Australia may act against terror in Asia
-
I don't usually agree with what Mahathir says, in fact more often than not I think hes a senile old fool whos mouth is too big for his own good, but this statement from him about John Howard and Australia, IMO hits the bloody nail on the frigging head,
'We send our students to study there, they have good schools, good teachers but unfortunately they have a leader who is totally insensitive and thinks he is a white man sheriff in some black country,'
As they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day!
-
For hundreds of years the Asian region has been the playground of those white trash piece of S@#t.
For centuries they have been exploiting our people taking what they need and trampling over our heads.
Whether in name of their so called "Democracy" or wanting to defend themselves of terrorism by attacking an Asian country without permissoin is another act of invasion.
Have we not learned from all these hundreds of years? Have we grown to fat and lazy that its muddled our brains?
If theres anything to be done. WE should do it ourselves not some white assed PM of another country sticking his stinking white nose into our business.
Terrorism is a GLOBAL threat. By the word GLOBAL it means the whole damn world. Therefore it is safe to say that be it Australia, Indonesia, Singapore, USA or even Great Britain......terrorism can strike anywhere....anytime.
I would rather die than have American or Aussie military put their foot into our Homeland. Remember....no one made the Americans the world's police....they made themselves that way by decades of slowly brainwashing other super powers (namely the USSR) to lay down their arms and dismantle their nukes. Thereby making themselves the only threat to the rest of the world because no one can stop them.
John Howard just wants to make sure Australia has that kind of power...but over us Asians. Thus he uses the excuse of terrorism. However...as I said b4.....terrorism can happen anywhere in the world at anytime. -
You people are taking John Howard's words too seriously. First of all, no way did he mention he is going to bomb any SEA countries. No point did he mention he is going to send Australia Defense Force into another country without the permission of the govt or UN. What he did do is trying to "scare" some terrorists anywhere in the world, be it in Afaganistan or Indonesia or even Phillippines that Australian will act to destroy them before they strike (but not necessary alone and without any UN backing and the host nation permission). The pre-emptive strikes could be in the form of providing support to the host nation army to hunt them down even before they attack Australian targets.
Whatever Howard has said, I wouldn't take it too literally as he would not act against the majority of the Australians' wishes when he is trying to "protect their interests" and win the next election,
Australia, is afterall, not as powerful as the US or Israel.
Just relax... lots of talk... but no action - its just politics!!!! -
Exactly...read my initial post guys.
Re: Howards comments. Misguided? Probably. Stupid? Defnitely. Arrogant and Insensitive? You bet your life. But theres absolutely no need for the SE Asian countries to get so worked up! Its nothing but playing up to the domestic gallery. Besides, read his full comments and then pass judgement, those comments have been taken so out of context its unbelievable.
I can't believe national leaders are so stupid and insenstive (Howard) and prickly and defensive (Mahathir and all others). These are people who've been ELECTED to run countries. Jeez -
...And guess what.... those countries that responded to Howard's comment are those who implicitly admitted they've got terrorist problem in their countries and worried if ADF is going to send some SAS to destroy the terrorists and in the process make the govt look weak and useless (not only that, plus the inability to protect its own border) !!!!Originally posted by Viper52:Exactly...read my initial post guys.
Re: Howards comments. Misguided? Probably. Stupid? Defnitely. Arrogant and Insensitive? You bet your life. But theres absolutely no need for the SE Asian countries to get so worked up! Its nothing but playing up to the domestic gallery. Besides, read his full comments and then pass judgement, those comments have been taken so out of context its unbelievable.
I can't believe national leaders are so stupid and insenstive (Howard) and prickly and defensive (Mahathir and all others). These are people who've been ELECTED to run countries. Jeez
However, I do agree that Howard does have the habit of acting on his impulse since the Sept11 tragedy. The Bali bombing just pushed his impulse a notch higher.... Maybe its time Uncle Pete should become the PM and Howard should just enjoy the retirement benefits...
