Singapore Economy underfunded compared to military
-
To trip wire ..
Tsk Tsk .. the flames are already starting.. I must have hit a nerve.
Typical PAP thuggery .. when faced with an argument, they attack the messenger.
Also, when did I attack the SAF? I am calling the purchases of the "toys" a white elephant .. not the whole SAF ..
But never mind, you can have your personal opinion and personal attack against me .. its ok .. shows that I am indeed asking the right questions and certain people "high up" are afraid of my line of questioning. -
To trip wire,
By the way, you just justified Dr M .. Rm0.03 per 1000 gallons should be subjected to inflation as well.
As for inflation, our economy rises by a growth of say 5% cumalative for the past 37 years .. so what is our inflation rate? A measely 2-3% .. so we actually have an increase of 2%-3% per year in net gain of military budget.
.. but forgive me anyway .. I am a person who lack mature thoughts and have insufficient information and a lack of understanding in international affairs and also a spine ..
for all I want to do is to question if our military is overfunded compared to our economy ..
Sheeesh. -
Originally posted by kenhor:To trip wire ..
Tsk Tsk .. the flames are already starting.. I must have hit a nerve.
Typical PAP thuggery .. when faced with an argument, they attack the messenger.
Also, when did I attack the SAF? I am calling the purchases of the "toys" a white elephant .. not the whole SAF ..
But never mind, you can have your personal opinion and personal attack against me .. its ok .. shows that I am indeed asking the right questions and certain people "high up" are afraid of my line of questioning.
DROP DEAD... muahahaaaa.......
you?
you hit the right question??? SAF's deterrence value is based on its weapon and man... including its purchases of advance weapondary.... which donkey chicken nation is gonna be deterred by an SAF that wields parangs?? 
Your logic is typically.... U P S I D E -- D O W N......
By the way.... you didnt answer all the questions i raised leh
.... dont come in here cry 
like a baby and claimed to be 'attacked' 
..... challenge the points if you can..... 
dont avoid the issue hor.... hahahaaaaa......... and... dont praise yourself up through heaven's floor hor... wait the angels take big big stick and wack wack your backside.... -
Originally posted by kenhor:To trip wire,
By the way, you just justified Dr M .. Rm0.03 per 1000 gallons should be subjected to inflation as well.
As for inflation, our economy rises by a growth of say 5% cumalative for the past 37 years .. so what is our inflation rate? A measely 2-3% .. so we actually have an increase of 2%-3% per year in net gain of military budget.
.. but forgive me anyway .. I am a person who lack mature thoughts and have insufficient information and a lack of understanding in international affairs and also a spine ..
for all I want to do is to question if our military is overfunded compared to our economy ..
Sheeesh.
BUAY TAHAN SIAH....... this ape came from which jungle har??? (my thoudsand apologies)
An agreedment is an agreedment... unless the agreedments makes for provisions that the prices is to be peg to the inflation rate... the agreed price (of a particular currency) sticks as it is written on the agreedment for the full term of the contract..... simple buissness dealing also dont know... wanna come in here and talk about economy ........
anyway... using your argument.... back on you... (this sounds silly but i think must come down to your level of IQ to be able to let you see the picture)... singapore sells back the treated water back to johor for 50 cents... did singapore ever say malaysia should pay more because of the inflation over the decades?? did singapore ask that malaysia to pay higher prices because the cost of treating the water has been going up and up?? why singapore so stupid har?? why singapore still must sell the water back to malaysia when its obviously making a lost?? BECAUSE... its part of the agreedment... and likewise... the price of treated water sold back to malaysia is also NOT PEG TO INFLATION RATE!! my god... you really sibeh jialat........
and to your question if our military is overfunded compare to the economy.... i think you should first read through my post... there are answer there... and dont forget to carry a economic 101 book and start chewing it... muahahaaa.a......
