Soldiers chained to defend Malaya/Singapore 1941
-
Eyewitness report of one Encik Razali, 70, Kg Tok Amat, Kelantan
“When the Japanese were invading pantai Sabak and Tok Amat, we were ordered to hide in trenches that were dug out below our houses by the British army. When the Japanese came, we were so afraid because the bullets passed so close right above our heads, they sounded like bees. Sound of explosions shook our hideouts.
When the British retreated to Kota Bahru, the Japanese ordered us to come out of the trenches. We saw with our own eyes the sight of war. We saw bodies of soldiers scattered everywhere, and the shore was splattered with human blood.
We saw the bodies of Indian soldiers who were chained by their leaders at the fort, and because they were unable to retreat and they had no choice but to protect the fort till the end of their lives.” -
put it in its correct context lah BOY...
indian troops were never much trusted to begin with... not since 1857 when they mutinied... u think the brits have short memories ah?
what's your friggin' point? that the brits were inhumane, imperialist scoundrels? i got ONE word for you... DUH... -
my point is:
Do we need to chain our soldiers in the line of fire?
.........................( maybe you need to chain me..
-
in the first place, this isn't THEIR country...Originally posted by idwar:my point is:
Do we need to chain our soldiers in the line of fire?
.........................( maybe you need to chain me..
if u were intending to desert, i will gladly do u the honours of delivering the bullet through your skull... no need to waste metal chaining u to your post.
even if u are unwilling to fight for your country, u will fight for the man proning in the mud beside u... u will fight for your wife, family and children. can u bear to let them down?
would u rather an invading army impale your kids with bayonets, slit your daddy's throat and rape your wife and mother?
hmmm... but maybe that is asking too much for the likes of u... i'll rather just shoot u through the head so u won't get in the way later. -
Why are you so sure that an invading army will very likely commit atrocities against civilian?Originally posted by CX:would u rather an invading army impale your kids with bayonets, slit your daddy's throat and rape your wife and mother?
hmmm... but maybe that is asking too much for the likes of u... i'll rather just shoot u through the head so u won't get in the way later.
-
Why are you so sure that an invading army will very likely commit atrocities against civilian?Originally posted by CX:would u rather an invading army impale your kids with bayonets, slit your daddy's throat and rape your wife and mother?
hmmm... but maybe that is asking too much for the likes of u... i'll rather just shoot u through the head so u won't get in the way later. -
do u know any invading army that hasn't committed atrocities? has there ever been a war where the ultimate victims has not been civillians?Originally posted by want to know:Why are you so sure that an invading army will very likely commit atrocities against civilian? -
errm, falkland?Originally posted by CX:do u know any invading army that hasn't committed atrocities? has there ever been a war where the ultimate victims has not been civillians? -
Nice One! Brother!Originally posted by snk86:errm, falkland?
-
total civillian population of the Falkland Islands?Originally posted by snk86:errm, falkland?
-
================================
Originally posted by CX:
do u know any invading army that hasn't committed atrocities? has there ever been a war where the ultimate victims has not been civillians?
================================
Japan 1945 : No record of japs civilians ill-treated by victorious Allies.
Only several Generals/Politicians got hanged on filmsy charges.
Even the the Emperor, who was the greatest War-Criminal, was spared !
He was the One who authorised everything.
Sometimes even civilians and emperors should be shot.......... -
and u think tha A-bomb was not a war crime? or the firebombings of japanese cities?
-
err, cannot say war crime lah, must say "colletral(spell)" damage. and no atrosity(or what ever dumb word it is) is because US only steped foot on mainland jap AFTER they surrendered. with the UN pact at hand, think they dare try anything stupid ah?Originally posted by CX:and u think tha A-bomb was not a war crime? or the firebombings of japanese cities? -
that one was meant in EXTREAM secartisimOriginally posted by want to know:Nice One! Brother! , cause i dun even think anyone is in the falkland islands -
collateral damage? for all that japan did at pearl harbour, practically no other american civillians were hurt on american soil... and do we remember that pearl harbour is a military installation? a perfectly legit target in times of war. and it wasn't that the japanese didn't want to declare war... it was cos the code clerks at their embassies couldn't de-code it and deliver it on time.Originally posted by snk86:err, cannot say war crime lah, must say "colletral(spell)" damage. and no atrosity(or what ever dumb word it is) is because US only steped foot on mainland jap AFTER they surrendered. with the UN pact at hand, think they dare try anything stupid ah?
hmmm... but how come the homes of women, children, old pple, and korean slave labourers became legitimate targets for american bombers?
how come we condemn german u-boats in the atlantic when the americans were doing the SAME sh|t in the pacific? unrestricted submarine warfare on japanese merchant shipping. executive order, courtesy of president roosevelt.
no recorded atrocities on Japanese civillians? hmmm... they must be angels and saints... but wait a minute! how come the Yakuzas found such ready markets for night clubs and brothels for G.Is on garrisson duty there? Shinjuku is what it is today, thanks to Yakuza enterprise and horny american G.Is.
and what about japanese-AMERICANs??? they were herded into concentration camps like cattles after pearl harbour... just for being of japnese descent!
no atrocities? my arse. there was b/s going on at every corner...
lets not be idiots here... to Idwar, show me one side of the coin and i will show u the remaining three.that one was meant in EXTREAM secartisim
eh... not i wanna say but... use dictionary lah... u mean "sarcasm " is it? , cause i dun even think anyone is in the falkland islands
but u are right... i thought i read somewhere once that at the time of the war, the local sheep population exceeded the pple living there or something...
even today, the civillian poulation on that small place is only about 2000+ ... and thats only cos tourism had generated jobs for that place. -
step 1. take gun
step2. shoot chain
step3. step away -
What a bullshit story !!! Eyewitness - Razali is so shell shock, and affected by the sudden rush of events. Got gun and bullet, cannot shoot away the chains and run ? or what he did not see is that the japanese may be the one to chain up the survivours before they shoot them. What he saw was just dead bodies on the wall.Originally posted by idwar:Eyewitness report of one Encik Razali, 70, Kg Tok Amat, Kelantan
“When the Japanese were invading pantai Sabak and Tok Amat, we were ordered to hide in trenches that were dug out below our houses by the British army. When the Japanese came, we were so afraid because the bullets passed so close right above our heads, they sounded like bees. Sound of explosions shook our hideouts.
When the British retreated to Kota Bahru, the Japanese ordered us to come out of the trenches. We saw with our own eyes the sight of war. We saw bodies of soldiers scattered everywhere, and the shore was splattered with human blood.
We saw the bodies of Indian soldiers who were chained by their leaders at the fort, and because they were unable to retreat and they had no choice but to protect the fort till the end of their lives.” -
I believe the Indian defenders, the Dogras, voluntarily chained themselves.
Perhaps someone can add more facts ?