Singapore At War
-
Singapore's best defence policy is peace. There is no value add in offensice or defensive military engagement. Win, lose or draw we would be strategically defeated in economic, social and political terms. The premise of our success as an economy has been and continues to be our stability. Therefore any military adventure, even one forced upon us, is by this fundamental measure a defeat.
Then why do we invest so much in defense? There are 2 reasons. The first as a deterrence and a particular kind of deterrence - offensive deterrent. That is to say, that we strive for the capability not only to defeat attacks but to counter with our own.
The second, is for social cohesion. The SAF has morphed over time to be a socio-political force in its own right. Every male learns the hard lesson of conformity, heirarchy and discipline when he hits 18. The SAF has also become development engine for "ideal" leaders. So military leaders transform into political ones. The men lead when in uniform become the people who follow, when in their whites.
Ultimately, one may abide my the first rationale but should correctly, be concerned with the second. We risk cultivating a junta of the generals, whose perspective, attitudes, training, values and comprehension of society cannot but fail to display a uniformity. -
People say that a cat got 9 lives. Or at least the cat can survive some physical impacts (eg a heavy fall from a high location) quite impressively.Originally posted by tripwire:Latest... from the papers... maharaja says that there are more then one way to skin a cat (singapore lah... the lion city)....
So it would appear that the lion city has just become the cat city in mahatir's eye.... so much for mutual respect hahahahaaa.....
Looks like this singapore cat.... needs to seriously wake up and set up some mouse traps against those northern rats....
Also, do people know that there are more than one way to skin & slaughter a hog? eg. high electric current; hang it upside down & sliced the body apart; tied the legs together & put it into a well of boiling water, etc etc.
But why do people want to skin a cat? Only those weird or mentally ill people will do that. eg a bomoh or a psychopath. On the other hand, slaughtering a hog or boar is nothing unusual. Slaughtering these oinking creatures are not so unusual & these creatures received lesser empathy. -
Pork Chop or Stir Fried Cat with sambal? =)
-
maharaja really should retire liow... he insist that singapore MUST accept malaysia's view where it is CORRECT and ENTITLED....Originally posted by Shotgun:Pork Chop or Stir Fried Cat with sambal? =)
What is correct to malaysia... need not neccessary be correct in singapore's view.....
Who is naturally entitled to what... is a matter of point of views.... ( reminds me of the bumiputra walking stick policies )
SO.... how to MUST accept??? this guy really really dumb... anyone knows what is maharaja's IQ har??? -
He really isn't stupid if u think about it. Know thy foe! Never dismiss them.Originally posted by tripwire:maharaja really should retire liow... he insist that singapore MUST accept malaysia's view where it is CORRECT and ENTITLED....
What is correct to malaysia... need not neccessary be correct in singapore's view.....
Who is naturally entitled to what... is a matter of point of views.... ( reminds me of the bumiputra walking stick policies )
SO.... how to MUST accept??? this guy really really dumb... anyone knows what is maharaja's IQ har???
The recent newspaper articles across the causeway shows this. They have publicly revealed the extent of their defence relations with Uncle Sam and these 2 are pretty friendy with each other of late.
USA is eager to cultivate moderate Muslim leaders in its war against terrorism and he has successfully cast himself in that image.
Now think: They used to be the banana republic and we the symbol of stability. In a shooting war under such circumstances, its obvious who gets to hold hands with Uncle Sam.
Now, they're the moderate Muslim state USA needs to court so the war against terror won't look like a war against islam. Where do we stand then now?
The situations are ripe all round for Malaysia to attempt a more hardline position in their dealings with us: US on their side, money flowing in, UMNO predicted to win a landslide... Mahathir didn't achieve this or come this far by being stupid. He saw his opportunities and he grabbed it...
Its not easy to counter something like that... one can only hope that PAS wins a few elections and throw Mahathir off balance... A weak UMNO is always friendlier with Sg... that would open its own can of worms for us... but it would swing the regional balance of power back in our favour again.
Hmmm... Any thoughts? -
dont bet on it... the americans got themselves pretty burnt up when they tried to cultivate muslim partners... for example... the shah of iran... then saddam of iraq... and many other so call pro-american moslems leaders.... it is doubtful that the americans would dare to continue to give uncontidictional support for any future moslem govt.... just as it did for the shah of iran....Originally posted by CX:He really isn't stupid if u think about it. Know thy foe! Never dismiss them.
The recent newspaper articles across the causeway shows this. They have publicly revealed the extent of their defence relations with Uncle Sam and these 2 are pretty friendy with each other of late.
USA is eager to cultivate moderate Muslim leaders in its war against terrorism and he has successfully cast himself in that image.
Now think: They used to be the banana republic and we the symbol of stability. In a shooting war under such circumstances, its obvious who gets to hold hands with Uncle Sam.
Now, they're the moderate Muslim state USA needs to court so the war against terror won't look like a war against islam. Where do we stand then now?
