Who is the best General in Singapore?
-
BG Eric Tan Huck Gim
First UN Force Commander.. Illustrious past some more
and ex Comd 9th Div, forgot liao the name.. the guy before the present Comd -
LOL, why the anti-scholarofficer sentiments? if there are as many scholar officers as some here claim, they can't ALL be bad? or are they?
i've never been to NS, won't make a judgement, just think the sentiments abit all too uniformly skewed to one side? is there any bias?
(not a statement, just a comment, i have NOT been to NS) -
somehow, people just love to bash scholars and officers.Originally posted by laser51088:LOL, why the anti-scholarofficer sentiments? if there are as many scholar officers as some here claim, they can't ALL be bad? or are they?
i've never been to NS, won't make a judgement, just think the sentiments abit all too uniformly skewed to one side? is there any bias?
(not a statement, just a comment, i have NOT been to NS)
so when the 2 come together - scholar-officers - u can imagine how it attracts attacks like honey attracts bees. -
some local U guys are good but i think they will just go up to COL.
Last seen Lt COL, HQ Guards G3, no idea where now
Ex 1 Guards CO, who get the BN Best Combat Unit last year, last seen Lt COL, no idea where now oso
Both should be in mid to late 30s. -
My nomination for best General is given to LIM BO SENG
No. As with Adnan Saidi, he's a war hero & a local icon but not a Singaporean soldier. Lieutenant Adnan was commissioned by the British army, but Major-General Lim actually wasn't - not even after he hooked up with the British SOE to form Force 136. He was Kuomintang all the way, purportedly linked to Chiang Kai Shek's clique & had engaged in many pro-China activities between '37 & '42 (that made him flee Singapore prior to the invasion). His posthumous promotion was conferred by the Kuomintang.
They're from a different era; you might as well considered the local nationalists who went up-country to join the MPAJA guerilla units, who were more active than Force 136 against the Japs. The MPAJA history is largely still fragmentary - except for its infamous leader Lai Teck - due to its relationship with the Malayan Communist Party. -
so passe..
=/ lim bo seng is like so long ago..leader of force136 and later prolly formed
Force"369" , continuation of force136 ?
Prove to me that scholar-officers better then normal officers?
As a human..you can't be good at books,theory,reasoning..aptitude..attitude..
military..social sciences..polictics..courtesy..defense..physical..
All at the same time ..Can we? -
hm..Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Prove to me that scholar-officers better then normal officers?
As a human..you can't be good at books,theory,reasoning..aptitude..attitude..
military..social sciences..polictics..courtesy..defense..physical..
All at the same time ..Can we?
what are "normal" officers? why differentiate between whether they are scholars or not? and is there a need to prove that one is better than the other? they all serve the same organisation and country rite? in the end all these are just labels. when you meet a person, its not written on their face that they are scholars rite? and if you meet someone outside, how would you know if they are officers much less scholars?
perhaps its time to ask ourselves why this discrimination of scholars (and officers) happens so frequently. is it because we feel injustice that they go up the ladder faster (even if they ARE that good)? jealous (that they are better than ourselves)? are all the tirades against them justified and substantiated or merely the result of our imagination and word of mouth rumours and conjured by our hurt prides and egos? -
Originally posted by Moxie:
LTA.Adnan should have been posthumously promoted to the rank of Captain by the British after the war.
[b]My nomination for best General is given to LIM BO SENG
No. As with Adnan Saidi, he's a war hero & a local icon but not a Singaporean soldier. Lieutenant Adnan was commissioned by the British army, but Major-General Lim actually wasn't - not even after he hooked up with the British SOE to form Force 136. He was Kuomintang all the way, purportedly linked to Chiang Kai Shek's clique & had engaged in many pro-China activities between '37 & '42 (that made him flee Singapore prior to the invasion). His posthumous promotion was conferred by the Kuomintang.
