SAF personnel come to school give talk to JC boys..
-
Originally posted by rooki:
What makes you think they can kill in the face of enemy fire?
Look at how spoilt Singaporean guys are. The most they've seen of blood or gore is perhaps in CS or some other FPS games. Do they even have any idea how putrid corpses smell? Do they know how crippling pain from bullet wounds can be? Can they overcome years of conditioning that killing is bad?
Huh. it's not as if those signallers never brought their own equipment along. If they'd tried to salvage and restore the communications grid using nothing but destroyed and damaged local equipment, then perhaps they'd deserve more respect.
How much more macsuline are Singapore's neighbours compared to Singapore's guys? Oh i don't know, garang enough to rob and steal? Garang enough to fight NSmen and win? Garang enough to defy authority?
In reply to your first sentence...you raise a valid point...but it all depends on the training. As they say, whenever a person appears in a crosshair, he ceases to exist. No qualms about morals, especially when he's trying to kill you.
Your second paragraph. I'm sure our boys who went to aceh for Operation Flying Eagle can tell you in detail how a dead body smells like, or how does it feel to pluck a dead baby boy's arm out of the rubble.
-
I'll make it clearer now that what I find lacking in the SAF is the attitude of people in leadership positions, because, we all know it, many of them are there only for the pension.
Also... consider all those regular admin officers... I'm sure many of you KNOW how fucked up they are. Probably a bit better when it comes to front line outfield commanders. But how much, I don't know.
16/f/loney: since u brought up the Courageous incident, I would also like to use that as an example of how lacking in leadership the SAF leadership generally can be. The captain tries his best to absolve himself of all the blame and push it onto the junior officers. Most captains I know would take it upon themselves to protect their people and shoulder the blame, whether they were on the bridge or not. As a matter of professional pride, most captains would go down with the ship. The captain of the Courageous turned in one of the most unprofessional and pathetic performances I'd ever seen from a military ship's captain.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
Yeah, just because a few commandos were garang, you generalise that to mean all of the SAF, including the vast unmotivated pansy bunch of NSmen/NSFs
But that unmotivated pansy bunch of NSF were in Aceh for that job right? -
If someone is so damn sensitive and insecure about her safety in times of uncertainy, i am pretty sure that she is based in somewhere 'safer'. But if she's not, she can do more than just bitching about her insecurity ...
-
Since we're all doing the "we've seen and experience more than you have" thing, I might as well say now that I watched a man bleed to death from a neck stab wound this year. How many of you have ever actually seen a man die?
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
I'll make it clearer now that what I find lacking in the SAF is the attitude of people in leadership positions, because, we all know it, many of them are there only for the pension.
Also... consider all those regular admin officers... I'm sure many of you KNOW how fucked up they are. Probably a bit better when it comes to front line outfield commanders. But how much, I don't know.
16/f/loney: since u brought up the Courageous incident, I would also like to use that as an example of how lacking in leadership the SAF leadership generally can be. The captain tries his best to absolve himself of all the blame and push it onto the junior officers. Most captains I know would take it upon themselves to protect their people and shoulder the blame, whether they were on the bridge or not. As a matter of professional pride, most captains would go down with the ship. The captain of the Courageous turned in one of the most unprofessional and pathetic performances I'd ever seen from a military ship's captain.
I quoted this example to highlight that the SAF is not unprepared.
It's sad....that: You don't seem to understand how a typical ship operates.
When you say: I have the ship!
YOU and, I say again, YOU take the responsibility of the ship in your hands. YOU answer if the ship gets into trouble.
-
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
In reply to your first sentence...you raise a valid point...but it all depends on the training. As they say, whenever a person appears in a crosshair, he ceases to exist. No qualms about morals, especially when he's trying to kill you.
That's easy to say, in practice, it's another story. Our military is largely a conscript military. The problem with conscripts is that you KNOW they're not all hardcore nutjobs, so you simply have no way of knowing which way they're going to react till sh1t hits the fan. How many of our boys have actually fired a rifle in anger? Too small to be indicative, to be honest. -
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
a good laugh, your childishness displayed throughout your post and your inability to grasp the work of our signallers would probably spell to us that you havent went for your NS.well, spoiled singapores whom cannot pull the trigger, whom cannot see blood. Then perhaps police officers firing off their revolver (happened many times in our history) to defend themselves, SOF personnels in the SQ117 incident, medical stuff, paramedics in our everyday lives are not Singaporeans then.
How much of the US forces deployed to war zones had seen battle, had taste the bitterness of killing and saw the tragic of losing their mates? How much of our neighbours had pulled a trigger, had killed a man or had lost a mate?
