Sign On: RSAF AEO
-
cookiecookie - Huh? Did your kakis know about the CTP, or did they retire before it was in place (2004)? The company involved (Right Management Consultants) is still here &, checking around, is no fly-by-night operation either. Check for yourself. MINDEF itself had stated it is the world’s largest such firm, "works with 4,900 corporate clients worldwide, including 80% of the Fortune 500 companies" & has a track record of partnering the British MoD "to provide re-settlement services to all ranks of the armed forces. Over 10,000 service leavers use Right’s service each year & since it started, over 40,000 service leavers have benefited from Right’s expertise in this field." I don't think they're an outplacement service in the direct sense, so it's up to those interested to take advantage of their programmes, & then network. Yeah, I'd meant GLCs. While scholars do get the choice postings, they have hundreds of such companies/subsidiaries/associates absorbing "lower" & farmer senior officers. This link has a list: http://www.yeocheowtong.com/Salaries.html As for NGOs, I was thinking more of the VWO kind (Winston Choo at the Red Cross, Tan Thean Seng at the Salvation Army, etc.). The appointments are there; that your acquaintances end up falling between the cracks instead can't negate this fact. In fact, these opportunities actually extrapolate, the more the Govt. keeps privatising its services, & the new owners (invariably partly state-owned & "insider" directors named to their board of directors) subsequently expand overseas. Don't believe? Well, see who'll buy Tuas Power in the coming months, for example, & then note the appointees. Hmm, I thought it's the outmoded wospecs who ended up working for MOE? What are officers doing there, being much younger & generally better-educated (Masters degrees) to strike out on their own, if need be. In any case, the TS will have to re-contract with the RSAF more than once before ever attaining senior rank, so even if he's naive now, he'll be wiser in taking the next step as he gets older.
-
The guy who retired as a COL and now holding an office lower than a younger, 30+ something staff officer would hold retired last year when the economy was hot, so of cos it was after 2004.
I have read that website long before you pasted it. The top half of the list are the SAFOS who retired as service chiefs or one-star. Out of the list of non generals, i spotted 5 SAFOS already. Tham Kui Seng. Lee Wai Mun.Tang Kok Fai, Quek Poh Huat and the Navy AO Yoon Kam Choon are scholars. Not all scholars stay until they get their star, they leave earlier in their 30s because of offers. Those are just what I spotted, there are a lot more whose history is not googlable. How to pick out? It is easy. Just look at the ones who hold important appointments (Asst Chief of General Staff) or were AO.
I did not say that all the farmer officers end up stranded. I say a sizeable proportion do. If you count the no. of LTC and COL in the list minus the scholars I spotted, you will realise that the no. is a minute fraction of the no. of LTC and COL in SAF. Do you how many LTC and COL are there at one time in the whole force?
You are not right to assume that there will only be an increase because the trend of govt privatising its work (first coming out with stat boards and then GLCs) is not a new trend. it's been around since the early 80s. Any spike would have happened in the 80s and the 'trend' has reached the plateau years before this list is compiled. Also you should go to SAF now to count the no. of officers that fit the impression in your head of the typical SAF officer. Out of the lot, how many % are graduates and out of the graduates, how many did a local MBA.
Think the ones who end up doing AV work and work in schools are the non grads but the grads can expect a downgrade in commensuration to the rank that they retired at. This is because it is hard having to fight with so many other leaving COL and LTC who are also 45.
I think its much safer to sign on as spec. Most get the 2nd contract and WOSPECS retire at the same age as civilians, plus they can never get fired.
-
Can a degree holder sign on as a spec if he so wishes?
Cos so far i have not met a degree holder regular spec yet. But i have seen many non graduate regular officers.
What if the guy really prefers to be a spec because he sees more pride and interest in specialist's work and he happens to have a degree?
-
cookie -
In other words, organizational attrition, lah? (Within the pyramid rank hierarchy.) Thanks for the explanation, but at the same time, you agree that this alleviates the alarmist tone of your original post? If you can make it all the way to 45 - or wear at least LTC rank, IMO - the Establishment (SAF, Govt, whatever) will "take care of its own".
