Commando unit barred from SAF competition
-
i have heard far worst... though seriously i cant prove it since its a case of i heard it from someone else kind of thingy...
i heard that there was this scholar who was sent on a trainning course...
he flopped it but he told the instructor to pass him OR ELSE since he is a scholar, he is sure to be promoted so far above that instructor, he will make his life suffer till he quit SAF!!..
in the end, his demands was passed up the channel and ... HE PASSED...
-
I agree...i think that's one of the major flaws. Let's have some perspective, it'll be dumb of SAF, let alone any organisation, not to want to recruit the nation's best and brightest. Scholarships is definitely a way to seek'em out.Originally posted by Viper52:Is it really that good? Look at the typical scholar's career. Its already mapped out the minute he puts pen to paper. He'll supposed to fast-tracked up the ladder, usually from a middle level position, supposedly for him to gain experience. His term there is usually more or less fixed, until the next step up and so on until he arrives where it's been planned for him.
But with this fast-track thingy, i'm afraid that SAF is at risk of losing it's soul (warrior soul that is). Sure, being able to write well and plan ahead is well and good. That's what a staff officer must be good at. But an army can't fight with staff officers...it needs leaders...people who inspire and lead by example. I've know of an OC whose men would do anything for him..because they know he really cares for them. Men can tell whether their leaders are genuine or not. When they know that their leader is behind them, instead of climbing their backs for the crabs and stars, they will go for excellence. I'm sure this quality is something that can be found in peacetime too. Mindef needs to put its ear to the ground when it comes to assessing people for promotion. Ask questions like "What does his subordinates and peers think about him? Is he a screamer or is he cool as a rock under pressure" Let the answer factor heavily in promoting junior and middle-management officers (scholars or not). -
Now the critical question is: Can we change the system even if its discovered to be flawed? As it is most of the decision makers today are the scholars (i.e the beneficiaries of the system). Now should the day come when the system's failings become painfully obvious to everyone else and a source of embarrassment to Singapore, will these scholars stubbornly cling on to the system that put them there in the first place? Or can we trust that these people will put the country's interests above that of their pride and slaughter whats already their "sacred cow"?
Would you? -
Well, i'm not sure if this forum can serve as a pressure group like that of the US based Soldiers For The Truth or www.sftt.org where truth-tellers or the salt-of-the-earth soldiers sound out about abuses in the system. Perhaps some of you may already know, in the US, they have this famous vietnam vet called Col David Hackworth (who is one of the founders of SFTT). He writes a very widely read weekly syndicated op-ed called "Defending America" which can be found in www.hackworth.com where he exposes wrongdoings or serious flaws in the military. It gets the attention of lawmakers there. Needless to say, he is persona non grata with the military suitsOriginally posted by Viper52:Now the critical question is: Can we change the system even if its discovered to be flawed? As it is most of the decision makers are the scholars (i.e the beneficiaries of the system). Now should the day come when the system's failings become painfully obvious to everyone else and a source of embarrassment to Singapore, will these scholars stubbornly cling on to the system that put them there in the first place? Or can we trust that these people will put the country's interests above their pride?
Would you?
Thinking aloud: "How i wish the most very senior level fella in MINDEF is listening or reading these stuff" -
Reason is they're 2 fit liao !
no need wat best unit !
-
Agreed. And its not as if these storemen and supply supervisors can DON'T cover up. As it seems, the cover up for this kinda thing is passed from the previous batch down to the next batch. So much crap that the next batch HAS to cover up also.
And imagine what would the CO do to the poor storeman if he refuses to cover up and do everything by the book? It will definitely cause the unit to do badly for the best combat unit competition if such cover ups were suddenly exposed and investigated thoroughly. These storemen also LAN LAN have to cover up lor. And now when their cover up is discovered, they will definitely be blamed for this.