The situations are ripe all round for Malaysia to attempt a more hardline position in their dealings with us: US on their side, money flowing in, UMNO predicted to win a landslide... Mahathir didn't achieve this or come this far by being stupid. He saw his opportunities and he grabbed it...
Its not easy to counter something like that... one can only hope that PAS wins a few elections and throw Mahathir off balance... A weak UMNO is always friendlier with Sg... that would open its own can of worms for us... but it would swing the regional balance of power back in our favour again.
Hmmm... Any thoughts?
The reason is rather simplistic... the problem of the moslem world is that... IT has already identified americans as the SATAN... and such perception isnt gonna change overnight... having a few moderate moslem leaders at its beck and call... would not for one minute change the overall perception of america in the eyes of the likes of Osama... and might even re-enforce the perception of the american SATAN trying to subvert islam.... through islamic head of state....
One only need to look at saudi arabia and egyt and we see very clearly ... that moslem leaders who dance with americans.... are always wary of the potential backlash of the more radical moslems in their country.... and has from time to time... rebuke american govt or given financial support to local radical moslems in order to gain acceptance in their own respective moslem community....
On the other hand... .moslem leaders who shake uncle sam's hand too often and fail to address the potential anti-american backlash in their country... easily found themselve on the wrong side of the gun ... as such, many such leaders, though moderate, are unable or unwilling to sway public opinion towards american favour... furthermore... such moslem leaders would also find themselves easily offending other moslem leaders that have a home crowd of blood thirsty anti-american audience to address...
Take for example... the latest meeting in malaysia by moslem state leader on terrorism... mahatir's stand on terrorism... though moderate was equally offensive to the isrealis and the arabs....
to the isrealis... mahatir's position is a subtle acceptace of terrorism... while arab nations think mahatir is MAD to even consider their fellow palestinians brothers as terrorist ... instead of the freedom fighter that they deserve......
Poor maharaja... got hit by rotten eggs on both sides to his face... worst.... his countrymen... the moslems... kept very very silent..... thus... one can see the futility of cultivating moderate moslem leaders... except for local USA media consumption....
In any case... able to shake hand with uncle sam is a 2 edge sword... maharaja will risk a backlash in his upcoming election if he stick too close to Bushy man and give the PAS an advantage.... sticking too close to uncle sam... has a price to pay... it aint free.. and it aint gonna be a walk in the park.... bushy man could just as quickly dump maharaja on the fence as he has invited him to his office for a cup of tea....
Lastly... maharaja.... is a fickle man himself... a man who in the past... constantly express anti-west, anti-capitalism.. anti-soros publicly in forums and in international conferences... even snubbed uncle sam during APEC... and getting into hot temper with australia....
Thus... if i am bushy man.... i would think twice before considering maharaja a dependable ally or even friend....
But... the war against terrorism is heating up ... and bushy man... needs some friends on the muslim ground for the time, this is to divide the enemy and take them out one by one... a simple strategy ... in dealing with the muslim threat....
as to wat will happen to maharaja or malaysia once Uncle sam has finished its buissness... its anyones' guess. but i doubt... uncle sam is gonna kiss maharaja... that is... if maharaja has not been 'replaced' by PAS.....
The... reason for my belief is actually quite simplistic... as long as Moslems and jews cannot sit down and talk in peace... how can malaysia and america gonna even think of shaking hands honestly???
Is malaysia gonna accept isreal and close down palestinian embassy in malaysia?? or will uncle sam stop supporting isreal.... just to make friends with malaysia??
There is an unbridgeable gap between malaysia and america... but for the moment... at least... both has something to gain from each other.... a marriage of convenice.... -
I agree that there is often a backlash when Muslim leaders align themselves too closely with USA.
Pervez Musharraf found that out to his dismay... and USA has fallen short to endorsing his "referendum" 'cos they "can't verify the results"... This is a classic case of Muslim leaders who have failed to balance the 2 opposing interests.
I did say that Mahathir is opportunistic. He changes his mind constantly because of this, not because he's indecisive or inconsisent. If anything at all, his oppportunism is amazingly consistent.
He obviously sees the benefits of making that statement that pissed off both the Israelis and the more hardline Muslim states. But it was also this same meeting that got America's attention. They don't need a pro-everything puppet. They know this method doesn't work anymore. They chose Mahathir cos he's not known to be a puppet. This boosts his credibility as well as theirs.
Right now, Malaysians are likely to prefer aligning themselves closer to the US because it makes them look good and it makes Sg look bad.
They don't do it out of any deep seated love for the US. It IS a marriage of convenience but even marriage of conveniences brings up possible complications for close neighbours...
Right now, it enables them to take a more hardline stance in their relations to us and that affects our interests adversely. -
to be frank... malaysia's alignment with USA may or may not bring into effect any negative or positive effect between the 2 nations... It is severely dependent on the position of the USA....Originally posted by CX:I agree that there is often a backlash when Muslim leaders align themselves too closely with USA.
