonesians and fight for them. I will use your SAF weapons and what I learned from the SAF to kill people like you, rape your wives and daughters and laugh in your face"
when that happens, you will be paid fully for the warped sense of "bills" that comes with interest as well. -
I really do not do justice to overlook all the issues mentioned here..but suffice to say it 's not just stupid on the hastily formulated laws regarding N.S. defaulters.. there are so many issues on this which the GARMEN parliamentarians had overlooked or are just considering..we have a hastily made law because of one American musician or just because surrendipitiously the Garmen are on a blind road down the way of unforseen situations?
Read:http://www.sgwiki.com/wiki/SAF_Deaths which I quote here at length:
Government to impose stiffer penalties for NS defaulters
There are really several issues which in the course of being of dual citizenship which can be burdensome for those needed to do their national service in Singapore. Some people may be born and brought up as Americans or Australians or some foreign countries where they don't know anything about Singapore except that their parents were from an alien Country and had registered them as "citizen" of Singapore by no choice of their own. Should such a person when he come back to Singapore as a tourist wanting to see his parent's homeland, then suddenly discovered that he had been N.S.defaulter! That had happened before, so had the Parliamentarians discuss this issue at all?
Besides the financial restraints and the out-of-Country plus out of sight situation, should these dual citizenship holders be forced to comply with the narrow-minded laws of Singapore?
Then what:they would be forced to live with a bunch of N.S. whose worldviews and culture were not exactly his own, what would be the likely culture shocks be , Are Singapore aware of these people who maybe truly Singaporean at heart, however, the N.S. would be negatively be inculcating some initial wrong values among foreign born registered Singaporeans serendipitously! Is that what the Garmen really wanted? I think the Garmen imagine those foreign born Citizens of Singapore in China and India are wealthy enough to fly home and to their loyal services to Singapore... I believe such issues are just the top of the tip of greater issues that I believe Singaporeans had allowed their Garmen people to run the show, but down to the bottomline, a law when made, is still LAW and who will take all the stupid blames? Who will suffer at the end of the stick?> The rich rulers, the politicians, or the common people -
Well said, Atobe.Originally posted by Atobe:At least the Chinese population in Malaysia is assured of their right to a Malaysian Citizenship - which cannot be taken away just because you are out of the Country for more then TEN Years.
Although racial politics exist in Malaysia, due to the economic disparity and disadvantage of the different communities dating back to pre-independence, the Malaysian Chinese still could not complain much, as discrimination is not financially administered but only in the form of government services.
However, the Malaysian Chinese had shown their resillience and intelligence by adapting to the changing circumstance, and have strived to overcome the initial handicap that was politically imposed. The Malaysian Chinese had beaten the odds and had bettered their own lot and won the race with a heavy handicap weighing on them.
The Malaysians prefer to work in Singapore to earn the Singapore Dollar, which when exchanged into Malaysian Ringgit allow them to earn two to four times what they can earn in Malaysia.
The Malaysians need the jobs that we can offer, and our businesses and industries need the Malaysian workforce.
Where does this leave the average Singaporean ?
We will need to change our POLITICS that affect our entire political, economic, cultural and social psychic and competitiveness.
We have to have a more open system that allow Singaporeans to take charge of our own political process, much like the Japanese citizens are participating in the Government decisions that affect the future of its Citizens.
The Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Party need to learn from small countries such as Switzerland, Israel, Ireland, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and even Finland, that the Citizens must be involved in the decision making process that affects our own Future.
Decisions that affect our own Future cannot be left to Politicians, and Politics cannot be the exclusive business of Politicians only.
Politics is about the Singapore Citizenry, about our present and future.
It is not the exclusive monopoly of the Ruling Party, but the Citizens. -
Yes, there is a price to pay for enjoying our security.But it does not make it any more moral to tie down citizens, or God forbid, 2nd gen PRs who have NOT even grown up here to serve NS if they have made the choice to leave.Those who want to stay, will serve and grudgingly still give their marginal best.
It is the nature of these laws that are ironically, smacking the notion of patriotism as a self-induced construct back at the government who choose to regulate even the concept of self-patriotism.
NS has to stay, but we rather not have people who want to leave.If you choose to stay, you make a better soldier in the NS context, why'd do we want to also keep those who want to leave?To mask over incompetencies in recruitment?Population is not an excuse.
