Why NS ?
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
But you go on to decsribe the following fantasy:
That is in the case where I am completely trapped, and yes, it is fantastical. There's too many things that can go wrong with it for it to work, but I was working to satisfy his need for me to say that I'd defend myself. I can sure attempt it, but I might not be alive to witness the results.
I should have made myself clearer. I'm against conscription, but I am for the existence of a military. My initial statements were directed at the people who seemed to be under the impression that any invasion would leave Singapore a barren ruin, which is not the case.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
See, people like you are why I'm a misanthropist.
I guess it's easier to laugh at someone who thinks differently than to sit down and think it through, eh? This just proves that people in Singapore are sheep. They want to conform, and people who're unusual i.e. not stupid get the short end of the stick. 'big words'? Only if you have the brain of a retarded three year old, my friend. I guess you still believe that storks deliver babies, eh?
Now, on to the argument. Firstly, I resent the imposing of an arbitrary authority on my actions. In order to die on your feet (i.e. fighting), you have to first suck the collective cocks of all your 'superiors' in the military. Dying on your knees is almost equally distasteful, but I know which I'd choose. At any rate, that choice is a false dichotomy (look it up). Present your 'choice' to the many people who continued their daily lives under foreign occupation, and see what they'll say to you. In case you didn't know, it's quite possible to live on in Singapore even when a foreign flag is flying over it. It doesn't make the shit smellier or the food less filling.
Also, epic reading comprehension fail, anybody? I've never spoken of collaboration, though if I knew you, I'd certainly be tempted. It's already been established that Singapore doesn't have a great deal to muck about with when defending itself, and we can safely assume that our allies already have a great deal of trouble of their own if anybody ever tries to invade us. Go look up 'force projection' before we continue, and tell me if you think we can still afford a conflict. Go compare the dispositions of the forces of our most likely opponents, and our own forces. Look up our daily consumption of food and other essentials, and do some quick mental math (if that's beyond you, I'd suggest suicide). MBTs are extremely iffy to use in tropical conditions, since they bog down extremely often in wet weather. The AMX light tanks that we have are barely capable of standing up to a fart, let alone modern AT weaponry. Ground strike aircraft are going be able to do jack shit against enemy positions in forested areas unless you embark on a massive defoliation programme. In effect, our military is just there to threaten anybody who attacks with a bloody nose.
On to your example. Funnily enough, I've noticed that all of them seem to involve rape or some kind of assault on females. You might want to undergo a psych assessment for hidden misogynistic tendencies and rape fetishes.
I'm guessing that you've never had any kind of training in unarmed martial arts or self-defence. Those odds are highly unfavourable, and unlike the movies, the 'hero' usually doesn't take one mook down with one hit, and I'm speaking as someone who's tried sparring with multiple people. If you choose to stay and fight, I'll be sure to nominate you for a Darwin Award. If I may say so, you'd stand an excellent chance of winning, since fighting a group of armed men by yourself, with the life and dignity of a female at stake is the epitome of stupidity. They'll cease giving out the awards because nobody is going to be able to top that.
Anyway, in that situation, I'd make a run for it with my female companion. Before that, I'd throw my wallet as far as I can in the opposite direction, and make sure that my companion is ready to bolt as well. If I have to fight to delay my pursuers, I'd do it.
Alternatively, I'd drop my wallet fairly close to me, and when somebody comes to pick it up, I'd wallop the shit out of the guy and grapple him. His friends can either back off, or watch as I break his bones and joints. It's pretty easy to break a fair number of them, and coincidentally, those are also going to cause a great deal of pain. The elbow, the shinbone, the knee, the feet, the hands and the wrist are all prime targets. I'd bet money that most of them make a nice, satisfying crunching sound as they break.
From what I've seen, you'd try to resist, get beaten to a pulp, and have your wife get assaulted, robbed and raped too. Get it into your head that foolishness is not bravery. Repeat after me:
Foolishness is not bravery.
Foolishness is not bravery.
Foolishness is not bravery.
Foolishness is not bravery.
Foolishness is not bravery.
Corrected.
I'm completely willing to fight for and die for a cause that I believe in, but 'patriotism' is not it. Defending a line in the map is not it. Defending a government that I don't particularly like is not it.
If I need to put that in simpler words, do let me know.
if you think a wall of text is going to help you with your arguments, then you are sadly mistaken ...
I guess centurion there has put it nicely, you are hum ji ....
let me distil everything that you've said for you ... it's about about the "me" ..
"I don't think we can win from what I've read, so I don't see the point in fighting, let's just surrender, why risk my ass and waste my time ?" - isn't that the gist of what you've been saying, you've been basically saying that it'd all be a waste of time ...