Pervez Musharraf found that out to his dismay... and USA has fallen short to endorsing his "referendum" 'cos they "can't verify the results"... This is a classic case of Muslim leaders who have failed to balance the 2 opposing interests.
I did say that Mahathir is opportunistic. He changes his mind constantly because of this, not because he's indecisive or inconsisent. If anything at all, his oppportunism is amazingly consistent.
He obviously sees the benefits of making that statement that pissed off both the Israelis and the more hardline Muslim states. But it was also this same meeting that got America's attention. They don't need a pro-everything puppet. They know this method doesn't work anymore. They chose Mahathir cos he's not known to be a puppet. This boosts his credibility as well as theirs.
Right now, Malaysians are likely to prefer aligning themselves closer to the US because it makes them look good and it makes Sg look bad.
They don't do it out of any deep seated love for the US. It IS a marriage of convenience but even marriage of conveniences brings up possible complications for close neighbours...
Right now, it enables them to take a more hardline stance in their relations to us and that affects our interests adversely.
even though maharaja's press and defence minister has been trying to imply otherwise... ( they must think we pretty dumb...) i dont buy one bit of it.... do they really think that if singapore and malaysia should come to blows... americans are gonna side them?? i seriously doubt it...
The key point here is to understand the USA's mind of thought.... true... right now.. they wanna play with maharaja... but that does not in any way... imply or suggest that maharaja is gonna get anything in return... although... that's the impression that maharaja wants to project to singapore....
The basic reason is once again.... a matter of national interest...
In my opinion.. the USA would probably prefer singapore and malaysia to remain status quo... there are many reason for that...
1.. it ensure a certain level of stability... along a key global straits... the economy is already in shit... this is hardly the time to entertain another war over a critical international straits...
2... as long as SG nor MAL is in any overwhelming advantages position... both side will need to dance to US tunes... or risk loosing out... in a way... as long as malaysia and singapore continue to exist... USA can play singapore card to threaten malaysia and vice versa to wrangle the biggest gains possible for america....
Maharaja obviously dealt himself a pretty bad move... now maharaja must continuously suck bushy's cock or risk getting into big trouble with SAF.... in fact.. the only winner in this case... is UNCLE SAM... maharaja lost... so did singapore... all becos a moron up north.. though opportunistic... got a vision shorter then his nose....
3.. USA cant afford to loose singapore to malaysia.. since that will be one less card to play against malaysia in times of crisis... and malaysia would then effectively control the world most important straits... Going by normal logic of divide and rule... permitting either singapore or malaysia to dominate the strategic straits where US projects its influence and millitary power... is a big NO NO for any superpower....
lastly... americans are no fools... they know damn well that malaysia is a mulsim nation... their trustworthyness is as thin as paper.... but as long as america got singapore in the region... USA are pretty much confident that they can make maharaja bend over... whenever... wherever required...
Furthermore... singapore's relationship with USA is built through a multi-tier system such as through australia..EU.. Japan and many other gobal players... through diplomatic... economic and millitary linkages..
last but not least... Singapore has good ties with isreal.. both countries has mutual common interest in seeing that american's position against muslims... are .... in place.... so to speak...
As to the recent spate of claims by maharaja's goon about good relationship with USA... i think they are just trying to comfort themselves and to reassure its people that singapore would not resort to force to settle mutual disputes becos malaysia is on 'good terms with america' and it is doubtful that SAF would dare to march up the peninsula as long as malaysia continue to pay tribute to Uncle sam... kowtow to the american flags once in a while... curse the radical muslims now and then... and who knows... ??? maharaja might do a good blow job on bushy's dick... that might even see malaysia getting some sort of 'reward'!!
Watever the case.. the only way that malaysia is gonna really really become a US ally... is actually quite simple... all they have to do is to denounce allah.... burn all the koran and tear down all the mosque in malaysia and all muslims become christians.... simple isnt it?
well... obviously not... wat i am saying is... the chances of malaysia and USA becoming allies is as good as the chances that malaysian muslims will denouce their religion... becos... its the malaysian religion... that is unbridgeable chasm to establishing long term partnership between US and MAL...
Even turkey has found that... despite being a secular state... its largely moslem faith has make turkey a rather .... unwelcomed member in NATO.. EU and in its relations with USA....
malaysia.... is no where even near..... BUT having said all that... i must therefore see the situation as one of global politic... as long as you know the limitation of the game... it doesnt hurt to wait a while for a more favourable wind...... -
Hrm, so in this case, would Malaysia make use of this opportunity to buy arms that the US would not sell normally? Eg. AMRAAMs, Superhornets, etc. If they do, how would this affect SAF's arms developement/purchases?
