Singaporean Amphibous capability
-
Originally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:
[/b]
[b]
Which country's intel agency would not detect the transportation of a nuclear transportation device? Components can be disassembled yes but the parts are all controlled and most are monitored by the CIA. An ICBM is not something you can hide in a briefcase.
And Y would we need to get one if we dun have LONG DISTANCE targets? Assuming China declares war (idiotic fantasy), which countries would they have to go thru. If you're gonna reply by sea, start reading up on your politics. Their agenda is Taiwan, not us.
You think China capable of launching large scale amphibious assault on us why not settle their Taiwan headache first. Still adamant on getting nuke is a good thing? Read:
[b]BIG FAT WASTE OF MONEY[/b]
Yeah brother.. agreed on ur pt...and Too much resources will be deployed by China just to hit Singapore with a ICBM, While there is an possibility in every single thing on earth.. its like using a MBT to clear a spider web...
it only reflect how "intelligent" the military leaders and politicians of the long distance country are, to hit SPore with an ICBM, wiping us out, without gaining anything back.. when we are not a thorn in their flesh... Waste their $$ and not gaining in any other way... unlike our immediate neighbours, wiping us out MIGHT benefit them , less competition economically, but also lost of income from SPORE... its a double edged sword...
When China have to destroy a country without gaining anything , it will be ROC, to "save their own face" rather than destroy Spore , where it is illogical. Yes there is the slightest possibility, but i guess the only person who will make that type of decision, will be NCC boys... hiaz.. -
i was HIGHLIGHTING an example on how a foreign power could occupy US.
not say China.
say , India build up , or any country build up , your forces down , and u cannot occupy other countries as part of your Forward defense , occupying and defending on enemy land, your strike range is about 2,000km
enemy attack from 6,000 km away.
We would be clearly out-ranged in this place even with KC-135 , our range is around south china sea, a foreign power has many things to gain , our national reserves , a port to block out his enemies and a foothold in international trade.
A Secret ICBM , which is NOT DISCLOSED , which maybe we got now.
would by then be useful.
Israel chose to reveal the nuke so that enemy will not attack.
Singapore will not chose to reveal the nuke so that enemy will not know,
art of deception, and if revealed SEA will be destabilized.
Therefore a hidden nuke would be the best option.
Who knows?
you all might be arguing here and there but here the person sitting on top of bukit gombak might have the same idea as me? -
Now you are just plain contradicting yourself. First you said that if China attacks S'pore we can launch a nuke at them. Then now you claim you were just giving an example of how a foreign power could occupy US not say China. WTF??? Seems like you don't even know what you yourself are babbling about.
And please lah, S'pore is so small. Where the hell are you going to store a nuke? And if the nuke should leak, the entire island will be wiped out in less than 48 hours. Not too bright a suggestion is it?
Sigh! If you want to engage in fantasies that's fine. Start a new thread & go & fantasise there all you want. Don't ruin this thread which is SUPPOSED to be about amphibious capabilities.
You are trying to make yourself sound real professional by talking about military stuff as if you're so familiar with it. But the crux of your views show just how infantile your thinking is. -
Can't agree with you more. Let's hope that all your postings educate this boy, and he does not go out and have similar discussions with any foreigners.Originally posted by esesce:Now you are just plain contradicting yourself. First you said that if China attacks S'pore we can launch a nuke at them. Then now you claim you were just giving an example of how a foreign power could occupy US not say China. WTF??? Seems like you don't even know what you yourself are babbling about.
And please lah, S'pore is so small. Where the hell are you going to store a nuke? And if the nuke should leak, the entire island will be wiped out in less than 48 hours. Not too bright a suggestion is it?
Sigh! If you want to engage in fantasies that's fine. Start a new thread & go & fantasise there all you want. Don't ruin this thread which is SUPPOSED to be about amphibious capabilities.