-
Exactly, and thats why I said in the initial post those SE Asian countries who've responded are:Originally posted by Joe Black:...And guess what.... those countries that responded to Howard's comment are those who implicitly admitted they've got terrorist problem in their countries and worried if ADF is going to send some SAS to destroy the terrorists and in the process make the govt look weak and useless (not only that, plus the inability to protect its own border) !!!!
However, I do agree that Howard does have the habit of acting on his impulse since the Sept11 tragedy. The Bali bombing just pushed his impulse a notch higher.... Maybe its time Uncle Pete should become the PM and Howard should just enjoy the retirement benefits...
1) Those who know they have not done enough about the terrorist problem (Indonesia Philippines and Thailand) and
2) Those who have done enough but simply have a chip on their shoulder and a big mouth to match (Malaysia) and would seize any chance to start a tirade against perceived Western "imperialism"
These countries should really spend more time and money fighting against the terrorists, rather than waste it holding press conferences and venting their spleens against out-of-context remarks -
What the whole mess needs now is a win win situation. Australia might attempt to make pre-emptive strikes on TERRORIST targets, not government targets. This whole war was never one between nations. Unfortunately, nations that do not do their part to eradicate their pests seem to have made the war on terrorism a war on them? I empathise with them. Why, because they are simply not as well connected in the global arena? The world doesn't understand their difficulties? They only know that they are not doing their job. Indonesia is fighting more than terrorism at the same time. Its fighting corruption and poverty. Their government knows damn well they can't win. Does John Howard care? He couldn't give a rat's ass even if the rest of his people wanted to. Now, he wants to come in as an enemy, to take care of the terrorist infestation himself. He doesn't make any attempts to really HELP does he? Offer any economic packages yet? He could have put it nicely, did he?
I don't blame him for wanting to protect his country. I respect that. I feel sorry for the Australians that died in the Bali bombing, and i feel some sort of retribution is necessary. But by being so insensitive to his neighbours, he'd probably helped the terrorist in dealing a critical blow to Australia and the world. FEAR, CHAOS, and Distrust. Would any SEA nations trust Australia now? Hell, NO. What should he have done? He could have offered suggestions to organise another international task force to apprehend and take down these terrorist hide-outs. Indonesia needs help, not a rabid dog growling down its ass.
Whats Singapore's role in all this ruckus? Definitely not sending F-16s in. Even if we HAD accurate intelligence, its still a violation of sovereignty. We are not a superpower. Only superpowers play preemptive games. We can only watch our borders tight, keep our customs on the ball, and security forces on the alert. Even if some damned bomb goes off in City Hall, all I can say is WE FUCKING SCREWED UP already. F-16 or not, WE SCREWED UP. So far, we did not. And should work hard and keep it that way. At the same time, we should be at peace with our neighbours. We should unite all of them, against the terrorism, and deal with the problem and not the people. Make peace between the nations and rain hellfire on the crazy bastards.
I think we have reach a time, when every nation's own ego, self-centredness, and sovereignty has bitten the country in the foot. Every leader who seeks to portray himself as the strongest man to lead his people, finds himself caught between possible conflict, and embarrassment. Perhaps, just perhaps, it is time for mankind to learn how to do what is right, instead of what is politically acceptable. Do What Is Right. -
Well said... I totally concur !!!!Originally posted by Shotgun:I think we have reach a time, when every nation's own ego, self-centredness, and sovereignty has bitten the country in the foot. Every leader who seeks to portray himself as the strongest man to lead his people, finds himself caught between possible conflict, and embarrassment. Perhaps, just perhaps, it is time for mankind to learn how to do what is right, instead of what is politically acceptable. Do What Is Right. -
The problems with the present terrorist cells are that they remain secretive and illusive, and until hard evidence is in hand – it will be purely a psychological war to win the “hearts and minds” of the general populace (Muslims and Non-Muslims), so as to prevent the feeble minds from being swayed to their concept of Islam and Jihad.