-
Well... to be very frank... we dont know what issue maharaja intends to bring up in his meeting with bush.... thus the old adage position of SAF will have to apply.... that is... we must wait and see...Originally posted by Shotgun:Hrm, so in this case, would Malaysia make use of this opportunity to buy arms that the US would not sell normally? Eg. AMRAAMs, Superhornets, etc. If they do, how would this affect SAF's arms developement/purchases?
Watever cards maharaja intends to deal... it must be understood that one meeting.... even for a few hours.. have limitations and it really depends on USA's percieved usefulness of maharaja.... vis a vis... US position against muslims.. and other regional states including thailand and singapore.... plus the potential aftereffects.. and backlash.. which might appear in the shadows....
americans are no fools... they knew maharaja is opportunistic... but at this point of time... it will be useful to have a mouthpiece in the muslim world... so as to divide the muslim fratenity towards american advantage.... while at the same time... useful for domestic consumption to garner continual effort against 'terrorist'.
a divided enemy is always preferrable against a united foe... and america got 2 nice big stick to use against maharaja if he want to be naughty... the 2 stick are SAF and thai millitary...
As to providing arms to malaysia... i seriously doubt it... but it wont be totally bad for us... if malaysia can get AMRAAM.. then it automatically implied that SAF and RTAF will also have access to AMRAAM or US would risk loosing 2 good friend... in a region dominated by muslims... america dont need another middle east....
Watever it is... maharaja is gonna come out saying that he defended the palestinian cause.. and uncle sam is gonna come out saying that malaysia is with USA in against terrorism (which include palestinians)...
In short... the upcoming meeting will give a vomiting useless position... with regard to anti-terrorism or anything... maharaja will just simply try to claim good relationship... with his visit to america...which holds no water.... a wayang show....
finally.... there is questionable doubt in my mind.... if USA really wanna cultivate moderate islamic leaders... in malaysia... why talk to a dying old man who is fast heading for his final resting place in the ground.... when the designated future PM of malaysia badawi... seems rather silent... Badawi's silence during the conference on terrorist and the recent mahatir visit to USA is truely... deafening!!
[This message has been edited by tripwire (edited 06 May 2002).] -
This thread still around .. wow .. over 1 year already.
Anyway, what we all fail to realize is that for our dear friends up north, their number one piority is job creation. Whether Dr M is serious about all that terrorism shit is debateable. But his trip to USA will be with 100+ businessmen. you can be sure that there will be more business deals signed than actual mutual defense pacts.
The shooting war may not have begun, but the economic war is in full swing.
By the way, can any one let me know what will the Australian AF jets up north in Butterworth do in case of us invading? Will they fight against us under the FPDA? -
hey all. i'm doing a project analysing singapore's military capabilities and our chances of 'victory' against our nice northern neighbour up there... thought this would be a nice place to get ideas. =P doing this proj coz i realised so few ppl know anything more than what a SAR-21 is and other stuff like that. and for them to know would probably boost some morale =P
i dont know about malaysia and US arms though. recently malaysia bought up a few polish tanks similar to T72s and is now producing T-84s, which are upgraded T80s. they've looked at the SU-30 fighter and the igla SAM. Doesnt all this seem russian to you? and all these new equipment means we're facing MBTs in future conflicts... what are we gonna do about it????
And as for the australian fighters.. i wouldnt know though. Malaysia is part of the FPDA as well. fighting against someone who you allied with?? but in the first place s'pore and m'sia are allied under the FPDA as well. but i think the FPDA is there only to enhance training possibilities. if it runs deeper than that i'm not too sure. its supposed to, but well... anything can happen. -
Well, why would the Aussies fight against Singaporeans? Aussies are more friendly with Singapore than Malaysia. Furthermore, it will be big trouble for Australia, New Zealand and America alike if Singapore falls under Muslim (esp fanatical) control. RAAF at most would not be involved in anything, if they are going to be dragged into a war, I am 101% sure they will be on Singapore's side.Originally posted by kenhor:This thread still around .. wow .. over 1 year already.
Anyway, what we all fail to realize is that for our dear friends up north, their number one piority is job creation. Whether Dr M is serious about all that terrorism shit is debateable. But his trip to USA will be with 100+ businessmen. you can be sure that there will be more business deals signed than actual mutual defense pacts.
The shooting war may not have begun, but the economic war is in full swing.
By the way, can any one let me know what will the Australian AF jets up north in Butterworth do in case of us invading? Will they fight against us under the FPDA? -
Haa~ well tripwire ...you can reinterpret it =) Their mascort is a tiger =) so there are many ways to skin themselves tooOriginally posted by tripwire:Latest... from the papers... maharaja says that there are more then one way to skin a cat (singapore lah... the lion city)....
So it would appear that the lion city has just become the cat city in mahatir's eye.... so much for mutual respect hahahahaaa.....