You are trying to make yourself sound real professional by talking about military stuff as if you're so familiar with it. But the crux of your views show just how infantile your thinking is. -
so far it hasnt and most of us have given upOriginally posted by sgdiehard:Can't agree with you more. Let's hope that all your postings educate this boy, and he does not go out and have similar discussions with any foreigners. -
God forbid! If he talks to foreigners like that, they might think all S'poreans are as mindless as that.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Can't agree with you more. Let's hope that all your postings educate this boy, and he does not go out and have similar discussions with any foreigners. -
Patience hath a limit.Freedom of speech is a right.Silence is also a right.Do what you please with him.Ignore him until he gets what we are trying to teach him.
-
Singapore confirm no nukes but didnt disclosed that we do not have 'SILVER BULLETS'.Originally posted by esesce:Now you are just plain contradicting yourself. First you said that if China attacks S'pore we can launch a nuke at them. Then now you claim you were just giving an example of how a foreign power could occupy US not say China. WTF??? Seems like you don't even know what you yourself are babbling about.
And please lah, S'pore is so small. Where the hell are you going to store a nuke? And if the nuke should leak, the entire island will be wiped out in less than 48 hours. Not too bright a suggestion is it?
Sigh! If you want to engage in fantasies that's fine. Start a new thread & go & fantasise there all you want. Don't ruin this thread which is SUPPOSED to be about amphibious capabilities.
You are trying to make yourself sound real professional by talking about military stuff as if you're so familiar with it. But the crux of your views show just how infantile your thinking is. -
So........that maybe why Australia's interested in those missiles?
-
Please lor who says 1 nuke is the size of 1 football field?
Just imagine we hire over 10,000 researchers , and we only come up with 2 or 3 products every year, and don't tell me u need 3,000 researchers for 1 product? not adding in ST's 12,000 personnel? Surely some will be used for the silver bullet? -
There just isn't any hint of realistic or logical reasoning in this guy. All we're getting is fantasy. Can we shut this down?
-
Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:
[/b]
[b]Please lor who says 1 nuke is the size of 1 football field?
Just imagine we hire over 10,000 researchers , and we only come up with 2 or 3 products every year, and don't tell me u need 3,000 researchers for 1 product? not adding in ST's 12,000 personnel? Surely some will be used for the silver bullet?
well... on the screen of your computer, the nuke in Red Alert may only appear as a tiny red dot..ST 's 12000 personnel includes the not-so-intelligents like you... Huh you mean you have read about in singapore there are how many doctorate researchers...? go do ur research as to spore have how many doctorate researcher. smart.. to employ 10k or 3 k reseachers to produce nuke ( secretly ) without the international research community knowing..?? come on lar... the spy satellite up there to enjoy the breeze only..??
Who knows?
you all might be arguing here and there but here the person sitting on top of bukit gombak might have the same idea as me?
Well... To all the old birds that had served and still serving ur reservist... ain't we lucky that the guy at gombak does not think like him...??
[/b] -
well brother... i share your sentimentsOriginally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:There just isn't any hint of realistic or logical reasoning in this guy. All we're getting is fantasy. Can we shut this down?
...( its just clearly illustrated a few points ) But since a forum is a place for people to share intelligent thoughts, think giving those with naive,unrealistic and unintelligent hypothetical assumptions based on computers games experience, the "Cold Turkey" experience..?
,
I call upon all the old birds , with real life experience, to have a good laugh and ignore those found to the above mentioned symptoms.To address the issue of using another nick, its ok.. thru a person's comments, we will be able to separate the green horns from the old birds...
Thru this thread , i had learnt a few things:
1. When i have my kids, will let them play with computer/play station / X box games which not only stimulate intellectual thinking abilities, but relative realism to the real world are included.
2. The negative aspects of a heavy weightage of simulation in military training.
This thread had shown some of the -ve pts ( being reflected by a certain participant in this thread ) of using simulation in training which the US Army had noticed in a study that they had conducted.
Isn't this great..?? while MSD can reflect in their report to Mindef from reading this thread that they had also notice some of the pts being mentioned in the US Army study.