"I don't like this goverment, so fark it" - go see the fire in the HDB example I've put above.
"if we fight, we'll just serve to piss off any aggressor further, so let's pull down our pants and bend over ? " ... now this one's real cute ...
tell me which of these statements do you dispute ?
and then you talk about unarmed combat ? ... rofl ....
sure ... I believe you would grapple with robbers and rapists and break a few of them as you put it ... from someone who's stated that he won't fight to defend and protect what's his and his own ... more likely your "calculations" would tell you to kneel down and beg ? ... as you would when some one comes along and invade your country ? ...
let's look at this cute statement from you.
The trouble only started when the French started to actively resist, being the idiots that they were.
I guess they made the choice to die on their feet ... instead of you who'd choose to grovel on your knees to live ....
but then here you are, talking about unarmed combat against robbers and rapists, break his joints and break his bones eh ? ..... kapow ! kablonk ! .... big words indeed kid ....sure, after what you've said previously, people certainly believe you'd do it ...
we were discussing this thread in another just now ... and I guess, what someone elses said was true ....
it's only the kids who've yet to serve ... or those who've nothing, no property, no loved ones, no stake in this country, and thus really nothing to lose... that'll be spouting something like this ....
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
That is in the case where I am completely trapped, and yes, it is fantastical. There's too many things that can go wrong with it for it to work, but I was working to satisfy his need for me to say that I'd defend myself. I can sure attempt it, but I might not be alive to witness the results.
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. You are then effectively talking about the same thing. I assume you are looking at it in terms of being physically trapped. Fatum, on the other hand, is talking about being trapped by his family and friends not being able to escape. If you didn't insist on being so literal, you might just find yourself in agreement with him.
Anyway, it's coming to one in the morning here and I'm off to cop some Zs. I eagerly await to see what transpires between now and when I log in tomorrow morning.
-
If anything.....NS exposed me to people I thought I would never meet.
Like the idiot who sleeps in the same bunk as me but bathes only twice in 5 days.
-
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
When it comes down to it, a country is just a space where a bunch of people live, there's no need to shed blood over who gets what.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that any occupying forces would lay waste to Singapore and destroy all you love. Seriously, look at what we have. Only an idiot would destroy the lot. We've got a fairly competent workforce, industry, strategic location, and docks. The point of conquest of a nation such as Singapore is not to raze everything, but to obtain our resources. They're going to want to keep the citizens content, because having to devote massive resources to systematically repress insurgents is neither fun or efficient.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
When it comes down to it, a country is just a space where a bunch of people live, there's no need to shed blood over who gets what.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that any occupying forces would lay waste to Singapore and destroy all you love. Seriously, look at what we have. Only an idiot would destroy the lot. We've got a fairly competent workforce, industry, strategic location, and docks. The point of conquest of a nation such as Singapore is not to raze everything, but to obtain our resources. They're going to want to keep the citizens content, because having to devote massive resources to systematically repress insurgents is neither fun or efficient.
I don't give a shit about that.
And you know any invading force would not give a shit about us either.
You don't want to defend what you like, that's fine.
I don't want to know whether our invading forces will be friendly or not.
-
Originally posted by parn:
I think Singaporean boys should not be educated, so that they will be more humble, loyal to the country, more faithful in their relationship, less social conscious, honest, shy, and easier to listen to their girls.
Ohh....and they won't even doubt or REQUIRE A REASON to do their NS.
Gone are the days when I'm Cleopatra and Loyal Men served me.
Wow unbelieveable that any sane people with some level of intelligence will spout such nonsense.Are only guys require to show their patriotism? Are girls excused from it? A mind-boggling question.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
When it comes down to it, a country is just a space where a bunch of people live, there's no need to shed blood over who gets what.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that any occupying forces would lay waste to Singapore and destroy all you love. Seriously, look at what we have. Only an idiot would destroy the lot. We've got a fairly competent workforce, industry, strategic location, and docks. The point of conquest of a nation such as Singapore is not to raze everything, but to obtain our resources. They're going to want to keep the citizens content, because having to devote massive resources to systematically repress insurgents is neither fun or efficient.
Dude. Do you know what you're saying?
You're saying that it's ok to be a slave as long as the master is good!
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
a country is just a space where a bunch of people live
Gross oversimplification. Take any social perspective at random, and you will find that the concept of a country is much more than real estate - it is identity. Admittedly, in Singapore said identity is still in its infancy, but it is identity nonetheless.
As I said, I sympathise because Singapore seems to be as irrelevant to your sense of identity as it is to mine, but that does not mean that such a view can justifiably be imposed on anyone else.