Looks like this singapore cat.... needs to seriously wake up and set up some mouse traps against those northern rats.... -
Haa~ well tripwire ...you can reinterpret it =) Their mascort is a tiger =) so there are many ways to skin themselves tooOriginally posted by tripwire:Latest... from the papers... maharaja says that there are more then one way to skin a cat (singapore lah... the lion city)....
So it would appear that the lion city has just become the cat city in mahatir's eye.... so much for mutual respect hahahahaaa.....
Looks like this singapore cat.... needs to seriously wake up and set up some mouse traps against those northern rats.... -
A project analysing singapore's military capabilities and our chances of 'victory' against our nice northern neighbour up there?Originally posted by recoil:hey all. i'm doing a project analysing singapore's military capabilities and our chances of 'victory' against our nice northern neighbour up there... thought this would be a nice place to get ideas. =P doing this proj coz i realised so few ppl know anything more than what a SAR-21 is and other stuff like that. and for them to know would probably boost some morale =P
i dont know about malaysia and US arms though. recently malaysia bought up a few polish tanks similar to T72s and is now producing T-84s, which are upgraded T80s. they've looked at the SU-30 fighter and the igla SAM. Doesnt all this seem russian to you? and all these new equipment means we're facing MBTs in future conflicts... what are we gonna do about it????
And as for the australian fighters.. i wouldnt know though. Malaysia is part of the FPDA as well. fighting against someone who you allied with?? but in the first place s'pore and m'sia are allied under the FPDA as well. but i think the FPDA is there only to enhance training possibilities. if it runs deeper than that i'm not too sure. its supposed to, but well... anything can happen.
What are you doing now? How did you get such a topic for a project? Perhaps if you just summarize the issues mentioned in this thread, you'd get enough words for your project, hahahhaaaa....forget about the research! -
at the first sign of war between singapore and malaysia....Originally posted by kenhor:This thread still around .. wow .. over 1 year already.
Anyway, what we all fail to realize is that for our dear friends up north, their number one piority is job creation. Whether Dr M is serious about all that terrorism shit is debateable. But his trip to USA will be with 100+ businessmen. you can be sure that there will be more business deals signed than actual mutual defense pacts.
The shooting war may not have begun, but the economic war is in full swing.
By the way, can any one let me know what will the Australian AF jets up north in Butterworth do in case of us invading? Will they fight against us under the FPDA?
RAAF will simply take off from butterworth and head straight north to thailand...
end of involvement...... -
What I think is that if the Aussies find out that we are going to invade malaysia, they will let the Malaysians know so as to keep us from breaking the peace.
The Aussies probably hate both us and the Malaysians equally ... remember when SingTel bought Optus, their military accused us of spying against them.
So they may want to prevent either of us from having war break out and cutting off their link with Asia (most flights in and out of Australia come from Singapore I think)
But under FPDA, if we invade Malaysia, for whatever reason, does Australia and UK HAVE to intervene? I do not know what is the exact wording of the treaty ... anyone with any idea on the EXACT text .. we can talk about interpretation later. -
well. i've done quite a bit. if i have a lot of statistics will the ISA come down on me? =POriginally posted by Eyezer:A project analysing singapore's military capabilities and our chances of 'victory' against our nice northern neighbour up there?
What are you doing now? How did you get such a topic for a project? Perhaps if you just summarize the issues mentioned in this thread, you'd get enough words for your project, hahahhaaaa....forget about the research!
and i found this. its pretty long.regarding aust-m'sia relations.
Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Malaysia Concerning the Status of Forces, done at Kuala Lumpur on 3 February 1997
NATIONAL INTEREST ANALYSIS
Date of Proposed Binding Treaty Action
The proposed Agreement with Malaysia concerning the Status of Forces (the Agreement) was signed on 3 February 1997 and shall enter into force on an exchange of notes between the Parties confirming that all domestic requirements to give effect to the Agreement have been met. It is anticipated that this exchange of notes will take place as soon as practicable in 1999.
Date of Treaty Tabling
11 November 1998.
Reasons for Australia to Become a Party to the Treaty
A Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is an internationally recognised means of handling the issues arising out of the presence of one country's visiting forces in the territory of another country. Australia has a SOFA concerning United States forces in Australia, a reciprocal SOFA with Papua New Guinea and a SOFA concerning Singaporean forces in Australia to complement the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) Agreement which provides SOFA-type provisions for Australian forces in Singapore.
As members of the FPDA, Australia and Malaysia have had an FPDA Agreement in force since 1971. However, in recent years that Agreement has not adequately provided coverage for the bilateral defence activities beyond those of the FPDA, particularly in the area of personnel exchanges. The proposed SOFA will address this discrepancy as it will apply to Australian forces engaged in all defence-related activities other than FPDA activities in Malaysia and to Malaysian forces engaged in all such activities in Australia. The 1971 FPDA Agreement will continue to apply to Australian forces engaged in FPDA activities in Malaysia.