Funny your choice of words, though: "stranded." Looks like both of us were debating different tacks on the same thing: a perceived continuation of an "Iron Bowl". Maybe the CTP arrangement was a sign that they couldn't create enough GLC openings to absorb the newer "retirees", but personally I think it was decent that they initiated this contingency. Looks like your kakis missed out, then.
Look, all I said was that GLCs & VWOs will eye these higher ranks, & it's a pool consisting of hundreds of potential companies. (The majority in the link I posted belonged to the so-called first-tier - hence the scholar appointees - & each of them can have their own sub-units & affliates.)
Off-tangent: Those who dropped out earlier, or couldn't adjust to corporate life, or accept lower pay, or fizzle out in their 3rd career line.
-
Originally posted by blitzonic:
cookie -
In other words, organizational attrition, lah? (Within the pyramid rank hierarchy.) Thanks for the explanation, but at the same time, you agree that this alleviates the alarmist tone of your original post? If you can make it all the way to 45 - or wear at least LTC rank, IMO - the Establishment (SAF, Govt, whatever) will "take care of its own".
Funny your choice of words, though: "stranded." Looks like both of us were debating different tacks on the same thing: a perceived continuation of an "Iron Bowl". Maybe the CTP arrangement was a sign that they couldn't create enough GLC openings to absorb the newer "retirees", but personally I think it was decent that they initiated this contingency. Looks like your kakis missed out, then.
Look, all I said was that GLCs & VWOs will eye these higher ranks, & it's a pool consisting of hundreds of potential companies. (The majority in the link I posted belonged to the so-called first-tier - hence the scholar appointees - & each of them can have their own sub-units & affliates.)
Off-tangent: Those who dropped out earlier, or couldn't adjust to corporate life, or accept lower pay, or fizzle out in their 3rd career line.
No. I was not alleviating my tone. I stand by what I said. You came up with a list of people that you claim supports your theory that majority of farmer regulars are either flying high or doing something not much worse off than what they retired as, and I competently disproved you when I found out that half of the non-generals in the list are scholars. I already mentioned scholars leave the force sometimes way before the mandatory retirement age because they can or while they're still COL or LTC. (through offers that pour in before they hit 45 eg BG Bernard Tan etc). While they're still in service they would have sat on the boards of several private companies, which aids in this premature transition should they want to. Did you know that Lim Swee Say left the force as an LTC and now he's a minister? Basically your whole argument hinged on that list, which I tore asunder.
I told you before, the people i knew who retired generally retired after the schemes came out. You seem to think you can change this fact simply by proclaiming otherwise after I said this. Maybe things were worse before the scheme, that's probable don't you think?
I think you made another unsubstantiated 'personal statement' when you claim that there are "HUNDREDS" of GLCs waiting to take in retired LTCs by the droves eagerly at a lower level than the first-tier appointees or that the skillsets needed by these disparate types of companies and the skillsets of these people match, or that they necessarily see the value of their skillsets. Also, I find how there're even 1 "HUNDRED" GLCs a spurious concept. I do not think there're even 100 GLCs, not to mention the "hundreds" you said. Very broad strokes in many statements.
And my original point that majority of them who of cos find something else after retirement, take up offices that are lower than their rank of retirement stands. But full COLs who held important appointment like CSO, CEO, Chief Commandoes are definitely well-sought after.
-
Thanks guys! Appreciated all the advice posted here. Meanwhile, must focus on my fyp! down to the last 100metres.. Regards, Nolatari
-
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
No. I was not alleviating my tone. I stand by what I said. You came up with a list of people that you claim supports your theory that majority of farmer regulars are either flying high or doing something not much worse off than what they retired as, and I competently disproved you when I found out that half of the non-generals in the list are scholars. I already mentioned scholars leave the force sometimes way before the mandatory retirement age because they can or while they're still COL or LTC. (through offers that pour in before they hit 45 eg BG Bernard Tan etc). While they're still in service they would have sat on the boards of several private companies, which aids in this premature transition should they want to. Did you know that Lim Swee Say left the force as an LTC and now he's a minister? Basically your whole argument hinged on that list, which I tore asunder.
