RMAF shopping for AEW&C
-
To tripwire,
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...
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...
Correct .. so when the Malaysians take steps to counter the forward defense strategy of ours, please don't consider it a hostile act. They are doing exactly what you are saying .. taking care of their own people. -
To gary1910
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.
You have a good point. Lets see it in our context.
What are the Isrealis afraid off? That the Arabs wipe them from the face of the earth .. that is in their blood.
Are the Malaysians out for blood? Nope .. they want to CONQUER us .. not DESTROY us. Like I said earlier .. the Isrealis are not the best Ideological teachers for us .. their context is very different from our situation. Malaysia will love to have us as part of their nation. They want our infrastructure, our national reserves. Not as a burnt out wasteland.
And right now, their economy is doing better than ours. So MAD can stand for the destruction of their economy, and their lifestyle, and all that they worked for in the last 40 years.
That is enough as a deterrence to keep them at bay. At best, the chinese there will also not agree to lose all that they worked hard for. The scenario is find out what they want and deny them.
Its easier to destroy them militarily and economically than wiping 25 million people out of the face of the earth. we have enough weapons to do that. And the flip side is that if they are too weak, Indonesia and Philippines will be the one that will benefit, Sabah and Sarawak is very temptingly.
So that my friend .. threating economic ruin is MAD ... -
To gun,
Well, is RMAF buying it in the 1st place ?
Wait and see .. my opinion is that by announcing that they are LOOKING at AWACS, every AWACS dealer in the world will set up a booth in Lima03. They will take 2 years to decide and award the contract in Lima05 .. that way, they can stretch the economic benefit for two shows. -
[quote]Originally posted by kenhor:
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.
With what? Which capital does the SAF have the capability to ruin? (Other than KL - which is moot if the enemy is not Malaysia) We don't have ICBMs, or even MRBMs to hit any enemy capital like you so cheeringly suggest. Our planes don't have the range, our navy doesn't have the capability. Please, use your brains to examine the practical aspects before coming up with hare-brained suggestions
Should we get such offensive capability
1) Our neighbours will complain no end
2) People like you will bleat no end about the cost. As it is you have been moaning again and again about the limited offensive capability we possess already,
You moan about our limited offensive capbilities, yet now you suggest we should possess even more offensive capbilities. Which is it?
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.
What is it that you've been smoking? anyone with a little military knowledge would know FIBUA is the costliest kind of conventional warfare, in terms of casualties as well as in monetary terms like ammo expended. Please stop making a fool of yourself.
a) Which enemy is going to attack both singapore and Malaysia at the same time
Refer to 1941. You cannot take Singapore without coming in through the Peninsula(ie. take Malaysia first). The marine geography here precludes a large scale amphibious landing in Singapore. Like I've said there are no short to medium term enemies but you agreed that doesn't mean we shouldn't plan
b) Which enemy is going to attack both Singapore and Malaysia ONE AT A TIME
Every one, because its foolhardy to invade Singapore from the sea and the only way is to invade Malaysia and move down south like the 25th Army did, which IMO is a textbook case of an invasion of Singapore.
c) WHY isn't the SAF deployed furthur up north if the intended target was Singapore.
Because regional sensitivities and short sighted ones like you insist that we must not have that capability. As it is you're already bitching constantly about Singapore having the capability to deploy 75 km north
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.
Another short sighted view. If Malaysia is invaded and overrun. The next target will be us.
If you can answer questions a)-c) .. you will see no need for a mersing line.
I did, but I still do see the need -
To |05|
I bought my copy 2 weeks ago in JB .. just before the clamp down .. sorry .. lent it to my friends at work .. must start my anti-war movement with people around me.
I am looking for 2 other shows .. Gettysburg and Gods and Generals .. 5+ hours long of Civil war drama .. been looking in JB for damn long time .. can't find it.
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. 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.
Friend, do you know what you said is TOTALLY not true. EVERY other country which has the draft is a vigirous democracy. The soldiers listen to the officers. They listen to the generals. The generals listen to the CiC .. who is the head of the government .. who can be removed from office by losing the election.
In Singapore, you disobey an order .. you are finished. But you can't even vote. 70% of the population CAN NOT vote. So what checks and balances are there. If the leader of the country tells you to invade, you have NO CHOICE but to invade.