Its such a sad case. If the entire SAF logistics is like that, can the SAF fight effectively? What if the equipment thats supposed to be there on paper... is actually not? The SAF invests huge amounts of money on logistics software, and so many units can't be bothered to use it, rather relying on their own system to manage their logistics. And when they need something, the fall back on the primitive system of requests.
If there is a waste of money on the part of SAF, its not just the CDO. But a majority of units out there, for failing to make full use of the software and equipment it has put in place for proper logistics handling.Originally posted by Viper52:Putting the blame squarely on some lowly logistics spec or enlistee and hanging him will not help matters. Thats called scapegoating.
We need to use this incident to realise that this culture of one-upmanship and elitism, if taken too far, will do no good in the long run, and examine on ways to change this mindset. The posts about the actions of the Commandoes by the other posters just goes to show that this competitive mindset has been taken too far. To the point that winning is everything, never mind how you get there (Switching off your MILES is cheating)
Tripwire, you may have been too harsh on the SAF in your post, but you're spot on in saying that this competitive streak has become a bad thing and is IMO already harming rather than helping the SAF in its primary role, the defence of singapore
I don't think the punishment is too harsh, had 1 CDO BN remained in the competition and won it in spite of this issue, the message we're sending out is that its ok to do such things and still be possible to get ahead. By barring them, it might actually serve as a wake up call, not just to them, but too all others who use such underhanded means to get to an end.
And no, I don't have a beef with 1 CDO BN or any of its members, my beef is with the culture and system that IMO is pervasive here, not just restricted to the military -
lets face it
which unit dosent 'cheat' or cover up in order not 2 get into hot soup?????
i'm sure every unit does it
da way i see it i think it some excuse 2 prevent da Commandos from takin part in tis comp
or may b some other units r not happy since da Commandos r da record holders of tis comp
but i heard tat
da Commandos will b involved in some classified missions so they have 2 sacrifice tis BCU comp
da other units now had betta take more precautions when they try 2 'cover' up
-
i have nothing against the Cdos..but i think u gave them too much credit..i believe almost everybody is unhappy wif the Cdos winning the compy everytime..but its a fact tat the Cdos will do anything to win the compy..even during Atec..they can switch off the MILES n chiong a MG trench..brave indeed...Originally posted by 35MM Gunner:lets face it
which unit dosent 'cheat' or cover up in order not 2 get into hot soup?????
i'm sure every unit does it
da way i see it i think it some excuse 2 prevent da Commandos from takin part in tis comp
or may b some other units r not happy since da Commandos r da record holders of tis comp
but i heard tat
da Commandos will b involved in some classified missions so they have 2 sacrifice tis BCU comp
da other units now had betta take more precautions when they try 2 'cover' up
involve in classified mission? errr...i dun think tis is America..the compy involve the whole unit..tat include NSF n regular...
n if its reali they r in a classified mission..wat makes u think it involve the whole Battalion? most likely its onli involve the CRF or SOF...n yea how big is the CRF n SOF tat they can affect the compy?
nobody is blaming them..as u said most unit cheat also...but y wana give excuse y they r out of the compy? all wear green a mistake is a mistake....u can do watever u like..but dun get caught..
35MM GUNNER ur a Cdo? -
Classified mission my foot. LRI involves the logistic personnel in the unit, what does it have to do with the ops unit? Sheesh.
-
well wadya know? singapore everything also must have paper and 1000 forms, and the guy who conforms best to govt standards wins the day
-
it's worse when the idiots are thinking of ISO ratings...
hmmm... come to think about it, do any of the units have the rating?
it's a fiasco in the private sector anyway... worse still, the stupid SQC and SQA ratings which some decide to go for...
i read their website... some "companies" with SQC ratings have no premises, 1 person and only a mobile phone number...
if the SAF decide to go for such ratings, i expect that unit to grind to a halt totally...Originally posted by laser51088:well wadya know? singapore everything also must have paper and 1000 forms, and the guy who conforms best to govt standards wins the day -
i believe that the logistic base have some sort of ISO thingy...
