Singapore At War
-
Altrex posted 28 March 2000 10:59 PM posted 14 April 2000 02:15 AM posted 14 April 2000 10:30 AMOriginally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Hey chillout, don be so damn farking critical
cosz it is obvious that singapore is at a disadvantage.Ok maybe 100% is too much but i believe to a certain extend singapore is undefendable.BTW other countries' military are(mostly)made up of regulars.SGs are well not trained as much....
VistureM posted 08 January 2001 11:04 PM
tripwire posted 22 February 2001 12:09 AM
For ur info, those are some good posting on this topicÂ… pls read them b4 u start commentin...... -
... the power of local propaganda.Originally posted by NDU:we did have Best pilot from the Top gun, best diver in Navy seal courses etc!!!!!! Go and get more information on these area b4 u gave this comment!!! -
Please understand that a regular army is not neccessarily better trained or better equiped comparatively gainst a NS army.Originally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Hey chillout, don be so damn farking critical
cosz it is obvious that singapore is at a disadvantage.Ok maybe 100% is too much but i believe to a certain extend singapore is undefendable.BTW other countries' military are(mostly)made up of regulars.SGs are well not trained as much....
A regular army is also made up of man who may have families, have feelings and some though brandishing smart uniforms and talk loud can also be a coward, and regulars desertion from a regular unit is pretty common things in times of war as well as in peace anywhere around the world.The time of the samurai code of warriors honor are long history liow.
example: singapore compare against malaysia or Isreal against most if not all the other arab nations.who do u think is better equipped?
In fact, regular army can be ill trained, ill equipped and suffer from poor leadership and morale as well, due either to poor funding or corruption.
Many of the world's so called regular armies are also suffering from a lack of actual war experience like SAF in view of the lack of major conflicts. including many countries regular army in our neighbourhood.
War experience from one war need not neccessarily be applicable in another war against another enemy using different weapons under a totally different terrain and leadership.
War experience in fact could have negative effect as well as positive effect on an army's performance.
With the constant evolution in military technology and strategy, experience from yesterday's war could be useless or worst, lead to an army's destruction.
example, the Hun's invasion of the roman empire, the romans are so used to set battle and boast an unmatchable experience in such battle tactic for over 400 years of endless war was helpless against the Hun's raiding strategy on horsebacks.
A more recent example is from the gulf war, the IRAQIs after 8 long years of war with iran is so used to the idea of ground warfare that when the americans came with bombers and fighter planes instead of ground troops. the IRAQIs were stumped and were totally paralysed and subject to open molesting by allied forces while its million soldier looks on from the ground in disbelief.
And was not the iraqi army experienced?? i think they can be considered as veterans. yet the veterans are squished like ants by young hot rod inexperience american pilots, many of them who are in the 20s and were probably sucking milk during the vietnam war,where their only experience in combat is in a simulator!! -
Originally posted by eye:
Let me be frank. malaysia is different from singapore. in terms of size, population and everything else.
certain military options which are available or suitable to malaysia may not be applicable to singapore which is an island nation with little land and resources.
each country must determine its best defence strategy base on their respective strength and weakness. malaysia's 'peaceful' military posturing is in my view a mere reflection of such a consideration by malaysian leaders. likewise, singapore's 'aggresive' military posturing was a reflection of its leaders consideration of its strength and weakness.
Posturing is merely sending a message of sort, but such messages can be misleading or even with an evil intent. even declared intention or posturing could be faked.
singapore's aggressive stance could actually be a result of strong desire for peace rather then for war. if singapore really wanna wack malaysia, wouldnt it be stupid to appear aggresive and put malaysia on alert??
on the other hand, malaysia's 'peaceful' posturing could actually be misleading as it hopes to 'disarm' malaysia's enemy's vigilance. and in this endless war dance, singapore's aggressive stance might be considered as a signal to malaysia that singapore will not let down its guard no matter how 'peaceful' a posturing malaysia may take.
one thing we must all understand is that, posturing can be changed quickly, a defensive posturing can quickly become aggressive if suddenly all the military units are moved suddenly to the border. on the other hand military competency, skill and knowledge cannot be gained in a few days.
and no matters how much both singaporeans and malaysians may have desired strongly for peace. often, its the small group of man up there in the leadership that decides on war or peace. and once one side starts shooting, the other side will automatically shoots back and soon war between 2 groups of leaders ends up on everyones lap.
sad thing is, many of those who have no choice in the decision of peace or war will have corpses in their family while the leaders would simply be talking brave.