-
Originally posted by Spartans:
Wow unbelieveable that any sane people with some level of intelligence will spout such nonsense.Are only guys require to show their patriotism? Are girls excused from it? A mind-boggling question.
Sorry, did you just try applying the words "sane" and "intelligence" to parn?!
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Sorry, did you just try applying the words "sane" and "intelligence" to parn?!
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
The French got the Germans. We got the Japanese. Nuff said.
By your description above, it sounds like the German took over France to care for the French. What's wrong with this picture?
Okay, now I'm really off to bed.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
@LazerLordz:
Is this the one that you're referring to?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)
I read an excerpt, and it doesn't seem particularly relevant.
Too bad then. In most parts of Asia, high politics and hard power are the only recognisable languages between state entities. This reality will not let you run from it.
It is also the bedrock of why NS exists.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
pride and honour.
Are you sure?
Often you can find neighbourhood aunties also complained NSF stink, especially the recruits.
Are you sure ordinary Singaporean will associate pride and honour with our NSF?
I dun think so. You sweat and defend your nation and yet you belong to the lower end of the society.
-
Originally posted by elindra:
Dude. Do you know what you're saying?
You're saying that it's ok to be a slave as long as the master is good!
Don't mind him. AFAIK, all that he has posted, is full of unsubstantiated arguments and overgeneralisations about the seemingly irrelevance of NS as a defence policy of Singapore.
-
Originally posted by Spartans:
Are you sure?
Often you can find neighbourhood aunties also complained NSF stink, especially the recruits.
Are you sure ordinary Singaporean will associate pride and honour with our NSF?
I dun think so. You sweat and defend your nation and yet you belong to the lower end of the society.
Why be so glad to associate with the ignorance of those who are blind?
I wouldn't trust neighbourhood aunties to understand defence policy and security anyway. In this context, it doesn't matter what they think. The notion of a military is so that people can sleep in peace and have their ignorance defended by the very same people they aren't happy to share a train carriage with.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
When it comes down to it, a country is just a space where a bunch of people live, there's no need to shed blood over who gets what.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that any occupying forces would lay waste to Singapore and destroy all you love. Seriously, look at what we have. Only an idiot would destroy the lot. We've got a fairly competent workforce, industry, strategic location, and docks. The point of conquest of a nation such as Singapore is not to raze everything, but to obtain our resources. They're going to want to keep the citizens content, because having to devote massive resources to systematically repress insurgents is neither fun or efficient.
you still don't get it do you .....
when you try to be clever and try to justify why you would not fight and defend your loved ones and what you have ... you don't realize that you are digging an ever bigger hole for yourself ....
I'm not even going to dispute the fact that the nazis were "civil", this is such a comical assertion that I think it's not worth my time ... I dunno what kind of history you've been googling online kid, but you must have been smoking something damm good at the same time, but I should remind you that you are spitting on the millions who died in the nazi holocaust, the millions who died fighting to be free in world war two, including, perhaps, even your ancestors here.
or maybe your ancestors were somewhere far away during the japanese occupation ? when the japanese came along to claim south east asia as their "southern resource area?" ... you love selective reading kid.
and do you honestly say, that you do not understand why the frogs were actively resisting ? ... do you honestly say that you cannot comprehend why people would want to fight anyone that comes along to invade your country, your land ? ... do you honestly say, that you cannot understand why people would want to live free ? .... do you honestly say, that you cannot understand that you've basically saying that it's better to collaborate and cooperate with the enemy than to resist ? ....
What kind of a man are you ? .... do you call yourself a man ? ...
are you trying to dig yourself out of the hole that you've dug for yourself, or do you truly believe in what you've just posted above ? ... do you honestly think you'd be better off passively submitting to any invaders that come to your country to plunder and take over ? ... or you are just trying to act smart, by writing stupidly ? ...
I guess there's no need to continue ... everyone would be able to form their own conclusions about you by now.
-
And you are living in a disillusion that every damn person play nice in a war. you think mr osama is going to say i will feed you nice and well after he has captured you? What makes you think that people are going to hold things like the geneva convention true?
These are just guidelines. The strong will always bully the weak and thats human nature. And tell your so called civil occupation to the jews. Let them hear what you have to say about the germans.
Tell the chinese that they should have let the japanese enter china and see what kind of reaction you get.
tell the ethnic chinese in indonesia that their women should have just opened their legs wide and let the locals rape them.
You ever heard of the phrase give a person an inch and he takes a foot?
Rape pillage and destruction are a part and parcel of war. So dun give me that dumb idea of yours.