How many US citizens are spoilt pansies? Remember guns are legal there.
And also you seem to fail to grasp the difference between police officers (more often than not regulars, much more then police NSFs), the SOF (regulars too) and ordinary NS grunts forced to serve.
Not all Singaporean men are equal, but the proportion of unmotivated NSmen and regulars vastly outnumbers the motivated minority to the point that the SAF's ablilty to wage war is severely compromised.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Since we're all doing the "we've seen and experience more than you have" thing, I might as well say now that I watched a man bleed to death from a neck stab wound this year. How many of you have ever actually seen a man die?
i watched my best friend die on the hospital bed after an accident. But so what? Does that make a difference to anything? The only lesson i learned after that was that speeding kills. I've already conceded that there's no point explaining to CIVILIANS about the intricacies about the armed forces. Like that tagline for the ladie's credit card....THEY JUST DONT GET IT.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
I quoted this example to highlight that the SAF is not unprepared.
It's sad....that: You don't seem to understand how a typical ship operates.
When you say: I have the ship!
YOU and, I say again, YOU take the responsibility of the ship in your hands. YOU answer if the ship gets into trouble.
It's sad you don't know what professional pride means. Professional pride for many captains I know means even IF someone has responsibility of the ship, the buck stops with them, and they often would rather take the blame. Of course I know how it works. No need to be patronising just because u mistakenly think I do not know anything of such SOPs. But of course Courageous' captain doesnt want to ruin his nice army pension does he? How else is he going to keep up with mortgage payments for his nice home lol -
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
i watched my best friend die on the hospital bed after an accident. But so what? Does that make a difference to anything? The only lesson i learned after that was that speeding kills. I've already conceded that there's no point explaining to CIVILIANS about the intricacies about the armed forces. Like that tagline for the ladie's credit card....THEY JUST DONT GET IT.
Funny that singapore guys make the automatic assumption that women = civilians. No wonder most of them fail so hard in this thread. Only people not getting it here are you guys =) It's very amusing to watch all of you repeatedly assume I have no military experience and am a civilian =)And yes, watching someone die has a very sobering effect. It makes u wonder if you can take a life if the need arises. And you know what? Having seen someone die, it helped me understand that I CAN take a life if I have to.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
How many US citizens are spoilt pansies? Remember guns are legal there.
And also you seem to fail to grasp the difference between police officers (more often than not regulars, much more then police NSFs), the SOF (regulars too) and ordinary NS grunts forced to serve.
Not all Singaporean men are equal, but the proportion of unmotivated NSmen and regulars vastly outnumbers the motivated minority to the point that the SAF's ablilty to wage war is severely compromised.
Don't make me laugh.....inability to wage a war????????????Sorry. I forgot you've never seen the bottom of the coin yet, under the veil of what info you're fed.
Thus said, ever wondered why M'sia did not step afoot Pedra Branca, unlike in other cases of disputed islands?
Hmm....on the other hand, if you're blissfully ignorant then SAF must be doing a good job allowing you not to know ANYTHING.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
How many US citizens are spoilt pansies? Remember guns are legal there.
And also you seem to fail to grasp the difference between police officers (more often than not regulars, much more then police NSFs), the SOF (regulars too) and ordinary NS grunts forced to serve.
Not all Singaporean men are equal, but the proportion of unmotivated NSmen and regulars vastly outnumbers the motivated minority to the point that the SAF's ablilty to wage war is severely compromised.
Time to set the record straight.
MANY US CITIZENS are spoilt pansies. The legal right to own a gun does not make someone tough. Many US citizens are worse than Singaporeans when it comes to stuff like that for the simple reason of there being no conscription.
I regularly participate in CQB training and skirmishing with caucasians and I can say that just because someone has a weapon doesn't mean they're not spoilt. People I train with have frozen under the threat of simulated rounds, what makes u think they will move when under real fire just because they're US/UK citizens?
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
But that unmotivated pansy bunch of NSF were in Aceh for that job right?Go find out how many NSFs went for Aceh vis a vis regulars.
Just because a few were garang doesn't disprove the point that the vast majority of NSFs and perhaps regulars are unmotivated.
Of course, those Aceh personnel could've been motivated by something else...
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
That's easy to say, in practice, it's another story. Our military is largely a conscript military. The problem with conscripts is that you KNOW they're not all hardcore nutjobs, so you simply have no way of knowing which way they're going to react till sh1t hits the fan. How many of our boys have actually fired a rifle in anger? Too small to be indicative, to be honest.Well, if someone is trying to kill me, i would damn hell try to kill him first. Basic survival instincts. Does that make me a hardcore nutjob?