which in my view is pure idocy and crap of a CO that has lost a screw...
how could they permit outsiders to know the logistical workings of SAF logistic base.. considering their importance to the SAF operational secrecy..
and are they gonna let those people to rumaged through SAF inventories of wat we have, how much we have now and where they are??
technically... that would enable foreign spies to know exactly how much supplies does SAF have in a war and how long SAF could last before the next resupplies...
i sincerely hope that they maintain military secrecy during such inspection.. or simply limits such inspections to only a small non-core unit and then use watever gains from ISO to be used in other part of logistics department which should be remaind closed...
else... IF i am the SAF general... i would kick that bastards ass... and you all can see his face at mindef video website.... -
Was from one of the log unit that got the ISO rating, and in fact was from the batch that had to work its ass off to get that blasted rating. Had guys who had to stay in shuffling papers in the middle of the night and even come back on weekends to clear stuff.
All said and done, not much to worry about when it comes to security. From what i could see, it was pretty much paperwork inspection to see that the forms and inventory tracking SOP was followed. If wartime scenario, i think confirm must cut corner liao. The inspectors didn't get to see the operational side of it tho. Seemed that they were more concerned with peacetime operation than in actual wartime scenario. All in all, i (grudgingly) say it was a good thing, cos it really cleaned up everything, after all the loose ends were finally tied up. At least the guys from the next batch didn't have the nightmare of papers and numbers not tallying. -
it's actually very true dat every single unit does cover-ups and stuff... in actual fact it happens in every single working environment... think abt it.... if things seems as if it's going smoothly workers will work well.... if they're not it's gonna be hell.... to me all dis hype abt cdos not gettin the bcu is all bull shit....if we've been getting it for 17 straight yrs and juz lose out in 3 diff yrs wats wrong man? we gotta give others a chance.... there're soooooo many units ard fightin for the award.... i can truly sae it's reallie a beautiful sight to see men doning the red berets a beautiful sight involved in the guard of honour.... but again.... it'll be quite boring too see it for sooo many yrs.... u guys dun have to worry bout the cdos... we noe our combat and fitness standards we'll never lose out to any other unit.... the main question is can WE the cdos fight better and go further den any other unit during war times..... YES WE CAN... and dat's wat matters most to every s'pore citizen..... i rest my case.... FOR HONOUR AND GLORY
-
Originally posted by IAF:By David Boey
THE crack Commando unit has been barred from competing for one of the military's top honours because of cheating involving record-keeping and fitness scores.
Several personnel from the 1st Commando Battalion are also facing disciplinary action.
This is believed to be the first time a Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) unit has been booted out of the competition for the Best Combat Unit award. It is a major blow to the Commandos, who hold the record for having won the annual award 17 times, since the contest started in 1969.
The battalion last won it in 2001. Last year, it was edged out of the top spot by the 40th Singapore Armoured Regiment. The red berets' bid to reclaim the honours, given out every year during SAF Day celebrations on July 1, ended late last year.
In response to The Straits Times' queries, the Defence Ministry (Mindef) yesterday confirmed that irregularities were uncovered in late 2002 in the logistics or storekeeping records of one of the sub-units of 1st Commando Battalion. There were also discrepancies in the individual fitness test scores reported by two of the unit's specialists, who handle the stores.
A ministry spokesman said: 'The SAF takes a serious view of such matters. As a result, the unit was disallowed from participating in the Best Unit Competition for the year. This is to uphold the integrity and high standards of the competition.' Disciplinary action is being taken against the individuals concerned.
Word of the Commandos' ban has been making its rounds in defence-linked Internet chatrooms.
It is believed that storekeepers, who are tasked with managing all supplies from light bulbs to spare tyres, doctored some paperwork to account for missing items.