For an alleged terrorist spiritual leader such as Abu Bakar Bashir, who deny even the existence of Al Qaeda or J.I. - how does the Security Service pry the evidence that is locked in the mind of this alleged Terrorist?
The position of the Indonesian Authorities during the first arrests of Singaporean and Malaysian members of the J.I. movement - and prior to the “Bali Bombing” - was to wait for “Hard Evidence” before moving against their own Nationals.
If the Bali incident had not happened inside IndonesiaÂ’s sovereign territory, but were to happen at Clarke Quay in Singapore, with the Terrorist Plot being planned in Batam, and the Terrorists escaping by boat in the dark after executing their evil deed; if based on strong intelligence information that such terrorists are Indonesians, and the Indonesian Authorities still insist on "Hard Evidence" before acting after a "Bombing" in Singapore.
Should Singapore then have the right to make any retaliatory moves to reach into the heart of the Terrorist’s Cells inside Indonesia – when the Indonesian Authorities continue to demand “Hard Evidence” before they are prepared to move against their own nationals.
Fortunately, as the situation had borne out, the Indonesian Authorities have reacted and waded into the heart of the villages and homes and religious schools – without any “hard evidence” - and as events had borned out, the Indonesian Authorities are now beginning to harvest all the “Hard Evidence” which they demanded to see BEFORE taking actions.
What if, another situation is to develop within Australia, or Singapore, or Thailand, and Indonesia refuse to move against their own Nationals?
Should justice be allowed to remain to be thwarted by “National Pride” and allow Terrorists to gloat behind the protection of National Sovereignty? -
Well, then the entire concept of national sovereignty as already backfired on the world. What is national sovereignty? It includes the right to defend the nation's people. And another country's national sovereignty remains to defend encroachment by another country to defend it's national sovereignty.
In anycase, my view is that, we have the right to make stringent checks to prevent these terrorists from infiltrating and operating. We have the right to terminate these people. And that is all we, as a sovereign nation can do. To use military force, as a nation, to encroach another country's border without permission, is an act of aggression no matter how you put it, justifiable or not.
And should there be such a need to use such military force, we must then be ready to be at war. Overtly or covertly, we must then be prepared to face the consequences of our actions.
Call me idealistic. It is best that SEA tackles this terrorist infestation as a whole. And to use military force, not as individual nations, but operating under a UN banner. -
Yep, agree with 'Shotgun'
If anyone comes in military uniform to Singapore with military orders, I doubt the gov't is gonna let them do their business around here unless it has been officially approved.
Every country sets it own laws to defend its sovereignity within their own borders. If people are going to ignore that sovereignity and send troops in because they think a certain country is not doign something right, then the UN will have failed as its predecessor did. Perhaps even more miserably than the League of Nations, since UN has so much support from so many countries. -
wat if... for some political or religious reasons... some countries decided it is not in their interest to move against terrorist cells within its border hitting their neighbouring countries??Originally posted by laser51088:Yep, agree with 'Shotgun'
If anyone comes in military uniform to Singapore with military orders, I doubt the gov't is gonna let them do their business around here unless it has been officially approved.
Every country sets it own laws to defend its sovereignity within their own borders. If people are going to ignore that sovereignity and send troops in because they think a certain country is not doign something right, then the UN will have failed as its predecessor did. Perhaps even more miserably than the League of Nations, since UN has so much support from so many countries.
Will the UN then order economic or even millitary sanctions against such a nation OR will UN respect each nations' sovereign rights and do nothing??
The key problem here is... IF terrorism is not eliminated... Countries will end up in wars to protect their own respective citizens... then the UN would have FAILED just as well....
And if the UN move against a particular nation through sanctions or even military expedition... wouldnt that signify a failing of the UN as well??
The UN is not GOD and definitely has no final authority where every nation MUST obey... the UN is only as strong as the nations that makes up the UN... and to have the UN to move against its members is equivalent to weakening its very foundation of support...