I told you before, the people i knew who retired generally retired after the schemes came out. You seem to think you can change this fact simply by proclaiming otherwise after I said this. Maybe things were worse before the scheme, that's probable don't you think?
I think you made another unsubstantiated 'personal statement' when you claim that there are "HUNDREDS" of GLCs waiting to take in retired LTCs by the droves eagerly at a lower level than the first-tier appointees or that the skillsets needed by these disparate types of companies and the skillsets of these people match, or that they necessarily see the value of their skillsets. Also, I find how there're even 1 "HUNDRED" GLCs a spurious concept. I do not think there're even 100 GLCs, not to mention the "hundreds" you said. Very broad strokes in many statements.
And my original point that majority of them who of cos find something else after retirement, take up offices that are lower than their rank of retirement stands. But full COLs who held important appointment like CSO, CEO, Chief Commandoes are definitely well-sought after.
Oh dear, seems like you're accusing others when you're just ill-informed. Rather than drag on & play the typical "who shouts loudest" game (or "seniority" for that matter - if so, you should've otherwise figured out my past handles here), I'll call you out: post the names of the kakis you mentioned. Best PM me your own too, so I can reference you when checking up on their background.
Go on, your turn to back up your claims. lol
I read somewhere that Lim Swee Say was switched to NTUC when he was a MAJ? In my tim, we used to joke he was one of the "flops" of the scholarship scheme, unlike Lee Hsien Loong, George Yeo, Lim Hng Kiang & Teo Chee Hean who stayed on much longer (& climbed higher), & also cuz he's since like to keep "long" hair (half covering the ears).
-
Yes, LSS was a major when he swapped the SAF for the National Computer Board. He was only in his early thirties, then.
-
Here's a link to a IMF staff article from 2004 that estimated Singapore's government-linked companies to be in the hundreds http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3567142/Singapore-Inc-versus-the-private.html
After checking out some of the corporate group structures of these organizations, I estimate three of them (Singapore Technologies, Keppel & SembCorp) to total at least 150 subsidiaries by themselves.
-
Guys, thanks but let's not hijack the thread further. Nolatari is trying to rein in the off-tangent talk.
-
If I may interject ...
blitzonic is mostly correct but he left out some important details. In the first place, many staff & senior SAF officers are seconded (usually farmers) or transferred (usually scholars) when still in service, under the dual-career scheme since 1981. It is true that the scholars tend to dominate the MINDEF, MFA & ministry postings, but those regulars who are appointed to stat boards or IHL councils can expect to permanently serve in some public-sector capacity after retirement from active service. This is part of the overall strategic administration at the state level, in placing military men, senior bureaucrats & ruling politicians (the latter two groups also invariably reservist officers in rank) to manage the country's critical infrastructure. The difference is scholars get to retire much earlier (in their thirties, like Lim Swee Say & Lim Hng Kiang), & as long as they've reached staff level. The experience they gain provide the continuity when it comes to taking over or overseeing GLC's later on.
cookiecookie exaggerates a bit but is otherwise correct in implying that farmer LTC's lose out to farmer COL's & BGs, not to mention scholar-regulars & high-flying civil servants, in getting co-opted into these agencies. The attrition rate does affect them, who are at the bottom of this pecking order. But it is not a rigid situation either, because many a fast-tracked officer or bureaucrat have prematurely quit for the private sector too. The economy remains robust enough to absorb those who can transit to corporate life. A selected few, of course, also go into politics.
-
Originally posted by sgSanguine:
If I may interject ...
blitzonic is mostly correct but he left out some important details. In the first place, many staff & senior SAF officers are seconded (usually farmers) or transferred (usually scholars) when still in service, under the dual-career scheme since 1981. It is true that the scholars tend to dominate the MINDEF, MFA & ministry postings, but those regulars who are appointed to stat boards or IHL councils can expect to permanently serve in some public-sector capacity after retirement from active service. This is part of the overall strategic administration at the state level, in placing military men, senior bureaucrats & ruling politicians (the latter two groups also invariably reservist officers in rank) to manage the country's critical infrastructure. The difference is scholars get to retire much earlier (in their thirties, like Lim Swee Say & Lim Hng Kiang), & as long as they've reached staff level. The experience they gain provide the continuity when it comes to taking over or overseeing GLC's later on.