Army inspectors unmasked the cover-up during a logistics readiness inspection at the battalion. The inspection, which assess the level of competence of storekeepers in SAF units, is part of the selection process in the best-unit competition.
The year-long assessment also grades SAF units on matters like battle readiness, administrative efficiency, marksmanship, manpower issues and the way the unit handles security matters.
The unit with the highest overall score receives the Best Combat Unit trophy from the President during the SAF Day parade on July 1. The winning unit also gets to safeguard the SAF Colours - a top honour reserved for the best unit in the SAF.
The 1st Commando Battalion, based at Hendon Camp near Changi Point, has traditionally been regarded as the leading contender for the trophy because some of the fittest and most motivated national servicemen are selected for commando training.
which joker so loyal to his unit or bribed by somebody? not scared charged ah? punish the culprits can liao, what for ban whole unit? -
Originally posted by DarrenWong:it's actually very true dat every single unit does cover-ups and stuff... in actual fact it happens in every single working environment... think abt it.... if things seems as if it's going smoothly workers will work well.... if they're not it's gonna be hell.... to me all dis hype abt cdos not gettin the bcu is all bull shit....if we've been getting it for 17 straight yrs and juz lose out in 3 diff yrs wats wrong man? we gotta give others a chance.... there're soooooo many units ard fightin for the award.... i can truly sae it's reallie a beautiful sight to see men doning the red berets a beautiful sight involved in the guard of honour.... but again.... it'll be quite boring too see it for sooo many yrs.... u guys dun have to worry bout the cdos... we noe our combat and fitness standards we'll never lose out to any other unit.... the main question is can WE the cdos fight better and go further den any other unit during war times..... YES WE CAN... and dat's wat matters most to every s'pore citizen..... i rest my case.... FOR HONOUR AND GLORY
never say die ar cdos!!!! but..... thats the way my friend!!!! i like your style! -
After reading thorough the postings, the some postings are saying:
THE crack Commando unit has been barred from competing for one of the military's top honours because of cheating involving record-keeping and fitness scores.
Several personnel from the 1st Commando Battalion are also facing disciplinary action.
This is believed to be the first time a Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) unit has been booted out of the competition for the Best Combat Unit award
In response to The Straits Times' queries, the Defence Ministry (Mindef) yesterday confirmed that irregularities were uncovered in late 2002 in the logistics or storekeeping records of one of the sub-units of 1st Commando Battalion. There were also discrepancies in the individual fitness test scores reported by two of the unit's specialists, who handle the stores.
A simple case - a few "cover-ups " got blown, so what !
Nothing wrong - everybody else is doing it etc
Conspiracy against the Commando from wining the Best Unit Competition.
Classified mission ???
Interesting points.
I don't think they are not the real issues.
Important question that no one has asks / answers so far, why was this case released to the press?
From my understanding of SAF, for any negative case to be release to public mean its BIG issue / case.
It will NOT be as simple as reported in the newspaper, what is published should be just the " tip of the ice berg?".
Let me highlight that It will need the clearance of at least Minster of Defense or higher, for this case to release to newspapers, -
This is plain embarassing. Remembering what 1 Commando was like ten years ago, watching my old unit fall from grace in this manner really stings.
My loyalty still remains with the Commandos; such things are hard to let go of. However, being realistic, I am not surprised, much less offended, at the smudging of logistics records. For as long as I have known, the ethos of the unit was that maintaining stores held a very low priority in comparison to getting the job done. The implicit assumption was that in completing the mission, plenty of equipment, both ours and the oppositionÂ’s, would be damaged, destroyed or lost. This assumption was carried through to training, and in the interests of focussing upon the mission, our willingness to write off equipment was much higher than what would be typically found in other SAF units. Certainly our logistics people earned their pittance.