3. I miss my reservist... when we can speak the same lingo with our buddies who have the almost the same intellectual abilities and the ability to relate to the real world.
well, let us all the old birds just ignore the green-horn-NCC-boy-computer-games-inspired-soldier-wanna-be....
next time maybe when we post we state that only those with relevant combat/ real life experience will be entertain...?? ( real life computer games combat experience not inclusive ) -
ive been reading this thread..wondering if i shld add some of my comment..Originally posted by sgdiehard:Can't agree with you more. Let's hope that all your postings educate this boy, and he does not go out and have similar discussions with any foreigners.
im starting to fear for our future...
if this guy become a SAF officer in future..im starting to pity those under him next time..
it is very obvious that he got no regard for human life..he think he can churn out hundred n hundred of grenadier n grunt just by harvesting tiberium???
im starting to see a trend in either SAF or military nuts forum...
kids are starting to invade both corners...well..i dun mind to have them around..if they just use abit of their common sense..
n things are going bad running 2 side..one side we have people like our CnC expert our very own damn bad luck boy n garang gang n on the other we have kengkia n keng gang who are trying very hard to get exempt from NS or get a downgrade..especially their leader who is trying to declare gay..
looking on both side..our future is bleak..when the last of Old Sch SAF NSmen ROD... -
There's still hope man.I'm sane and emotionally stable.
-
If you are in service now, you would see lots of incompetent NSF officers.I have the misfortune of having to serve with one.He's younger than me and has all these weird ideas about changing the way we run things, and they all sound good if taken alone but ludicrous when applied in the context of my Coy.Do I have a say?I can , but he won't listen.Would a self-professed expert listen to advice from ppl who have served just a bit more time than him?Nah.Originally posted by NathanG5:ive been reading this thread..wondering if i shld add some of my comment..
im starting to fear for our future...
if this guy become a SAF officer in future..im starting to pity those under him next time..
it is very obvious that he got no regard for human life..he think he can churn out hundred n hundred of grenadier n grunt just by harvesting tiberium???
im starting to see a trend in either SAF or military nuts forum...
kids are starting to invade both corners...well..i dun mind to have them around..if they just use abit of their common sense..
n things are going bad running 2 side..one side we have people like our CnC expert our very own damn bad luck boy n garang gang n on the other we have kengkia n keng gang who are trying very hard to get exempt from NS or get a downgrade..especially their leader who is trying to declare gay..
looking on both side..our future is bleak..when the last of Old Sch SAF NSmen ROD... -
So sad but too oftern true.Originally posted by LazerLordz:If you are in service now, you would see lots of incompetent NSF officers.I have the misfortune of having to serve with one.He's younger than me and has all these weird ideas about changing the way we run things, and they all sound good if taken alone but ludicrous when applied in the context of my Coy.Do I have a say?I can , but he won't listen.Would a self-professed expert listen to advice from ppl who have served just a bit more time than him?Nah.
Just apply SAF COC no. 7 - ignore the bastard.
When the shit hits the fan (hope it never does) I expect a lot of blood to flow before we find our 'middle ground'. Sadly, a lot of silly mistakes and poor judgement errors will first have to be made, and a high price will be paid first.
Then, and only then, will we get our act together, and win the fight. Just hope enuff of us clowns, remain to solve the problems that are beginning to be apparent. -
Listen to what in the first place?
You all are born in the generation of 70's and your way of doing things range back to the 80's and 90's
Total Defense means a full spectrum defense, maybe im having the sort of illusion that im staying in United states, but whateva, im just considering the same PAC-III Missile batteries mount on our air-bases , and the sales of all other AA stuff into other countries through ST.
No Aircraft Carrier , but long range strike capability provided by KC-135 ,
with some SLAM-ERs,
I do understand what you all are saying , regarding the feasability stuff , etc...
if you all are saying that there's peace for us , i don't think so.
There seems to be pro's and con's to every situation.