The proposed Agreement will facilitate a range of bilateral defence activities by establishing standard conditions for the presence of Malaysian and Australian visiting forces on issues including jurisdiction, claims, immigration requirements and customs duties.
The Agreement is consistent with Australian policy on the development of Australia's substantial and diverse Defence relationship with Malaysia and its provisions are consistent with those of other SOFAs to which Australia is a party.
Obligations
The provisions in the Agreement are very similar to those contained in other SOFAs to which Australia is a party.
The Agreement sets out standard conditions concerning the rights of, and access to facilities used by, forces of Malaysia or Australia (Annex I) and the status of these forces (Annex II) when in the country of the other. These conditions include the following matters:
Annex I - Rights and Facilities
* Training (Section 1)
Authorisation to use predetermined land and sea areas, air space and facilities for training or exercises.
* Movement of forces, vessels, aircraft and motor vehicles (Section 2)
Freedom of entry to and egress from areas and facilities subject to the Receiving State's right to prescribe routes to be used.
Ships may visit ports with the Receiving State's consent; movements to be in accordance with normal international practice.
Freedom of movement for individuals for the purpose of normal administrative duties and private activities.
Passage of explosives (including ammunition) through ports in compliance with local laws; indemnity for port authorities and receiving Government; payment of compensation for damage resulting from any explosion.
Movement of forces, vessels, vehicles or aircraft under comparable conditions to forces of the Receiving State in respect of pilotage, harbour charges and all dues or tolls.
* Telecommunications systems (Section 3)
Authorisation to operate facilities for communication in a nonprejudicial manner to operation of public utilities and services; not to be used for non-official communications, which are to be transmitted by public telecommunications services at normal rates.
* Postal services (Section 4)
Authorisation to operate Post Offices; items not to be posted in contravention of the Receiving State's postal regulations including those concerning customs, health, dangerous goods, aviation security and quarantine.
* Local purchases (Section 5)
Commitment to purchase locally goods and commodities, if available at a suitable price and of the standard required.
* Employment of local civilians (Section 6)
Commitment to employ local labour subject to local labour laws (including industrial awards and determinations) provided that the labour is available and appropriately qualified.
* Use of public services and facilities (Section 7)
Authorisation to use public services and facilities on no less favourable terms than those available to other users in like circumstances.
* Importation and exportation (Section
Applicability of Receiving State laws and regulations concerning customs, taxation and other authorities.
Official documents under official seal exempt from customs inspection.
Importation duty and exportation exemptions for equipment, material, motor vehicles, provisions, supplies and other goods for the exclusive official use of the force; for personal effects, furniture and household goods upon arrival; and for one private motor vehicle.
Procedures for transfer of items imported free of duty to those not entitled to an exemption.
Importation and exportation exemption for Service authorities for all fuel, oil and lubricants exclusively for use in official motor vehicles, aircraft and vessels.
* Motor vehicles (Section 9)
Official motor vehicles, excluding hired motor vehicles, to carry registration number issued in Sending State and distinctive nationality mark, and to be registered if required.
Privately owned motor vehicles to be registered under, and subject to, local law.
* Driving licences and laws (Section 10)
Acceptance of Sending State licence for operation of official motor vehicles in the course of official duty.
Local laws to apply in all other respects to driving of motor vehicles.
* Personal taxation (Section 11)
Application of the Agreement of 20 August 1980 with Malaysia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income.
* Abuse of privileges (Section 12)
Sending State to render all assistance within its power to prevent abuse or misuse of the privileges granted and ensure proper discharge of obligations imposed by the Agreement.
* Occupation of land or buildings (Section 13)
Sending State to make a contribution to the Receiving State in respect of land or buildings occupied.
* Claims (Section 14)
Government-to-government claims waived for damage arising out of or in the course of the performance of official duties, for maritime salvage, and for damages for injury or death while engaged in the performance of official duties.
Consultation for settlement of claims for other damage arising out of performance of official duties.
Third party claims procedure: claims to be handled under the Receiving State's law in the same way as claims for harm attributed to the Receiving State's defence force; where the Sending State alone is responsible, cost of claims distributed in the proportion of 25:75 to the Receiving State and the Sending State respectively; where both Parties are responsible or responsibility cannot be attributed, then costs to be distributed equally between them; procedure not to apply in respect of third party motor vehicle insurance policy claims or contractual claims.
Assistance in exercising compulsory execution processes against private moveable property within an area of use by the Sending State.
Cooperation in procurement of evidence for a fair hearing and disposal of claims.
No claim of immunity against civil claims can be made by the members of the visiting force, the civilian component or their dependants.
* Annex II - Status of Forces
* Criminal jurisdiction (Section 1)
Service authorities of the Sending State have the right to exercise all jurisdiction conferred on them by the law of the Sending State over all of their visiting personnel who are subject to the service law of the Sending State. The authorities of the Receiving State have jurisdiction with respect to offences committed within the Receiving State and punishable by the law of the Receiving State.
