Malaysia to get 48 PT-91M main battle tanks
-
Malaysia has a fantastic record of boasting about its intended arms purchases years before they actually get anthing(IF they actually get anything). In fact they're probably the only country I know who is so loud-mouthed about their wants. Pity all too often what they get is nowhere near what they wantOriginally posted by Innocent_Malaysian:i also have some info:
on 4th november,our DPM is going to S.Africa for the world summit,
my friend who is a local representitive of denel aviation said our DPM might have a look at the Rooivalks....
what does this mean??
it means we are getting the rooivalk in the future to kick your @$$..
This attitude has obviously rubbed off on you. Malaysia has said it was interested in armed helicopters before singapore confirmed its interest. The first batch of RSAF Apaches have been signed sealed and delivered, meanwhile you're threatening to kick our asses with Rooivalks...gee I wonder why I'm so scared
Examples of your boastfulness:
Wanted to get Tornadoes and Hawks, ended up with significantly downsized Hawk order.
Talked about wanted 30+ aircraft, ended up with 18 MiGs and 8 Hornets.
Wanted submarines since the 1980s, finally ordered in 2002
Attack helos (see above)
I hate to tell you this, but with track record like this, you guys make yourselves the laughing stock of the world. -
interestinf!!but second thought if u are going 2 start slaughtering civilian we will be the one being flatten by them.We are violating the UN,we want to make the whole world think the malaysian start the war 1st,and we can get excuse to occupy it ma
U must be crazy to even think of this horrible stuff!! -
That is bad reputation the malaysian had.I think they are lossing the trust from suppliers and reputable defence news agency like Janes defence.Only their local agency love to start boasting that their country is buying this acquiring that.....when i read it got sick..
.No wander singapore dun seems to take malaysia report of possible hardware acquisition too seriously.... -
Oh no... you're not gonna try to pull off a "My Lai" massacre again! shit... the P.R fallout was horrible after that!
At least have the good sense to try to keep it quiet... besides, i don't like the idea of killing civillians. Not because its cruel or anything... but such acts clearly shows that the armies perpetrating the atrocities have no idea how to conduct the war any longer and are performing random acts of terror to hope to pressure the opposite side to end the war... thats leaving things too much to chance.
Case in Point: Nanking Massacre... the japs didn't go on a rampage for fun... it was co-ordinated at the highest level with the clear intention of its consequences and intended effect. It didn't work.
"My Lai" didn't work either... I'll rather pump 5.56 into where it matters.Originally posted by EXCO:Did you know that after the Americans had enough of backstabbing by the villagers, they killed every single villager they saw and wherever they went, they did the same? America did not lose the vietnam war. VC didn't win either. What is it about repeating history? we will very gladly kill every single villager we see and flatten the whole of KL. We have the capability to do that. -
I did not say we are going to do that, I am just saying what the Americans did. To the best extent i only said that we have the capability of doing so. If the "Civilians" are armed and attack soldiers with the aim of deterring the soldiers, and like what HARIMAU has said, they are tasked with defending their homes and issued M16s... They are technically no longer civilians. Anyone on a battlefield and has a gun is fair game. Think about it.
-
Anyone with the ability to carry arms should be shot or knifedOriginally posted by EXCO:I did not say we are going to do that, I am just saying what the Americans did. To the best extent i only said that we have the capability of doing so. If the "Civilians" are armed and attack soldiers with the aim of deterring the soldiers, and like what HARIMAU has said, they are tasked with defending their homes and issued M16s... They are technically no longer civilians. Anyone on a battlefield and has a gun is fair game. Think about it.
-
well, technically under the Geneva Convention, any personnel NOT clearly wearing uniforms or recognisable insignias of armed forces during combat but are armed and attack regular forces do so at their own peril... they are not protected by laws pertaining to threatment of POWs...
The Al Qaeda found out recently... but i still find it distasteful to implicate civillians in any way in wartime.