For Israel owning a nuke
-Prevent extermination of it's population
-Block from being bullied
Not
-Global Instability
-Fear of trading with it
I also don't understand why, USA , owning over 6,000 ICBMs would be so afraid of small countries like Iraq threatening it , or Israel.
Even for Singapore , you might argue that Singapore is already well defended
not much need to boost any stuffs , mights well disband the arm forces in peacetime? tomorrow you can't tell whether the armed forces will face a challenge or not...
1 thing which we must know
Balance of power between Singapore and Indonesia and M'sia
is getting narrower in the future, we must acknowledge it , after
all those corruption ends , their almost 220 million total population is gonna be more advantageous then us in the end , its awakening dragon.
1 Reason to illustrate this point is in the M.E , just look at IL and it's neighbours , Egypt and S.A all has latest F-16 jets, UAE with 80 block-60 F-16,
Egypt with over 400+ M1 Abrams , just imagine , do you think IL can survive a combined assault on it's 6 million population??
Answer is No, therefore to block off the combined assault nuke will have to be used as a deterrent. The reason why it cannot say no is because national security will be threatened. Cannot say yes because will have instability.
Sooner or later , we will face up to the fact that they will progress,
The Reason Why IL managed to progress so much is that
in 1970's the countries around it, Syria and Egypt were not using up-to-date weapons, now Egypt almost has the same kind of weapons they using.
NO more thing such as balance of power, Countries with higher population will ultimately be the winner in the end...
Conclusion : Singapore Armed Forces can maintain it's balance of power over it's neighbours for perhaps some years to come, but it must note down that the balance of power will 1 day tilt towards the others , due to higher population , and more contribution towards GDP
(Just like Normal tech and acad Vs Special stream, special stream go university faster, normal tech and acad slow, but 1 day will catch up with them, if ever.)
When the balance of powers tilts , thats when u panic , learn from Country X -
Majority of us have just completed our service. Your mentality is so shallow that you can only see in your two dimensional screen and your fantasy 2D wars. You're currently no better than the paper/simulation generals you despise. You fail to comprehen that there are more than just arms and numbers in a battle.
What we're getting from a green horn like you is nothing but hogwash. Peacetime disband armed forces? Might as well invite our neighbours to occupy us like Indonesia to East Timor. You, who have not even been through a single maneuvre, have no credibility to tell us what we should be doing when you do not understand it in the first place.
Nukes are strategic weapons, so is water and oil. Just how will you react if our neighbours suddenly decides to get a nuke? If you still cannot comprehend that diplomacy is our main defence, might as well migrate to the ME to go join a better army and fight out your fantasy wars. -
Malaysia has a population of 220 million? Anyway, most still do not have the indication of defending Malaysia especially the chinese as of the traditional bias towards NS. This is still in their minds. My relatives in Malaysia have this to say (I'm the only Singaporean in the family)Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Listen to what in the first place?
You all are born in the generation of 70's and your way of doing things range back to the 80's and 90's
Total Defense means a full spectrum defense, maybe im having the sort of illusion that im staying in United states, but whateva, im just considering the same PAC-III Missile batteries mount on our air-bases , and the sales of all other AA stuff into other countries through ST.
No Aircraft Carrier , but long range strike capability provided by KC-135 ,
with some SLAM-ERs,
I do understand what you all are saying , regarding the feasability stuff , etc...
if you all are saying that there's peace for us , i don't think so.
There seems to be pro's and con's to every situation.
For Israel owning a nuke
-Prevent extermination of it's population
-Block from being bullied
Not
-Global Instability
-Fear of trading with it
I also don't understand why, USA , owning over 6,000 ICBMs would be so afraid of small countries like Iraq threatening it , or Israel.
Even for Singapore , you might argue that Singapore is already well defended
not much need to boost any stuffs , mights well disband the arm forces in peacetime? tomorrow you can't tell whether the armed forces will face a challenge or not...