Universal suffrage HAS to be lowered to 18.If you are able to bear arms, then you should jolly well be allowed to fucking vote or make your decision on citizenship matters.Anything else is mere control and a sickening way of ensuring we have quantity, which might impact undesirably on the quality.
Why has this been ranted on for decades and nothing has been done?Do you see any reactivity on such issues?Or do we only see reactivity on issues related to comfortable issues like lift upgrading?A matured and open society?Bullshit.
People like us serve and realise that this nation is worthy to protect because we believe it will improve and evolve, not stuck in a rut.It's sad but it's our duty, if we have chosen to stay.I may not like or agree with those who choose to leave, but I'm inclined to defend them because it should be their right to make their abode elsewhere and not be forced to pay maximum costs, but their own internal marginal costs. -
Originally posted by depressed:
I recall very clearly one Indonesian Singapore PR (2nd generation) who told me "If Singapore and Indonesia go to war, I will run to the Indonesians and fight for them. [b]I will use your SAF weapons and what I learned from the SAF to kill people like you, rape your wives and daughters and laugh in your face"
[/b]
Holy crap. -
This is farking long overdue. It should have come about as soon as conscription was implemented. In fact, the USA lowered the age of voting following the Vietnam draft because many student protestors agitated for it.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Yes, there is a price to pay for enjoying our security.But it does not make it any more moral to tie down citizens, or God forbid, 2nd gen PRs who have NOT even grown up here to serve NS if they have made the choice to leave.Those who want to stay, will serve and grudgingly still give their marginal best.
It is the nature of these laws that are ironically, smacking the notion of patriotism as a self-induced construct back at the government who choose to regulate even the concept of self-patriotism.
NS has to stay, but we rather not have people who want to leave.If you choose to stay, you make a better soldier in the NS context, why'd do we want to also keep those who want to leave?To mask over incompetencies in recruitment?Population is not an excuse.
Universal suffrage HAS to be lowered to 18.If you are able to bear arms, then you should jolly well be allowed to fucking vote or make your decision on citizenship matters.Anything else is mere control and a sickening way of ensuring we have quantity, which might impact undesirably on the quality.
Why has this been ranted on for decades and nothing has been done?Do you see any reactivity on such issues?Or do we only see reactivity on issues related to comfortable issues like lift upgrading?A matured and open society?Bullshit.
People like us serve and realise that this nation is worthy to protect because we believe it will improve and evolve, not stuck in a rut.It's sad but it's our duty, if we have chosen to stay.I may not like or agree with those who choose to leave, but I'm inclined to defend them because it should be their right to make their abode elsewhere and not be forced to pay maximum costs, but their own internal marginal costs. -
The problem that the Young feel that they do not belong here is perhaps due to the fact that they are considered sufficiently MATURE to be responsible to defend the POLITICAL FUTURE of Singapore - BUT by the same yardstick of MATURITY they are NOT SUFFICIENTLY RESPONSIBLE to participate in any POLITICAL PROCESS for the sake of Singapore Politics.
This kind of 'double standards' is a common feature with the Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party. -
"kill people like us ? rape our wives ? ... "
well ... to be honest, I'm laughing ...
childish talk again ... in a war ... I assure you ... these sort of people would run away at the first opportunity ... along with everything they can bring ... fight us ? ... he's more likely to avoid getting into a war at all cost instead.
why ? ... cos I don't believe he knows what it means to stand for something, people who think like this are selfish, and think in terms of what the society does for me, what's in it for me, rather than the other way around ... people like this are leachers. you expect someone like this to fight ? ... even for the other side ? ...
oh no, I assure you ... he won't ...
-
Assuming this case.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Yes, there is a price to pay for enjoying our security.But it does not make it any more moral to tie down citizens, or God forbid, 2nd gen PRs who have NOT even grown up here to serve NS if they have made the choice to leave.Those who want to stay, will serve and grudgingly still give their marginal best.
It is the nature of these laws that are ironically, smacking the notion of patriotism as a self-induced construct back at the government who choose to regulate even the concept of self-patriotism.