AND DONT CHALLENGE ME ON ECONOMICS.... you not my level... muahahaaaa...... -
pardon me..but kenhor can i ask u a question?
have u gone thru national service?
becos i cant imagine a NSmen so disagree wif SAF buying new stuff or replacing age old weapon?
if u have gone thru..wat vocation u take? -
[quote]Originally posted by NathanG5:
pardon me..but kenhor can i ask u a question?
have u gone thru national service?
becos i cant imagine a NSmen so disagree wif SAF buying new stuff or replacing age old weapon?
if u have gone thru..wat vocation u take?[/quote
wat makes you think he is a singaporean???
this is the same fella who thinks that we should pay maharaja more because of inflation while at the same time... we should refrain from spending money defending our family.... he sounds like from the other side of the causeway one.... -
yea now u mention..he might be a Msian
-
i really don't think where he's from or what he is matters here... what's important is facts and the facts that he raised are well... superficial.
most of us here agree that Sg's defence is based on deterrence and a deterrence already implies that u place an overwhelming commitment to it in the hope that it will never be used. that is basically why so much resources is placed into it. its never a question of overspending on a white elephant because we WANT it to be a white elephant.
the day this elephant gets dirty, its gonna be stained blood red and nobody wants that. to prevent that, u keep it polished and whitewashed so it scares off the neighbours.
its expensive but we really don't have an alternative. peaceful co-existence is always sought but bear in mind that the problem doesn't always lie with us and u can't bend over every time they raise hell. if u didn't have a deterrent, they'll u 86 anytime they want... then u'll be spending more money on lubricant instead...
(my apologies for the crude allusion)
and kenhor, yes, i believe in everything i post. i do not pay lips service to gov't propaganda. i am not being compliant. i am being objective. i will criticize when its due and i will give due credit also.
we can't help u if ur company employs banglas and dresses them up as foreign talents, but i have nothing but respect for first class managers who work non-stop, take no shit and turn around a failing product line and make it profitable. i have nothing but admiration for first class academics who speak 15 languages, hold multiple degrees and doctorates and are recognised experts on certain subjects.
sure, a local can do that too. but how many of such people are there in the world? labour is a commodity governed by laws of demand and supply too. u pay for what u get and if u pay peanuts, u get monkeys.
i don't know the people u work for so i'm in no position to comment. but i hope u know enough of the people u're criticizing to make sure that u're giving a balanced perspective.
and i don't see your point about U.S.A, China and Sg. 3 separate independent, sovereign countries who are free to conduct their own foreign affairs... yes, we see U.S.A as a stabilising force in the region. so do many other people whether they like to admit it or not. philipines grudgingly, indonesia tacitly, malaysia increasingly enthusiastically, korea, japan and taiwan definitely.
so whats your point? that we shouldn't support the U.S just because it makes us look servile? thats ridiculous and no mature political observer would come to that conclusion. -
One of the reasons Singapore still exist is that we have a strong credible SAF....Firstly in terms of military, it ensures our potential agressors will not dare to do anything rash, and think twice. We will *NOT* become another Kuwait.
Secondly, in terms of investment. Our defence spending figures to the defence spendings, even in hard times....send a strong signal to investors. It tells them we are committed to the defence of Singapore. Which investor will want to invest in Singapore if he/she feels that the country is not capable in defending itself?
Our lack of stragetic depth, forces us to utilise technology as a force multiplier. This costs quite a large sum of money to purchase, maintain and sustain.... Deployment overseas for exercises and training also costs quite a sum...We do not have space to train.....all these costs money.
Our defence spending, indirectly helps us also build up our defence industries. Is always better to reduce our dependance on other countries for our military needs. E.g. In times of conflicts, we can deploy.....without the worry we run out of ammo for our weapons.
I do not want to see our armed forces like Aussie military, do not have sufficient budget to practise live firing. - Source : Austrilian News
There's a old chinese saying...."maintain an army for thousand days....use only for a moment"....Defence spending should be kept the way it is. The current policy had served us well, and I see no reason to change it.
There's a 3rd sgt who had once said in the ST forum. "What you cannot defend, does not belong to you"...not 100% sure of the exact words....but I believe in that concept.
In terms of Economy, what you expecting the goverment to do? Ask the goverment to keep on giving out SG shares....rebates? Might as well ask for free housing, free food, free money while we are it??
