RMAF shopping for AEW&C
-
Dear Viper52,
Off the top of my head, none in the short to medium term, but then should we wait for one to appear before upgrading our defences and formulating a plan?
Remember, until 1940 Britain regarded Japan as not a short term threat to it's interests in Asia
I know, I can't think of any country either. But another point to note is that war strategy changes with technology. It may come to a point where having a buffer zone of 100km northwards can not guarantee singapore's safety from war damage.
If our strategy changes, I will definately prefered to have a strategy which would not alienate our neighbours -
To singapore tyrannousaur,
They shouldn't feel threatened because Singapore would never move to hamtam them as long as they do not shove us
What guarantees are there that Singapore will never make the first move?
After all, we are a dictatorship, where the ruling party has been able to push for any and all rules with out any checks and balances.
Suppose our economy fails .. and the PAP declare war to divert attention or fight for resources .. its a possible scenario.
So I ask you again. What assurances can anyone give that our government will not throw the first punch. -
If it comes down to having to throw the first punch, then I say our country must be really messed up as it is.
In which case, your idea of MAD would be unworkable in our situtation anyway, because as you have so stated, nobody will listen to your idea, much less the "dictatorship".
So forward defence it is. -
[quote]Originally posted by kenhor:
To viper52,
Of course you will say that we are not threatening .. you don't live in JB or Batu Pahat. But they know that we have plans to turn their city into a war zone if the worst does happen. Will that make them happy? Is this what feeling safe in Singapore is about .. to deny the citizens of other countries the same kind of "safety"
How safe do you think they'll feel if we opt to stay on this island and let our enemy use their land as a staging area to invade or besiege us? -
Agree... esp when some potential mad northern leader is willing to lose a few cities in arty range, hence nullIfying your MAD...
Our best option following collaspe of diplomacy is to walk up to them and actually kick their butt. As Doktor M. already put it, we have no space to play with.
Unless we got nukes and they dun have that is... -
Kenhor, for all your concern about the feelings and safety of those living in JB and Batu Pahat, you forgot one important thing. Should the Mersing Line be activated to counter a third party invasion of Singapore via Malaysia, it would only mean that the MAF has collapsed and virtually the entire Peninsula from Alor Star to Gemas has fallen. By that time would you think Johoreans would oppose a move northward by us?
Our dear Dr Albar would probably be personally handing out garlands to every one of the SAF soldiers crossing the Causeway. -
Originally posted by kenhor:
To Tripwire
[b] you are very idealistic leh... first off.. malaysia already have division in east malaysia, couple with dozens of other units from the navy and airforce and watever local homeguard... how much economic difference would a sub-base add to the local economy???
Judging from the benefits of Lumut over the last 10 years, it will do wonders to the town supplying the base.
you mean there is no other means of improving a malaysian's towns prosperity except by building military bases har?? 
who you trying to kid??
secondly... SABAH dont need to depend on malaysia for its security as malaysia MAF sucks bottom when it come to defending east malaysia security as you have also noted... the presence of large number of pino in sabah...
As Sabah does not have a private army, it depends on the MAF. Of course, the MAF can comprise of Sabahan soldiers.
your english is really horrible leh... can you read properly and answer in reasonable argument??
lastly... how much more addition to the security of sabah can be increased by the mere addition of 2 subs when an entire malaysian division and other units are already there??
2 subs is just the beginning .. once you have a base, additional units are posted there right?
your english is really horrible leh... can you read properly and answer in reasonable argument??
the truth is... sabah dont even want to be in the federation... if not because of historical reason, thanks to the brits and LKY.. sabah would have become an independent state...
Thats your opinion .. and we will never know will we? oh... there are plenty of historical and govt official record plus private studies on this matter... afterall... it aint no secret...
and it is a fact.. that sabahans have no acceptance of federal authority...
Opinions are like an asshole, everyone has one .. unfortunately in this case... its the sabahans opinion that count more... you should get to know them better.... 
dont make me crack.... there is no love between sabah and the federal... singapore and brunei are not even in the picture... and as far as i sees the progess of singapore and malaysia... i wont be the least surprised if sabah would be better managed by its own people...