Where there is concurrent jurisdiction, the Sending State has the right to exercise primary jurisdiction over visiting personnel in relation to offences in the course of official duty, offences solely against the security of the Sending State and offences against the person or property of other visiting personnel; the Receiving State has primary jurisdiction over all other offences.
Procedures for waiver of primary jurisdiction and requirement for sympathetic consideration of a request by the other party for waiver.
Procedures for co-operation, subject to the laws of the Parties, in the arrest of offenders, investigation of offences and collection and production of evidence.
Sending State not authorised to carry out the death penalty within Receiving State.
Guarantee of procedural safeguards common to the legal systems of the Parties, including a prompt and speedy trial.
* Security (Section 2)
Authorisation to maintain Service police for maintenance of discipline and to take reasonable measures, subject to the law of the Receiving State, to protect the security of the force.
* Compulsory service (Section 3)
Exemption from liability for compulsory service.
* Carriage of arms (Section 4)
Entitlement to possess and carry arms when authorised by their State's official's orders to do so. Carriage of arms outside facilities and areas used by the force to be made by arrangements between the appropriate authorities of the Parties.
* Exchange control (Section 5)
Concurrent application of foreign exchange regulations of both Parties for acts done in the territory of the Receiving State.
* Entry and exit (Section 6)
Members of the force exempt from visa and passport requirements; need only photo ID card and travel orders.
Members of the civilian component and dependants require passports, but are exempt from visa or entry permit requirements.
Exemption from laws and regulations on the registration and control of aliens; nonacquisition of any right to permanent residence or domicile.
Procedures to retire or separate from the force in the Receiving State.
Procedures in response to a request from the Receiving State for removal of an individual.
* Respect for local laws (Section 7)
Duty to respect law.
Duty to abstain from any activity inconsistent with the spirit of the Agreement.
Costs
This treaty action does not impose on Australia a requirement for any foreseeable financial expenditures. The proposed Agreement does set out a reciprocal regime for handling claims (see Claims (Section 14)). The proposed Agreement provides for certain exemptions from local fees and duties; these are also reciprocal.
Future Protocols
The proposed Agreement does not provide for the negotiation of any future legally binding instruments.
Implementation
The proposed Agreement is consistent with the Defence (Visiting Forces) Act 1963. The Act will provide authority for implementation of a number of provisions of the proposed Agreement but no legislative measures under the Act will be required.
The Agreement required consequential amendments to be made to the Migration Regulations to include Malaysia in the definition of ''SOFA forces member'' and ''SOFA forces civilian component member''; to the Customs Regulations to give effect to the provisions of the Agreement that give concessional treatment to the importation of personal effects, household goods, furniture and motor vehicles of members of the visiting force, civilian component or dependants; and to the Commonwealth Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act to give effect to the exemption in Annex 1, section 8(4)(a) of the Agreement, which allows members to import goods free of duty.
The Agreement will not effect any change to the existing roles of the Commonwealth and the States and the Territories.
Consultation
Information on the proposed Agreement was notified to the States and Territories through the Commonwealth-State Standing Committee on Treaties' Schedule of Treaty Action and no comment has been received to date. The Agreement does not require State or Territory cooperation for its domestic implementation.
Withdrawal or Denunciation
The Agreement can be unilaterally terminated on 180 days' notice by either Party. If the Agreement is terminated, then those provisions that confer rights or impose obligations on the Parties concerning claims, indemnities or private rights remain in force as if the Agreement had not been terminated. -
2 years actuallyOriginally posted by kenhor:This thread still around .. wow .. over 1 year already.
Anyway, what we all fail to realize is that for our dear friends up north, their number one piority is job creation. Whether Dr M is serious about all that terrorism shit is debateable. But his trip to USA will be with 100+ businessmen. you can be sure that there will be more business deals signed than actual mutual defense pacts.
The shooting war may not have begun, but the economic war is in full swing.
By the way, can any one let me know what will the Australian AF jets up north in Butterworth do in case of us invading? Will they fight against us under the FPDA?
and its getting better man! -
Who would u rather they spoke to? An underling so Mahathir can do the Anwar again?Originally posted by tripwire:finally.... there is questionable doubt in my mind.... if USA really wanna cultivate moderate islamic leaders... in malaysia... why talk to a dying old man who is fast heading for his final resting place in the ground.... when the designated future PM of malaysia badawi... seems rather silent... Badawi's silence during the conference on terrorist and the recent mahatir visit to USA is truely... deafening!!
[This message has been edited by tripwire (edited 06 May 2002).]
They probably know how sensitive he is to perceived "foreign subversions" and competition to his position.
Everybody else of importance has shut the hell up regarding Malaysian-US relations probably 'cos they don't wanna get implicated if it turns out bad. As is so often said... the domestic backlash can be quite nasty...