Basically our soceity is based on meritocracy....You work, you get paid...Don't work...no food on your table. Simple as that...We are not like US, the goverment feeds you even if you don't work. What the gov can do is develop the infrastructure, provide incentives...attractive factors...and woo the investors in. The global downturn affects us all...not something the Goverement can just spend like mad, and make the problem disappear.
Just my two cents. -
American society and government not meritocratic? Singapore did not invent meritocracy and does not have a monopoly in it unlike PAP would have you think otherwise. If meritocracy was NOT the backbone of American institutions, they wouldnt have become so strong economically, (or for that matter, of all of the current developed countries)
And all the rhetoric concerning economics 101 and the caveat "A little knowledge is dangerous" it would be appropriate to say that this arguement is certainly not based on serious academic economic discussion but rather of a socio-political nature.
My personal view is that the premise that Singapore will never be able to forge better ties with our neighbours because of political and cultural differences. Certainly a regional arms race will not aid in the establishment of a greater ASEAN in terms of trade and mutual self-benefit. Probably it is this very fundamental idea that is the hidden white elephant that forces countries into increased defense spending, not the process itself.
The best solution for compromise between economy and military? Decrease spending on military hardware; pour more money into "middle-tech" research and development and give our professional soldiers across the board wage increases.
Btw what is $500 million these days? -
"What you cannot defend, does not belong to you"
My property, my life and my mind belongs to me. -
not if u cannot defend it...
they can kill you, steal your property, lock u in a concentration camp and brainwash u...
thats why i keep saying: don't wanna fight? where to run to? would u rather they burnt your house, raped your wife and daughters and murdered your sons in cold blood? I'll rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
yeah yeah... geneva convention regulates conduct of warfare in signatory states... napalm is banned, flamethrowers are banned, landmines laid have to be judiciously marked out with LIMAS and mapped and killing of non-combatants is banned, all combatants have to wear uniforms and clear insignias and killing of medics, Red Cross personnels, etc, etc is banned... POWs taken have to be treated in a humane, civilised manner (what a joke... who on earth would drain resources to babysit POWs... )
if all combatants observed all the regulations, war would actually be more peaceful than peacetime... -
I do agree with that. Call me crazy, but I am a person who believes in war for greater peace. If you put 10 persons together, there will be conflicts in 5 days. If you put 10 countries together, you have a war in 50 years. It is that simple, and it is undeniable. Honestly I think much of the Geneva Convention is bullshit. Take a moment and think. If you are in a war, your natural instinct would be to kill anything that doesn't wear the same uniform as you, by all means possible. Medics and Red Cross personnel are exempt, that I understand due to their medical(and thus, for general humanity) roles, but what? banned napalm? flamethrowers? nah... thats almost naive.Originally posted by CX:yeah yeah... geneva convention regulates conduct of warfare in signatory states... napalm is banned, flamethrowers are banned, landmines laid have to be judiciously marked out with LIMAS and mapped and killing of non-combatants is banned, all combatants have to wear uniforms and clear insignias and killing of medics, Red Cross personnels, etc, etc is banned... POWs taken have to be treated in a humane, civilised manner (what a joke... who on earth would drain resources to babysit POWs... )
if all combatants observed all the regulations, war would actually be more peaceful than peacetime...
To fight a war nowadays actually involves the law, and if indeed everyone fights according to the law, UN might as well have a law to ban wars. It will definitely work. -
how can this be the best solution when we knew that decrease spending on millitary hardware actually reduces our deterrence value over time.... and effectively place the nation as a whole in a compromise position....Originally posted by asdfg2:The best solution for compromise between economy and military? Decrease spending on military hardware; pour more money into "middle-tech" research and development and give our professional soldiers across the board wage increases.
Btw what is $500 million these days?
when we are in a compromised position... our rights and freedom would be effectively curtailed and we will lose various advantages in economics and geopolitical negotiations due to strong arm twisting by regional and neigbouring powers....
IF you cant defend your wife.... and a few enemy soldier wanna rape her... what r u gonna do?? wave the UN flag infront of their face??? recite the UNHCR charter on human rights??? i am sorry to say... this world is run through force of arms...