Call it arrogance, callousness or just plain sloppiness, but we never paid much attention to the niceties of military life. We were often cited for not saluting other unitsÂ’ officers, employing guerrilla tactics in BTEC exercises and, in one case, painting in our own parking space at SAFTI. As Henry David Thoreau would have it, "Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! I say, let your affairs be as two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand instead of a million count half a dozen, and keep your accounts on your thumb-nail". We were there to do a job and do it damned well, and as long as that was achieved, we were, and I do believe we remain, unabashedly unapologetic for all other transgressions.
What, if the rumours are true, shames me is that the fitness records were falsified. A full score on the fitness tests was the minimum required for the job, and a problem in this department, in light of the ethos I described above, simply will not do. If the unitÂ’s state of fitness was such that records had to be falsified, losing the Best Combat Unit competition would be a foregone conclusion anyway.
Another part of our ethos is that we tend to self-regulate, and in terms of fitness our standards would be more demanding than what Mindef sees fit to impose. As much as I would hate to disagree with a fellow Commando, I would point out to DarrenWong that if we need to falsify our records for the sake of meeting Mindef standards, we have well and truly fallen even further below our own standards. Unless things have changed radically since I left, Commandos are self-starters; on a normal day, without need for instructions, most of us would go for runs around AETI while waiting for the Duty Officer to sign everything off. I was far from being the fittest man in my company. However, despite all these years and a relatively sedentary lifestyle, I can still clear a 2.4 kilometre run in less than ten minutes.
Vis-Ã -vis the claims of Commandos turning their MILES harnesses off during exercises, a major shift in culture must have taken place for such practices to occur. Apart from the usual grumbling about being unable to book out in the evenings, my lot rather looked forward to playing OPFOR and having some real fun. Some of us wanted to try out new tactics; other simply had plenty of aggression to release. Either way, the net effect was that the majority of us went out for the satisfaction of properly trouncing the opposition. This, more so than any regulation, precluded the idea of turning the MILES harness off. Again, it our self-regulatory nature manifesting itself. If the current lot are in fact trying to win for the sake of the record, half the unit motto ought to be shamefully erased.
Those from my company who stayed on have risen to reasonably senior positions by now; the last time I checked, all of the officers were majors. I can only sincerely hope that they remember the way we did things, and maintain or regain that standard.
A point of irony to note: thomasct pans the wild speculations made by other posters, and immediately following makes some speculations about tips of icebergs himself. This is somewhat inconsistent. -
Agreed , some speculations were a bit out of realityOriginally posted by Gedanken:A point of irony to note: thomasct pans the wild speculations made by other posters, and immediately following makes some speculations about tips of icebergs himself. This is somewhat inconsistent.
As for " about tips of iceberg " , I am not inconsistent.
Speculations are just speculations.
What I am highlighting is that whether the press article Is the whole case or a part of the case ??
Let look at the facts as reported in press.
Two staff caught - the whole unit got ban / blacklisted and case release to the national press.
Quite unbelievable to say the least considering the level of clearance need for such actions to taken agianst any unit let alone the pride of SAF .
The Commando Battalion - the SAF 's most elite of elite units, got publicly humiliated just because of two of its store specialists were caught cheating & doing paperwork cover-ups.
-
Double posting
-
Thomas, your assertion is in itself speculation, distinct from fact in that there is no verifiable evidence to demonstrate it.
The reported facts here are presented in the last sentence of your latest post: two specialists were caught cheating and the unit was banned from the Best Combat Unit competition.
The rest of it is pure speculation. Is it really the tip of the iceberg? Is there an iceberg? If so, what exactly does the rest of the iceberg consist of? Specifically, what else has happened to result in the banning? Who is responsible? Where and when did it happen? Who made the decision to ban the Commandos from the competition? What regulation specifies the minimum level of clearance (by this I take it you mean seniority) for such a decision to be made and for such information to be released to the press? Exactly what is the level of clearance required?
As a measure, if the answers are facts, they will be based upon what "is"; not what "should", "could", "would" or "must be". Framing an assertion in the negative does not make it fact; just because it is not one thing does not necessarily mean it is the other.
