Can our soldiers really kill?
-
Can our soldiers really kill?
I'll offer a two-part answer. The first, what is your immediate reaction when I say "citizen soldier". Keeping in mind that Singapore has one of the world's longest tenures of mobilizable personnel. We're not volunteers or a militia; neither are we professionals nor part of a permanent standing force throughout. But, & I'm sure many of you shall find out, you & your teenage buddies who are training together now will still be doing the same when you hit thirtysomething. That's over 10 years, man. Not everyone will like each other; age will set in sooner or later; guys will get posted in & out. But the core bonding will be there. We may not be battle-tested, but if you read the memoirs of those who were, it's often the small-group brotherhood that shall help one survive. In decisive times, take care of the smaller things first, & let the larger stuff worry itself.
On a less serious note, my other answer is to not to get too idealistically absorbed. If you've ever charged up Good Morning Hill at SAFTI, you'd known a million things is always happening at the same time! Factor in enemies bullets &/or mortar shells, plus your own increasing fatigue -- of course it's natural to panic, or freeze up, or fire back blindly! But, before your nerve fails you for good (i.e. turn coward), instinct & rote training shall come forth first. Not the other way around. Duty too (I almost say "obedience"), when you receive a command & realize you must execute it to get things done. -
Come to think of it...
When i was doing guard duty, I actually wanted to shoot back at this guy who was fooling around outside the gates pointing a gun at me firing caps (make noise only).
Only when I determined it to be toy gun I let my guard down.
Maybe i am being stupid. -
Haha...have probable said this...but will say it again...under ROE u're right to engage him. But how would you feel, facing his parents telling them "Aunty, Uncle, it was me who shot your son, because he shot at me first with a cap gun."Originally posted by Ponders:Come to think of it...
When i was doing guard duty, I actually wanted to shoot back at this guy who was fooling around outside the gates pointing a gun at me firing caps (make noise only).
Only when I determined it to be toy gun I let my guard down.
Maybe i am being stupid. -
It is some bo liao person, on a motorcycle.. riding past the gates... shouting "ORD LOH" then fire away....Originally posted by SpecOps87:Haha...have probable said this...but will say it again...under ROE u're right to engage him. But how would you feel, facing his parents telling them "Aunty, Uncle, it was me who shot your son, because he shot at me first with a cap gun."
it was Ferry Terminal duty.... i was more worried that the missed bullets hits the Aviation Fuel Silo behind...
don't want to make world news.... -
omg! close.Originally posted by Ponders:Come to think of it...
When i was doing guard duty, I actually wanted to shoot back at this guy who was fooling around outside the gates pointing a gun at me firing caps (make noise only).
Only when I determined it to be toy gun I let my guard down.
Maybe i am being stupid.
-
Anyway...the million dollar question is...not if our soldiers can shoot at other enemy troops. But if our soldiers/airman/sailors are willing to engage a plane that is hijacked and going towards Swissotel or some other tall building or using a Harpoon to engage an Super Tanker headed towards Jurong Island or Pulau Bukom.
-
If during war, I have to fire a single round from my rifle, then Singapore has more or less lost the war... lol
-
If you read On Killing, which is a very good book on the human cost and instincts on taking lives, you will realize that the survey on WW1, WW2 and the like are very true indeed.Originally posted by banzie:Why not... its not like the past... you use knife and the guy scream like hell...
Now... you should him likely you don't even see his expression. It was so far away.
You'll natural instinct will take over.. furthermore like some said. We are already accustomised to violents in gaming or etc... the first trigger may not be easiest but probably easier for us all.
I think the survey on the WWI is not very true.
For example in Vietnam war about 2000 bullet to one casualties. Not because they soldier didn't shoot but they shot blindly out of fear and wasted quite abit of bullets.
Humans have a very deep rooted instinct against taking life, unless you belong to the 2 percent of the population with no such issues. Military training has over the ages since WW2, been trying to take away this instinct by training methods that make it easier and easier for the soldier to kill.
If you ask me, our modern soceity with it's heavy amount of violence in the media and entertainment, along with our modern, realistic training methods, will mean that our soldiers will have far less issues with killing them the grunt in WW1 or WW2 had.
But what happens after the war, is another issue. -
This is naive thinking!! Instead, during war, if you did not get to fire a single round, most probably you are already dead.......from missile/artillery strikes ..... or if you're at the front attacking/defending against the enemy.....most likely your reflexes are somewhat slower than the enemy in front of you and he gets the first fatal shot/s at your guts!!Originally posted by jianfish9:If during war, I have to fire a single round from my rifle, then Singapore has more or less lost the war... lol
War will still be fought....for how long.....and who wins will be determined when war comes along.....