And what has 12 years of education given to you? Other then being able to write one whole pile of horse shit that is so fundamentally flawed that i can't believe my eyes that i am reading such stuff.
Look up 'civil' and 'occupation', and put them together. The Germans were remarkably polite, and even went to far as to set up soup kitchens and aid the French in maintaining order and civil infrastructure. The French started actively carrying out sabotage and dissemination of anti-German propaganda, which threatened the security of the occupying forces. The Germans returned the favour with reprisals, which then led to a vicious cycle.
When it comes down to it, a country is just a space where a bunch of people live, there's no need to shed blood over who gets what.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that any occupying forces would lay waste to Singapore and destroy all you love. Seriously, look at what we have. Only an idiot would destroy the lot. We've got a fairly competent workforce, industry, strategic location, and docks. The point of conquest of a nation such as Singapore is not to raze everything, but to obtain our resources. They're going to want to keep the citizens content, because having to devote massive resources to systematically repress insurgents is neither fun or efficient.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Gross oversimplification. Take any social perspective at random, and you will find that the concept of a country is much more than real estate - it is identity. Admittedly, in Singapore said identity is still in its infancy, but it is identity nonetheless.
As I said, I sympathise because Singapore seems to be as irrelevant to your sense of identity as it is to mine, but that does not mean that such a view can justifiably be imposed on anyone else.
If they took a cynic's point of view, they might find that it is as irrelevant to their identities as it is to you and me. Identity is what you make of it.
Personally, I think the furore over this is because of the human need to dominate and to avoid domination. Being able to put one up on anyone by fending an attack off is the equivalent of tweaking their nose and 'proving' that you're superior in some way.
However, if you have someone like Gandhi, who steadfastedly refused to play the game, it infuriates the players to no small extent.
Originally posted by elindra:Dude. Do you know what you're saying?
You're saying that it's ok to be a slave as long as the master is good!
Are we not slaves now? Most of us are trapped in an endless cycle of economic bondage that lasts from the cradle to the grave.You cannot eat freedom, or honor. You cannot heal your wounds with them, you cannot breathe it, you cannot fight with it. You've never been truly hungry, have you?
I suggest you check out this link:
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
If they took a cynic's point of view, they might find that it is as irrelevant to their identities as it is to you and me. Identity is what you make of it.
Personally, I think the furore over this is because of the human need to dominate and to avoid domination. Being able to put one up on anyone by fending an attack off is the equivalent of tweaking their nose and 'proving' that you're superior in some way.
However, if you have someone like Gandhi, who steadfastedly refused to play the game, it infuriates the players to no small extent.
Are we not slaves now? Most of us are trapped in an endless cycle of economic bondage that lasts from the cradle to the grave.You cannot eat freedom, or honor. You cannot heal your wounds with them, you cannot breathe it, you cannot fight with it. You've never been truly hungry, have you?
I suggest you check out this link:
Please.....don't make me hang around here just to see what kind of dumb reply comes from you next.
I need my sleep!
-
Thread's going off topic...
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
If they took a cynic's point of view, they might find that it is as irrelevant to their identities as it is to you and me. Identity is what you make of it.
Ooh, no no no no. Read Tajfel - over the past 50-odd years, his work on social identity has been supported by a substantial body of research.
Cynics, by the way, love standing against things because it hides the fact that they don't stand for anything. They're cowards.
And speaking as a practicing psychologist, Maslow's stuff is warm and fuzzy, but ultimately has not proven to be substantial enough for any significant practical purposes. I'd put it in the "outmoded" bin along with Freudian theory.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
If they took a cynic's point of view, they might find that it is as irrelevant to their identities as it is to you and me. Identity is what you make of it.
Personally, I think the furore over this is because of the human need to dominate and to avoid domination. Being able to put one up on anyone by fending an attack off is the equivalent of tweaking their nose and 'proving' that you're superior in some way.
However, if you have someone like Gandhi, who steadfastedly refused to play the game, it infuriates the players to no small extent.
If you want to discuss issues of identity and how it can be deconstructed, this is not the forum for you.
-
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
Thread's going off topic...
Just lock it.Otherwise I'll hang around here and lose sleep.
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
Are we not slaves now? Most of us are trapped in an endless cycle of economic bondage that lasts from the cradle to the grave.You cannot eat freedom, or honor. You cannot heal your wounds with them, you cannot breathe it, you cannot fight with it. You've never been truly hungry, have you?
I suggest you check out this link:
Kid I think I know Maslow's theory better than you.And you're trying to use Maslow's theory for what?? Justify why you should bow down to the occupiers of the country??
I think you should use your own words on yourself " You've never been truly hungry, have you" to be able to write all the bollocks which you just did in your earlier posts.