The current war against terrorism is actually led by the SUPERPOWERS... namely AMERICA that has suffered direct attack from such groups such as AL-QE...
the truth is... terrorism has existed for decades!! as INDIA, ISREAL and RUSSIA would have testified... BUT NO actions on the part of the UN was forthcoming... while innocent civilians were blown to pieces......
SO... i put forward the posiition that.. the UN has long long ago FAILED when it failed to heed the cry of fellow nations.. and has continue to fail the nations that have placed their faith in it...
The UN at best... is a venue of resolution... but it is NOT the ultimate authority, and ITS position is severely limited by its lack of resources, autonomy and power (millitary and economics)
so... i support howards idea... HE SAW the incompetence of UN... and as a leader.. a PM of australia... IT is HIS responisbility to see to the safety of his people against ANY govt or groups or terrorist cells that acts either directly against his people OR against his people's interest by NOT ACTING...
-
i'm now living in aust...and everyone around here keeps saying that it's howards fault that bali got bombed in the first place juz coz he wanted to take a stand against terrorism and was prepared to fight against terrorism...
what kind of logic is that? how can we see other countries get bombed and still take a no stand and do nothing about it?
if aust wants to go into asia and help them then by all means do it...defence forces here are juz trying to protect their neighbours and in doing so perhaps help themselves as well. what happened with indonesia can't just be accepted and everyone juz sit bak and say wah so good this is never going to happen to me.
until u can say ur defence forces are so fantastic and so impenetrable that bombs will never hit your country then can you stop others from so called 'interfering' with you.
ignorance is not innocence but sin..................
sorry this is my first time posting...hope i dun sound too opinionated... -
Ooops, sorry, din't think b4 i shot off m big mouth. . anyway, let me re-phrase, sovereignity to the point where the human rights are not compromised. . . feel free to correct me again if i'm wrong. . . *fingers crossed*
-
Then he will have to bare the consequences of the action, whether it's justifiable or not.Originally posted by tripwire:wat if... for some political or religious reasons... some countries decided it is not in their interest to move against terrorist cells within its border hitting their neighbouring countries??
Will the UN then order economic or even millitary sanctions against such a nation OR will UN respect each nations' sovereign rights and do nothing??
The key problem here is... IF terrorism is not eliminated... Countries will end up in wars to protect their own respective citizens... then the UN would have FAILED just as well....
And if the UN move against a particular nation through sanctions or even military expedition... wouldnt that signify a failing of the UN as well??
The UN is not GOD and definitely has no final authority where every nation MUST obey... the UN is only as strong as the nations that makes up the UN... and to have the UN to move against its members is equivalent to weakening its very foundation of support...
The current war against terrorism is actually led by the SUPERPOWERS... namely AMERICA that has suffered direct attack from such groups such as AL-QE...
the truth is... terrorism has existed for decades!! as INDIA, ISREAL and RUSSIA would have testified... BUT NO actions on the part of the UN was forthcoming... while innocent civilians were blown to pieces......
SO... i put forward the posiition that.. the UN has long long ago FAILED when it failed to heed the cry of fellow nations.. and has continue to fail the nations that have placed their faith in it...
The UN at best... is a venue of resolution... but it is NOT the ultimate authority, and ITS position is severely limited by its lack of resources, autonomy and power (millitary and economics)
so... i support howards idea... HE SAW the incompetence of UN... and as a leader.. a PM of australia... IT is HIS responisbility to see to the safety of his people against ANY govt or groups or terrorist cells that acts either directly against his people OR against his people's interest by NOT ACTING... -
After the 9-11 incident - that brought down the World Trade Center in NY City - did the United Nations sanctioned the US invasion into Afghanistan, which the USA claimed is harboring Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden ?
The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, was an "act of war" that was brought onto the USA by a Terrorist Organisation, led by an idealistic fanatic in the form of Osama.
