SAF personnel come to school give talk to JC boys..
-
Originally posted by rooki:
Your conjecture that NSmen will kill when pushed is just that: speculation. When reality shows a much more meek and submissive way of handling things.
what reality? did we have a war for u to claim that reality?The reality was that we were deployed when needed, as needed, kill when needed and as needed by which unit when needed, as needed. Do a research on our military history pal.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
I knew before any of you did about how the rescue operation was going, and what the SAR teams were expecting to find. So once again, please don't make your silly assumptions.
You freaking missed the point again! -
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
Trust me when i say i know what doing anything "in a fit of anger" will result in, military or otherwise. Oh. And i never 'accused' you of being a civilian (is that a crime?).
If you see your best buddy killed in the line of fire and feel a desire to avenge him, is it not anger?
If you've seen your family home ravaged and hence want to kill the enemy, is it not anger?
If you find your female relatives raped and killed, and feel a burning muderous rage towards the enemy, is it not anger?
If Singaporeans can't kill in a fit of anger, then such tragedies will only serve to weaken the NSmen in times of war. Thank you for proving my point about the wussiness of SG guys.
-
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
Darling, my training has taught me to NEVER do anything in a fit of anger. "to shoot for a purpose in war"? Yeah of course i have a purpose, ITS WAR! Doesnt mean i have to get personal about it. Since you're here bragging about your credentials, i believe you've read about the Marines retaliation strike on Fallujah after 4 blackwater guys were murdered during a convoy operation. THAT is what happens when you get angry. You make emotion-based decisions. And all of us in the military know what a fat lot of good that does.
Now you're making me laugh. It's time to teach you some simple ENGLISHhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/radio/specials/1837_aae/page22.shtml
In a military context, 'to fire in anger' means to shoot for a purpose in war. For example, a submarine that 'fires in anger' shoots missiles at an enemy ship. Shots fired in anger are never just for practice; they're fired to deliberately cause damage or harm.
Read ok? don't just keep spouting the same nonsense. "To fire in anger" has nothing to do with emotions or anger. It just means to fire a shot at the enemy that is intended to do damage.
For example: Pte Jones has gone through 2 firefights and has not fired a shot in anger!
That means that although Pte Jones was involved in 2 firefights, he has never actually opened fire at the enemy, lord only know what he doing during the firefight!
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
I knew before any of you did about how the rescue operation was going, and what the SAR teams were expecting to find. So once again, please don't make your silly assumptions.
You see only what you see.With your eyes?
Obviously not......please don't sully the memory of the dedicated crew which did an uphill task of managing to keep the vessel afloat till help came and the poor girls who threw their lives in defense of the Eastern Straits.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
sad indeed.
Your assumptions are a good demonstration of how most SAF personnel assume they have the upper hand when in fact they're underestimating their enemies. -
To rooki and 4Justice.
I understand your concerns. Each nation's military trainning and experiences are different. And if you don't have an indepth understanding of our military organisation or had been part of it, you cannot just simply brush off the efforts and sacrifice of our men. It's not just nationalism or proffessionalism. 'Women just don't get it!'
It can be said that putting a gun in one's hand does not mean he would have the guts to fire. Nor does it also mean he WONT fire, if there is a need.
Within our army, our boys had always been trained to be a team player. If someone within the team flinches or hesitate, another will come to harm or die.
Some boys may not fire, but that guilt will live with him forever, watching his team-mates killed. Will our soldiers fire, when the time comes for it, rich or poor, stupid or intelligent?
I believe and have the fullest confidence in them that they will fire. Self preservation dictates they will, or they will die or their teammates die.
Furthermore, your claim that half of our army is lazy and the other half is hardworking? Do you have empirical figures to show such a conclusion? YOU DO NOT!
Are you even aware of the numerous trials and performance tests our army conducts every year, local and overseas? Officers and non-comms get sacked if they fail to measure up, from the cook to our generals in the general staff.
So, if you wish to cast aspersions on OUR men, please support your figures with data and relevant facts, otherwise, you only impunge the honour and sacrifice of our men in uniform.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Your assumptions are a good demonstration of how most SAF personnel assume they have the upper hand when in fact they're underestimating their enemies.