cookiecookie exaggerates a bit but is otherwise correct in implying that farmer LTC's lose out to farmer COL's & BGs, not to mention scholar-regulars & high-flying civil servants, in getting co-opted into these agencies. The attrition rate does affect them, who are at the bottom of this pecking order. But it is not a rigid situation either, because many a fast-tracked officer or bureaucrat have prematurely quit for the private sector too. The economy remains robust enough to absorb those who can transit to corporate life. A selected few, of course, also go into politics.
Good points. You brought up something which I'll need to ask my bro about. Over CNY, he'd received news of an overseas posting, but not to Arizona or any airbase where there's a SG community. Rather, he'll be more or less on his own (on the other US coast), & his family on their own as well. I'd figured it was some military-liaison appointment, & wondered why the RSAF didn't send a scholar over instead. But now I wonder if he's not being co-opted into the diplomatic corps or something, to possibly apprentice for a post-retirement career. Need to ask him whether it'll come with a COL rank, too.But it's a touchy topic for him right now: his wife & in-laws aren't happy about them uprooting from here.
See, even big-shot officers must obey their deployment orders. lol
-
Originally posted by blitzonic:
See, even big-shot officers must obey their deployment orders. lol
Now I know why you kept on stubbornly insisting that farmer regulars have great retirement plans. So it is becase you believe your brother is a "big-shot" officer. Sorry I literally am laughing now while typing.
First go ask ANYONE in the SAF who is above the rank of MAJ whether being posted overseas in a military liaison appointment is considered a big deal. It is not and I challenge you here by hereby inviting anyone else here in the know to arbitrate with intimate knowledge. That's how sure I am.
You say that your brother is there on his own and is some sort of military liaison. I gather it is not even a military attache. And yet already military attaches are commonly posted to many LTCs and COL. the retired COL I know was a defence attache when he was a full COL. He told me that most of the other defence attaches are LTC and COL, because they are large in numbers (people of those 2 ranks) and a military attache is needed in many countries.
Defence attache positions are not given to big shots, scholars and fast climbers. Go check! They simply cannot be taken away from SG or SAF for more than a year (eg command and staff college in the US/UK). They are needed in the Administrative Service, and in SAF are needed to hold Joint Chief positions (please ask your brother how many JOINT directorates there are, and who are helming them, ALL BGs and scholar high fliers) like Ravinder Singh, Hugh Lim, Tan Meng Dui and formerly BG Bernard Tan were holding.
Here's how to spot the symptoms:
Appointments of a big shot: Div Com, ACGS, Joint Chief. Not military attaches.
You think your brother is such a "big shot"?
Is he even a full COL? Do you know how many COL there are in SAF? A LOT.Even the other COLs, no one thinks that of them and you actually are shameless enough to say here that your brother is a "big-shot"? I never met anyone more shameless before in a forum. Your brother is NOT going to be a diplomat or the next Tommy Koh please amuse me further with your wishful thinking. (Depending on his age now and when he got his 2nd crab) he may make COL like the thousands of others before him, who unlike your bro, actually managed to be defence attaches overseas in the many countries all around the globe and many who were forced to downgrade in commensuration of rank when transiting to civilian positions.
There are way too many civilians competing with them for the middle level positions, and the CVs have more transferable experience.
Are you really that deluded as to think that your LTC brother is a 'big shot' in the SAF now? Do you know who are the people everyone would not deny are the big shots? I never met anyone so thick skinned. Please go ask him who are Joseph Leong, Ng Chee Kern, Ng Chee Peng, Chan Chun Sing, Ravindar Singh, Tan Meng Dui (the new JID chief). Your brother and everyone else know who they are. I am not as sure they know who he is.
This is no longer abt "Where-Do-Farmers-End-Up", the argument's marked an amusing watershed when you posted that you believe he is a "big shot" officer!