If you cannot present clear, factual and verifiable answers to these questions, your assertions are not based upon facts - they are speculative, educated guesses at best. If you have no facts to answer the above questions, your statement that there must be more going on than just two specialists being caught cheating cannot be proven any more than speculations of classified missions and the deliberate intent to ban the unit from competition. Therein lies the inconsistency.
In any case, I would not pay too much heed to any of this if I were you. I occasionally tutor Honours students writing their theses and I get finicky about these things. -
THAT BAN ON COMMANDOS
3 soldiers fined for rifle sling cover-up
Elite warriors barred from Best Combat Unit contest after discrepancies uncovered
By Goh Chin Lian
DETAILS of what had happened to warrant the unprecedented move to bar the Commandos from vying for the Best Combat Unit title this year emerged in a military court yesterday.
Three regular servicemen overseeing supplies for the elite force had made up documents to account for some extra rifle slings that were not on its records, ahead of an audit by the Defence Ministry.
But the auditors uncovered the discrepancies and reported them for investigation.
This cover-up and other discrepancies over individual fitness test scores dashed 1st Commando Battalion's hopes of clinching the top award that it had won a record 17 times since the contest started in 1969.
The Singapore Armed Forces had barred the unit to uphold the integrity of the contest, which involves a year-long assessment of its forces on matters ranging from logistics and battle readiness to administrative efficiency.
No details emerged about the fitness test scores yesterday. A Defence Ministry spokesman said the officers in that case would be 'disciplined in due course'.
Yesterday's case involved the logistics officer of 1st Commando Battalion, who had come to know of 144 extra rifle slings in its store last October, just before the audit.
The usual procedure is for the Commando headquarters to record that the slings had been purchased, but the consignment had gone straight to the battalion instead.
Instead of waiting to sort out the confusion, the logistics officer instructed his quartermaster to draw up a document showing that the slings were on loan from the headquarters to the unit.
The quartermaster and a warrant officer from the headquarters signed for the loan, knowing it was bogus.
The three servicemen were each fined $800.
In passing judgment, Major (NS) Marvin Bay, the president of the court martial, noted, among other things, the servicemen's past record of exemplary conduct and that their actions were not for personal gain.
But Major Bay, who is also a district judge in the Subordinate Court, said: 'It never pays to do things the easy way rather than the right way.
'It is after all when we are faithful in small things that we can be trusted in important matters, such as the defence of Singapore.' -
The judge has a point. But it's tragic that careers are ended...not because they lost live rounds or rifles....but rifle slingsOriginally posted by IAF:In passing judgment, Major (NS) Marvin Bay, the president of the court martial, noted, among other things, the servicemen's past record of exemplary conduct and that their actions were not for personal gain.
But Major Bay, who is also a district judge in the Subordinate Court, said: 'It never pays to do things the easy way rather than the right way.
'It is after all when we are faithful in small things that we can be trusted in important matters, such as the defence of Singapore.' -
well.. the persons concerned would haf known when they did the cover up tt they run the risk. at tt point of time i bet they never tot it would be found out. but now, they pay the price. they reaped wat they sowed, even though it may be out of loyalty and pride...Originally posted by IAF:The judge has a point. But it's tragic that careers are ended...not because they lost live rounds or rifles....but rifle slings -
The judge has a point. But it's tragic that careers are ended...not because they lost live rounds or rifles....but rifle slings
the ppl involved lacked ethics and professionism (SAF core values) and thats y their careers have ended there.
Anyways, the saddest thing that i read here is that the cdos switched off their miles during atec.
personnally i feel that training must be realistic. so what if they r able to charge up the hill now, at d end of the day, if when really breaks out, do u dare to chiong up the hill like u did during atec with bullets flying all ard ?
ATEC is the time to test the effectiveness of ur training.
i personnally knows a few cdo and they really deserve the respect that the cdos have built up over the years.