Sorry, but the personnel don't assume when they are the ones carrying it out.Quite the contrary, most of them even laugh on the outside.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
You make me laugh.
We don't have to fire a shot to prove our point.
Again, drawing back to Pedra Branca, do you honestly think we have a MEEK and SUBMISSIVE presence there.
Hell, even our neighbour up North frequently complain of our AGGRESSIVE way of doing things.
Who's the meek one?
Well, I'm not sure if the ordinary SG guys had a say in Pedra Branca.
However, the ordinary SG guy is definitely going to be the frontline grunt in times of war. The aggresiveness you speak of is that of the government trying desperately to punch above its weight and pissing off neighbours in the process.
The government is equally aggressive in emasculating Singaporeans. The meek are the ordinary serfs.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
You see only what you see.With your eyes?
Obviously not......please don't sully the memory of the dedicated crew which did an uphill task of managing to keep the vessel afloat till help came and the poor girls who threw their lives in defense of the Eastern Straits.
Wrong. When something like that happens many people whose efforts are vital towards the subsequent SAR operations don't necessarily get to see the ship or the scene. Please don't sully the efforts of the SAR teams as well as the many personnel behind the scenes who put in a massive effort to ensure that the SAR operation was able to continue in a bid to recover the bodies of those poor girls. your shallowness is unbecoming for someone who talks about honoring the dedicated.
Now excuse me, my ride for my CQB training is arriving in 30 mins and i need to go pack my gear and guns up.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Now you're making me laugh. It's time to teach you some simple ENGLISHhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/radio/specials/1837_aae/page22.shtml
In a military context, 'to fire in anger' means to shoot for a purpose in war. For example, a submarine that 'fires in anger' shoots missiles at an enemy ship. Shots fired in anger are never just for practice; they're fired to deliberately cause damage or harm.
Read ok? don't just keep spouting the same nonsense. "To fire in anger" has nothing to do with emotions or anger. It just means to fire a shot at the enemy that is intended to do damage.
For example: Pte Jones has gone through 2 firefights and has not fired a shot in anger!
That means that although Pte Jones was involved in 2 firefights, he has never actually opened fire at the enemy, lord only know what he doing during the firefight!
I'm sorry, i thought i was speaking English here. You take things in your own context, i take things in mine. Why don't you tell everyone what unit you are, or WERE, from, so we can all volunteer for it to have the same mindset that you have. And stop all the farking quotes. you trying to tell me you take everything you read as gospel?
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
what reality? did we have a war for u to claim that reality?The reality was that we were deployed when needed, as needed, kill when needed and as needed by which unit when needed, as needed. Do a research on our military history pal.
The reality is that almost all SAF NSmen have never pulled the trigger with intent to kill or maim.
Working together successfully in humanitarian efforts doesn't mean working together successfully to kill.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
To rooki and 4Justice.
I understand your concerns. Each nation's military trainning and experiences are different. And if you don't have an indepth understanding of our military organisation or had been part of it, you cannot just simply brush off the efforts and sacrifice of our men. It's not just nationalism or proffessionalism. 'Women just don't get it!'
It can be said that putting a gun in one's hand does not mean he would have the guts to fire. Nor does it also mean he WONT fire, if there is a need.
Within our army, our boys had always been trained to be a team player. If someone within the team flinches or hesitate, another will come to harm or die.
Some boys may not fire, but that guilt will live with him forever, watching his team-mates killed. Will our soldiers fire, when the time comes for it, rich or poor, stupid or intelligent?
I believe and have the fullest confidence in them that they will fire. Self preservation dictates they will, or they will die or their teammates die.
Furthermore, your claim that half of our army is lazy and the other half is hardworking? Do you have empirical figures to show such a conclusion? YOU DO NOT!
Are you even aware of the numerous trials and performance tests our army conducts every year, local and overseas? Officers and non-comms get sacked if they fail to measure up, from the cook to our generals in the general staff.
So, if you wish to cast aspersions on OUR men, please support your figures with data and relevant facts, otherwise, you only impunge the honour and sacrifice of our men in uniform.
sexism sexism sexism. Like I said, stop assuming I haven't been in uniform before.