If a similar situation were to happen to Singapore, with the Singapore J.I. Terrorists bringing down the Raffles City Towers, and the perpetrators are led from Indonesia - Abu Bakar Bashir, should Singapore simply sit tight and wait for world opinion to work in its favor ?
Singapore may not have the size, nor the political and military clout of the USA to put pressure on the Indonesian Authorities to act against their own nationals, who commit trans-border crimes; but we must not allow ourselves to be seen to be helpless under such circumstances.
If Singapore's military strength is not our first option of response, then it must be shown that it will be the final option if all else fail.
Transgression on another country's sovereignty need not be brought about by the Government of a Country.
A Country's Government is responsible for the Actions of War brought about by its Citizens or Residents against another Country.
If a Government does not respond to such as an Act of War by its Citizens or Residents on another Country, the Host Country of these evil perpetrators shall then be a party to the Act of War.
Sovereignty is no longer the question in this undeclared act of war. -
VERY VERY WELL SAID... i cant say it any better....Originally posted by Atobe:After the 9-11 incident - that brought down the World Trade Center in NY City - did the United Nations sanctioned the US invasion into Afghanistan, which the USA claimed is harboring Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden ?
The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, was an "act of war" that was brought onto the USA by a Terrorist Organisation, led by an idealistic fanatic in the form of Osama.
If a similar situation were to happen to Singapore, with the Singapore J.I. Terrorists bringing down the Raffles City Towers, and the perpetrators are led from Indonesia - Abu Bakar Bashir, should Singapore simply sit tight and wait for world opinion to work in its favor ?
Singapore may not have the size, nor the political and military clout of the USA to put pressure on the Indonesian Authorities to act against their own nationals, who commit trans-border crimes; but we must not allow ourselves to be seen to be helpless under such circumstances.
If Singapore's military strength is not our first option of response, then it must be shown that it will be the final option if all else fail.
Transgression on another country's sovereignty need not be brought about by the Government of a Country.
A Country's Government is responsible for the Actions of War brought about by its Citizens or Residents against another Country.
If a Government does not respond to such as an Act of War by its Citizens or Residents on another Country, the Host Country of these evil perpetrators shall then be a party to the Act of War.
Sovereignty is no longer the question in this undeclared act of war.
BUT there is a tiny technical problem...
Wat if... you CANT prove it is originated from the JI?? OR IF the indonesians refuse to accept the Proof that we has been providing them all this time???
wat then???
do we strike... without permission as Howard suggested... OR do we sit tight and make a fool out of ourselves.??? -
If ever a "Bali Type Incident" is to occur in Singapore, our Forensic Experts will work much faster then what the Indonesian Authorities have done in putting all the elements together, even with the help of the Australian, Japanese, and U.K. Investigators.
In a tightly controlled Singapore, it is very unlikely that our paranoid Police will NOT be able to finger the culprits.
If the gathered evidence conclude that Indonesians are the instigators and planners of a "Bali Type" or "WTC 9-11" incident in Singapore, we have several options at our disposal:
Firstly the use our economic assistance as a trump card to pressure the Indoneisan Government to respond.
Secondly, through the influence of the U.N., and friendly Governments, to mobilise and form a world opinion to put pressure onto the Indonesian Government to respond.
Thirdly, the Indonesian Government must be informed that any Government must be responsible for the "Acts of War" committed by their Citizens or Residents, on another country. Either the responsible Government react positively and pursue the evil doers, or the Government can only be party to the crime.
This was the position of the U.S. Government, when the ultimatum was given to the Taliban Government to surrender Osama Bin Laden - for the evil works done to the W.T.C on 9-11 in New York City.
Regrettably, if a hostile Indonesian Government cannot control or refuse to react against the "Acts of War" by their Citizen against Singapore, then the Indonesian Government will be a party to the "Acts of War" by their Citizen.
The last option is War itself, that must involve the S.A.F. -
If ever a "Bali Type Incident" is to occur in Singapore, our Forensic Experts will work much faster then what the Indonesian Authorities have done in putting all the elements together, even with the help of the Australian, Japanese, and U.K. Investigators.
