Spend less on Defence?
-
How much money goes to Defence? Buy top of the line planes....then throw away after a few years......what a waste.
Better spend less and use the money for the people........eg NS can be reduced to ONE year.......top salaries of Cols, Generals cut to reasonable levels...reuse old weapons........
In return, spend more on health care, lower hospital bills, lower transport costs.....free education for all.....
It's time for a RE-THINK.... -
for your info, the average age of the planes you are refering to is about 20-30 years old. And i wun call that few years if i were you.Originally posted by Dr Who:How much money goes to Defence? Buy top of the line planes....then throw away after a few years......what a waste.
Better spend less and use the money for the people........eg NS can be reduced to ONE year.......top salaries of Cols, Generals cut to reasonable levels...reuse old weapons........
In return, spend more on health care, lower hospital bills, lower transport costs.....free education for all.....
It's time for a RE-THINK....
And as for tanks, they were used since the birth of the nation.Each of them have an average age of 60 years. They have been there even before you were sucking you thumb. And from an engineering point of view, those things are not exactly the safest things to drive abt.
As for rifles, you want something that keeps jamming all the time due to poor design age and fatique? If you do i salute you.
And if you talk abt NS, you have 3 months to learn all the basics and the rest of the time you are there to apply all them in practical. 2 years is barely enough to train a soldier if you ask me.
As for reusing old weapons, read the above . . . . .
Finally . . .please for goodness sake do your research before jumping the gun !!!!!
On the contrary it is time for you to re-think . . . . . -
As for the rest . . .i refuse to answer it in military nuts. Please repost your topic in speakers corner instead.
We will only discuss the military aspects here. -
Look, the Indon navy is ex-East German junks....
Their air force is not functional
their army are good for counter insurgency only
Why you need to arm yourself to the teeth?......there is no threat from anyone......except the JI bastards... -
this is a really bad case of under estimating your enemy.Originally posted by Dr Who:Look, the Indon navy is ex-East German junks....
Their air force is not functional
their army are good for counter insurgency only
Why you need to arm yourself to the teeth?......there is no threat from anyone......except the JI bastards...
what makes you think they are totally non functional ? Even with a few functional ships you can effectively blockade the whole straits of malacca . . .with mines and ships then what the hell are you going to use to deal with them? Sampans?
And while their planes may not be very well maintained, the last time i heard, quite a fair bit of them are still airworthy.
And indonesia have a 700 000 strong army. Even if they are 1/2 trained as you claimed they are, if they decide to do a major human wave some how, you want some 1/2 trained 1/2 farked singapore ns men to defend the shores?
Use your logic sometimes and read the news paper more often for goodness sake.
Oh if you have time, pls read sun tze art of war.
And the internet is a nice place to do research too. -
Yes, all nations should cut defence spending and practice disarmament. The money could go to more worthy causes like education and healthcare costs. Not to mention public transport.
-
I suspect that Dr. who is Malaysian, first he tell us that we should not kill or fight, that now tell us not to buy expensive new planes!!
All this wayang will do you no good, Dr. Who, afterall we are not the decision making on what we should buy?
And you think if you come here to TCSS will persuade Singaporean not to defend SG interest, you are even more naive than we think!!!
And to those chicken coward should just fxxk off from SG, if you are not even want to defend what is your, to protect your family etc
I , eventhough out of Mindef Reserve i.e. not recallable during the time of tension, will volunteer to bear arms to defend SG. -
while it's always a good wae to gain brownie points wif the ppl, wtf do u wish to use against the enemy(tat is, assuming if there is one in its most general sense possible)Originally posted by iveco:Yes, all nations should cut defence spending and practice disarmament. The money could go to more worthy causes like education and healthcare costs. Not to mention public transport. invades us????
not tat the Gov wont...it jus cant...u're not using buses as bombs when the enemy invades rite??? -
In the first place, there should be a UN resolution to cap armed service numbers to no more than 15 per cent of those eligible to vote. In this way, nobody is capable of invading anybody, and world peace is guaranteed.Originally posted by Lance_han:while it's always a good wae to gain brownie points wif the ppl, wtf do u wish to use against the enemy(tat is, assuming if there is one in its most general sense possible) invades us????
not tat the Gov wont...it jus cant...u're not using buses as bombs when the enemy invades rite???
A side note, the way the Jehovah's Witnesses are treated in Singapore seems to me like a mini Holocaust. Even Seoul has higher regard for them. -
hmm...the UN hasnt realli been at its peak nowadays....even china also heck care liao...wad makes u tink it will succeed???Originally posted by iveco:In the first place, there should be a UN resolution to cap armed service numbers to no more than 15 per cent of those eligible to vote. In this way, nobody is capable of invading anybody, and world peace is guaranteed. -
Try playing Nationstates. It is quite fun.Originally posted by Lance_han:well..good idea...but the world is not wad it seems nowadays... -
PC game???Originally posted by iveco:Try playing Nationstates. It is quite fun. -
Go to www.nationstates.net and create your own nation. Have fun.Originally posted by Lance_han:PC game??? 
-
looks good...gonna try it nowOriginally posted by iveco:Go to www.nationstates.net and create your own nation. Have fun. -
face it . . .un is weak now . . .not much more than an empty shell.
-
The purpose of the United Uations was to replace the defunct League of Nations that failed to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War. However, the UN is becoming almost like its predecessor these days as it's powerless to act in the event of international conflict. Some people never learn their lessons.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:face it . . .un is weak now . . .not much more than an empty shell. -
no tat...Originally posted by iveco:The purpose of the United Uations was to replace the defunct League of Nations that failed to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War. However, the UN is becoming almost like its predecessor these days as it's powerless to act in the event of international conflict. Some people never learn their lessons.
it's just like wad happens to us when we were once in school but after tat came out as working adults....we just return it to our "teacher" -
No offence to you, iveco, but your opinions bear similarities to pacificist theories that have been repeatedly disproved throughout history.