Now, I shall go and prepare for CQB training. With any luck I'll be able to get a few more knife kills today. I narrow missed getting one with a thrown knife this wednesday.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Now excuse me, my ride for my CQB training is arriving in 30 mins and i need to go pack my gear and guns up.
Do not think that ur participation in airsoft will translate into good military knowledge by our intepretation. So dont borther showing it off here. I myself did my share of CQB in NS so thanks but no thanks.Good luck for CQB.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
If Singaporeans can't kill in a fit of anger, then such tragedies will only serve to weaken the NSmen in times of war. Thank you for proving my point about the wussiness of SG guys.
try me on for size and i'll prove your point.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
Well, I'm not sure if the ordinary SG guys had a say in Pedra Branca.
However, the ordinary SG guy is definitely going to be the frontline grunt in times of war. The aggresiveness you speak of is that of the government trying desperately to punch above its weight and pissing off neighbours in the process.
The government is equally aggressive in emasculating Singaporeans. The meek are the ordinary serfs.
That really pisses me off.You've seen the situation at the Straits or not?!
DON'T FREAKING TALK ANYMORE RUBBISH.
Do you know what our boys are doing there to keep the M'sians away?
You don't know, you keep your bloody mouth shut. The lost lives guarding that sector were to safe-guard that area and you have the bloody cheek to tell me that.
-
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
I'm sorry, i thought i was speaking English here. You take things in your own context, i take things in mine. Why don't you tell everyone what unit you are, or WERE, from, so we can all volunteer for it to have the same mindset that you have. And stop all the farking quotes. you trying to tell me you take everything you read as gospel?
Funnily enough, BBC's English and their context ARE English. Just because you're ignorant of a simple military phrase most ENGLISH speaking military personnel would know, doesn't mean I'm speaking rubbish. If you wish to stop embaressing yourself further, I suggest you ask someone truely in the know, maybe a US or UK serviceman, what "firing in anger" means. Good day =)
-
Originally posted by Hellraiza:
try me on for size and i'll prove your point.
Is that all you have to say, Internet Tough Guy?
And even if you were really tough, that doesn't say anything about the meekness of most ordinary SG guys.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
Do not think that ur participation in airsoft will translate into good military knowledge by our intepretation. So dont borther showing it off here. I myself did my share of CQB in NS so thanks but no thanks.Good luck for CQB.
Sorry. I had my military training 1st before I decided to continue with it in a semi official capacity. Perhaps when our PMC is set up I'll send you a business card.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
The reality is that almost all SAF NSmen have never pulled the trigger with intent to kill or maim.
Working together successfully in humanitarian efforts doesn't mean working together successfully to kill.
How many of US forces deployed to modern war zone today had kill someone pior to that?
Ur idea about killing someone to prove ones manhood is stupid and narrow. Certainly by ur defination, you are yourself a wuss.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Funnily enough, BBC's English and their context ARE English. Just because you're ignorant of a simple military phrase most ENGLISH speaking military personnel would know, doesn't mean I'm speaking rubbish. If you wish to stop embaressing yourself further, I suggest you ask someone truely in the know, maybe a US or UK serviceman, what "firing in anger" means. Good day =)
What, you have a hard-on for the good old colonial days? And you're avoiding my question. Tell us which unit you were from, give some concrete to all the fucking crap you're spouting here.
-
For the record, I disagree with Rooki about our boys being pansies. I think most can fight if they want to. I state again, its the leadership I have my doubts about. People who want the king's shilling without spilling blood.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
Sorry. I had my military training 1st before I decided to continue with it in a semi official capacity. Perhaps when our PMC is set up I'll send you a business card.
thank you, i look forward to your business card and also a better discussion of military issues between us, maybe i can learn more from you.stay safe 4justice.
-
Originally posted by rooki:
Is that all you have to say, Internet Tough Guy?
And even if you were really tough, that doesn't say anything about the meekness of most ordinary SG guys.
Yes that is all i have to say. The rest, i'll do. With your honourable presence of course.
-
Originally posted by 4Justice:
For the record, I disagree with Rooki about our boys being pansies. I think most can fight if they want to. I state again, its the leadership I have my doubts about. People who want the king's shilling without spilling blood.
Sometimes the "scholars" make me laugh.