Of course, but again, thats your opnion, so only what the Sabahans think is relevant, not 2 singaporean people anonymously posting on a forum. which in my case... is obtained from studies made by historians... you?
dont make me laugh... you know ^%!* about sabah people and their aspiration... you just wanna take cheap shots at achievements made by singapore..
I know as much as any singaporean about sabah. Why would you know more? because... it was a subject of interest and study which i did.... and last i check... its still valid... 
typical malaysian moronic belief.... thinking that what works in singapore would work in ipoh or anywhere else... your PM has been copying singapore so often, it makes one wonder... if malays lack leadership and creatitivity abilities...
Correct .. thats why the Sabahans won't want independance, they don't see how it will benefit them
[/b] i dont see the relevance of this 2 opinion... can you?? look below... your english is really horrible leh... can you read properly and answer in reasonable argument?? -
Originally posted by kenhor:
you seem to be missing the point entirely.
To nismoS123,
[b]if you want to die while fighting a war, please migrate up north.
over here, we prefer to fight to survive and gloat about it.
I am sure that thousands of Russians who served in the WP armies shared your view when they were with the 3rd Shock Army ..
I guess the defeat due to economic failure of the Soviet Union came as a shock to them.[/b]
the basis of any defence stradegy is to keep ourselves alive and our enemies dead. what's the point of defense when we're dead?
MAD, as you described, works well, on paper, when everything and everyone is reduced to a statistic. you die i die, no one gains, woot.
however, try telling a soldier that, let them know that, when the enemy is coming, that they all are to be reduced to kamikaze fighers, to take down as many enemies troops as they can before their own demise. i'm sure that's going to be a great morale booster. -
Originally posted by Viper52:
Hmm...
[quote]
And even if they are not in the air for whatever reason, there is a top of the line MIG-29 flight simulator build by CAE for training RMAF pilots.
Yes and RSAF has no simulators
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/rsaf/lpad/tn-tf.asp -
it's called sarcasm.Originally posted by technowizardry: -
Thank you NismoS123, spot on!Originally posted by technowizardry:
On the Way was talking about the RMAF's simulators like it was the be-all and end-all of their advantage over Singapore, when it is readily acknowledged internationally that we have the most advanced and comprehensive simulators in the region which are used by countries like Thailand, Brunei and Indonesia, to name a few. I just couldn't resist the sarcastic retort -
ah peh.... you born on which planet one....Originally posted by On the way:Kenhor,
I think you are wasting your breath here with a lot of xenophobes, who cannot admit that the RMAF may be up to something and that they are capable and posess some element of power. I agree with most of your points and consider you a voice of reason in this debate. I am S'porean myself, but I try to see both sides and never underestimate a potential adversary no matter how weak or incompetent they may seem. Some points to consider.....
- A RMAF AEW will be held far in the north guarded with fighters. This is standard operational practice in many air forces. Its is a fact that the RMAF has already signed an upgrade contract with MAPO to install the Phazontron N0119MF dual BVR radar in all their MIG-29s. In addition, the MIGs are to be upgraded with Vympel R77, which are every bit as competent as the AIM-120. The MIG escorts will take u out BVR if you try to engage the AEW.
Also, The RMAF AEW will instantly detect mass take off from all RSAF airfields from the safety of northern malaysia. By the time RSAF a/c pass KL, most of the fighters stationed in Langkawi and Butterworth would already be scrambled. A BVR duel would occur north of KL that will take its toll on the attacking RSAF A/C. Should the remaining RSAF a/c survive this, they can still destroy the airbases and maybe lose a few more to Malaysian SAM and AA activities, and close in "heater" dogfights. By the time they return to S'pore, they will find that all their airbases plus alternate runways at Changi, PIE, etc,. will be destroyed or cratered by Malaysian MLRS, and long range arty. I predict mass ditching of RSAF a/c in the south china seas. They may all form up on KC-135 and refuel and do circuits until one of the runway is repaired, but I would'nt bet on it. In the meantime, if the Malaysians are smart (and I am sure they have considered it), they would be sure to retain some strike a/c like their SU-30s in the airbases in East Malaysia. From there, using the AEW for C & C, they can launch long range strikes into S'pore. Also if the AEW has rudimentary Joint Rivets capability, they will be able to detect the flow of SAF armour and transportation heading towards the causeway and other crossing points. They can direct arty fire or even ground attack a/c on to these routes.