As for your request to dabble more money into R and D for middle tech... i must stress... IT IS WRONG AND WASTEFUL to pour money into R n D without a reasonable expectation of returns or potential value.... take for example... i felt it is crazy to throw thoudsands if not millions of dollars into research and feeding researchers who cannot generate a reasonable returns or dabbles in studies which is of pure academic purpose or simply to counter challenge the views and findings of another research group without reasonable financial or real returns....
In fact .... i always wonder... what the hell is wrong with our govt is pouring billions into biotech research... especially when some of those research project they funded has little or no economic value!!... i might as well throw the money into buying pampers and milk powers to give it to parents for free..!!!
and those of you think i am anti-biotech... please understand that i am not against them... but simply my majors in biotech and economics has made me realise the stupidity of some of those PHD and MSc... babbooons... who think money drops from heaven and their only wish is simply to fill their personal resume with list after list of published articles with their names... in short... they are more interested in raising their values vis-a-vis against their peers rather then wonder... if their research is gonna be making money at all....
The govt should bear part of the responsibilities as well... for giving money so freely to any PHD tom dick and harry.... -
I would not resort to cheap shock tactics about my imaginary wife or son or about my family in general. A singaporean can as easily commit above-mentioned crimes and Justice can bever be truly served unless a) the criminal was caught or b) if you are of a vigilante mentality and revenge is your concept of justice, you must repay the criminal 10x in return personally.
Moreover, no crime is commited until actually performed or there is sufficient evidence for intent; or are you an American in disguise? After all the rhetoric, Malaysians, in the majority, have no desire to loot and pillage anybody.
There is a vast difference between political disagreements and murder, unless you believe in Clauztwiz.
"Middle-tech" R&D as the term I coined would suggest would not becutting edge technology like transporting objects a la Star Trek but improvement in logistics etc which could be effectively ported to commerical applications; like sandwich with longest lifespans or other auxillary means of combat. -
This world is run by regulations and law, which is enforced and no the otherway around. Only tyrants rule by force.Originally posted by tripwire:how can this be the best solution when we knew that decrease spending on millitary hardware actually reduces our deterrence value over time.... and effectively place the nation as a whole in a compromise position....
when we are in a compromised position... our rights and freedom would be effectively curtailed and we will lose various advantages in economics and geopolitical negotiations due to strong arm twisting by regional and neigbouring powers....
IF you cant defend your wife.... and a few enemy soldier wanna rape her... what r u gonna do?? wave the UN flag infront of their face??? recite the UNHCR charter on human rights??? i am sorry to say... this world is run through force of arms...
The deterrence factor wouldnt lie in miltary hardware but in the minds and resolve of the soldiers, which can never be bought. Did the Vietnamese have superior miltary technology? Granted Singapore has no area to defend, no jungles to run in. But if by purchasing excessive miltary hardware and forming an expeditory force, Sg becomes the most despised nation in the region and uses it's miltary power to strong-arm other nations into favorable trade negotiations like you proposed.
And in this world view of yours, war is not bound by convention or law so then someone in the region decides to detonate a mini-nuclear bomb or release a deadly biological agent, thus killing your entire family, annillating the entire nation except for its army, then what? See your wife and children get raped? LOL. It pales in comparison to them vanishing into dust. Unlike the US, Singapore cannot even survive even half a nuclear bomb. So who is to blame for this mock scenario?
Politics have always played a greater part in Singapore's economy and defence rather than the actual miltary itself. It always have been. -
basically, the I.T. business is probably becoming saturated already, at least will soon start to become saturated as more countries junmp on the IT. bandwagon and say 'Me too!'.
The gov't is seeing bio-tech develpoment and other aspects of life sciences such as gene manipulation as an area with great potential. And by turning Singapore into THE bio-tech hub and having many of the top brains in life sciences here, Singapore will hopefully be able to take the lead and stand out as the leader in bio/life science industry. And I disagree that there is little economic value in life sciences.
There are countless medicines you can come up with and improve. Also, new types of food can be developed. We have to understand that not all types of food which have been modified genetically are for asthetic reasons or reasons to make them more appealing to the public. Some have been develop to improve health situations in the world, for example the golden rice with beta-carotene in it to help our body create vitamin A. This golden rice was featured in Reader's Digest not to long ago and is a very good read.