And Badawi isn't that young as well... seems like they prefer gerontocrats at the helm. Haven't they learnt a thing from the USSR? Hmm... but we're not that much better off anyway... Tony Tan and SM Lee are both not that young... -
Or maybe Maharajah is just working on immigration issues when he decides to Migrate to the US after he retires?
What about this Badawi guy, what kinda fella is he? -
Well..after going through most of the posted messages in here, this is the only message with some brains behind it. The rest is just plain singaporean kiasu mentality.
Guess since Singapore Armed Forces are amongst the best, well equipped and well trained forces in the world heck, let them spent all their money on those hardwares. 60+Falcons, 40+F5S/T< hundreds of tanks, Newer Frigates coming by 2009 and lots more huh, well all i want to say is GOOD, thank you for giving the arms maker money and profit out of something which u singaporeans are afraid of..hhmm..your own shadow.
I dont think malaysia need to fight singapore through military, just use some basic economic sense and u can see around u how many singaporeans are out of work. HOw can a modern soceity like Singapore come to terms to these in the near future...i doubt it. Look around u mate, power isnt everything, its the mind that matters. U win now with all your military might that u have but remember all big powers comes down earthward bound one day. Remember Roman? Russian and now currently..the Americans? superpowers one day...beggars another day.
Think before u starts becoming more kiasu. -
Self praise is international disgrace my friend....what makes u a judge that other comments here are w/o logical thinking?Originally posted by jingo:Well..after going through most of the posted messages in here, this is the only message with some brains behind it. The rest is just plain singaporean kiasu mentality.
If we do not upgrade, how are we going to face up to the military of the future? Friend...this is not the stone age where we fight with stones and clubs...duh
Guess since Singapore Armed Forces are amongst the best, well equipped and well trained forces in the world heck, let them spent all their money on those hardwares. 60+Falcons, 40+F5S/T< hundreds of tanks, Newer Frigates coming by 2009 and lots more huh, well all i want to say is GOOD, thank you for giving the arms maker money and profit out of something which u singaporeans are afraid of..hhmm..your own shadow.
Your usage of history here seems limited and badly quoted...pray tell me...when did the Singapore Armed Forces aim to be a regional or even a world power? Simple maths will tell you that it is not pausible...the army here is for self defense....and the best history to support the usage of a strong self defense force will be the of Switzerland which repluse the invasion of the mighty German machine in the WW2. The situation here is just a vunerable.
I dont think malaysia need to fight singapore through military, just use some basic economic sense and u can see around u how many singaporeans are out of work. HOw can a modern soceity like Singapore come to terms to these in the near future...i doubt it. Look around u mate, power isnt everything, its the mind that matters. U win now with all your military might that u have but remember all big powers comes down earthward bound one day. Remember Roman? Russian and now currently..the Americans? superpowers one day...beggars another day.
Thanks for your advice mate....you do what you do best and we do what we think fit to do
Think before u starts becoming more kiasu. -
Afraid of our own shadow??? I sure as hell hope so. Would help me sleep a lot easier at night!Originally posted by jingo:Well..after going through most of the posted messages in here, this is the only message with some brains behind it. The rest is just plain singaporean kiasu mentality.
Guess since Singapore Armed Forces are amongst the best, well equipped and well trained forces in the world heck, let them spent all their money on those hardwares. 60+Falcons, 40+F5S/T< hundreds of tanks, Newer Frigates coming by 2009 and lots more huh, well all i want to say is GOOD, thank you for giving the arms maker money and profit out of something which u singaporeans are afraid of..hhmm..your own shadow.
I dont think malaysia need to fight singapore through military, just use some basic economic sense and u can see around u how many singaporeans are out of work. HOw can a modern soceity like Singapore come to terms to these in the near future...i doubt it. Look around u mate, power isnt everything, its the mind that matters. U win now with all your military might that u have but remember all big powers comes down earthward bound one day. Remember Roman? Russian and now currently..the Americans? superpowers one day...beggars another day.
Think before u starts becoming more kiasu.
Think before you spew dismissive and ill-informed bullshit and catcrap.
Power does not flow exclusively out of the barrel of a gun, but we sure as hell don't wanna be looking down the barrel of someone else's pistol!
Sure, lots of people are outta work now due to 9-11 and a myraid of other factors ranging from political instabilities, cyclical economic recession and global economic restructuring... so tell us wise one: which one of these factors are within our control???
No threats? Well, its the eternal chicken and egg question: Threats are moderated precisely 'cos we're able to protect our vital interests with a credible deterrent. Try talking to the rest of Asia from a position of relative weakness... U think everyone else is peace-loving and reasonable like the rest of us here???
We're here talking about this not becasue we're jingoistic warmongers. We're not here 'cos we're "kiasu". We're here because we want to know and we value the informed opinions of others.
Shallow, simple-minded ignoramus like yourself are free to not be part of this discussion if you have nothing constructive to contribute.
------------------
I never saw a wild thing
sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.
D. H. Lawrence