But allow me to reciprocate your kind intentions. singapore have many high tech weapons, i think many malaysians knew that, but ever question why did singapore have over 20,000 anti tank weapons including MILAN, HELLFIRE and SPIKE ATMs when malaysia only have around 60 tanks?? whats more puzzleing is that the malaysian tanks are light tanks, but singapore ATMs are made for BIG GIANT HEAVY WEIGHT TANKS aka MBTs.
my conclusion, SAF wasnt geared simply towards attacking malaysia.Dear everyone who have posted on this forum,
First of all let me just declare that im a Malaysian (and Malay) so that people would know where my views are coming from.
I am not here to pick a fight with any of you but just to present my opinion on what have been posted on this particular forum.
First of all, relations between Singapore and Malaysia will continue to have turbulent moments for quite sometime due to our history. We used to be one country which later acrimoniously broke up. But just remember this: There will always be politicians who will talk nonsense (usually from our side) and those that are more than happy to capitalise on the turbulence between Malaysia and Singapore (to some extent I think both sides are guilty of this). But thats all to it. No one gets physically hurt. Period.
Anyway, to some extent, Malaysians nowadays are less succeptible to manipulation by politicians from the gov. after Anwar's case (but they could still be manipulated by those from the opposition i think).
Now regarding any potential conflict btween Malaysia and Singapore.
I think it is clear from Malaysian defence spending pattern (how much we spend overall and what we buy), our training (minimal joint arms, fibua and amphib)and our dispositions (units scattered all over the country in peace time formation, armour forces on all approaches to KL rather than bunched in Johore) we do not intent to ever use force on Singapore. And I think Singapore leaders (mil and gov) know about this too.
SAF capabilities are known to everyone in the region. We never tried to fully match SAF capabilities but only try counter them in a limited manner (i.e. limited number new long range arti , sams, atgw ) even when SAF clearly develops offensive capabilities to be directed against Malaysia (i.e. Combined arms divisions, Heliborne trained inf, Amphib trained inf, long range Arty, New LSTs, Attack Helicopters). These are capabilities designed to rapidly attack & destroy our forces and hold land without prior warning.
I understand from your defence doctrine that these are essential capabilities but I think the quantity of assets and training SAF have has crossed the line between having a deterrent force (If you attack me you will suffer) to a threatening force(I will and can attack you any time). It is also becoming more and more provocative.
From looking at our purchase of naval and aviation assets, it is clear in my opinion that our threat orientation is towards the Spratly Island and dealing with LIC.
We bought frigates with close in AD weapons and fast corvettes (second hand by the way) simply because our navy is hard pressed to maintain a credible detterent force in the Spratly area. We rushed into buying some of these assets and were very annoyed when they were delivered late as we (i.e. our navy commandos)were very exposed in the Spratlys.
It could also be noted that the new Naval base for the proposed Sub Force will be in Sabah, East Malaysia.
Our navy simply do not have the resources to put a strong and credible blockade without exposing our territory. We just have short of enough vessels (to illustrate, during the Sipadan crisis, our assets were streched really thin).
As for our fighters, our principal strike fighters (the FA-1
is geared towards Maritime Strike with the MIG-29s providing air cover. The Migs were purposely modified recently to allow them to provide sufficient air coverage over the South China Sea.
The unprotected bases such as Lumut Naval Base, Kuantan AF & Naval base and Butterworth AF base are clearly signs to Singapore and SAF that these assets are not directed towards Singapore. Our aircraft are only parked in sun shelters not too dissimilar from a car garage (no hardened shelters). All our bases (Lumut, Kuantan, Butterworth + army bases)and facilities (i.e. EW radars) does not have medium or long range air defense.
Our officers are trained and exposed enough to know that these assets are sitting ducks to Singapore but I think the goverment have decided long ago that this will be a sign of our goodwill.
What more do Singapore wants as a sign that we will never use force on them?
We do not have illusions that our Armed forces is the mightiest in the region capable of destroying anyone (nor do we aspire or profess to be one).
And we do not want to try matching SAF simply for the fact our money is simply needed for development.
What is my point from writing this post?
Stop thinking that Malaysia poses a serious military threat to Singapore. We never were and hopefully never will.
But if Singaporeans continue to treat Malaysia as a military threat even when all the signs given is that we are not,it might become a self fulfilling prophesy simply because we also need a deterent against all potential threats (in this case the SAF threat is real). It also provides fuel for those who want to capitalise on our turbulent relation.
If you want to compare strenght of armed forces, do it with another country. We were never in a contest with Singapore.
Force would not make our relations smoother.
Should there be anyone offended by my post, im sorry as i do not mean any offense.
Thank You.