NS has to stay, but we rather not have people who want to leave.If you choose to stay, you make a better soldier in the NS context, why'd do we want to also keep those who want to leave?To mask over incompetencies in recruitment?Population is not an excuse.
Universal suffrage HAS to be lowered to 18.If you are able to bear arms, then you should jolly well be allowed to fucking vote or make your decision on citizenship matters.Anything else is mere control and a sickening way of ensuring we have quantity, which might impact undesirably on the quality.
Why has this been ranted on for decades and nothing has been done?Do you see any reactivity on such issues?Or do we only see reactivity on issues related to comfortable issues like lift upgrading?A matured and open society?Bullshit.
People like us serve and realise that this nation is worthy to protect because we believe it will improve and evolve, not stuck in a rut.It's sad but it's our duty, if we have chosen to stay.I may not like or agree with those who choose to leave, but I'm inclined to defend them because it should be their right to make their abode elsewhere and not be forced to pay maximum costs, but their own internal marginal costs.
1. Couple migrated to Singapore and lived here for >16.5years where they had a son and their son has reached the minimum legal age for National Service.
1(a) A middle-income familiy living in HDB would gets to enjoy HDB flats subsidies, CPF contributions etc falls under the national policy.
1(b) A rich familiy staying at either HDB or private estate. It is important to note that in the former, the familiy unit gets to enjoy all the benefits provided for the majority Singaporeans.
In my opinion, is it fair for the group in 1(a) to serve the national while the group in 1(b) gets a chance of opting out of NS because they have the means to migrate again? Wouldn't such self-patriotism policy/law if ever implemented be discriminating.
Teens who has not outgrown to the stage of young adult are never mature enough to decide for themselves. What is patriotism to them at that time? Be thankful if they will still take care of their old sick parents in future.
One may argue about pursuing one's dream at that vigour age. Well, of course leeway must be given and aid genuine dreamers in their sucess but then again, will a human be self-contended upon achieve his dream? What happen if he doesn't?
As such, the law served its purpose by the scale of equity hence superceding self-patriotism. -
I'm talking about a son who has gotten PR by virtue of his parents settling down here, but he still lives in his home nation, and when he comes here for a visit one day, he is slapped with a tag befitting a draft dodger and a criminal.Now that is not fair, wouldn't you agree?Originally posted by TooFree:Assuming this case.
1. Couple migrated to Singapore and lived here for >16.5years where they had a son and their son has reached the minimum legal age for National Service.
1(a) A middle-income familiy living in HDB would gets to enjoy HDB flats subsidies, CPF contributions etc falls under the national policy.
1(b) A rich familiy staying at either HDB or private estate. It is important to note that in the former, the familiy unit gets to enjoy all the benefits provided for the majority Singaporeans.
In my opinion, is it fair for the group in 1(a) to serve the national while the group in 1(b) gets a chance of opting out of NS because they have the means to migrate again? Wouldn't such self-patriotism policy/law if ever implemented be discriminating.
Teens who has not outgrown to the stage of young adult are never mature enough to decide for themselves. What is patriotism to them at that time? Be thankful if they will still take care of their old sick parents in future.
One may argue about pursuing one's dream at that vigour age. Well, of course leeway must be given and aid genuine dreamers in their sucess but then again, will a human be self-contended upon achieve his dream? What happen if he doesn't?
As such, the law served its purpose by the scale of equity hence superceding self-patriotism. -
precisely.The faster our establishment addresses this gulf and moves away from this divisive policy, the better for our nation as a whole, too bad if it impacts on party rule and influence.Originally posted by Atobe:The problem that the Young feel that they do not belong here is perhaps due to the fact that they are considered sufficiently MATURE to be responsible to defend the POLITICAL FUTURE of Singapore - BUT by the same yardstick of MATURITY they are NOT SUFFICIENTLY RESPONSIBLE to participate in any POLITICAL PROCESS for the sake of Singapore Politics.
This kind of 'double standards' is a common feature with the Singapore Government a.k.a the Ruling Political Party.