This is just one scenario. People seem to forget that RMAF FA-18 Hornets pilots are trained by the US Navy aviators, some of the best in the business. They cannot suka suka pass u if u are a crap pilot. In addition, many high ranking RMAF pilots are actually Chinese, Eurasians or Indians. They do not have the discriminatory policy like the RSAF has. And trust me, these are competent pilots. Russian training is also of high standard. And even if they are not in the air for whatever reason, there is a top of the line MIG-29 flight simulator build by CAE for training RMAF pilots. Also RMAF MIGS have stuff that even the best RSAF a/c doesn't. Like quad bomb release racks for 250 and 500 lbs, and dual engagement BVR radar. I don;t know where all these false bravado is coming from. I know many RSAF pilots personally, some were my neighbuors, some I when to school with, but i have never heard even one of them talk down the RMAF like these people here in the forum. I think all these RMAF-is-a-big-joke forumners better wake up their ideas.
[
RMAF bo amraamski leh... how to do BVR with RSAF falcons armed with sparrow and possibly with derby and amraam and meteor and magic in the future?
secondly hor... RSAF outnumber RMAF by 3 to 1 advantage... not to mention the fact that RSAF got one heck of AD which will send even malaysian awacs to heaven if they dare to come too far south.... SU-30 also kenna swat out of the sky...
also you only need a 300 meter road to land a falcon... not very very the big problem finding one in singapore...
with regards to the malaysian arty against singapore... its ok... we got plenty of roads and many roads are "sheltered" by HDB flats... which can be seconded as runways in emergency...
but better then the above... RSAF got a runway in singapore that is very long... straight and usable by all RSAF aircrafts in times of war.. WHICH is protected from MAF arty, rockets or watever bullshit MAF got... obviously i wont tell you which road this is... though from my house.. i can see it every day.....
RMAF pilots are trained by US navy... big deal lah... The US is well known to never sold the best to other country especially more so when it come to islamic nation... so do you really think they will give a damn if RMAF pilot can fly or cannot fly? more likely.. the US wanna find out how RMAF pilot fly and find a way to kill them faster if they ever need to do so... -
Actually CAE do make quite nifty simulators if I may add.Originally posted by Viper52:Thank you NismoS123, spot on!
On the Way was talking about the RMAF's simulators like it was the be-all and end-all of their advantage over Singapore, when it is readily acknowledged internationally that we have the most advanced and comprehensive simulators in the region which are used by countries like Thailand, Brunei and Indonesia, to name a few. I just couldn't resist the sarcastic retort
If you have visited the ST booth in the most recent Asian Aerospace show, you would have noticed that we do have an indigenous capability to build our own. Cheaper of course, perhaps not as good - they've had over 50 yrs of experience... but to do something we can call our own... The feeling is special I can tell you.
Some teachers may have seen our simulators as part of the National Education thingy. -
the feelings and safety of those living in JB and BP are the responsibility and duties of the malaysian govt... they are not singaporeans.. and singapore is not responsible for the well-being of citizens of another nation...Originally posted by Viper52:Kenhor, for all your concern about the feelings and safety of those living in JB and Batu Pahat, you forgot one important thing. Should the Mersing Line be activated to counter a third party invasion of Singapore via Malaysia, it would only mean that the MAF has collapsed and virtually the entire Peninsula from Alor Star to Gemas has fallen. By that time would you think Johoreans would oppose a move northward by us?
Our dear Dr Albar would probably be personally handing out garlands to every one of the SAF soldiers crossing the Causeway.
singapore govt... acts and behave in a manner which it believe would achieve the best outcome for its citizens... just as malaysian govt would... we believe in mutual respect of each others sovereign rights and the right of their people to decide the fate of their country....