Note to all readers: All the above opinions were based on publicly available information that i have inferred from.
[This message has been edited by eye (edited 14 April 2001).] -
Dear tripwire,Originally posted by tripwire:Please understand that a regular army is not neccessarily better trained or better equiped comparatively gainst a NS army.
A regular army is also made up of man who may have families, have feelings and some though brandishing smart uniforms and talk loud can also be a coward, and regulars desertion from a regular unit is pretty common things in times of war as well as in peace anywhere around the world.The time of the samurai code of warriors honor are long history liow.
example: singapore compare against malaysia or Isreal against most if not all the other arab nations.who do u think is better equipped?
In fact, regular army can be ill trained, ill equipped and suffer from poor leadership and morale as well, due either to poor funding or corruption.
Many of the world's so called regular armies are also suffering from a lack of actual war experience like SAF in view of the lack of major conflicts. including many countries regular army in our neighbourhood.
War experience from one war need not neccessarily be applicable in another war against another enemy using different weapons under a totally different terrain and leadership.
War experience in fact could have negative effect as well as positive effect on an army's performance.
With the constant evolution in military technology and strategy, experience from yesterday's war could be useless or worst, lead to an army's destruction.
example, the Hun's invasion of the roman empire, the romans are so used to set battle and boast an unmatchable experience in such battle tactic for over 400 years of endless war was helpless against the Hun's raiding strategy on horsebacks.
A more recent example is from the gulf war, the IRAQIs after 8 long years of war with iran is so used to the idea of ground warfare that when the americans came with bombers and fighter planes instead of ground troops. the IRAQIs were stumped and were totally paralysed and subject to open molesting by allied forces while its million soldier looks on from the ground in disbelief.
And was not the iraqi army experienced?? i think they can be considered as veterans. yet the veterans are squished like ants by young hot rod inexperience american pilots, many of them who are in the 20s and were probably sucking milk during the vietnam war,where their only experience in combat is in a simulator!!
I agree regulars may not be as well of as a NS army. Due to some reasons, they may not get decent equipment or proper training even if they are regulars.But a huge % of our soldiers are NS ppl so i am saying that without regular training they may get rusty, no longer fit etc. About the iraqi army defeated by air-raids.....hmmm....I think its more due to tactical and equipment inferiority.They are not prepared 4 air strikes and thus are defeated easily. Thanks 4 ur interest in my posts.Ur comments are appreciated unlike UND's -
I mean NDU'sOriginally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Dear tripwire,
I agree regulars may not be as well of as a NS army. Due to some reasons, they may not get decent equipment or proper training even if they are regulars.But a huge % of our soldiers are NS ppl so i am saying that without regular training they may get rusty, no longer fit etc. About the iraqi army defeated by air-raids.....hmmm....I think its more due to tactical and equipment inferiority.They are not prepared 4 air strikes and thus are defeated easily. Thanks 4 ur interest in my posts.Ur comments are appreciated unlike UND's -
Dear NDU,Originally posted by NDU:Over here we are all referring to ‘if we emerge a war with a country that’s near to us, or within our region!. What type of knowledge or information u have to prove that they are better then our NSF( NS…. Those serve 2 or 2 ½ yr soldiers) remember this, rite now im not even mention abt our ‘regulars soldiers’.
In military term, it does not mean that if u r regulars u r better! (of coz experience do count…. Im ex-regulars as well!!!!!) Our SAF do provide good and sufficient trainin for every individual to become a SOLDIER, maybe rite now the trainin may be defer from what I got (10+ yrs ago) however, the current SAF have change their focus on physically to ‘thinking soldiers’. If u tryin to said others countries providing better training then Singapore( I mean our neighboring country) then I think u r tokin cock down here! Do u know that our SAF have regularly send our troops for over sea training, this included ex and upgrading courses. Do u think our neighboring can afford to do so…. Yes, maybe they can, but this only to a certain extend…. Do u know that SAF in term of weapon, technologies etc are much more better then our neighboring countries???? Do you know that we have more active soldiers then them? Do u know………. Think theres too much information u need to find out b4 u can comment on’ Singapore is undefendable!!!!’
Imagine, during gulf war, u think our governments wanna see that to happen to Singapore as well??? Pls lahÂ…. Use ur head and thinkÂ…. DonÂ’t open ur mouth without thinkn!!!
Btw if u r referring to the size of Singapore that gave u the idea that we are to small to emerge in war, then I tellÂ…. U r totally wrong!!! Go n get some information on Israeli !!!! and, for what I know, if there is a war, Singapore will definitely not goin to fight ON OUR LAND!!! if this gonna happenÂ…. By then we are all dead duck liao!!!! ThatÂ’s why we are so emphasis on our air forcesÂ…. Go and read others ppl comments on this topic and u will get some good information on these area!!!