The method of using a sort of virus to insert the DNA into the rice is a very good idea, since it is much more reliable than the gene gun method. It is probably discoveries such as these that Singapore hopes for. Even if it isn't, I am confident that the Singapore government is not so dumb as to invest its money into something it does not think has a high chance of succeeding.
kenhor commented that we spend alot per capita compared to other countries on defence. However, i wish to point out that other countries have a lot more capita (or people) than us. The is this inverted exponential curve graph with the x and y axes being defence spending and population size respectively.
This means that it actually gets more economical and cost-effective to defend yourself with a large force and have a large country with many people as compared to a small force in a small country with smaller population. Thus, Singapore's per capita defence spending will always remain among the highest in the world if we hope to maintain the current security we have and the deterrence message we are sending out.
Lastly, and perhaps related only to a few posts here (read for your own interest):
And recently, I have also seen some anti-PAP remarks flying around somewhere. I only have to say this: Singaporeans confidence still lie in the PAP. If you are wondering why you are middle age and still have NEVER voted once in your life on which is the right MP for your estate, it is due to the method the opposition parties' use during elections.
The opposition will always hope to gain some seat in parliament. However, the confidence of the people lies in the PAP and so far this confidence has not been misplaced. However, the people also do not want a wholly PAP government. To ensure that their candidates stand a chance, the opposition must compete in fewer constituencies to so that people in the constituencies the opposition is competing in can be assured that even if they were to vote for the opposition, the PAP is sure to retain its majority and therefore remain in power.
This way, Singaporeans will end up with a PAP majority gov't with at least a few MPs from other political parties. -
R&D is simply a very risky venture. Sky high returns or liitle/none at all, for projects with great complexity and astronomical outlays. There is no such thing as creating a research industry if you are not at the forefront and reaping the massive payoffs but is making minor improvements on current processes. Not only that, if the product in question has compartively little commerical value ie. improving vit A (!)content at a greater expense (which consumer would buy such a brand of rice? Would you?), it must be assumed that you are at least a decade ahead in technology in front of your competitors to ensure economic dominance in that particular field. by means of patents of the technology itself in question, as eventually other scientists would have come to the same discoveries. The question that comes to mind is what are Singapore's chances of becoming a leader? If taking in mind, your competitors are USA, Australia, Britain, China, then realistically the best one can hope for is second best, unless by some cosmic accident or fate, a potential Nobel prize winner is born in Singapore.
As a 14 year old, you still have secondary school, junior college, army, and college even before working life. Guns are not toys nor casualities a number in computer games. Not a single soldier in SAF (UN peacekeeper doesnt count, or medical support) has tasted war so don't BS about bravery and patriotism.
As for the PAP and politics, nowadays even PAP admits it is not simply the material aspect (even that is not a surety) of life that people desire, but other factors as well. Btw, the very nature of democracy; not a one-party country; dictates self-interest of political groups and individuals being paramount to the State appartus itself. Are the people content and happy with PAP as a whole or is the the lack of a viable altenative and the threat of instablity and its possible effect of capsizing a small boat a compelling reason? -
If you are going to sound like a Yankee, think like a Yankee, you had better have all of the Yankee army, technology, population and land to back you up. Otherwise you are just going to sound silly.
Or just simply become one. -
"how can this be the best solution when we knew that decrease spending on millitary hardware actually reduces our deterrence value over time.... and effectively place the nation as a whole in a compromise position.... "
It is a matter of timing as well as anything else. Besides like I said, deterence can be built by other means, rather that the outright purchase of advanced miltary hardware.
Already Singapore has an innate economic deterrence to your phantom "predators". Does Singapore have natural resources? I only know of one: its natural port and it would take a World War to want that particular advantage as recently proven, other regional ports are starting to compete economically. And in a World War (ie superpower miltaries) boy, where are the civilians going to run?
