Word of the Commandos' ban has been making its rounds in defence-linked Internet chatrooms.Hmmm....where are some of these forums anyone know?
b]
One can be sure is folks there will need to be on the ball.Originally posted by IAF:Hmmm....where are some of these forums anyone know?
SAF intranet.Originally posted by IAF:Hmmm....where are some of these forums anyone know?
Paper play or not, I still prefer the SAF way over the Taiwanese . Maybe that is why those ROC pple sees their guest opertes with too many red tapes while theirs allows lotsa leeways;Originally posted by IAF:i remember during a time in Starlight...when i overheard a ROC personnel remarking that the SAF is really obsessed with 'papers' when he observed that lots of SAF forms change hands during handing over and taking over of eqmt.
Hmmm...I've heard similar stories about the more 'elite' units as well...Originally posted by the Bear:bloody idiots... what kind of "training" is this?
bet you the less-than-useless REMFs forced them to do this...
Originally posted by whiteillum:no one is perfect, commandos included
let it rest peeps
Originally posted by tripwire:i think my last post has been rather harsh on the men and women of SAF...
true... that in my time with SAF... there are good, bad and ok ok officers and men... and i believe it still is so....
SAF is a big tree... there are bound to have a few guniang apples...
and sometimes... i wonder if the situation could be a result of the scholar policies... where officers without scholistic papers are forced into such drastic actions to prevent themselves from being condemmed... i dont know... but it could be...
furthermore... it appears that we might be overblowing this cheating thingy... afterall, the fault of a storeman cannot, and should not have resulted in an entire battalion being penalised... maybe MINDEF is simply too horseshit and disregarded the morals of the commandos... its downright unfair in my views...
maybe MINDEF can minus their points, but i seriously doubt MINDEF should punish the entire battalion, its downright unfair in my view to the other men and officers of 1st commando... who did their best and gave their best...
technically... we all want to win... please tell me... which unit likes to loose? if we like to loose.. then wat kind of security would SAF be providing singaporeans?
i sincerely feels that MINDEF should review their decision... i dont think its right of me to have been so emotional... true.. i hate those commandos... but we all belong to SAF... and though we may be from different units, we share common burden and a common mission...
perhaps, commandos could review their pass actions... all might not be lost... the commandos could come out of this disgrace even stronger...
i wish them well and may they win the next best combat unit award....
cheer up commandos... and kick your guniang song about you people leading the way and we infantry piggy back you all... afterall... we are behind you to back you people up in the field you know...![]()
![]()
![]()
Putting the blame squarely on some lowly logistics spec or enlistee and hanging him will not help matters. Thats called scapegoating.Originally posted by the Bear:no one asked for perfection..
however, integrity and honesty is expected...
and worse, cheating in training is only going to harm our soldiers...
the more real the training, the less people will die when it is needed.. haven't the REMFs figured this basic fact?
sheesh!
the remfs know this for a factOriginally posted by the Bear:no one asked for perfection..
however, integrity and honesty is expected...
and worse, cheating in training is only going to harm our soldiers...
the more real the training, the less people will die when it is needed.. haven't the REMFs figured this basic fact?
sheesh!
Originally posted by whiteillum:the remfs know this for a fact
however, its usually the commanders on the ground tat make mistakes. remfs do no exist in our army until as high up as divisional HQs. either way, how rear can the mfs be when the war start?
as much as i personally haf my own misgivings about the system of choosing and nurturing scholars in the saf, perhaps we should all try to look at it in another perspective. the saf has to renew itself constantly and ensure it stays young and the young are given the chance to go up so that they can constantly attract good people to join them. singapore has had no operational experience since the confrontasi many years ago, so there is realli no avenue for the earmarked to prove themselves other than through other means, such as war gaming and tactics and so on. of course we all know watever happens in real ops is vastly diff from watever happens on paper, but having someone who can plan and think b4 planning and come out wif a good plan is better than having someone who cannot do so as well right, given that both are similarly inexperienced in ops? saf chooses its scholars not solely based on academic results. they look at their ns performance, eca and other aptitude tests. we canot deny that academic results played a huge part. mabbe they r not quite right to do that. but actualli do they haf many other choices? i used to disagree wif how young man from the same year same batch and same school tend to go thru much of ns together cos i felt they wil be so insulated from the rest of society that they may become aloof and insensitive. but i realise there r limitations to our kind of people's army. i dun think the method of choosing and grooming earmarked top talent in the saf is perfect. i think there r certain influences within very high up that haf caused its methodology to be wat it is now, and this influence caused it to become rather skewed. but so far, the system has worked well. o cos there has to be a better system of doing things somewhere. i believe the saf is smart enuff to be on a constant lookout for such better means of looking for their future leadership.Originally posted by IAF:[quote]and sometimes... i wonder if the situation could be a result of the scholar policies... where officers without scholistic papers are forced into such drastic actions to prevent themselves from being condemmed... i dont know... but it could be...
I believe it is a strong contributing factor....this scholar policy is something gone dreadfully wrong. There are so many scholars nowadays....A decade ago, a perfumed prince usually get the choice operational postings. Nowadays, its not uncommon to find them in schools too. Not too long ago, i know of an SAF Overseas scholar (rank captain) in the role of a PC of a OCS platoon. And this is after his previous appt as a PC in a rifle unit. Perhaps this is a good thing it's a more realistic pace rather than making him OC next (which was true for my president scholar PC during my NSF who quickly became OC after that). But think about it, his appt is something that'd normally go to a non-scholar.
Given this highly flawed emphasis on paper qualifications or good paperwork (paperplay again) as a poor substitute for real military excellence its not surprising that people sometimes do dumb unethical things, like fudging the books, out of insecurity .
Its scary....but that begs the question again...is the SAF culture embodied in this best unit thingy helping to turn out warriors or perm secs or white-collared criminals?