IF the citizens of malaysia felt their lifes are in peril... one wonders why they still stay in harms way.. similarly.. singapore citizens felt too that their lives are in perils of malaysia arty and MRLS... but we do not complain to malaysian govt, like they do in their papers (like guniang )... we simply accept it as malaysian's right to do wat it feels is in its best interest and simply looks to the govt of singapore to do something about it...
lastly... singapore forward defence policies are created based on the analysis of its strength and weakness.. and based on the merits of various strategy based on the circumstances, constraints and limitation of present day technology.... thus... the forward defence policies is not of malicious intent... but an unavoidable consequence of the restrictions imposed on us...
and as a nation.. singapore will do watever it can and within its ability to ensure the safety of its populations whenever a conflict occurs...
in war... you either kill or be killed... obviously... there arent many choice when one is pushed to the wall.. and the code of chivary is long dead... in war... you cannot except morality and high horse ideology... only idiot dead corpse(or would be corpse) think like that... -
Ken,
MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION .. both die .. not one die and one get hurt only .. both die. >
MAD is only applicable if both side has WMD like nuclear, for eg the cold war, WP & NATO both have enough bombs to destroy eachother many times over,even one side is able to start a preemptive strike to destroy the other side nuclear capability, chances are they only destroy some of it by not all. (SSBN, mobile lanucher, hardened & secret missiles silo etc.) which mean the other side could still strike back & destroy them. i.e MAD
Both MAD do not work with conventional weapons that sg has or could has, becos Sg has only one city & they have many.
Getting WMD?
No countries will sell any WMD to another country w/o the whole world making noise.
Even we have, where are we going stored it? underground?
Only in 40 by 20km land mass which the enemy could easily target if they too have WMD.
By then we are already totally destroy, only retaliation is by submarine based missiles, but who is left to give the command?
My pts are
1. MAD is only applicable to WMD.
2.You must table to withstand the first strike & enough left to able to destroy the enemy.i.e large places to conceal the WMD & sufficient number for it.
So how could sg get their hand on WMD?
Is sg large to conceal WMD & able to retaliate after first strike?
Both answers are a big NO! -
Originally posted by kenhor:
To gun,
[b]Question that u should ask is what makes a 737 platform any safer or cheaper to maintain than E2C ?
Because they have more experience with the 737 than the E2C
[/b]
Well, is RMAF buying it in the 1st place ? -
Originally posted by |-|05|:
Tell me if Malaysia can upgrade one of their MAS 737 to this ?
All military planes as common sense will tell you do not carry black boxes though transports,training planes and the likes might.Helicopters also do not carry blackboxes.
Think we have a different interpretation of what "black box" means in aviation term.
In the context of today's aircraft design, be it civilian or military, "black box" or electronic system packages are both critical and essential component to meet the demanding tasks and need of services expected. In fact, international law requires all airworthy planes to be fitted with certified navigation and communication systems like transponders. And this will become even more inconceivable for ANY modern aircrafts, be it helo or transport, to remain even marketable in current increasing need for secure and reliable blank boxes onboard.
Needless to say, military planes now can't even get airborne without those onboard active flight control system. Switch on a Block52 F16 and u will observe the 1st thing it does is an auto system POT and avionics check sequence. It only bothers the engine status check later after the electonics and the gyro stablized.
I don't understand your point about no hving "black boxes" onboard certain missions such as covert or spying when you most needed it. Remember the emergency landing of a USN EP-3 at Hainan island, China in April 2001 after collision with a PLAF F8 fighter ? The US didn't hv a choice, all the crew could do is to follow the procedure and destroy the hard drives, dump sensitive code books before landing. The Chinese still striped the EP3 anyway.
[quote]And also once they have the ability to operate,repair/replace the radar and upgrade would it not be possible for them to upgrade a few "former" MAS B737's?
The challenge isn't about maintaining the basic flying condition of the plane. It is a question of RMAF's ability to service the complex systems onboard, not including operational proficiency and the integration into their over-extented variety of airforce inventory.