The people are against a few government policies at this moment.
a) lack of democracy
b) too many FT
Has the government listen to the people? So think really hard if you can truly trust a government who has absolutely no checks and balances. Only one other government in Asia has more ruthless might .. thats the North koreans .. The PAP has more power than even the Iranian clerics. Thats what I am worried about. -
To kanzer
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.
I can't tell you too much .. the infomation is not verified .. but there are stories (by my politician contacts in Malaysia) that there are very good reasons why KL is chosen as the venue for talks between North Korea and USA .. I can't go furthur that this .. use your imagination .. the wilder the imagination, the better ..
Malaysian passports can't got to one country only ... Israel .. every other country in the world is fine ... -
[quote]Originally posted by kenhor:
must start my anti-war movement with people around me.
Theres a difference between being anti-war and turning the other cheek whenever you get slapped -
Dkhoo,
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.
I think we can find a way to be 100% assured of destroying each other economically. Read my answer to one of the other forum members ..
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.
Threatening Singapore or Malaysia to turn the country into Somalia will be sufficient to make both sides see the light. Countries with too much to lose will not want to risk it all.
If Singapore was next to Mongolia then maybe the Mongols will not be afraid to be knocked back to stone age.
But Malaysia wants to be developed. They want economic prosperity. The people there want a nice life. They can have the 5Cs without too much difficulty. They are living in a underpopulated, resource rich, technologically advanced, trading nation. MAD on their economy and to turn that country into Somalia will be too much to lose.
Why would an aggressor nation be deterred by the threat of injury if he could inflict death upon us in return?
Thats assuming that the aggressor is them. Suppose that for next 20 years, we do this to them, they catch up and they do it to us. How will we like it? Do onto others what you want others to do onto you.
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.
Thats your opinion .. I prefer my samurai scenario. Remember this. Invasion of Malaysia for whatever "forward defence" reason is considered an act of war by the international community.
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.
Wrong .. see my answer in an earlier thread .. our government has no checks and balances .. too risky to allow our government to have such power ..
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.
We may not have all those, but our neighbours are even more poorly equipted .. compared to what they have ours is definately better. We have been spending 5-6% of our GDP on weapons .. for 30 years .. and our GDP is higher than all other ASEAN nations .. go figure if our neighbours feel that our weapons are purely for defensive use only.
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.
Its their water.
They parade their military hardware.
Have you never attended a NDP?
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.
Sorry, ah .. I don't share your feelings. In fact, I think 99% of Malaysians are not interested in war or military. During the Malaysia NDP last year, they rolled out their machineray .. my cousin took photos and asked me what the heck are these machines. We know what they are .. they don't. There are less warlike than you portray them to be.
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.
Of course, you and I can agree to disagree on this .. its just an opinion.
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.
If you want to discuss doctrine, lets see which other nation in this world actually practiced this doctrine and kept the peace for how long. -
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.
Another point I've almost forgotten. As your new-found friend On the Way helpfully pointed out in the previous thread on the SAF Light Tank when he vigourously defended the Mersing Line, the SAF is not built as an occupying army. Our strategy to to parry the blow and force the enemy into suing for a diplomatic solution in the shortest time possible -
To viper52,
Oh year .. forgot to mention that I am a christian .. I do believe in turning the other cheek.
With what? Which capital does the SAF have the capability to ruin? (Other than KL - which is moot if the enemy is not Malaysia)
Well then if the enemy can stage to Johore, it will have sufficient targets within reach. And we can stage from Brunei . or our friends in Taiwan .. so don't play dumb with me. And keep your cool.
What is it that you've been smoking? anyone with a little military knowledge would know FIBUA is the costliest kind of conventional warfare, in terms of casualties as well as in monetary terms like ammo expended. Please stop making a fool of yourself.
FIBUA is costy to BOTH the attacker and Defender. While establishing a half baked "defensive corridor" in the deep jungle and palm oil estates will be expensive to the DEFENDER. Especially if we are unfamiliar, in the dark, 100 km of line, with enemies in front, behind and a long logistical trail. Again, please be less personal in your rebuttals.