Last but not least, if u r saying our regulars r not so compatible with others countryÂ… then I got no choice but to fuck u againÂ… yes, I do agree that not all regulars are giving their best to the organization. However, there are still lots of them who has not only proved to the country that they are outstanding/best but to the world as well. we did have Best pilot from the Top gun, best diver in Navy seal courses etc!!!!!! Go and get more information on these area b4 u gave this comment!!!
anyway, after reading ur post... it shown nothing but u r still GREEN
U may think i am green maybe i am but I think u are some1 wif too much confidence in our armed forces. BTW war is not just bout superior training(if SG is soooo good), equipment is definitely an advantage.But SG
defending(i don believe SG would willingly go offensive)is quite different i believe SG depends too much on other countries and our neighbours are hostile.We are unlikely to get aid from em.So SG without the ability to survive on its own wif out food + water.
BTW how tactically effective are our senior officers are unproven.So i believe u are too cocky and overconfident.BTW i am airing my views and welcome ppl to 'enlighten' me. Try not to be offnsive next time....ok~? -
eh...NDU.....I know you have "good" intentions to teach or "brainwash" Dyc3d@r9 on being positive towards our defence capabilities but I suggest you should talk in a less rowdy way. In all your post you just swear and scold everyone who think negatively. Furthermore, the points you give sounded more like some propaganda (as IO has quoted) than solid facts.
I dunno if you are really so garang or so positive about the SAF and SG's defence (Hopefully you really are) but you comments are so "harsh". I even suspect that you are some foreign impersonator trying to upset this topic with the so-call "Singaporean arrogance" that our neighbours tot we had.
Do you know that by the comments you made, you are no better off than a certain "SNAFU" that took part in this topic earlier on. You sounded quite immature leh.
Just tone down an give everyone a chance lah!
Why all the flaming? -
hahahaaha isit.... Actually in real life, im like that alsoÂ…. Tryin to change liao lahÂ….. u know whatÂ…. Although iv left the forces for quite sometime but im still behaving like a crazy sgtÂ… sigh sigh sighÂ…Â… thanz for the remindinÂ….Originally posted by Silenthunter:eh...NDU.....I know you have "good" intentions to teach or "brainwash" Dyc3d@r9 on being positive towards our defence capabilities but I suggest you should talk in a less rowdy way. In all your post you just swear and scold everyone who think negatively. Furthermore, the points you give sounded more like some propaganda (as IO has quoted) than solid facts.
I dunno if you are really so garang or so positive about the SAF and SG's defence (Hopefully you really are) but you comments are so "harsh". I even suspect that you are some foreign impersonator trying to upset this topic with the so-call "Singaporean arrogance" that our neighbours tot we had.
Do you know that by the comments you made, you are no better off than a certain "SNAFU" that took part in this topic earlier on. You sounded quite immature leh.
Just tone down an give everyone a chance lah! Why all the flaming?
[This message has been edited by NDU (edited 06 May 2001).]
[This message has been edited by NDU (edited 06 May 2001).] -
To Illegal Operation,Originally posted by Illegal Operation:... the power of local propaganda.
Why I said all these, coz I did have friends who came out to be ‘iron man’ award from U.S Navy seal course, you can also check with ur friends (if any of them from diving unit) isit true that till now, all singapore navy personal whom have attended the seal course had never ‘ring the bell’ b4….. as for the best pilot in U.S top gun school its actually came out in newspaper in a few years back…. -
Btw, our SAF is to ensure we have the capability to defend ourself!!! Singapore will never challenge or provoke others and get herself into a war….. although it may be true that others may seen hostile to us. perhaps, they have the same feelin toward us as well. Hence, SAF have been active in upgrading our equipments and purchasing of latest and lethal weapon. However, whatever the SAF do is just to ensure that we are well ahead of some nearby countries. Maybe u will get to know ‘SAF better’ only after u have enlisted. Don’t mislead by others comment on how ‘fuck-tup the SAF is’. Try to find out urself I can say that lots of us have a bad impression on SAF even b4 we get into it and start fucking here and there…..…… and im not over confident on our SAF!!!! Maybe due to the nature of job scope I have during my navy day, and the amount of information we get from our intelligent department, we are in fact much better then the country at south and north. Try to thin of it, why are we living so ‘peacefully’ for the past 30 yrs? If our forces was not solid enough do u think we can live so happily till now???Originally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Dear NDU,
U may think i am green maybe i am but I think u are some1 wif too much confidence in our armed forces. BTW war is not just bout superior training(if SG is soooo good), equipment is definitely an advantage.But SG
defending(i don believe SG would willingly go offensive)is quite different i believe SG depends too much on other countries and our neighbours are hostile.We are unlikely to get aid from em.So SG without the ability to survive on its own wif out food + water.