Having said that, whether Malaysia has the financial powess or even clearance to acquire this US-make is still an open question. According the Bernama's report, the KL gov is more interested (politically correct ?) in the cheaper Swedish-made EMB-145 which is also used by Brazilian and Greece a/f -
Actually, the Erieye radar is the Swedish made component. The EMB-145 is the Brazilian jet is the one the RMAF is looking hard at for mounting the Erieye radar on.Originally posted by Gun:According the Bernama's report, the KL gov is more interested (politically correct ?) in the cheaper Swedish-made EMB-145 which is also used by Brazilian and Greece a/f
The Swedes and Greeks are using the Swedish Saab 340 turboprop as the aircraft, only the Brazilians are using the EMB-145 currently -
I spend too much time watching old war movies .. I recently finished "All quiet on the western front" .. a very captivating WW1 movie .. it seems so pointless for war really. Such a waste sending 18 year olds to die for the kaiser. Here is the most telling part of the show. The kaiser addressing the troops.
Wow dude could you lend me that?!?!?! i've been looking for it since 1995!!!!!I never got to finish the show due to school.....and it was only shown once on SCV!!
i watched till around the part one of the guys got a brand new pair of leather boots from his dying friend....10 June 2003 · 08:33 PM
The fact that our army is a conscript army and not a regular army.The thing is unlike a regular army a conscript army can only function in a defence mind set...otherwise moral is gonna be really lousy.I mean i'm sure you've been through national service....now i present this to you.You get moblized and send to fight a war when you do not agree with the reason.Will you fight?Since you do know that there is NO threat and you've got your own family.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To singapore tyrannousaur,
They shouldn't feel threatened because Singapore would never move to hamtam them as long as they do not shove us
What guarantees are there that Singapore will never make the first move?
After all, we are a dictatorship, where the ruling party has been able to push for any and all rules with out any checks and balances.
Suppose our economy fails .. and the PAP declare war to divert attention or fight for resources .. its a possible scenario.
So I ask you again. What assurances can anyone give that our government will not throw the first punch.
A regular soldier would gladly do it since it's his job and he is paid to do it.
You on the other hand is a conscript who's "job" is to protact your family which is not threatened.Unless we got nukes and they dun have that is...
Lol yea well if we did nuke erm i'm sure u know that we'd be screwed along with the whole reigon.....Think we have a different interpretation of what "black box" means in aviation term.
err..from what i just read i think we do.... oops
My interpretation of the blackbox is the flight data recorder not it's electronics suitThe challenge isn't about maintaining the basic flying condition of the plane. It is a question of RMAF's ability to service the complex systems onboard, not including operational proficiency and the integration into their over-extented variety of airforce inventory.
That is another matter completely.I was responding to views on why the RMAF would be better off with a B737 then the E-2C.The part about electronics well the RMAF will most definately have problems mantaining it without a good supply line.Which is why i still say the B737 is prefered due to the fact that they only have to source for the electronics and not both the electronics and planes spares.
Having said that, whether Malaysia has the financial powess or even clearance to acquire this US-make is still an open question. According the Bernama's report, the KL gov is more interested (politically correct ?) in the cheaper Swedish-made EMB-145 which is also used by Brazilian and Greece a/f
This would do them good if they ever get an arms embargo dropped on them.Or if they are short of cash. -
Originally posted by kenhor:
as i say before, there is a difference between military cooperation and fighting a proxy war.... we have also a good military cooperation with the US.... the thais also enjoyed close working relationship with the US, but it doesn't mean that US will wage a proxy war through them. that is my point here. there is a huge gap and difference here. to wage a proxy war involves the pentagon and CIA pouring $$$ into msia or give them some benefit which they cannot refuse..... i would not assume a scenario without considering these factors. of course if there are some other factors to consider too. I would like to hear from you.
Who is to say that there is no cooperation between the pentagon and the maf? And what makes us think that Malaysia will not share military information with the USA? The last I read, Malaysia still sends some of its military officers to USA for training.