Refer to 1941. You cannot take Singapore without coming in through the Peninsula(ie. take Malaysia first). The marine geography here precludes a large scale amphibious landing in Singapore. Like I've said there are no short to medium term enemies but you agreed that doesn't mean we shouldn't plan
As I told you earlier .. Malaya was one country. Singapore was the capital in 1941 for the british forces .... you have not got any proof that a country will want to attack Malaysia and Singapore together.
Every one, because its foolhardy to invade Singapore from the sea and the only way is to invade Malaysia and move down south like the 25th Army did, which IMO is a textbook case of an invasion of Singapore.
So you are living in 1941 is it? If I want to attack Malaysia, i will take them from KL , not Kota Baharu. And at the same time, I will not BOTHER with dealing with them ONE AT A TIME .. I WILL HAVE TO ENGAGE BOTH AT THE SAME TIME .. only a fool (or a person stuck in 1941 tactics) will employ a piecemeal tactic to first finish off Malaysia and then go to Singapore ..
Because regional sensitivities and short sighted ones like you insist that we must not have that capability. As it is you're already @&%^^ing constantly about Singapore having the capability to deploy 75 km north
I am craping about the fact that we are using the malaysians as a body shield just to save ourselves .. not to help them if they are invaded. If they are invaded and we just form a line 100km to the north, does that help them in any way?
Another short sighted view. If Malaysia is invaded and overrun. The next target will be us.
Yeah right .. then there is more reasons to fight the enemy as a team rather than forming a "security cordon"
Ok .. tempers are flaring .. I will agree to disagree here .. lets just both cool off for a while and resume next week. I got to go overseas for an assignment. -
how can i not regard that as a hostile act...when their ministers are shooting their mouth off about singapore's vulnerability to their whimps and wills simply because now they got better military toys???Originally posted by kenhor:Correct .. so when the Malaysians take steps to counter the forward defense strategy of ours, please don't consider it a hostile act. They are doing exactly what you are saying .. taking care of their own people.
diplomatically... its totally unacceptable for such rude and uncouth behaviour on the part of malaysia govt...its equivalent to coercsion on the part of malaysia through force of arms, demanding singapore to submit ourselves to their wish and desire... NO nation on earth would sit idlely by when another threatens them as openly as those goondos up north... singapore has been very very tolerant thus far...
just becos i recognised malaysia right to defend itself from singapore...or any other nation... does not give them the right to belittle my country and my country's ability to defend itself from outright belligerent behaviour from those monkeys up north...
if our pass dealings with malaysia is any basis to go by... i would rather sleep with a snake then to share a cup with those hyenas...
YET ... incredibly... you are here spouting nonsense about the feelings of malaysians living in south peninsula malaysia when the malaysian people and govt have absolutely no regard for the feelings, rights, respect and sovereign right of singapore and its people...
you came in here shouting your ass off against forward defence... yet at the same time... you seems to agreed with malaysia's less then friendly actions... verbal and otherwise..
its seems to me... that you have serious misgivings when singapore tries to defend itself.. while at the same time... you are so very supportive when malaysia is purchasing weapons that could be used against singapore's interest and its people... it begs to wonder... which side are you on??
if you are a malaysian... i would say... you are truely patriotic... maybe i will accord you the same respect i had for innocent-malaysia... who though naive... is nonetheless patriotic...
how about you? -
ken, please save us from another of one your "samuari" opinion.Originally posted by kenhor:Wait and see .. my opinion is that by announcing that they are LOOKING at AWACS, every AWACS dealer in the world will set up a booth in Lima03. They will take 2 years to decide and award the contract in Lima05 .. that way, they can stretch the economic benefit for two shows.
Even if all the interested parties were to offer best package plus technological transfer in the Malaysia contract, one has yet to see the $$$ on the table. And even if it takes "2 years to decide" on which one to buy, the world has already pass it by and no one can guarantee that Malaysia can even efford such system in the near future. That is one criteria that any salesman will look into a potential customer.
Being a salesman yourself, U should know better. -
Oh geee...now why didn't Tunku think of that when he wanted Singapore out of the federation in 65? Again, no love was lost in the seperation even until this very day.Originally posted by kenhor:To gary1910
[b]Malaysia will love to have us as part of their nation. They want our infrastructure, our national reserves. Not as a burnt out wasteland.