BTW how tactically effective are our senior officers are unproven.So i believe u are too cocky and overconfident.BTW i am airing my views and welcome ppl to 'enlighten' me. Try not to be offnsive next time....ok~?
For the past few postin of my it seen like ‘hot’ becoz the first postin u had was not true…. After I know that u are just a little boy I did tone down my ‘fire’ as well… but pls don’t underestimate ourself. Actually I really hope u can get into some siong siong unit and get more ‘insight’ information on our SAF….
cheers -
Btw, our SAF is to ensure we have the capability to defend ourself!!! Singapore will never challenge or provoke others and get herself into a war….. although it may be true that others may seen hostile to us. perhaps, they have the same feelin toward us as well. Hence, SAF have been active in upgrading our equipments and purchasing of latest and lethal weapon. However, whatever the SAF do is just to ensure that we are well ahead of some nearby countries. Maybe u will get to know ‘SAF better’ only after u have enlisted. Don’t mislead by others comment on how ‘fuck-tup the SAF is’. Try to find out urself I can say that lots of us have a bad impression on SAF even b4 we get into it and start fucking here and there…..…… and im not over confident on our SAF!!!! Maybe due to the nature of job scope I have during my navy day, and the amount of information we get from our intelligent department, we are in fact much better then the country at south and north. Try to thin of it, why are we living so ‘peacefully’ for the past 30 yrs? If our forces was not solid enough do u think we can live so happily till now???Originally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Dear NDU,
U may think i am green maybe i am but I think u are some1 wif too much confidence in our armed forces. BTW war is not just bout superior training(if SG is soooo good), equipment is definitely an advantage.But SG
defending(i don believe SG would willingly go offensive)is quite different i believe SG depends too much on other countries and our neighbours are hostile.We are unlikely to get aid from em.So SG without the ability to survive on its own wif out food + water.
BTW how tactically effective are our senior officers are unproven.So i believe u are too cocky and overconfident.BTW i am airing my views and welcome ppl to 'enlighten' me. Try not to be offnsive next time....ok~?
For the past few postin of my it seen like ‘hot’ becoz the first postin u had was not true…. After I know that u are just a little boy I did tone down my ‘fire’ as well… but pls don’t underestimate ourself. Actually I really hope u can get into some siong siong unit and get more ‘insight’ information on our SAF….
cheers -
although a huge percentage of our guys are NSmen with no regular training, it must be noted that training is not such a simple subject.Originally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Dear tripwire,
I agree regulars may not be as well of as a NS army. Due to some reasons, they may not get decent equipment or proper training even if they are regulars.But a huge % of our soldiers are NS ppl so i am saying that without regular training they may get rusty, no longer fit etc. About the iraqi army defeated by air-raids.....hmmm....I think its more due to tactical and equipment inferiority.They are not prepared 4 air strikes and thus are defeated easily. Thanks 4 ur interest in my posts.Ur comments are appreciated unlike UND's
trainings can have a wide spectrum of different qualities and standard.
training could be for the purpose of learning a new skill or refreshing an old skill. the later obviously require less time then the former which will require proper guidance and a longer period of time to be proficient in it.
the question is not really how often we are trained but how well we are trained. it makes no sense charging up the hill everyday if u learn nothing after all these effort.
i can charge up the hill 100 times a day, but that does not make me a better or more competent soldier than someone who probably charge up the hill less the 5 times under a good instructor
so training technics, training design, training operations and training objectives such as the ICTs for the NSmen ensure a certain level of competency.
next, a regular army though regular could suffer from lack of training as well, either due to lack of funds, leadership, guidance, advisory or due to plain politicking.
Iraq lost the war becos it puts more faith on the army then in the air force, an experience they gained from the 8 year iran iraq war.
Iraq lost of the war, becos from its experience, air force has never won a single war against iran and neither has iranian air force won anything during the long 8 year war. -
everytime when people talk about singapore going to war, the first thing that they always ask is where are the food and water going to come from.Originally posted by Dyc3d@r9:Dear NDU,
U may think i am green maybe i am but I think u are some1 wif too much confidence in our armed forces. BTW war is not just bout superior training(if SG is soooo good), equipment is definitely an advantage.But SG
defending(i don believe SG would willingly go offensive)is quite different i believe SG depends too much on other countries and our neighbours are hostile.We are unlikely to get aid from em.So SG without the ability to survive on its own wif out food + water.