1 thing which we must know
Balance of power between Singapore and Indonesia and M'sia
is getting narrower in the future, we must acknowledge it , after
all those corruption ends , their almost 220 million total population is gonna be more advantageous then us in the end , its awakening dragon.
1 Reason to illustrate this point is in the M.E , just look at IL and it's neighbours , Egypt and S.A all has latest F-16 jets, UAE with 80 block-60 F-16,
Egypt with over 400+ M1 Abrams , just imagine , do you think IL can survive a combined assault on it's 6 million population??
Answer is No, therefore to block off the combined assault nuke will have to be used as a deterrent. The reason why it cannot say no is because national security will be threatened. Cannot say yes because will have instability.
Sooner or later , we will face up to the fact that they will progress,
The Reason Why IL managed to progress so much is that
in 1970's the countries around it, Syria and Egypt were not using up-to-date weapons, now Egypt almost has the same kind of weapons they using.
NO more thing such as balance of power, Countries with higher population will ultimately be the winner in the end...
Conclusion : Singapore Armed Forces can maintain it's balance of power over it's neighbours for perhaps some years to come, but it must note down that the balance of power will 1 day tilt towards the others , due to higher population , and more contribution towards GDP
(Just like Normal tech and acad Vs Special stream, special stream go university faster, normal tech and acad slow, but 1 day will catch up with them, if ever.)
When the balance of powers tilts , thats when u panic , learn from Country X
Their NS can't work, still kena racial split or stealing cases. When will they grow? -
Malaysia still has money problems - You think the corruption problem will stop? There will still be people doing such activities.
Also, their programme has revived but went dead later on. Look at their plans to get AEW or more jets has only worked out for 18 more SU-30. But will be balanced as their F-5 has went off from duty due to its age. -
I do see that in the future, Singapore might need a nuclear weapon as a margaining card on the table when the strategic balance between Singapore and our neighbours get off balance, disadvantage to our side.
Eg. Malaysia can purchase in the future 50+ Astros2 system which can simultaneously in salvos blanket Singapore. Previously when they have 18 Astros, we purchase 20 Apaches as the next step, however when Malaysia purchased 50+ Astros, it is beyond our capability to purchase 100+ Apaches.
Thus you see there will be a limit to Singapore in terms of balancing ourselve by a conventional weapon to coventional weapon challenge. In my case of 50+ Astros, it is clear that malaysia have shear advantage over us, something as good as them having a WMD and we have none. I do see that in the future, for the sake of balancing the balance, we might just have to result in having non-conventional weapons against our neighbours overwhemming strength of conventional weapons.
In simple sense, if malaysia can have the capability to level Singapore, we must have the capability to level their's as a form of MAD deterrent. Many people will highly that malaysia might go nuclear as a result, which is yet detrimental to our balance. However i disagree. I do not see a difference between Malaysia having 50 Astros2 and 1 nuclear weapon (other than the political consequences and the military strategies involve), thus i do not see why their introduction of 1 nuclear warhead or more as a result of our introduction on 1 nuclear warhead or more, going to be detrimental to the balance as square one.
I think the nuclear weapon that we might have in the future got to be a strategic scarecrow. One might not be a nuclear scientist to know of the negatives of a nuclear fallout, thus eventhough we launch our nuclear weapon to neutralise our enemy's strategic weapon (in the case of 50+ Astros), we are still in the silent spring as our enemy. Thus i see that politicians both sides must see that the 50 Astro2 is as a form of deterrence as well as the nuclear weapon, because mutual destruction is never a continuation of policy.
Thus unless the strategic balance can balance using conventional weapons, Singapore might have to go nuclear if no conventional alternative is beneficial to us. -
I believe in this view. But you need to have educated troops to operate as well. Why I say this is because their RMAF pilots have to go through 1 year of english training which is stupid to our view. Also, they need to have more as their size demands it.Originally posted by foxtrout8:I do see that in the future, Singapore might need a nuclear weapon as a margaining card on the table when the strategic balance between Singapore and our neighbours get off balance, disadvantage to our side.