The KL mentality took a while to appreciate and accept the fact that Singapore outperform its antagonistic neighbour not thru sure size of a bully, but thru wit and forsightedness, while having lost the initial hope that Singapore would eventually come crawling back.
That is what the KL leaders can't live with for the last 3 decades: The very fact that an independent and properous nation is possible without need to join Malaya.
Sabah ? Sarawak ? What happened to Brunei ?
So why the need for a rapid deployment unit in the MAF ?
To keep the Malaysian federation under control ? -
Friend, do you know what you said is TOTALLY not true. EVERY other country which has the draft is a vigirous democracy. The soldiers listen to the officers. They listen to the generals. The generals listen to the CiC .. who is the head of the government .. who can be removed from office by losing the election.
Yes i worry about the fact that we simply follow the goverment also.
In Singapore, you disobey an order .. you are finished. But you can't even vote. 70% of the population CAN NOT vote. So what checks and balances are there. If the leader of the country tells you to invade, you have NO CHOICE but to invade.
The people are against a few government policies at this moment.
a) lack of democracy
b) too many FT
Has the government listen to the people? So think really hard if you can truly trust a government who has absolutely no checks and balances. Only one other government in Asia has more ruthless might .. thats the North koreans .. The PAP has more power than even the Iranian clerics. Thats what I am worried about.
About having no choice well that's not particularly true.I have not got much time but ill post what i can for now.Thus far i only know of 3 countries which has the draft.Taiwan,German and Russia.In Germany and Russia they can opt for national service in the education area and all other public/community areas.In those countries i can see the people not responding to a call to arms in an invasion due to their lack of a secert police.I mean i'm not talking about the NSmen here i'm talking about the reservist units.Ask youself if you get moblized to invade when Singapore is not directly threatened would you do it?Well you should not though i worry because chances are most people here would sadly as some have become mindless goverment drones.Just look at the recent SARS cases of people becoming mindless goverment drones.Say more later after spending 10mins typing this i'm really late hehe
-
I think you are the joker. You seem to have suffered from some form of amnesia. May I remind you of the high losses suffered by the original batch of 40 A-4s purchased by S'pore. These include (recalling from my memory) a 4 ship formation lost when it crashed into a Phillipine mountain at while using the practice range at Clark Air base. Loss of 5 pilots as one of them was a TA-4s. One A-4 crashed into chicken coop in Punggol, one crashed into Farmer's house, one crashed into the sea after gunnery practice, etc. Losses were so heavy they had to buy a second batch of 70 airframes, followed by 16 more. Today, total A-4 strenght is only around 40. U do the math. In addition, Hunter losses were pretty bad too, including from my recollection the loss of 2 in a mid-air collision over the Straits of malacca. Also, BAE Strikemasters were lost, as I recall seeing the wreck of one in a hangar in Tengah years ago. Look at our own accident rates first before looking at others. By the way the A-4 flown by the RMAF were refurbished by Gruman in the US. I doubt at that time whether they were that familiar with this type of Douglas aircraft. Is your AF buddy a fighter pilot?Originally posted by Gun:Last time I heard my AF neighbour buddy saying that there isn't much to talk about RMAF and its threat. I asked Why & he replied:
Just observe their accident ratio and its operational readiness.
Example 1.
"Beginning in 1995, 16 Mig-29N Fulcrums, derived from the Mig 29S, were delivered, along with two Mig-29NUB trainers. One aircraft has been lost to date. Serviceability has been a major problems with the Fulcrums and it has been reported that at one time , only a maximum of seven of the surviving 17 Mig-29s were airworthy. They had to spend another million$ to get it up to
standard 4 yrs later."
Example 2.
40 A-4 PTM (Perculiar-to-Malaysia) of 6 and 9-Sqn in Kuantan were prematurely grounded in 1999 due to high attrition rate after hving introduced only 15 years earlier from US. Reason: faulty or fake spare parts were supplied by corrupted ex-RMAF folks.