BTW how tactically effective are our senior officers are unproven.So i believe u are too cocky and overconfident.BTW i am airing my views and welcome ppl to 'enlighten' me. Try not to be offnsive next time....ok~?
I think food and water are not the most important thing in the event that singapore goes to war, simply because water and food can be bought in the international market. the key thing is can the RSN ships keep the sea line of communication (AKA shipping lane) free from enemy attack.
As long as the navy together with the air force can control the shipping lanes to singapore, we can ensure a quick and constant supply of war materials as well as medicine and basic food and water from the international market. While at the same time deny such access by our enemies and force them to run down their reserves especially in spareparts and ground their high tech weapons like warships and warplanes plus ammunition stockpile.
singapore's victory lies in the hand of our navy, it is great to know that our govt have finally awaken to the realization of the importance of warships and have begun to actively upgrading it through the purchase of submarines, MPA, stealth warships and many other project including inviting friendly nations to use our naval base with the purpose of increasing our deterence value. (do anyone think malaysia or even indonesia would dare attack singapore whenever there is a US carrier battle group berthing at CNB??)
War in present terms are no longer between 2 states or between a few states, WAR nowadays are an international and global affair. under such a situation, it is very beneficial to have alot of powerful friend around the world who though may not send troops to your aid, will do what they can to keep your country supplied while making the lives of your enemies difficult through global sanctions.
Lastly, there is nothing to be ashamed about seeking foreign help. there is nothing wrong in such a move, in fact, it will be stupid for anyone to think that they can stand alone in the dark. other then the super powers of the world, every other nations including all of the SEA nations are dependent on super power and first world nations for investment, market, technology, informations and Weapons!!
While it is always comforting to be able to rely on oneself, such as when we develope local defence technology product like FH2000 and SPIKE that is of comparable standard to the best in the world today. WE must realise that our lone effort may not be enough.
IN fact, no SEA nations are capable of producing its own fighter planes!! we are all reliant if not 100% dependent on foreign purchase of such items. so if singapore is too dependent on foreign aids, are not then all of the other SEA nations doing likewise?? how much stronger are they then compare to singapore in truth?? at least singaporeans can repair our own planes though we cannot produce the respective spare parts, while our neighbours have to send their fighter planes to singapore for major repair!!
It matters not how you win a war or deter an enemy. the important thing is you win the war and live to write the history whichever way you like and gets to trample on your enemy's grave. HONOR is meant for the victor PEACE belongs to the dead. -
The strength of the local tabloid lies in the ability to report news which they perceive as newsworthly.Originally posted by NDU:as for the best pilot in U.S top gun school its actually came out in newspaper in a few years backÂ….
The Singapore airport was recently struck off as the best airport in the world. I don't see it mentioned anywhere.
For every Rambo that emerges from the armed forces, there are a 1000 more lemons.. but we will never see chao keng lemons being featured in the tabloid. -
Why will I attack and ruin a country who has nothing to boost of but its human resources and an economy based largely on investments by MNC?Originally posted by NDU:If our forces was not solid enough do u think we can live so happily till now???
As death toll rises, I am effectively wiping out the same factor that incites me to launch the attack. Resources..
And that, is what I feel had kept Singapore peaceful. -
If our people do not curb that holier than thou attitude, no amount of defense capabilities will make neighbours less hostile.Originally posted by NDU:although it may be true that others may seen hostile to us. -
such things happens all around the world in many if not all the nations. which country got a thoudsand rambo and only one lemon??? in fact, it is the rarity of such rambos that makes them newsworthy and given high appraisal.Originally posted by Illegal Operation:The strength of the local tabloid lies in the ability to report news which they perceive as newsworthly.
The Singapore airport was recently struck off as the best airport in the world. I don't see it mentioned anywhere.
For every Rambo that emerges from the armed forces, there are a 1000 more lemons.. but we will never see chao keng lemons being featured in the tabloid.
if everyone is a rambo, then the lemon would be the one on the prime news instead.
u eat vegetable, i eat vegatable, many people eat vegetable, SO....what is so newsworthy about eating vegetable???
the media is use as a gel to glue the people into one nation by presenting selective information to the public. either by projecting a nations success or a national threat.