In a tightly controlled Singapore, it is very unlikely that our paranoid Police will NOT be able to finger the culprits.
If the gathered evidence conclude that Indonesians are the instigators and planners of a "Bali Type" or "WTC 9-11" incident in Singapore, we have several options at our disposal:
Firstly the use our economic assistance as a trump card to pressure the Indoneisan Government to respond.
Secondly, through the influence of the U.N., and friendly Governments, to mobilise and form a world opinion to put pressure onto the Indonesian Government to respond.
Thirdly, the Indonesian Government must be informed that any Government must be responsible for the "Acts of War" committed by their Citizens or Residents, on another country. Either the responsible Government react positively and pursue the evil doers, or the Government can only be party to the crime.
This was the position of the U.S. Government, when the ultimatum was given to the Taliban Government to surrender Osama Bin Laden - for the evil works done to the W.T.C on 9-11 in New York City.
Regrettably, if a hostile Indonesian Government cannot control or refuse to react against the "Acts of War" by their Citizen against Singapore, then the Indonesian Government will be a party to the "Acts of War" by their Citizen.
The last option is War itself, that must involve the S.A.F. -
and how do you intend to make use of SAF to prode the indonesians into actions? and how do you stop a war once the objectives are achieved?Originally posted by Atobe:If ever a "Bali Type Incident" is to occur in Singapore, our Forensic Experts will work much faster then what the Indonesian Authorities have done in putting all the elements together, even with the help of the Australian, Japanese, and U.K. Investigators.
even so... the question is not the authencity NOR the accuracy of the investigations... BUT rather... IF indonesia will or will not want to accept the resulf of the investigation DUE to its own political concern... The indonesians might just simply ignore or refuse to accept ANY reports....
In a tightly controlled Singapore, it is very unlikely that our paranoid Police will NOT be able to finger the culprits. That is not the key question... the question is... HOW to make indonesia accept our investigation report and acts actively against the perpertrators..
If the gathered evidence conclude that Indonesians are the instigators and planners of a "Bali Type" or "WTC 9-11" incident in Singapore, we have several options at our disposal:
Firstly the use our economic assistance as a trump card to pressure the Indoneisan Government to respond. Our economic assistance to indonesian government is hardly significant... and at WORST... the indonesian government might even consider it a great opportunity to milk singapore for the every single cent in our coffers to gain their cooperation... a somewat blackmailing i would expect no less from those people...
Secondly, through the influence of the U.N., and friendly Governments, to mobilise and form a world opinion to put pressure onto the Indonesian Government to respond. The indonesians would simply consider such actions as acts of hostility and unfriendly at best... and at worst... an infringement on the indonesians sovereignty and an assault on the nobel indonesians character and global standings... which i would believe they are not gonna swallow it silently without either some form of alleviations in compensations....
Thirdly, the Indonesian Government must be informed that any Government must be responsible for the "Acts of War" committed by their Citizens or Residents, on another country. Either the responsible Government react positively and pursue the evil doers, or the Government can only be party to the crime. I doubt they are bothered with such reminders from a nation the size of singapore... and though SAF is strong.. it is doubtful... SAF would go to jakarta to demand actions or intend to occupy the entire indonesian achipelago assuming that SAF is able to defeat TNI on a 70,000 island hopping operations....
This was the position of the U.S. Government, when the ultimatum was given to the Taliban Government to surrender Osama Bin Laden - for the evil works done to the W.T.C on 9-11 in New York City. US is a superpower... Singapore... is not even a regional power...
Regrettably, if a hostile Indonesian Government cannot control or refuse to react against the "Acts of War" by their Citizen against Singapore, then the Indonesian Government will be a party to the "Acts of War" by their Citizen. The indonesians would simply act innocent an express their condolences....
The last option is War itself, that must involve the S.A.F.