In the meantime....those who have to undergo military training as fulltime NSF or as reservist NS... will just have to ensure that you polish up on your skills and prepare for any eventualities. And those of us who have finish our NSF/reservist liabilities should take up arms to support our soldiers..as we have the war fighting skills ingrained into us when we were serving.
I am very sure......if SG is defeated....the enemy will plunder our little island of assets, money and our women too......after shooting most of us men dead [they cannot let our men survive to avenge in the future again]. Do you guys want that to happen to your loved ones?? -
No one can tell till such a time comes...
-
>>with our modern, realistic training methods, will mean that our soldiers will have far less issues with killing them the grunt in WW1 or WW2 had.<<
More impersonal, yeah.
But since the thread starter focused more about close-quarter combat, I'm not sure modern technology has had a great effect here. The M1 Carbine they used is the predecessor's of today's M16. What's so high-tech? (The M1 Garand, according to google, lasted until the Korean Wear & is a silent-precision drill rifle nowadays.)
Reflex & rote training will take over in the real thing. We all have experienced it some in our NS. Remember the CTSS package (or whatever you call it nowadays) in the shooting range? Not sure if you guys do the full 300m rundown anymore. But its last part -- when you're panting like mad, & the targets flip up 10m ahead, & you thrust your rifle against your hip & straighten the front arm & then fire -- you learn to shut out everything & execute automatically. Then you hear a command, & it's the same: ease spring, squeeze trigger & clear arms.
Ditto with bayonet fighting. All the infamous "see that tree, go touch it" appetizers have a designed purpose, to render you completely shagged out. After all, you're not going to fix bayonets a mile from the enemy in the real thing. Again, rote training (& pent-up aggression) takes over, since it's too tiring to second-guess things. Who knows, this conditioned reaction may save you someday.
These kind of habit are ingrained from drill. It'll be the same thing inside a AMX-13, or firing a 155m howitzer, etc. & they shall be applicable in wartime. To Singlish, it's "mo2 lian4", not "xun4 lian4."
On a sidenote, I found it curious that a WW2 example was used but, to take it at face value, I don't think the Yankees then were as "prepared" as today's troops, inc. the SAF. America had gone isolationist after WWI (indirectly allowing fascism & Nazism to fester within the vacuum), & their military forces drastically reduced by 1940. The troops they sent to WWII were conscripts, but with less training compared to now. That's why they're so heroic, despite all the setbacks, obstacles & inexperience. The Australian counterparts who were sent to Singapore were defeated by the Japs, but who's to say they weren't gallant too? Baptism of fire, man. -
U take it wrongly. I am saying that if the place I am posted to has to pick up a rifle and fight, then its all over. lolOriginally posted by FireAndHell:This is naive thinking!! Instead, during war, if you did not get to fire a single round, most probably you are already dead.......from missile/artillery strikes ..... or if you're at the front attacking/defending against the enemy.....most likely your reflexes are somewhat slower than the enemy in front of you and he gets the first fatal shot/s at your guts!!
War will still be fought....for how long.....and who wins will be determined when war comes along.....
In the meantime....those who have to undergo military training as fulltime NSF or as reservist NS... will just have to ensure that you polish up on your skills and prepare for any eventualities. And those of us who have finish our NSF/reservist liabilities should take up arms to support our soldiers..as we have the war fighting skills ingrained into us when we were serving.
I am very sure......if SG is defeated....the enemy will plunder our little island of assets, money and our women too......after shooting most of us men dead [they cannot let our men survive to avenge in the future again]. Do you guys want that to happen to your loved ones?? -
All over in what sense, care to enlighten??Originally posted by jianfish9:U take it wrongly. I am saying that if the place I am posted to has to pick up a rifle and fight, then its all over. lol
The place that you have to pick you rifle and fight will be at the front lines. This does not mean it is the end.......but than again ........looking at your posting.....probably it IS the end for you......kena blasted by the enemy before you can even shoot back......hehehe 
So relax.....when the time comes......just blast the enemy in front of you......take a few out before you go down.......you would have done your part as a soldier......
But.....if the angels are with you......and your time on this earth is not up.....you'll probably live through the war.......what you will become after that, i cannot forsee......
-
This may not go down well with some people.
My take on this is: Shoot to kill, not to maim. Unless absolutely sure, avoid head shots. Upper body shots have a higher chance of achieving a kill due to a larger surface area.
Shi Ke Sha, Bu Ke Ru. -
read his post again.Originally posted by FireAndHell:All over in what sense, care to enlighten?? The place that you have to pick you rifle and fight will be at the front lines. This does not mean it is the end.......but than again ........looking at your posting.....probably it IS the end for you......kena blasted by the enemy before you can even shoot back......hehehe
So relax.....when the time comes......just blast the enemy in front of you......take a few out before you go down.......you would have done your part as a soldier......