IN fact, no media is absolutely unbiase and truthfull 100%. even renowned media like TIMEs , NEWSWEEK and CNN plus hundreds of others in the same line has become so obsess with defending their 'free' and 'honest' reputations, that they vehemently deny others from equal opposite representation of their 'media position' by refusing to accept and publish counter-statments even when faced with the undeniable fact that they could be WRONG!.
because, a wrongful media is worthless garbage media. if the media continuously publish a story and then retract the story later when confronted with the truth. WHO is going to buy their media?? who will trust them??
SO for the sake of money and bonus and salary, it is not beyond the possibility of reality that the so call media may be lying for a bowl of rice.
so is this a fault of the media?? obviously NOT, they are like human like us, they need food and water and pay their bills. how can anyone fault them for doing what they feel is a best way to ensure their salary when we do the same ourselves.
WHO says that the media is the champion of freedom and democracy?? these are all pure publicity gimmicks to lure the people into buying their products. the same thing that your local chicken rice store is trying to do by convince you that his chicken rice is the best in the world or maybe his herbal soup can boost your virility.
so whose is at fault?? we lah, the masses and our idealistic idiotic timbuktu logic of the free media being the champion of democracy and freedom and suppressing our inner wisdom by thinking that reporters and all those who work for the media are angels who goes without food, water and money.
SO.... the local media is no less and no more honest or bias if you like when compared against CNN or TIMEs magazine. it is the consumer that must be smart enough to understand the real politik and economic aspect of life.
failing which, no point blaming the local media if you are simply pure dumb. -
WRONG!!! heehee.....Originally posted by Illegal Operation:Why will I attack and ruin a country who has nothing to boost of but its human resources and an economy based largely on investments by MNC?
As death toll rises, I am effectively wiping out the same factor that incites me to launch the attack. Resources..
And that, is what I feel had kept Singapore peaceful.
what kept the peace in singapore is real geopolitic, economics and the SAF.
the first is uncontrollable, geopolitic is played across the region and the world in a dangerous dance of giants trampling mad around each other along the dance foor while the small feets scamper around avoiding the falling foots.
the second is limited control, but is subjected to the rise and fall of the power of the unseen hand of free economics.
the last is controllable and is the one and only that can be reliably depended on to stand the ground in the event of the failure of geopolitic and economics.
the value of singapore far exceed its MNCs and world class labour force.
singapore alone with its miserably small GDP or GNP is nothing in the eyes of giant nations.
GENERAL MOTORS makes more money in one year then all singaporeans AND malaysians make in 2 years!! America has many companies the size of GM. so what is so great about singapore or malaysia??
thus to justify our right to survive, singapore and even malaysia or indonesia must prove to the giants that our value went beyond pure economics, money, profit and market in the global game of power, war, politics and idealogy.
THE SAF strengthens singapore govt's hand in representing singapore on the global stage where a country's value in the eyes of superpowers are on the basis of military muscles and money stockpile. IN fact, there are many nations in african which are larger then malaysia, but u dont see the superpowers giving them a damn. becos they are poor and weak. -
wrong. it is not our holier than thou attitude that is causing all these animosity. rather it is the sore red eye infection of jeolousy of our neighbours that is giving rise to the problem.Originally posted by Illegal Operation:If our people do not curb that holier than thou attitude, no amount of defense capabilities will make neighbours less hostile.
it is their attitude of i am bigger then u, and statements like 'little red dot' that really *wham* home the message to all singaporeans of the importance of SAF admist a sea of red eye demons. -
The greatest example of a holier than thou attitude is one for which we always think every soul is jealous and long to be like us. Why should I be jealous of a country where the bulk of the population live in pigeon holes and pays through their nose for a car and...(fill in your laments here) if I could own 2 cars that cost as much as a COE, a house with a garden and backyard, and earn enough for me and my family to live comfortably in my country?Originally posted by tripwire:wrong. it is not our holier than thou attitude that is causing all these animosity. rather it is the sore red eye infection of jeolousy of our neighbours that is giving rise to the problem.
If that is true, then Singapore would have been the country with the highest number of migrants. Instead, we have foreign workers who treat our country as nothing more than a stepping stone to let them scale to greater heights. They will leave gracefully the moment our economy shows signs of instability. -
I am sorry, I don't think I grasp your point. Let's put it this way, if we have petroleum gushing out from underground, it makes helluva good sense to want to take over our land.Originally posted by tripwire:THE SAF strengthens singapore govt's hand in representing singapore on the global stage where a country's value in the eyes of superpowers are on the basis of military muscles and money stockpile. IN fact, there are many nations in african which are larger then malaysia, but u dont see the superpowers giving them a damn. becos they are poor and weak.