So who is the joker here ? -
Aiyah lets do wat kenhor say lah..drop our gun if there is reali a invasion..let the enemy rape our woman kill our kids...den we ask GOD to forgive their sin..set up a confession booth..ask the enemy to confess their sin..they kill us all again..rape our woman....for next decade waiting for UN to intervene...
im not a christian..im a Buddhist...we preach abt peace too...kenhor i realize most of the stuff u say in this thread since the beginning it..r crap...if the above happen to Singapore..Kids got kill woman got rape...i will hunt down every single one of the fuckers who did tat..well dun think it will happen..cos forward defence will still be carry out..not ur samurai theory....n when tat reali happen..its becos the enemy drew the 1st blood...bet u never seen a angry buddhist got slap on his face eh..we dun believe in giving the other side of the face for pple to slap..dun think they have the chance to slap too..wahaha..so forgiving my my.. -
The fact is that it is extremely difficult to repatriate the F-16s from the US and the A-4s from France after the fighting has started. If S'pore started the conflict by a pre-emptive strike up to the Mersing line, we will be labeled aggressors in the world forum. For France and the US to permit our planes to leave their territory fully fueled and armed immediately, is asking too much. Pressure from the Muslim world will be made to bear on the US and France to hold the planes there. Even if they do take off, which country will give them permission to land and refuel? U can divert a KC-135 to escort them back, but even that may not be enough without any stops, and it will disrupt the tempo of your air ops to divert the KC 135 to Europe and North America. On paper, we have the bigger air force. The reality is that we have to start with what we have and finish with what we have, and not count on the overseas aircraft. In that sense, we do not have that great a numerical advantage.Originally posted by |-|05|:You seemed to have ruled out the fact that we have more planes and that some of our F-16's are stationed overseas.Also fighter planes can take off in 800m of runway....i'm sure we have many islands that can handle that.Also what makes you think we do not have the Aim-120's and SAM's and AA that the Malaysians in your situation have used to such deverstating effect?
Oh and no i'm not belittlering the Malaysian armed forces in fact i give them alot of credit and would pay attention and not write them off.However i will not write off our armed forces either -
actually 3 went into the mountain... 1 plane RTB due to mechanical fault...the pilot who RTB is none other than the same pilot for the ill-fated MI185Originally posted by On the way:I These include (recalling from my memory) a 4 ship formation lost when it crashed into a Phillipine mountain at while using the practice range at Clark Air base. Loss of 5 pilots as one of them was a TA-4s. -
My poor Viper,
Again u are missing the whole point. The fact is the RMAf have the training, the equipment, and yes even chinese pilots flying for them, such that they are a credible force. I can tell you are a armchair wannabe (wannabe what I don;t know?), and probably have never served in any capacity in any armed forces. Were you a NS reject condemned to reading only theory? Only stupid people underestimate their enemies to the degree that you do. By the amount of time you spend in this forum expousing your half baked ideas and personal attacks on people, I can only conclude 2 things. Get a job you loser, and get a life. There is more to life than breaking down every ones's post and attacking each little detail as erroneous. (yes CAE does make the best flight simulators in the world, and yes there are chinese pilots in the RMAF, get your facts straight). Your own immaturity show ups every time you post. If you are man enough post this, other wise, I couldn't care less. Really the standard of this forum shows by their poor choice of moderators, and than by the fact that u are running around, afraid the PAP will shut u down for allowing the wrong post. I think I will take my ball and go to another forum. By the way is the 52 in Viper 52 your IQ point?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 -
I remember that only one ejected and crashed(it was a black knight practise), the other one flew back to tengah despite being told to eject. the pilot later become a full colonel and head the AFI. one went missing during a night mission and never came back, nobody knows what happened to it to this day. another famous one was in phillipines where the pilot ejected below 200ft and died but the a/c glided onto a field. if he never ejected, he might have live. he could have ejected at a higher altitude but he choose to guide the plane away from crowded areas before ejecting.Originally posted by On the way:. In addition, Hunter losses were pretty bad too, including from my recollection the loss of 2 in a mid-air collision over the Straits of malacca. -
I don't think I am suffering from any clinical illness that can contribute to what I've observed in RMAF accident record of the last 10 yrs. Statistically, RMAF had actually lost avg 3 pilots annually due to accidents for the last 10 years !Originally posted by On the way:I think you are the joker. You seem to have suffered from some form of amnesia. May I remind you of the high losses suffered by the original batch of 40 A-4s purchased by S'pore.