Oh and i'm glad i've never heard of any SAF soldier firing off a rifle in "ANGER". Speaks volumes about professionalism.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
It's sad you don't know what professional pride means. Professional pride for many captains I know means even IF someone has responsibility of the ship, the buck stops with them, and they often would rather take the blame. Of course I know how it works. No need to be patronising just because u mistakenly think I do not know anything of such SOPs. But of course Courageous' captain doesnt want to ruin his nice army pension does he? How else is he going to keep up with mortgage payments for his nice home lol
So you're telling me that the phrase: "*** has the ship" bears no meaning?Everyone on the bridge is accountable for every word they speak.
If you know about SOPs, you would know that the top guy is not called a "captain".
-
Originally posted by rooki:
How many US citizens are spoilt pansies? Remember guns are legal there.
And also you seem to fail to grasp the difference between police officers (more often than not regulars, much more then police NSFs), the SOF (regulars too) and ordinary NS grunts forced to serve
Are u that stupid to think that US citizens are not spoilt pansies (im not saying that they are, neither are we) solely because they own guns?There is no distinction between regular, NSmen and NSF. All will react accordingly when their lives are threatened.
-
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
Well, if someone is trying to kill me, i would damn hell try to kill him first. Basic survival instincts. Does that make me a hardcore nutjob?
Oh and i'm glad i've never heard of any SAF soldier firing off a rifle in "ANGER". Speaks volumes about professionalism.
N Korea shooting a S Korea tourist "in anger". -
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
Well, if someone is trying to kill me, i would damn hell try to kill him first. Basic survival instincts. Does that make me a hardcore nutjob?
Oh and i'm glad i've never heard of any SAF soldier firing off a rifle in "ANGER". Speaks volumes about professionalism.
Can I suggest you look up the meaning of "in anger" with regards to military usage? You who just accused me of being a civilian who "don't get it", failed to understand a common and simple military term? Thats ironic it is.
Even the cadet-trained people here I train with know what "firing a weapon in anger" means. -
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Can I suggest you look up the meaning of "in anger" with regards to military usage? You who just accused me of being a civilian who "don't get it", failed to understand a common and simple military term? Thats ironic it is. Even the cadet-trained people here I train with know what "firing a weapon in anger" means.
You have a tendency to miss the point.No firing.
Isn't it desirable?
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
So you're telling me that the phrase: "*** has the ship" bears no meaning?Everyone on the bridge is accountable for every word they speak.
If you know about SOPs, you would know that the top guy is not called a "captain".
Its a marine term, and has applied to Navies since the dawn of mankind. They might not be called captains in the SOP, but you know what I'm talking about, lets not play on technicalities here thanks, because thats just petty and pointless.
Fact remains that most naval ship captains WILL rather go down with their ship even if they weren't in charge on the bridge.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
It's very amusing to watch all of you repeatedly assume I have no military experience and am a civilian =)
Not to be sexist, u are as honourable to me as any other forumner here.We assume your lack in military experience for the fact that u have not demostrated to us ur understand of our armed forces in the context of our region.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Time to set the record straight.
MANY US CITIZENS are spoilt pansies. The legal right to own a gun does not make someone tough. Many US citizens are worse than Singaporeans when it comes to stuff like that for the simple reason of there being no conscription.
I regularly participate in CQB training and skirmishing with caucasians and I can say that just because someone has a weapon doesn't mean they're not spoilt. People I train with have frozen under the threat of simulated rounds, what makes u think they will move when under real fire just because they're US/UK citizens?
If you'd bother to research, most US troops are hicks that come from poorer, rural areas where hunting is a pastime and gunfights are common. Almost all Singaporeans, on the other hand, resemble the cosseted pansies in NYC when it comes to physical toughness. But of course those NYC pansies have not undergone the mindwashing effect of NS, so in the end they're still tougher than SG NS guys.
If caucasians freeze under simulated rounds, you can bet that the soft asians from Singapore will do worse.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Its a marine term, and has applied to Navies since the dawn of mankind. They might not be called captains in the SOP, but you know what I'm talking about, lets not play on technicalities here thanks, because thats just petty and pointless.
Fact remains that most naval ship captains WILL rather go down with their ship even if they weren't in charge on the bridge.
Then it's not SOP what.....And I would rather my command try to save his arse.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
You have a tendency to miss the point.No firing.
Isn't it desirable?
No YOU have a tendency to miss the point. Read his post again:"i'm glad i've never heard of any SAF soldier firing off a rifle in "ANGER". Speaks volumes about professionalism."
He thinks it means shooting someone out of anger. Opps 16/f/loney just pwned himself by missing the point.