They're from a different era; you might as well considered the local nationalists who went up-country to join the MPAJA guerilla units, who were more active than Force 136 against the Japs. The MPAJA history is largely still fragmentary - except for its infamous leader Lai Teck - due to its relationship with the Malayan Communist Party.[/b] -
just wondering, is it possible to get an SAF scholarship or smth to enter west point or USNA?Originally posted by LazerLordz:COL Loo Yong Poo.Navy Seal, Ranger, Commando, Airborne.Now that's a fine man I would rather have leading our Armed Forces instead of the scholars, who might be smart in their heads but lack the leadership quotient that has been carefully nurtured of the senior officers who are trained specfically for war.E.g, I would respect a graduate from West Point or the US Naval Academy rather than a scholar who was sent to Harvard or Princeton, then has a ROA that leads him to the CDF post.Let the scholars be analysts and policy hawks, let the fighters and warriors be in command.That should be the way.But then again, no one would blame a NSF when I say, that's the business for all you regulars.We pay you so much money, please do not lead us into war. -
I believe there is.However, both institutions are tough but someone who has placed warfare and tactics knowledge at the forefront of his list of to-do things, is rare here indeed.
-
It's part of the Military Training Award (MTA). candidates are usually serving officers with outstanding performances. The officers sent to West Point are often noted to be holding CPT in news of their graduation in SAF publications.Originally posted by sgFish:just wondering, is it possible to get an SAF scholarship or smth to enter west point or USNA? -
What ever species they may be outside SAF or after NS, we don't bloody care. In this forum and at least during NSF or when the SAF100 applies it matters what kind of funny ideas come across.Originally posted by wuming78:hm..
what are "normal" officers? why differentiate between whether they are scholars or not? and is there a need to prove that one is better than the other? they all serve the same organisation and country rite? in the end all these are just labels. when you meet a person, its not written on their face that they are scholars rite? and if you meet someone outside, how would you know if they are officers much less scholars?
perhaps its time to ask ourselves why this discrimination of scholars (and officers) happens so frequently. is it because we feel injustice that they go up the ladder faster (even if they ARE that good)? jealous (that they are better than ourselves)? are all the tirades against them justified and substantiated or merely the result of our imagination and word of mouth rumours and conjured by our hurt prides and egos?
For the record I am an NCO with some experience working under some scholar officers and non-scholar types. Most times no diff between the two (labeled or otherwise) EXCEPT that some who always never fail to astound me are from the both ends of the sepectrum.
I knew a CPT ("A" levels dropout) who by a miracle of dumb luck was promoted to CPT after 12 years as LTA MTO. Everything because of a lack of ability we suffered under him as OC. Eventually he resigned before he passed his "sell by date" as CPT.
I trained a scholar batch at BMT, many were destined to be scholar officers. Most were too theory driven, some absolutely inept, but because of their Super WH status was sent up to OCS and later got scholarships. Yes, the best and few are exceptional, but the majority was sadly lacking in command ability.
Above is only my two cents worth. -
If there's war, I would rather be led by a SWO who has years of REAL experience, rather than a MAJ who has only theoretical knowledge.
I'm not saying all our commissioned officers are bookworms & have no real experience, but the fact is that is the case for many of them. I've nothing against scholars flying up the promotion ladder & becoming COA or CDF. But seriously, in times of war, how effective are these ppl?
The ability to get all As in exams does not equate the ability to make effective decisions in combat. Similarly, one's grades does not reflect on one's soldiering ability. Best e.g. being some A-level students in my coy who were slackers & chao keng all the way, while there were some O-level students who were damn on the ball.
If I had to choose between experience & education, I'd choose experience. During my active days, our coy had 4 platoons. Our's was the only platoon with a 1WO as a PC. The rest had 2LT or LTA. All the other platoons had tons of trouble ranging from unhappy soldiers to sub standard performance. Our's was the only platoon with minimal trouble.
Call it coincidence if you like. I, on the other hand, feel its 'cos our 1WO had the experience to keep things under control. He demanded we performed well while looking after our welfare. Something which clearly the other 3 PCs weren't able to achieve. -
NSFs will always cover for each other , be it commanders or men, that is what I've observed.At times, the guys might abuse this and it may lead to poor command effectiveness, further more the 2LT and the LTA might have a different mentality from the 1WO or MWO.However, in the log, service side, officers perform better generally as a whole, while the opposite goes for the combat side.
-
Reminds me of a Brunei jungle-training exercise with 6SIR when I saw the CO got chewed out by a (lower-ranked) trainer for being heartless.
Can still recall the scolding like it was yesterday: "Your mortar people are dying back there, trying to follow your &*(#$@ pace."