Eg. Malaysia can purchase in the future 50+ Astros2 system which can simultaneously in salvos blanket Singapore. Previously when they have 18 Astros, we purchase 20 Apaches as the next step, however when Malaysia purchased 50+ Astros, it is beyond our capability to purchase 100+ Apaches.
Thus you see there will be a limit to Singapore in terms of balancing ourselve by a conventional weapon to coventional weapon challenge. In my case of 50+ Astros, it is clear that malaysia have shear advantage over us, something as good as them having a WMD and we have none. I do see that in the future, for the sake of balancing the balance, we might just have to result in having non-conventional weapons against our neighbours overwhemming strength of conventional weapons.
In simple sense, if malaysia can have the capability to level Singapore, we must have the capability to level their's as a form of MAD deterrence. Many people will highly that malaysia might go nuclear as a result, which is yet detrimental to our balance. However i disagree. I do not see a difference between Malaysia having 50 Astros2 and 1 nuclear weapon (other than the political consequences and the military strategies involve), thus i do not see why their introduction of 1 nuclear warhead or more as a result of our introduction on 1 nuclear warhead or more, going to be detrimental to the balance as square one.
I think the nuclear weapon that we might have in the future got to be a strategic scarecrow. One might not be a nuclear scientist to know of the negatives of a nuclear fallout, thus eventhough we launch our nuclear weapon to neutralise our enemy's strategic weapon (in the case of 50+ Astros), we are still in the silent spring as our enemy. Thus i see that politicians both sides must see that the 50 Astro2 is as a form of deterrence as well as the nuclear weapon, because mutual destruction is never a continuation of policy.
Thus unless the strategic balance can balance using conventional weapons, Singapore might have to go nuclear if no conventional alternative is beneficial to us.
Their mindset also have to change. RMAF cannot still use British Hawk 100 for fighter operation when it is a training jet. Only Malaysia is treating it like a fighter jet which is useless (Speed is less than Mach 1 and limited weapons) -
I think my post is to clear the sceptism that Singapore do not need nukes. Anyway, nice to know you share my views.Originally posted by sbst275:I believe in this view. But you need to have educated troops to operate as well. Why I say this is because their RMAF pilots have to go through 1 year of english training which is stupid to our view. Also, they need to have more as their size demands it.
Their mindset also have to change. RMAF cannot still use British Hawk 100 for fighter operation when it is a training jet. Only Malaysia is treating it like a fighter jet which is useless (Speed is less than Mach 1 and limited weapons) -
Finally someone who agrees partially with me
The Both perceived Northern and Southern neighbours, both is going to develop well in the next 50 years to come after weathering through the
1997 economic crisis.
Indo and M'sia has 220 million people, + we must not forget the rise of
religious fundamentalists in the country ; therefore we will definitely must be aware of them
220/5million in the future = 21 times.
that means our current GDP PCI of 38,000 , they just need 38,000/21
to match our current Economy , and they will development much more
lets say it becomes 10,000 PCI in the future , take 10,000 x 220million and you get 1 heck of a extremely strong region.
Sooner or later, SAF's unique edge will be overtaken .
Israel managed to have it's unique edge in 1973, Yom kippur war and Six-day war because very simply-speaking , it received latest delivery of F-15 aircraft to counter the poor MiG-23s and MiG-21 which Syria and Egypt was using.
But now , Most country in M.E has latest aerial and ground technology...
So now neither does israel has numerical or technological edge.
Can israel survive a joint strike now? Most likely No
Similar stuff will happen to SG , SG will not have any technological edge as the region progresses as a whole. Can Singapore survive a joint strike ?
Yes (due to indonesia having 4 latest SU-30 and poorly maintained F-16 jets
and M'sia having 8 F/A-18 , lesser den 30 MIG-29s and lesser then 30 SU-30)
Can Singapore survive a joint strike in the future? When technology is at par
and the human factor comes in? and numerical advantage nevetheless..