If your brother retires as a service chief OR, has a post-retirement appointment of Permanent Secretary (BG Loh Wai Keong, Lim Chuan Poh), or Deputy Secretary (Willie Tan who left the SAF in his 30s), or CEO of a stat board (BG Tay Lim Heng of MPA and formerly JID Director), Ronnie Tay (Former CNV and now CEO of IDA, former COA Lim Neo Chian now CE of STB), chairman of stat board (former COA Lim Chuan Poh, now chairman of Astar) OR VP/MD in a GLC (former CAF, Lim Kim Choon, VP of SIA, former CDF Ng Yat Chung MD of Temasek, former JID Director BG Bernard Tan now MD of DBS), then yes he is a "Big Shot" that everyone recognises as "big shot", and not only recognised by ONE PERSON only.
-
Originally posted by blitzonic:
Oh dear, seems like you're accusing others when you're just ill-informed. Rather than drag on & play the typical "who shouts loudest" game (or "seniority" for that matter - if so, you should've otherwise figured out my past handles here), I'll call you out: post the names of the kakis you mentioned. Best PM me your own too, so I can reference you when checking up on their background.
Go on, your turn to back up your claims. lol
I read somewhere that Lim Swee Say was switched to NTUC when he was a MAJ? In my tim, we used to joke he was one of the "flops" of the scholarship scheme, unlike Lee Hsien Loong, George Yeo, Lim Hng Kiang & Teo Chee Hean who stayed on much longer (& climbed higher), & also cuz he's since like to keep "long" hair (half covering the ears).
It seems that you are the who was unfortunately snuffed out when the LIST you turned up was overthrown by me when I proved that 75% of the everyone in the list were scholars. When I challenged you to disprove facts and figures I have thrown out, this is your meek response? Gawd can you come up with something less obvious to get off the stage with your face intact?
U also conveniently chose to "not see" like an ostrich that the poster you thought was endorsing your view said I was accurate on 2 counts.
FACT: You produced a list to prove your claim.
FACT: I found out that majority of the people of your list are scholars anyway!
FACT: You ended up with your tail between your legs and this is your response to get off? "Rather than drag on & play the typical "who shouts loudest" game (or "seniority" for that matter -" (HUH???) Is this your meek response upon my discovery to save face? Why don't you produce your brother's name right here and now since you are claiming that he is a "big shot". Come, pls produce your bro's name whom you think is 'big shot' so I can do a "reference check". I know his name will turn out nothing on the net, just like all the 'kakis' you're asking me to turn out, because they're all nobodies. Gettit?
Are you saying that scholars who are spotted by the administrative service and removed from SAF are underperformers compared to scholars who stayed all the way (eg service chiefs?) Is that your allegation?
And your remarks on Lim Swee Say confirms your ignorance of how the Admin Service and Civil Service work. I am not surprised, since your closest link to the government is your brother who's far removed from this.
Do you know who Peter Ho is? He's the Head of Civil Service (yes this is actually the name of the post, HCS is the one ALL the perm secs report to). Do you know how long he has been in the civil service and when he was taken out of the SAF? He returned to service in 1976 at 23 yrs old at the age all scholars do, and became a Deputy Secretary in 1990. 14 yrs later. He was removed from SAF to become a DS at 37 yrs old.
Please read http://app.psd.gov.sg/data/PressStatementonHCS24Mar05.pdf
pls also google Willie Tan Yoke Meng, also DS of Defence, another SAFOS who transited to civil service way before 45 cos Admin Service grabbed.
Do you know how many scholars left SAF way before retirement age to hold a higher in civilian equivalent post in stat boards and ministries? Do you know how much higher a PS and DS's rank are over the service chiefs and CDF? Do you know that the PS and DS are the boss of a ministry, and the SAF comes under Mindef (a ministry)? You calling them the lesser performers than the ones who left at a later time or taken to Admin Service at a later time? Do you have any idea the elite of the Admin Service, and how that correlates with SAF hierarchy wise?!!! All the top officers, real big shots, not cheong "big shots" like 40 yr old LTCs, are in the AS. The CDF and all the service chiefs and scholars at MAJ level who passed the interview are in the AS.