The only reason I can think for an invasion of Singapore would be political in nature: simply put, piss somebody off so badly by taking some ill-conceived moves of tactical aggression or the preparation and the appearence of it. -
BUT it still must be tag to economic effecacy else there is always the potential of abuse and waste.Originally posted by asdfg2:I would not resort to cheap shock tactics about my imaginary wife or son or about my family in general. A singaporean can as easily commit above-mentioned crimes and Justice can bever be truly served unless a) the criminal was caught or b) if you are of a vigilante mentality and revenge is your concept of justice, you must repay the criminal 10x in return personally.
its not a cheap shock tactic... and you miss the point... the point is... if the situation arises where your wife's security is at stake... wat are you going to do?? secondly... as you said yourself that even a singaporean can as easily commit such crimes... thus reaffirming the fact that such violence has been committed in the past, and therefore could happen in the future if not in the present... that is to say... such an event is possible, how then can you claim my statement as 'cheap shock tactic'?? or are you trying to be an ostrich and stick your head into the ground... thus see nothing... therefore nothing is happening?? isnt that foolish? vengence is a powerful word... i would hate to see events boiling down to a you rape my country women... i rape your country women in revenge kind of thing... thus i would prefer that with deterrence... such senseless violence against humanity can be best avoided.... the key is to deter.. because... deep down each and everyone of us... there is a darker side... and at times... fear... is the only thing that keeps our darker side in check... as someone said... absolute freedom and power.... corrupts....
Moreover, no crime is commited until actually performed or there is sufficient evidence for intent; or are you an American in disguise? After all the rhetoric, Malaysians, in the majority, have no desire to loot and pillage anybody. it is true that no crime is committed until its actually performed... but then... we didnt wait for the crime to happen first before investing money is building a police force and a judicial system to ensure that criminals are dealth with appropriately and swiftly to avoid further damage to society... likewise... you dont build an army until you are invaded... you cant build an army overnight and certainly not by a click of a finger... secondly.... the presence of the police force and the judicial system acts as a deterrence against crimes... likewise... a powerful military deters against aggressors from invading us.... surely this is simple logic....
There is a vast difference between political disagreements and murder, unless you believe in Clauztwiz. does it matter? when bullet come... i would like the opportunity to return the fire then debate about clauzwiz and wat nought political disagreement the warring nations may have...
"Middle-tech" R&D as the term I coined would suggest would not becutting edge technology like transporting objects a la Star Trek but improvement in logistics etc which could be effectively ported to commerical applications; like sandwich with longest lifespans or other auxillary means of combat. -
please elaborate your last point....Originally posted by asdfg2:This world is run by regulations and law, which is enforced and no the otherway around. Only tyrants rule by force. you mean nations.... nations are run by regulations and law... to be frank... even tyrants runs a nation by regulations and law to ensure a porper chain of command and authority... between nations... that is.. the world as it is.... is run by regulations and rules that is built on the foundation of force and power..... a simple example... the US is rule by law and regulations... but the US navy hardly follow the rules set down by the international maritime organ....when its moving near other naition water... simply because... they got the power to obliterate any nation who dares to challenge their freedom and rights.
The deterrence factor wouldnt lie in miltary hardware but in the minds and resolve of the soldiers, which can never be bought. Did the Vietnamese have superior miltary technology? Granted Singapore has no area to defend, no jungles to run in. But if by purchasing excessive miltary hardware and forming an expeditory force, Sg becomes the most despised nation in the region and uses it's miltary power to strong-arm other nations into favorable trade negotiations like you proposed. the minds and resolve of the soldiers are influenced by many factors.. of which millitary hardware play a significant position.... no soldier would chiong with a parang if he has a GPMG.... vietnamese would have lost the war against US if not for the economic and military might of russia and china backing vietnam up... excessive military hardware??? how do you determine when our millitary hardware purchase becomes excessive?? singapore becomes dispise by nations because we are strong?? well... you cant please everyone and i would rather people dispise me because i am strong rather then be weak and get pushed around... and just in case you
And in this world view of yours, war is not bound by convention or law so then someone in the region decides to detonate a mini-nuclear bomb or release a deadly biological agent, thus killing your entire family, annillating the entire nation except for its army, then what? See your wife and children get raped? LOL. It pales in comparison to them vanishing into dust. Unlike the US, Singapore cannot even survive even half a nuclear bomb. So who is to blame for this mock scenario?
while nuclear weapons are devastating.. its not gonna be so easily used as it carries a severe repercussion and it certainly sure as hell would invite reprisals ... that is why despite both the NATO and warsaw pack having thoudsands of nukes.. they still have to send troopers to move into zones of interest...
technology actually helps to narrow the gap between the big and the small... one nuke singapore gone.... one MX ICBM... singapore also go..