Let me rebut your theories categorically:
1) Theory of disarmament:Yes, all nations should cut defence spending and practice disarmament. The money could go to more worthy causes like education and healthcare costs. Not to mention public transport.
Disarmament has almost never worked in any case throughout history. All it takes is for one party to break the treaty and you have to start from scratch.
Germany did it before World War II and more recently, the USA broke the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia.
It's a easy thing to tell the World, let's make love not war. But do you seriously believe that while you throw down your weapons, everyone else is going to put down their guns too? We don't live in a perfect world.
2) Theory of Caps on Service Numbers:In the first place, there should be a UN resolution to cap armed service numbers to no more than 15 per cent of those eligible to vote. In this way, nobody is capable of invading anybody, and world peace is guaranteed.
This theory is flawed if only because different nations have different populations. For example, 15% of registered Malaysian voters is NOT equal to 15% of Singapore voters and we are nowhere near 15% of China's population (if they could vote).
Also, caps have been tried and failed, refer to history and you have the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 (before WWII). The treaty declared that signatories would keep their naval armament capped to a fixed ratio so as to avoid an arms race.
It officially failed when on December 29, 1934, the Japanese government gave notice that it intended to terminate the treaty. Its provisions remained in force until the end of 1936, and it was not renewed. We all know what happened next... -
The word Holocaust refers to the NAZI Genocide with regard to the Jews. It refers to the mass killing of the Jews or imprisonment in such poor conditions with the expectation that they would die eventually.Originally posted by iveco:A side note, the way the Jehovah's Witnesses are treated in Singapore seems to me like a mini Holocaust. Even Seoul has higher regard for them.
To compare Jehovah's witnesses to the Jews is flawed. We might imprison them but we definitely do not KILL them or lock them up and leave them without food, water or proper hygiene. -
+1Originally posted by CenturionMBT:for your info, the average age of the planes you are refering to is about 20-30 years old. And i wun call that few years if i were you.
And as for tanks, they were used since the birth of the nation.Each of them have an average age of 60 years. They have been there even before you were sucking you thumb. And from an engineering point of view, those things are not exactly the safest things to drive abt.
As for rifles, you want something that keeps jamming all the time due to poor design age and fatique? If you do i salute you.
And if you talk abt NS, you have 3 months to learn all the basics and the rest of the time you are there to apply all them in practical. 2 years is barely enough to train a soldier if you ask me.
As for reusing old weapons, read the above . . . . .
Finally . . .please for goodness sake do your research before jumping the gun !!!!!
On the contrary it is time for you to re-think . . . . . -
eh...the +1 is for...???Originally posted by hmsg:+1
-
Please don't expect the UN to be some all-knowing body with wide-ranging powers. The UN is only as effective as the member states want it to be. As long as every country seeks to put their own agenda ahead of the greater good, or unless the interest of the various states are congruent with the aim if the UN, the UN as an organisation can't do much..Originally posted by iveco:The purpose of the United Uations was to replace the defunct League of Nations that failed to prevent the outbreak of the Second World War. However, the UN is becoming almost like its predecessor these days as it's powerless to act in the event of international conflict. Some people never learn their lessons. -
Aerozapper: I get your drift on both the issue of disarmament and JWs. However, if you consider North Korea, the citizens are dying of starvation while millions of dollars are invested in nuclear weapons. The money could have been better spent getting food for the people. South of the border, conscription is practiced. However, Seoul makes provisions for conscientious objectors and that includes JWs. In Singapore, the JW community is treated like common crooks even though they have done no wrongs. It seems a little like discrimination to me.
Blockhead: Any member of the UN must be aware of its responsibilities. If it decides to flout rules and do things its own way, it is not being very responsible. -
Originally posted by iveco:
International law is seriously not as solid as some people may think. Fact of the matter is, there is no real enforcement. Sometimes, 'responsibility' can be a very flexible word, and so is 'obligation'.
Blockhead: Any member of the UN must be aware of its responsibilities. If it decides to flout rules and do things its own way, it is not being very responsible.[/b] -
Iveco, with respect to JWs, I understand where you're coming from, I was trying to point out that "Holocaust" was too strong a word as while it may be regarded as discrimination, the policy definitely does not require us to KILL them. The use of Holocaust is also inaccurate because in the years before WWII, the JW organisation actually SUPPORTED the Nazis discrimination against the Jews until the Nazis turned around and outlawed the JW as well.
Also, as for the part about Singapore discriminating against JWs, it should be noted that countries such as Canada, France, Greece and even the United States have on previous occasions also discriminated against this group. This is because the group is seen as a radical sect, even within main stream Christianity.
The reason they don't serve military service is because they believe in being "politically neutral".
They refuse to salute the national flag (or say the pledge), refuse participate in military service and refuse to vote. Their refusal to show allegiance to Singapore means that serving in Civil Defence or other uniformed organisations is out of the question too.
Part of their religion also deems blood transfusion to be unholy so they don't donate blood and even if some JW kid is bleeding on the surgeon's table, he can't accept blood.
I'm pointing out the facts, can you really say that our government is doing something that is wrong? I've debated it in my head repeatedly, while I don't really like the idea of imprisoning them, I don't see how a small country like us can accomodate a big group of them if they were allowed to spread. Are there any good alternatives to suppressing the group? What are they?