But.....if the angels are with you......and your time on this earth is not up.....you'll probably live through the war.......what you will become after that, i cannot forsee......
it's probably the same for me too.
having said this, all these declaration that "i'll shoot when i have to" don't mean nothing.
we won't know till the day comes when you have to place another human being in your loaded weapon's sights, and squeeze off the trigger, knowing full well that you're ending that poor sod's life. -
I think that since none of us has been in a situation where our lives or the lives of any of our family/friends/comareds are threatened,or been subjected to such pressures,then we cannot accurately say what we will do.
However,it's true we are desensitised by the content of modern media. -
if the enemy is the one that 'act busy, shoot into air' when he sees u,
will u still shoot him? -
shoot. and shoot again to make sure.
then again... if every enemy is like that, maybe can catch him and make him kiwi the boots for the whole Bn. -
The question is ...at that particular intense period....you really can't tell the difference whether the enemy is wayang or not....what with bullets flying and crashing everywhere...the only alternative is shoot the enemy dead, before his wayang shots find you.Originally posted by pervertboi:if the enemy is the one that 'act busy, shoot into air' when he sees u,
will u still shoot him?
Remember, during the early stages of GW1, Iraqi tanks rumbled towards the American lines with their guns facing backwards? The American and Kuwaities thought the Iraqi tank unit wanted to surrender.....but when the Iraqi tanks came within point blank range...they turned their guns around and blasted the American and Kuwaiti positions. A good number of Americans died in that ambush, eventhough they managed to eventually destroy the Iraqi tank units.
[I can't remember the name of the battle....you may need to read it up].
Therefore, no second thought about it, I will shoot the enemy dead, enemy wayang or no wayang. As long as the enemy fire his weapon, i have the legitimate right to kill the enemy.
Anyway, i know that when the time comes for me to be at the front facing the enemy, most likely i won't make it back alive...[unless the heavenly powers dictate that i can return safely after the war]. So before i go down ...i am gonna take some with me to hell!!! -
But shooting the maim has a larger effect on the enemy. They have to take dudes out to care for him and unlike dead bodies, wounded men are a bigger drain on morale and resources.Originally posted by crosshairs:This may not go down well with some people.
My take on this is: Shoot to kill, not to maim. Unless absolutely sure, avoid head shots. Upper body shots have a higher chance of achieving a kill due to a larger surface area.
Shi Ke Sha, Bu Ke Ru. -
Yes I know that. But considering how "their" dudes actually find it within themselves to care for their downed comrade actually brings up a lot of questions, and one in particular:Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:But shooting the maim has a larger effect on the enemy. They have to take dudes out to care for him and unlike dead bodies, wounded men are a bigger drain on morale and resources.
WTF are we doing trying to kill these decent folks? -
Because some politicans set our lives on a collision course?Originally posted by crosshairs:Yes I know that. But considering how "their" dudes actually find it within themselves to care for their downed comrade actually brings up a lot of questions, and one in particular:
WTF are we doing trying to kill these decent folks?
But when it comes down to it, and if you need to win, maiming makes more sense then killing. As well as a worthy war story for your enemy to tell his children assuming you don't injure him too seriously. -
if i recall correctly, i read something about Russian female snipers a really long time ago.
they wound an enemy.
then kill those who rush to help.
if i remember correctly.
____________________________________________
i doubt anyone really cares abt wat happens to the "other" guy when rounds keep whizzing by.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Because some politicans set our lives on a collision course?
But when it comes down to it, and if you need to win, maiming makes more sense then killing. As well as a worthy war story for your enemy to tell his children assuming you don't injure him too seriously. -
I wonder how they really derived that figure... Hmm... front line usually wait for air strike den chiong right? Where got need to fire weapon? The rest are busy trying to find cover, more like avoiding getting killed than killing. Of course only 15-20% get the chance to shoot.Originally posted by ord personnel:"...it has been estimated that only 15-20% of front line American combat soldiers actually fired their weapons at the enemy..."
When you get to be in that actual scenario, it will be a totally different situation.
Nevermind, I just crapping away...
Back to work!!
-
Originally posted by Ristar:
Russian, or the movie Full Metal Jacket?
if i recall correctly, i read something about Russian female snipers a [b]really long time ago.
they wound an enemy.
then kill those who rush to help.
if i remember correctly.
____________________________________________
i doubt anyone really cares abt wat happens to the "other" guy when rounds keep whizzing by.[/b]
Anyway I'm the shoot to kill type. I don like to see some dude screaming in agony when I can just blow his head off and he won't know a thing. But if it really gets down to deciding to go for that shot I wonder if I am able to do it.