If we want to make assumptions, we better look at worst case scenario .. that USA may have some links with the MAF and that political difference aside, there are still good relationships between the soldiers of both sides.[/b] -
Originally posted by kenhor:
To viper52,
[b]No we're not threatening...like I've said, the plan is not to move in unless wer're threatened. But as I've said, the politicians and the press refuses to potray the full picture by giving the idea we'll cross the border whenever we feel like it.
Of course you will say that we are not threatening .. you don't live in JB or Batu Pahat. But they know that we have plans to turn their city into a war zone if the worst does happen. Will that make them happy? Is this what feeling safe in Singapore is about .. to deny the citizens of other countries the same kind of "safety" DO you think they care about how we feel in terms of safety and security when they shout "potong potong" during rallies, threaten to build a bridge to replace the causeway while casually lefted out the water pipes?? DO you think they are even bothered about how singaporeans feel when they purchase the Astro 2, PT-91, SU-30, Mig-29, G5 arty and brags about how difficult it is for singapore to do point defence?? Do you think you are out of your mind to worry about how malaysians feel rather then the security of your own people?? i think you are NUTS.... last I CHECK... singapore govt has NEVER EVER threaten malaysia with words of war, conflict or shooting down RMAF planes as loosely as MAF defence minister had and still is....
Its like the USA having a plan to use Singapore as a base for offensive military operations into China .. if we found out about those plans ... don't you think that we will get excited?[/b] they have a plan... we have a plan... but neither USA or singapore has been so unrulely, unabashed in threatening war against the PRC like Malaysian kuku leaders has against singapore... PRC, USA and singapore leaders are far more mature and diplomatic then those monkeys they call leaders up north... -
To singapore tyrannosaur
If it comes down to having to throw the first punch, then I say our country must be really messed up as it is.
In which case, your idea of MAD would be unworkable in our situtation anyway, because as you have so stated, nobody will listen to your idea, much less the "dictatorship".
So forward defence it is.
That's why MAD should work .. if we are messed up and have forward defense, our leadership will invade north on a flimsy pretext. If we have MAD, things can get worst .. much worse.
Agree... esp when some potential mad northern leader is willing to lose a few cities in arty range, hence nullIfying your MAD...
You mean range of our airforce .. not just arty .. and when you say a "few" how many cities do you think Malaysia has? Let me count them for you. KL, Penang, Ipoh, Seremban, Melaka, JB, Kuantan, Kuching, Kota Kinabalu, Kota Baharu, Perlis, Alor Setar, Kangar, Kuala Trengganu. Any more? 14 cities. By threatening 14 cities over 1 city of ours, do you think that they will want that loss ratio? -
Kenhor,
I do not think you understand the concept of MAD. It only applies if in a conflict both sides are 100% assured of destroying each other. That is why the superpowers built enough nuclear weapons during the cold war to vaporize each other literally hundreds of times over -- so that no matter how many were disabled or destroyed by enemy action, enough capability would remain to assuredly destroy the other party in return. That is why it is Mutual Assured Destruction.
We do not have a 100% chance of completely destroying Malaysia. We have a 0% chance of doing that. I think you overestimate our capabilities. We cannot have a strategy that relies on MAD. Comparing our situation to the standoff between NATO and WP is ludicrous. In my opinion, the whole "poisoned shrimp" idea was retarded from the beginning, but it was the best that we could do at the time. Why would an aggressor nation be deterred by the threat of injury if he could inflict death upon us in return?
No, we must seek victory in war if we wish to deter the enemy. An aggressor must realize that he is likely to LOSE a war with us. That is the surest and most effective form of deterrence. The only war for us to defeat the enemy, and therefore deter him and prevent war is a forward defence doctrine. It is the most humane thing to do. If the temptation of war is removed from potential aggressors, then everyone will live in peace.
As for the intimidating effect of our forward defence doctrine, I have three things to say:
Firstly, our neighbors should and do realize that because of the conscript nature of our army, we can never be a force of aggression. We cannot annex another country. We cannot permanently capture and hold ground. We are not trained for counterinsurgency. Our neighbors only sometimes pretend to forget this for domestic political reasons. Regardless of how strong the SAF becomes, she can only be a defensive force. We cannot and therefore will not invade.