War needs to be part of the total solution... NOT the beginning of a new problem...and solve nothing...
assasination is one way... BUT it should be done in such a way that leaves NO traces... NOR indicate an assasination has occured... DEATH by 'natural' events... are best... a divine sort of punishment... -
look wat our prime minister had jus said..........
I find that its the best response and solution to our region's problem....... -
The views that have been posted so far by Tripwire and myself can only be hypothetical and no more.
It is regrettable and unfortunate that Indonesia has been referred to in the postings, as it has so far had its own citizens and residents being “caught” and "fingered" in some very “compromising situations” in the Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore; and as a single South-east Asian country, it has the most active number of Radical Islamic Groups that are running amok even within its territory (reference the Molukus Riots, Church Bombings, Night Club raids or riots, Aceh Rebellion).
Indonesia as a reference country, can also easily be replaced by Malaysia or Thailand or the Philippines, each country has its own variation of radical Islamic Groups that are actively taking up arms against the established rule of the Legitimate Governments of each of these South-east Asian Countries.
Any one of these countries will have to respond to the pressures of world opinion at the risk of a united action from the United Nations; if ever an incident such as that of the size of the 9-11 incident should befall onto Singapore.
Even for a Bali Incident within its own sovereign territory, Indonesia cannot afford not to respond, given the gravity of the situation; just as it has confirmed the hypothetical position that it cannot afford not to ignore outside opinions - which in this case is Australian pressures to let in Australian investigators to “HELP(??)” in the investigation of the Bali Incident.
No country can put National Pride and withstand the U.N. embargo and prefer to be a “Pariah State” by not taking actions against their own Nationals or Residents, and give protection and safe harbor to these perpetrators of “crime against humanity”.
Even Libya finally cave in after more then 10 years of preferred self isolation as a result of the U.N. embargo for the bombing of a Pan-Am 747 jet at Lockerbie, Scotland.
India had accused Pakistan of harboring Islamic Terrorists, and India would have launched a war against Pakistan, except for the fact that both now possess Nuclear Weapons – which Pakistan has assured that they will not hesitate to use the Nuclear Option, if their Army face massive defeat.
Israel has held the Palestinian Authorities responsible for the Terrorist Attacks against the Israelis. This accusation from Israel is repugnant and totally disingenuous, as the Israeli Army had systematically dismantled the effective tools of policing by the Palestinian Authority against any raids conducted by Palestinian Radicals.
Indonesia is a recognized friendly state towards Singapore, although there exist many vocal radical groups that remain volatile and exploited by extremists with their own agenda to gain power from the Islamic pulpit.
These radicals can usurp the leadership of the country from the Government, much as the Ayatollahs of Iran had usurped the powers of Government from the Shah of Iran.
If the Indonesian Government should suddenly fall and give rise to such a Radical Group to come into power, and which prefer to support and perpetrate hostile actions against Singapore, we cannot simply sit still and allow such groups to harm our lives and properties in Singapore.
Singapore will have to respond in an aggressive manner with the S.A.F.
Singapore is recognized as a Regional Power despite our size; and Singapore is quietly and modestly keeping a low profile.
Much to the discomfort of our Political Leaders, and as much as we would like to avoid the comparison, the truth of the unholy word is that Singapore is like Israel in the Middle East, with both being surrounded by Islamic Countries that has seen a strong revival of Fundamentalist Islamic practices.
Like Israel, Singapore cannot afford not to respond aggressively against terrorist Acts of Wars by individuals or groups that take refuge in neighboring countries that are either inept or powerless to stop such perpetrators.
How to end a war that involves the S.A.F?
We should learn from history to study how other wars ended.
From my own view, it depends on how the war is being planned and executed, and the goals and objectives that are to be achieved by the S.A.F.
It depends on the type of war that the S.A.F will have to fight. It depends on the duration of the war that the S.A.F can afford to fight; and how much has been achieved within the allotted period.
However, like the USA in its fight against terrorism, Singapore will depend on how much international support the Singapore Government and the S.A.F will receive in such a war.