The examples of your RSAF were an accumulation of over 2 decades of operation in both local and oversea tours.
Note the A4 formation crash in the Philipine, though tragic, actually bore testimony of the formation disipline required by any competent pilot. Even the Russian and US suffered similar fate when their elite acrobat teams (e.g Thunderbird) crash in complete perfect formation when their wing leader made that single judgement error.
Accidents do happen in this business end. Problem is what kind of lesson can be learn & prevented . For the RMAF Skyhawk case, even with contracted US firm didn't help to prevent the high attrition rate. What happened then ? Lack of training ? Lousy spare parts ? Poor servicing ? RMAF choosed the easy, but more expensive way out. On the contrary, the RSAF improved their existing A4 stocks and upgraded to SuperSkyHawk which is expected to an its illustrious role within this decade. So any reported A4S-1 lost so far ?
Now I am pretty sure that I am NOT suffering from any illness having seen RMAF F/A18D crash landed at Kuching International Airport only recently on 30 Mar ? Thank god both pilots ejected to safety
So who's the joker here ?
-
Kenhor,
If you think that Malaysia or Indonesia will be financially ruined by an invasion of Singapore you are sadly mistaken. The difference between them and us is that they can annex us while we cannot annex them. They can seize our assets and our population and take control of our industry and infrastructure. If they attack us and succeed it will hurt them for a decade or so, but in the end it will benefit them greatly. There is no MAD here. In the overall strategic picture, we are like any other small country in the world.
You seem incapable of understanding this point. Singapore simply does not have the capability to capture another country's territory since our soldiers are mostly conscripts with civilian lives. What happens after the "war" is just as important. Who would keep the newly captured territory pacified? How could we fight the insurgents that would surely appear? Conversely, the Malaysians or Indonesians can mobilize enough troops from their larger populations to pacify the whole of Singapore.
If the Government ordered us to invade a neighboring country, it would be like ordering us to fly to the moon. It is simply impossible, so the lack of freedom in Singapore is not an issue. We simply are unable to invade Malaysia successfully, so we will never try and they need never fear us. The temptation of war does not exist for us. Adventurism is a loser's game for Singapore. The man in the street there may not understand this, but you can be sure their leadership does.
As for international opinion in the wake of a defensive preemptive strike, it is not as simple as you or On The Way imagine. Any defensive move by Singapore would have been preceded by plenty of diplomatic maneuvering beforehand. The whole world will know our story and the reasons for our actions before we do anything. Our Government may be authoritarian, but they are certainly not stupid. Even the UN Charter permits preemptive strike in the event of an imminent threat to a member nation. We will not be in the wrong, and the world will know it.
Of course if the enemy strike first, then it is even easier for us. We would be the aggrieved party and would be able to respond with extreme prejudice. The morale of our troops will also be greatly enhanced. In fact, it is clear that the SAF is trying to gain the ability to absorb a first strike, with concrete aircraft hangers, bunkered ammunition storage, etc. It may even be worth the damage for our troops to be roused to righteous fury and the world to be firmly on our side, though I would prefer not to play with human life.
As for fighting in a foreign land rather than in Singapore where we possess an advantage: we simply have no choice. It is a matter of saving human lives, the lives of our women and children at home. Yes, we are more likely to be killed if we push outward. Our losses will be tremendous. But it is all worth it. That is the whole point of war after all, to risk death so that others might live better lives. It is not ideal, but it simply must be done due to the tragedy of geography. FIBUA in Singapore is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE.
I do not think a forward defence strategy is at all unworkable, offensive or unwise. It will be awesomely difficult. It will destroy many things, not least our innocence. But the alternative is far worse.