Secondly, the SAF specifically lacks deep strategic strike capability. We do not threaten our neighbors with ballistic or cruise missiles. We have no strategic heavy bombers. We lack sea control platforms like cruisers and aircraft carriers. This means that the SAF is not a force of intimidation. We cannot use the SAF as a stick to make our neighbors do what we want.
Thirdly, our neighbors are not extending the same courtesy to us that you suggest we extend to them. They threaten us with force or deprivation of water. They parade their military hardware. They try to make us feel insecure. We do none of these things, even to the point of keeping our military strength out of the public eye. Saying that we intimidate our neighbors is the pot calling the kettle black.
In summary, I do not feel that a forward defence doctrine is at all undiplomatic or unjustified. They have nothing to fear from us and they know it. On the other hand, we have an entire nation to lose. I do not think that the residents of JB should be at all offended or afraid at our military preparations. I would not be in their position. Of course, their warmongering press ensures that the reality is quite different, but that is not our fault.
Incidentally, a forward defence doctrine is not just the Mersing Line. It is the idea that we will prevent the enemy from reaching Singapore. If we are attacked from the south we will strike them at sea before they reach our shores, possibly capturing some islands to deny them to the enemy and to base our forces. Of course, due to our air and naval capabilities, an attack from the sea would be extremely difficult and unlikely, so we tend to concentrate discussion on the more interesting question of attack from the land. -
To viper
"How safe do you think they'll feel if we opt to stay on this island and let our enemy use their land as a staging area to invade or besiege us? "
Firstly, if an enemy lands in johor to invade us, we will not be hitting that enemy in Johor. We will be hitting his capital city with all we got .. killing his expeditionary army won't stop the war. Reducing his capital to ruin will.
Secondly, killing all our troops in battle will force surrender. Remember that our troops are our citizens. if we fully mobilize and establish the mersing line properly, that sucks up 25% of the male population. Killing that will automatically mean that defending the rest of singapore is impossible. My belief is that it will be easier to kill the SAF troops in Johor, compared to SAF troops in BUA like woodlands.
Its like the Mummy 2 movie .. what the heck did the defenders of the city in the first scene array themselves in front of the city to meet the enemy? They can wait in the city, endure some bombardment and sortie out .. it makes for a good movie, but I think its a stupid idea.
Kenhor, for all your concern about the feelings and safety of those living in JB and Batu Pahat, you forgot one important thing. Should the Mersing Line be activated to counter a third party invasion of Singapore via Malaysia, it would only mean that the MAF has collapsed and virtually the entire Peninsula from Alor Star to Gemas has fallen. By that time would you think Johoreans would oppose a move northward by us?
This is a very hypotetical question ..
a) Which enemy is going to attack both singapore and Malaysia at the same time
b) Which enemy is going to attack both Singapore and Malaysia ONE AT A TIME
c) WHY isn't the SAF deployed furthur up north if the intended target was Singapore.
I will tell you why .. we hope that the Malaysians will be invaded and we stake a claim to some portion of Johor during the fighting. If you can answer questions a)-c) .. you will see no need for a mersing line. -
To nismoS123
you seem to be missing the point entirely. the basis of any defence stradegy is to keep ourselves alive and our enemies dead. what's the point of defense when we're dead?
The point of deterrence is to prevent the fighting in the first place. You want a defence strategy, I want a deterrence strategy.
Defense strategy ties up critical resources .. deterrence frees up the same resources. Singapore has little resources to waste.
MAD, as you described, works well, on paper, when everything and everyone is reduced to a statistic. you die i die, no one gains, woot.
That's why its a deterrence. The enemy will have more to lose than us. 14 cities vs 1. Thats a big loss ratio.
however, try telling a soldier that, let them know that, when the enemy is coming, that they all are to be reduced to kamikaze fighers, to take down as many enemies troops as they can before their own demise. i'm sure that's going to be a great morale booster.
You may see it that way, I see it as the INVASION of a foreign land .. remember what the japanese did to china ... I am sure the young japanese soldiers though that they were righteous when they went to defend japanese interests during ww2.