On the contrary, we don't. Instead, its human resource we boost of. Massacring humans in times of war will bring the nation's economy to ruin. With no economy, no human resource, Singapore is a tiny piece of barren land not worthly of attention. -
The cost of living in singapore is high, that is what u really want to say. there is nothing worth lamenting about the high cost of living, because it is the result of high salary. the wealth effect if u understand economics.Originally posted by Illegal Operation:The greatest example of a holier than thou attitude is one for which we always think every soul is jealous and long to be like us. Why should I be jealous of a country where the bulk of the population live in pigeon holes and pays through their nose for a car and...(fill in your laments here) if I could own 2 cars that cost as much as a COE, a house with a garden and backyard, and earn enough for me and my family to live comfortably in my country?
If that is true, then Singapore would have been the country with the highest number of migrants. Instead, we have foreign workers who treat our country as nothing more than a stepping stone to let them scale to greater heights. They will leave gracefully the moment our economy shows signs of instability.
the problem is never the high cost of living but rather the equitable distribution of economic goods and services.
The answer is simple, too much money chasing a limited number of resources within a set geographical boundary. with little land to spare, we live in high rise flats, with little space available, we have to restrict the number of cars on the road.
yet dispite all of this negative points, why did many singaporeans still choose to stay and many migrants knocks on our door?? because of the lure of opportunity, wealth and prospect?
while other countries can boast of cheap car, cheap land, cheap house and lots of cheap stuff if not entirely FREE stuff. why isit that not everyone migrated to this land of utopia? the land of cheap and plenty??
because either the pay is low or the taxation is high, ultimately leading to low disposable income. its not possible to have high salary and low cost of living hand in hand unless u are at the top of the salary scale in the area, another possibility that is possible is in arab nations where the govt can subsidise everything with money pouring out of the oil field.
otherwise, normal logic would see a huge influx of migrants to this land of plenty unless there is a strict restriction against migrants as the presence of migrants automatically increase labor supply and depress wages and the increase in demand for food and basic neccessities push up the cost of living in the form of inflation.
the influx would continue until either a restriction is in place OR when the economy reaches a new level of equilibrium that will see the land of plenty and cheap turning into the land of the scare and expensive like singapore, japan, hongkong and all the metropolis around the world.
jeolousy?? jeolousy give no reason, it has no logic, no understanding and no desire to accept the reality. jeolousy is simply pure non-sensical rage and hate which is usually kindered by a sense of self inferiority complex which leads to fear, then to hate and then to the lost of all logical faculty of the mind.
tell me, did malaysian felt that singaporeans are snobbish, carrying that attitude of i am holier than you attitude, a perception resulted from their own inferiority complex?
or was it from their own perception that singaporeans are not humble or subservient enough toward them in view of singapore's small size vis a vis the other nations.
so was singapore branded snobbish because we are so, or was it because other nations in view of singapore's size do not wish to accord us the equal mutual respect that all sovereign nations deserve?
in short, did we get branded snobbish because we have the pride and courage to demand being respected as equals among all nation irreguardless of our size? -
human resource is singapore's largest resource, but unfortunately nations goes to war not base on economic reasons alone.Originally posted by Illegal Operation:I am sorry, I don't think I grasp your point. Let's put it this way, if we have petroleum gushing out from underground, it makes helluva good sense to want to take over our land.
On the contrary, we don't. Instead, its human resource we boost of. Massacring humans in times of war will bring the nation's economy to ruin. With no economy, no human resource, Singapore is a tiny piece of barren land not worthly of attention.
singapore's geopolitical strategic location has been in the radar of all superpowers who desire to control the merchant shippings between the pacific and the atlantic.
secondly, nations can goes to war for reasons that borders the realm of insanity if not outright heresy to outsiders but perfectly alright for those in the war irreguardless whether there is economic basis for such a war.
that is why some people call war, madness. -
Educated Singaporean, especially those who worked overseas are leaving at such an alarming rate that our government had to urge them to come back.Originally posted by tripwire:yet dispite all of this negative points, why did many singaporeans still choose to stay and many migrants knocks on our door?? because of the lure of opportunity, wealth and prospect?
The US, Canada and New Zealand ranks among the countries with the highest migrants, not Singapore. Foreign Workers on work permit and migrants are 2 totally different things altogether.
Singaporeans are indeed a snoobish lot. The way many of our people behaves the moment we stepped on foreign land makes one wonder what we had gained from years of courtesy campaigns. Ask around. Tour operators can spot Singaporeans miles away.
tell me, did malaysian felt that singaporeans are snobbish, carrying that attitude of i am holier than you attitude, a perception resulted from their own inferiority complex?