As an aside, the samurai of ancient Japan were little more than thugs in the service of local lords, kenhor. The vast majority pillaged the countryside and took what they wanted by force when their lords were not keeping them busy in gang wars with other lords. The Japanese simply have a tremendous knack for revisionist history. Even the "chivalrous" knights of Europe were no different. In your story, the samurai would simply have cut down the serf and raped his wife and children before burning down his village for having the temerity to stand up against noblemen like himself. Comparing our potential adversaries to samurai is incredibly silly and disturbing. -
maybe perhaps we are treating kenhor too harshly... afterall.. he is merely reflecting a different point of views.... and he might not be entirely wrong at that...Originally posted by NathanG5:Aiyah lets do wat kenhor say lah..drop our gun if there is reali a invasion..let the enemy rape our woman kill our kids...den we ask GOD to forgive their sin..set up a confession booth..ask the enemy to confess their sin..they kill us all again..rape our woman....for next decade waiting for UN to intervene...
im not a christian..im a Buddhist...we preach abt peace too...kenhor i realize most of the stuff u say in this thread since the beginning it..r crap...if the above happen to Singapore..Kids got kill woman got rape...i will hunt down every single one of the fuckers who did tat..well dun think it will happen..cos forward defence will still be carry out..not ur samurai theory....n when tat reali happen..its becos the enemy drew the 1st blood...bet u never seen a angry buddhist got slap on his face eh..we dun believe in giving the other side of the face for pple to slap..dun think they have the chance to slap too..wahaha..so forgiving my my..
he may not be entirely wrong you know... i mean... if we push his ideas a bit further... think of it a bit deeper.. it could actually make good sense and benefit SAF and singapore as a whole...
for example...
1...On the part where malaysians felt threatened by the strength of SAF and the potential of turning southern malaysia into a battle zone because of our forward defence strategy...
perhaps SAF should try to limit the amount of information available to the public, or at least tone down further.. our military might and keep more of our weapons secret... that way... we wont make malaysians feels too insecure.. while at the same time... we not only maintaining our ability to crush MAF in a single blow... but we could actually entice the MAF to underestimate SAF and perhaps invites them to attack us ... so that we might crush them and take their land...
2... On the part of FIBUA in singapore vs forward defence... maybe its not such a bad idea... though i would prefer the FIBUA in southern malaysia rather then in singapore...
SAF is well trained in FIBUA.. and we all know FIBUA takes a horrendous toll on attackers... if we hold the FIBUA and MAF tries to retake it... they will suffer huge loses... so much so... it begs to wonder... how long can MAF keeps sustaining such massive loses with a force of only 100,000 men?
in fact.. if SAF sends 500,000 men to do fibua in southern malaysia... assuming the exchange rate of 1 defending soldier for 12 attacker soldier... MAF would need an army of 6 million solder!!! to retake southern johor...
and if MAF really starts to pour goondo and half baked recruits into FIBUA... their loses will mount and in extreme cases... we could literary depopulate malaysian male population in FIBUA...
and since the war is still in full force... we could attempt to depopulate malaysia even further by FAE all their major towns and cities... keep this up... we might loose 100,000 men... but god knows how many millions of malaysians would be dead under the wrath of FAEs, cluster munitions, mines and diseases...
so much so... a protracted war... could see east malaysia break away with its 10 million population from the federation... as MAF is kaput and there are no one to prevent them from declaring medeka.....
and once peninsula malaysia population dropped to 5 million...annexing and assimilating malaysia into singapore becomes very very possible...
so... kenhors' idea do have merits... we are simply too quick to barbecue him....
our forward defence strategy could not be comparable to kenhor's method... depopulating and annexing malaysia for eternity...
our foward defence strategy's greatest flaw is in... we could not guarantee future peace after forward defence... this is because... we cant hold malaysia.. and we cant prevent them from rebuilding... nor prevent them from attacking us in the future...
using kenhor's war strategy... we not merely have a chance to really defend ourselves... but could actually achieve and exceed the aim of fighting a war and being around to pick up the pieces (DPM Lee idea)... now we could annex malaysia!!!
lets give kenhor a round of applause... if MAF knew of kenhors' plan... hell.. they wont even want to be near singapore... -
You Jenova witness izzit?Originally posted by kenhor:To viper52,
Oh year .. forgot to mention that I am a christian .. I do believe in turning the other cheek.
. -
he a jenova witness?? comeon... look at his argumentative behaviour.... he doesnt look like a guy who will turn the other cheek...Originally posted by CenturionMBT:You Jenova witness izzit?
if he ever did turn the other cheek... watch out... he could have a camera rolling somewhere... and use the footage to sue you for big bucks in court for indecent assualt