Since when does a party take precedence over the state?It's quite unspokenly felt, IMHO. -
A Permanent Resident who lives outside of Singapore ? ....Originally posted by LazerLordz:I'm talking about a son who has gotten PR by virtue of his parents settling down here, but he still lives in his home nation, and when he comes here for a visit one day, he is slapped with a tag befitting a draft dodger and a criminal.Now that is not fair, wouldn't you agree?
hmmm .....
if he lives outside Singapore, why does he need a Singapore PR for ? ... oversight ? ... a hedging bet ? ... infact, I guess that's why many parents maintain dual citizenship for their children, a hedge bet, isn't it ? ... when things are well and smooth, they'll stay on in Singapore, untill they are 21, if things screw up around here, they'll just pat their backsides and leave, that's the way many of them think, isn't it ? ...
now what do you guys think of that ? ... -
Originally posted by depressed:
Get serious. The guy doesn't want to serve NS but he wants to go to war?
without intending to continue the needless argument which might get too irrelevant, i have here a post from someone and you decide abt it:
During my time as a medical officer, I met many people like Pavin. They had great difficulties coming to terms with serving in the SAF. Some threatened suicide. Many said exactly what Pavin had said. Many a time I told them it was the law that they had to serve. No amount of reasoning should change that. Many of these boys said they never had a say, and it was all their parent's decision to come to Singapore, yet their father's never had to serve NS and thus did not know exactly what they were talking about when they ask their sons to serve NS.
I recall very clearly one Indonesian Singapore PR (2nd generation) who told me "If Singapore and Indonesia go to war, I will run to the Indonesians and fight for them. [b]I will use your SAF weapons and what I learned from the SAF to kill people like you, rape your wives and daughters and laugh in your face"
when that happens, you will be paid fully for the warped sense of "bills" that comes with interest as well.[/b]
You want me to read and decide about it? My answer remains unchanged. These kids need to talk to Mummy and Daddy and say, "I don't want to serve NS, get me out of here". If the parents don't give in, it's the parents' doing, not the government's. -
Hold the bus one cotton-picking minute! Why are people discussing dual citizenship? There's no such thing as far as the Singapore government is allowed - if you're holding citizenship elsewhere, their stand is that you give one or the other up. If people aren't happy with being Singaporean and have somewhere else to go, they're free to do so. So what's the beef?
-
Precisely.Originally posted by Gedanken:Hold the bus one cotton-picking minute! Why are people discussing dual citizenship? There's no such thing as far as the Singapore government is allowed - if you're holding citizenship elsewhere, their stand is that you give one or the other up. If people aren't happy with being Singaporean and have somewhere else to go, they're free to do so. So what's the beef?
Since when did Singapore ever recognise dual nationalities? -
You'll hear no dissent from me upon that point, Lordz - love it or leave it, it makes no difference to me.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Universal suffrage HAS to be lowered to 18.If you are able to bear arms, then you should jolly well be allowed to fucking vote or make your decision on citizenship matters.Anything else is mere control and a sickening way of ensuring we have quantity, which might impact undesirably on the quality.
On the other hand, what is being proposed here is something different. Young Mr Pavin's idea is based upon the intention to emigrate. Either he serves or gets out - no use yabbing about it.
As I said in an earlier post, exemption cannot be based upon the intent, but the act. If all that is needed is the intent, Pavin can stay in Singapore, not serve his NS and at the same time take full advantage of Singapore's economy (instead of probably earning a lower wage in Thailand) until he is too old to serve.
As for all of his other claims, he may well intend to go over to the US and live it up, but hey, talk is cheap. -
Get serious. The guy doesn't want to serve NS but he wants to go to war?
Firstly just because he refuse to serve in Singapore army does not mean he would not serve the Indonesian army. If you want me to choose between the idea of him serving the Indonesian army and go against us during a war with what SAF taught him or the idea of Singapore going to war against an invader, I would choose the former. For him to speak so strongly in front of a MO, who holds enough power over his PES status to decide if his going to suffer in a tough vocation or a slack vocation, not to mention he might be charged and sent to DB for that remark, speak volumes. Resentful people, no matter how timid they are, could sometime do things they normally won't do.