I wonder what PSD has to say when it learns that you believe your LSA/LTC brother's a "big shot" and said that scholars extracted out of SAF in their 30s to become PS and Head of CS are "underperformers". They will laugh till they have stomachache like me now! HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!
I tell you what, if he becomes like Peter Ho or Bernard Tan Kok Kiang or Wong Ann Chai, everyone will agree with U that he's a "big shot". There will be no contention. No one dares argue when someone says Peter Ho, Wong Ann Chai and Bernard Tan are big shot. Everyone diam diam.
His "big shot" status is only believed under delusion by one person - you. Hell, i bet even he doesn't have the gall to think so, being in the SAF himself
-
Originally posted by sgSanguine:
Here's a link to a IMF staff article from 2004 that estimated Singapore's government-linked companies to be in the hundreds http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3567142/Singapore-Inc-versus-the-private.html
After checking out some of the corporate group structures of these organizations, I estimate three of them (Singapore Technologies, Keppel & SembCorp) to total at least 150 subsidiaries by themselves.
I read the article, and nowhere does it say there are 150 subsidiaries. Please back up your "personal estimation". Also I used to work in ST. ST has 4 main subsidiaries excluding Chartered that they bought and this is official information acknowledged by ST. They are ST Aerospace, ST Kinetics, ST Marine and ST Electronics.
http://moe.calendarone.com/view/view_institute_webpage.asp?ID=ST&edu_level=Pre_University
"There are five companies under the ST umbrella which students may visit. They are Singapore Technologies Aerospace Ltd, Singapore Technologies Electronics, Singapore Technologies Marine Ltd, Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing Ltd, Singapore Technologies Kinetics Ltd."
The no. of subsidiaries under Sembcorp and Keppel each do not add up to more than 5. I can go to their websites easily to prove to you, because I work in a GLC, I know how many subsidiaries are under the other GLC. Sembcorp Logistics, Utilities, Marine, Industries, Gas.. yada yada. Can you name me up to 10? I have a problem getting > 5 for Sembcorp and I AM IN THE LINE.
http://www.sembcorp.com.sg/index.htm
http://www.sembcorp.com.sg/corporate_profile.htm
Keppel has ONLY 3 main subsidiaries only- Offshore & Marine (their biggest business), Property (they also develop condos, everyone knows) and Infrastructure. Pls refer to http://www.kepcorp.com/aboutus/groupstructure.asp
Investments do not count, as it just means Keppel taking their $ and having stakes in other companies such as M1. Those are not Keppel's subsidiaries (i hope legally you know what's the meaning of subsidiary), and neither does Keppel have a hiring say over these companies.
Also, when disputing on the no. of GLCs, I did not consider each subsidiary to be an individual entity. That is because GLC means an organisation (Def: Government Linked CORPORATION), its subsidiaries are UNDER the GLC.
For eg, SPH and SIngtel are GLCs. SPH has a subsidiary, SPH magazines. And no one would consider SPH magazines, the subsidiary independently when asked. Do you think earnestly that, SPH Magazines are COUNTED as a separate entity from SPH?
Perhaps this is where we differ when we defined the number of GLCs.
If you want to calculate the no. of subsidiaries instead of the no. of GLCs, the futility of proving the case of having enough jobs for these farmer regulars remains. If the calculation splits up each GLC into its various subsidiaries, the no. of people hired by EACH individual subsidiary is lesser, and of cos correspondingly lesser than if you were to combine them into ONE GLC- more people hired.
So at the end of the day, it's the same no. of positions. It's just your and we-know-who's prima facie way to impress upon the forum that there are SOOOOO MANY companies to absorb them (when actually the no. of positions are the SAME when the subsidiaries are combined).
But in truth, the calculation is the same because when i COMBINE all the subsidiaries to form ONE GLC to calculate, the no. of people it hires is the COMBINED figure of the no. of employee of EACH subsidiary anyway.
