Parallels with Iraqi Marines and the RSN's "Marines"
-
http://www.mca-marines.org/Gazette/2006/06walger.html
The roles of the Iraqi Marines are similar to our sea soldiers, except the sea-boarding ops and enhanced fast boat training.
Should we rename our sea soldiers into the Republic of Singapore Marine Corps, and train them for offshore island defense and reinforcement via naval landings as a occupying force alongside the Guards? -
Our RSN Defence Force is NOTHING near the Marines. Don't ply them with unneccessary praise, for it'll be a damn joke. Unless they actually manage to form a FORCE RECON then we'll talk. Heck, the USMC is even bigger than some countries armed forces COMBINED. Singapore Marine Corps? Don't insult the name of the Marines.
-
I'm comparing them with the Iraqi Marines la.Originally posted by Hellraiza:Our RSN Defence Force is NOTHING near the USMC. Don't ply them with unneccessary praise, for it'll be a damn joke. Unless they actually manage to form a FORCE RECON then we'll talk. Heck, the USMC is even bigger than some countries armed forces COMBINED. Singapore Marine Corps? Dream on...
Whoever talked about the USMC.
-
huh? we are talking abt renaming them. not comparing..Originally posted by Hellraiza:Our RSN Defence Force is NOTHING near the USMC. Don't ply them with unneccessary praise, for it'll be a damn joke. Unless they actually manage to form a FORCE RECON then we'll talk. Heck, the USMC is even bigger than some countries armed forces COMBINED. Singapore Marine Corps? They can dream on.
besides we are talking abt the israqis... -
Iraqis IRAQIs, not Israelis.Originally posted by mhcampboy:huh? we are talking abt renaming them. not comparing..
besides we are talking abt the israelis...
Gee, so many nations starting with "I". -
eh i typo...Originally posted by LazerLordz:Iraqis IRAQIs, not Israelis.
Gee, so many nations starting with "I". -
Originally posted by mhcampboy:eh i typo...
I think people are laughing at this thread.
-
no lei... im not laughing...Originally posted by LazerLordz:
I think people are laughing at this thread. -
"Marines" ? - reading the article, we already have a combination of various units covering those duties.
-
sorry, but read my last edited post
-
I know.Originally posted by bcoy:"Marines" ? - reading the article, we already have a combination of various units covering those duties.
I'm exploring the possibility of assigning more roles to the sea soldiers and relieving the other units' duties.
Seeing that it's better that forces that will carry out coastal operations, be trained in ship to shore ops and platform, island protection/recovery duties in these waters.
What are your views, I'm hardly an expert, just throwing up some ideas here.. -
am no expert too...
-
I get your point.Originally posted by Hellraiza:sorry, but read my last edited post
Do see my above post.That's the angle I was going for, the hypothetical scenario of changing the role of the RSN's force into a more integrated Marine-like force by allocating some of the roles now carried out by other units to them. -
Yes my friend, but i believe there already some units which have "marine" capabilities, so why waste money training up freshies?Originally posted by LazerLordz:I get your point.
Do see my above post.That's the angle I was going for, the hypothetical scenario of changing the role of the RSN's force into a more integrated Marine-like force by allocating some of the roles now carried out by other units to them. -
Yeah.Originally posted by Hellraiza:Yes my friend, but i believe there already some units which have "marine" capabilities, so why waste money training up freshies?
Ah well, I thought this thread wouldn't last long anyway..just playing about with ideas.
Seems like most agree that we shouldn't go down this path.. haha, not like as if I'm some policymaker eh. -
nonono...i would be happy to see an actual Singapore Marine unit set-up...i just dont think the sea soldiers fit the bill.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Yeah.
Ah well, I thought this thread wouldn't last long anyway..just playing about with ideas.
Seems like most agree that we shouldn't go down this path.. haha, not like as if I'm some policymaker eh. -
Ah okay.Originally posted by Hellraiza:nonono...i would be happy to see an actual Singapore Marine unit set-up...i just dont think the sea soldiers fit the bill.
Let's see if even more radical ideas come up from other people. -
I agree that the name 'sea soldiers' is less than ideal but they can't exactly be called 'marines' too due to their jobscope. In many countries, their marines though smaller in number is considered as a semi-elite force.
I think we already have a 'marines' element in SAF. And i am not talking about the Guards here. I suspect the RDF must have certain amphibous assault training and capability, this way they can then be considered rapid deployed.
-
Agreed.Originally posted by tankee1981:I agree that the name 'sea soldiers' is less than ideal but they can't exactly be called 'marines' too due to their jobscope. In many countries, their marines though smaller in number is considered as a semi-elite force.
I think we already have a 'marines' element in SAF. And i am not talking about the Guards here. I suspect the RDF must have certain amphibous assault training and capability, this way they can then be considered rapid deployed.
Sea soldiers, could be realistically renamed into Naval Response Teams?
The old name just sounds too pirate-like for me. -
Btw, Guards are trained in Naval insertion and coastal hook operations just in case you are not aware. Yup the troops are launched from LCU, FCEP.Originally posted by tankee1981:I agree that the name 'sea soldiers' is less than ideal but they can't exactly be called 'marines' too due to their jobscope. In many countries, their marines though smaller in number is considered as a semi-elite force.
I think we already have a 'marines' element in SAF. And i am not talking about the Guards here. I suspect the RDF must have certain amphibous assault training and capability, this way they can then be considered rapid deployed. -
They should be called "Sea-men" Nghur Nghur Nghur -Originally posted by tankee1981:I agree that the name 'sea soldiers' is less than ideal but they can't exactly be called 'marines' too due to their jobscope. In many countries, their marines though smaller in number is considered as a semi-elite force.
I think we already have a 'marines' element in SAF. And i am not talking about the Guards here. I suspect the RDF must have certain amphibous assault training and capability, this way they can then be considered rapid deployed.
We do not need a 'marines' element because it is a waste of money and infantry/guards can be/are trained in amphibious asssaults already. -
Actually, "during my time" the infantry did coastal hook and other sea assualt exercises too.
I agree the "sea soldiers" right now are just better trained "protectors" of a naval base (not trying to be offensive here). They are not strictly speaking an infantry unit.
Don't really think Singapore needs a Marine type unit per se. I think a better idea would be the re-activation of 2nd Guards (now that Singapore has more NS eligible males again) and have them develop a more extensive marine assault type role.
Just to go off tangent, anyone have any idea why 2nd Gaurds was chosen for de-activiation instead of 3rd? -
I thought there are news or rumors of reactivating it isit? I thought when 2Guards close down, 3 Guards was in it's infancy, isit?
-
How come? I thought people having less kids these days?Originally posted by insouciant:(now that Singapore has more NS eligible males again) -
88,89 got alot of males. Dragon year.Originally posted by Uncle_MooMoo:How come? I thought people having less kids these days?