You want me to read and decide about it? My answer remains unchanged. These kids need to talk to Mummy and Daddy and say, "I don't want to serve NS, get me out of here". If the parents don't give in, it's the parents' doing, not the government's.
no one says its the government's fault if the parents refused to allow their sons to migrate without serving NS. That's another issue not with regard to the issue Mr Pavin has mentioned. -
Originally posted by depressed:
I am an Indonesian n also a Spore PR used to served NS in 2 PDF Comd.
without intending to continue the needless argument which might get too irrelevant, i have here a post from someone and you decide abt it:
During my time as a medical officer, I met many people like Pavin. They had great difficulties coming to terms with serving in the SAF. Some threatened suicide. Many said exactly what Pavin had said. Many a time I told them it was the law that they had to serve. No amount of reasoning should change that. Many of these boys said they never had a say, and it was all their parent's decision to come to Singapore, yet their father's never had to serve NS and thus did not know exactly what they were talking about when they ask their sons to serve NS.
I recall very clearly one Indonesian Singapore PR (2nd generation) who told me "If Singapore and Indonesia go to war, I will run to the Indonesians and fight for them. [b]I will use your SAF weapons and what I learned from the SAF to kill people like you, rape your wives and daughters and laugh in your face"
when that happens, you will be paid fully for the warped sense of "bills" that comes with interest as well.[/b]
Shocked to hear this kind of remark, I used to have a colleauge who is a
Sporean n he escaped to America. He applied for exit permit after his BMT.
He went there n never came back. -
National service a universal obligation
I REFER to Mr Pavin Limanont's letter, 'Let those who intend to emigrate opt out of NS' (ST, Jan 1
.
All male Singaporeans are liable for national service (NS). This universal obligation to serve, including the appropriate way to deal with those who default, was debated fully in Parliament and reported in the media, including The Straits Times.
Should Mr Limanont or his parents have queries on his specific case, they may contact the Mindef Feedback Unit on 1800-760-8844 or at [email protected].
Col Benedict Lim
Director, Public Affairs
Ministry of Defence
typical customer service type of reply...jeez -
Oh, puh-leeze, you're killing me with laughter! This weed doesn't have the fortitude to attend military training but declares himself fit to go to a real war? What planet are you from?Originally posted by depressed:Firstly just because he refuse to serve in Singapore army does not mean he would not serve the Indonesian army. If you want me to choose between the idea of him serving the Indonesian army and go against us during a war with what SAF taught him or the idea of Singapore going to war against an invader, I would choose the former. For him to speak so strongly in front of a MO, who holds enough power over his PES status to decide if his going to suffer in a tough vocation or a slack vocation, not to mention he might be charged and sent to DB for that remark, speak volumes. Resentful people, no matter how timid they are, could sometime do things they normally won't do.
no one says its the government's fault if the parents refused to allow their sons to migrate without serving NS. That's another issue not with regard to the issue Mr Pavin has mentioned.
For him to speak so strongly in front of an MO only shows him to be a whiny drama queen.
Of course the issue is with Pavin: Daddy and Mummy can send him to Bangkok, Kanchanaburi or Phuket any time they want, and had they decided to do so, we wouldn't be seeing his absurd letter, would we? Had he acknowledged the bald truth of the situation, we wouldn't be seeing this letter either because it would be between him and his parents - the very fact that he's sent the letter to ST makes it obvious that he's trying to hold the government responsible for not giving in to his whining. -
Given the silly nature of Pavin's letter, a rubber-stamped response is as much (if not more) of a response as it deserves.Originally posted by depressed:National service a universal obligation
I REFER to Mr Pavin Limanont's letter, 'Let those who intend to emigrate opt out of NS' (ST, Jan 1.
All male Singaporeans are liable for national service (NS). This universal obligation to serve, including the appropriate way to deal with those who default, was debated fully in Parliament and reported in the media, including The Straits Times.
Should Mr Limanont or his parents have queries on his specific case, they may contact the Mindef Feedback Unit on 1800-760-8844 or at [email protected].
Col Benedict Lim
Director, Public Affairs
Ministry of Defence
typical customer service type of reply...jeez -
Okay forgive me, so this is what it's all about?Originally posted by Gedanken:Given the silly nature of Pavin's letter, a rubber-stamped response is as much (if not more) of a response as it deserves.
I have not read the papers for weeks, and will not do so.It's a piece of crap IMHO. -
You are uttering rubbish. If you had the intention to leave the country, would you wait 27 years to do so?Originally posted by Gedanken:So under this system, if I had intended to migrate to another country at the age of 45, I could apply to not serve NS?
Utter rubbish.