-
http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1390/topics/301931
Pls read the officers mentioned in this thread about big shots I started some time ago. These ARE BIG SHOT officers recognised by everyone, not only by their brother.That's why hor, everyone knows them and everyone can participate in the conversation, NAMING THEM, gossipping abt them. Hello wake up!! These are what you call big shots, definition of big shot in SAF: Everyone including NSFs knows them, speed of promotion, kind of appointments, rank relative to age. Pls note that majority of ppl participating in that conversation are NSFs. Is his name there? My guess is NOT.
Next, I welcome you to google and 'reference check' ALL these big shots. I challenge you to see if they have ever been seconded to be DAs.Big shots/fast climbers are not seconded to passive postions like DAs or camp commandant in Brunei. SAF’s contingent commander of Interfet (International Force for East Timor) yes cos that is ACTIVE DUTY, and definitely big brownie point scorer in the Timorese crisis (COA Neo Kian Hong).
DA? Pls find for me.Thanks hor! if you can find a RECOGNISED big shot doing such jobs, OVER being Div Commanders, ACGS and JOINT CHIEFS, this is my challenge to you.
Cannot believe that anyone who has been through NS would not know the definition of farmer. This is in reference to your ignorance in the "Advice Pls" thread where you said you thought farmer refers to people in Logistics?! I think this line of yours is bound to make ACGS (Logistics) COL Ngien Hoon Ping flip. Pls read Tim Huxley's Defending The Lion City. Huxley's book is so well regarded and used by academics, it's also recommended by the Mindef library. You can google it yourself. Also try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Armed_Forces_ranks
-
Originally posted by blitzonic:
wondered why RSAF didn't send a scholar over instead. But now I wonder if he's not being co-opted into the diplomatic corps or something, to possibly apprentice for a post-retirement career. Need to ask him whether it'll come with a COL rank, too. See, even big-shot officers must obey their deployment orders. lol
I quoted your statements all the SUPER FUNNY bits in RED and BOLD for everyone to laugh until peng.. ALL the bits that showed you believed your brother was a BIG SHOT and "why didn't they send a scholar over instead?" The answer is they don't post fast climbers to such posts.
Actually no need to go through all this trouble.
I challenge YOU now just pick up your hp now and give your brother a call and ask him.
Bro 1) are you a big shot? besides me, anyone else thinks so in the world, esp in SAF? 2) how old are you now? are you a 32 yr old LTC or a 42 yr old LTC? (If he's above age 40 but not COL yet, odds are bad) 3) What is the profile type of those sent to be military attache? Any of the scholar high flier I wrote you were equivalent to so far? Anyone of them were military attaches ah brother? Who among your bosses were sent to be military attaches?
-
Truth Hurts. But i think its not wise to laugh it out loud. Your mocking tone, tainted your otherwise well presented facts. Its nice of all of u to share your views, but lets not cross over the line, its the internet, we all can get misunderstood for what we actually meant.
-
My response would not have been conjured if he wasn't as BHB as to write the things he wrote. In general, if one wants to put something forth open to the judgment and KNOWLEDGE of other people, one should expect a corresponding response that befits what he puts out. If one disagrees, he's welcome to back his statements to counter the negative response with facts.
I urge blitzronic to ask his brother the questions, and if you dare, tell us his age. We can even gauge for you whether he can make COL or not, with so many of us here you'll certainly get an even diagnosis and not your blood-tainted one. 30 yr old LTCs are recognised big-shots for sure and they do exist, and everyone knows they'll make general. 37 - 40 yr old LTCs are not, and no one except their family maybe is under the delusion that they're big shots. You can tell some of the RSAF guys here his base command tours and his age which will give them an idea of whether he can get his 3rd crab.
And pls hor, don't fall into the naive propaganda that anything that sends you out of SG equals to prestige and propels you to be Tommy Koh. I cringe when I read how you said he's being inducted into the "diplomatic corp" based on an unknown overseas posting lower than a defence attache -DAs are taken up by many 43 yr old COL. and there you are sounding so pleased.
Anything that gets you beyond Johor is a sign that you've arrived is a sad delusion originating from the private sector, where quite a lot of people go around telling others they've arrived cos their company sent them to work in a tiny sales office in Beijing or cos they set up a one-man-show sales office in Vietnam for their small start-up.