Politics have always played a greater part in Singapore's economy and defence rather than the actual miltary itself. It always have been. -
" its not a cheap shock tactic... and you miss the point... the point is... if the situation arises where your wife's security is at stake... wat are you going to do??
secondly... as you said yourself that even a singaporean can as easily commit such crimes... thus reaffirming the fact that such violence has been committed in the past, and therefore could happen in the future if not in the present... that is to say... such an event is possible, how then can you claim my statement as 'cheap shock tactic'?? or are you trying to be an ostrich and stick your head into the ground... thus see nothing... therefore nothing is happening?? isnt that foolish?
vengence is a powerful word... i would hate to see events boiling down to a you rape my country women... i rape your country women in revenge kind of thing... thus i would prefer that with deterrence... such senseless violence against humanity can be best avoided....
the key is to deter.. because... deep down each and everyone of us... there is a darker side... and at times... fear... is the only thing that keeps our darker side in check... as someone said... absolute freedom and power.... corrupts.... "
It is people like you whom I find most threatening to myself and my imaginary wife, not some phantom enemy, I brought up the point about a fictious Singaporean not as a historical precedence, but as proof that if a Singaporean if and when committing a crime, I would pursue justice at all cost and not before anybody commited a crime and not spare him because he is Singaporean. Also, please do not presume to think for me. In your Machievillian world, to ensure that NOBODY in Singapore can rape your wife, you should go into politics and get into a position of power and become good friends with the judicary, so that the rule of fear alone would deter ANY singaporean from raping your wife or even thinking of raping your wife. As mentioned, this is a cheap shot which draws on fears on an imaginary bogeyman in order to gain support for your line of argument. Only the moronic are fooled.
"it is true that no crime is committed until its actually performed... but then... we didnt wait for the crime to happen first before investing money is building a police force and a judicial system to ensure that criminals are dealth with appropriately and swiftly to avoid further damage to society... likewise... you dont build an army until you are invaded... you cant build an army overnight and certainly not by a click of a finger..."
The role of the kind of "deterrent" army and the role of the police are diametrical (read tyranny below) and furthermore, a policeman is not your personal bodyguard, thus does not act as a deterrent. In your society too, everybody should own a gun in order for self-protection; the bigger the better.
"secondly.... the presence of the police force and the judicial system acts as a deterrence against crimes... likewise... a powerful military deters against aggressors from invading us.... surely this is simple logic...."
This is tied into my post concerning tyranny. The (just and equitable) laws and regulations are enforced and not the reverse in which a tyrant creats laws and regulations that justify the use of force against his enemies.
" does it matter? when bullet come... i would like the opportunity to return the fire then debate about clauzwiz and wat nought political disagreement the warring nations may have."
When bullet come, I would first seek cover first before even thinking of returning fire. This isnt a debate and I have used the adjective as a prelude to one. It is a description; if I have to explain this then it would be meaningless to discuss anything further. -
"between nations... that is.. the world as it is.... is run by regulations and rules that is built on the foundation of force and power.....
a simple example... the US is rule by law and regulations... but the US navy hardly follow the rules set down by the international maritime organ....when its moving near other naition water... simply because... they got the power to obliterate any nation who dares to challenge their freedom and rights."
Read post concerning abt talking and thinking like a Yankee.
Btw, the world is built on commerce, not on guns. Eg? Japan. -
"while nuclear weapons are devastating.. its not gonna be so easily used as it carries a severe repercussion and it certainly sure as hell would invite reprisals ... that is why despite both the NATO and warsaw pack having thoudsands of nukes.. they still have to send troopers to move into zones of interest...
technology actually helps to narrow the gap between the big and the small... one nuke singapore gone.... one MX ICBM... singapore also go.. "
I am thinking in this world described by you which is only governed by power and arms, there would be no restraint in using WMD or biological agents and esp against such a small nation like Singapore, whereby a small portion is only needed to wipe out the entire country. It is never going to be a level playing field.