Witness relates dunking death of soldier
-
Agreed.Originally posted by kwlee:give u an anology,
a kid goes to a shop, he steals. he succeed.
he thinks that no one can catch him.
he tries again! he succeed.
the continues until one day he got caught.
This tells us if u r not caught the 1st time or 2nd time, u will get caught 1 day. if r nt caught the 1st time realise the mistake and correct it.
The same goes for the death of the 2nd sgt. they have been practising this dunking since a few batch before his. nothing happened. the continue until this happened.
so i practically think that they have the mindset of kids
but the question is: are they the first ones to do such training? could it be that this is some kind of an unwritten code or method of training, passed down through the ages? "Common practices" ? -
it is those kind of
-eh, i found a more "real-like" method to train them, and nothing bad happen to them oso, next time ask them oso to train them like that ar-
soon, the so-called unstandard way of doing things, became STANDARD. -
a pity that 2SG Hu just lost his life like that. hope SAF pay more attention to safty in future.
anyway, i heard that 2SG Hu's younger brother, when it's time for him to enter NS, mindef won't post him to a combat vocation. a small redemption to 2SG Hu's family.
-
if that's true, its a kind of a double standard / special priviledgeOriginally posted by Gordonator:a pity that 2SG Hu just lost his life like that. hope SAF pay more attention to safty in future.
anyway, i heard that 2SG Hu's younger brother, when it's time for him to enter NS, mindef won't post him to a combat vocation. a small redemption to 2SG Hu's family. 
-
i dunno where i stand on this issue, if they want to simulate POW treatment, how not to do stuff like dunking and torture? U think think the enemy will ask u nicely to extract info? On the other hand, how do u control the instructors so as not to go too far? I think its a no win situation when it comes to such issues.
-
i think a system should be develop to simulate instead of human himself doing the simulation, at least the system can monitor the status of the body. -.-Originally posted by Goondu74:i dunno where i stand on this issue, if they want to simulate POW treatment, how not to do stuff like dunking and torture? U think think the enemy will ask u nicely to extract info? On the other hand, how do u control the instructors so as not to go too far? I think its a no win situation when it comes to such issues.
the 2sgt is my frenz's fren btw.
-
exactly.Originally posted by Goondu74:i dunno where i stand on this issue, if they want to simulate POW treatment, how not to do stuff like dunking and torture? U think think the enemy will ask u nicely to extract info? On the other hand, how do u control the instructors so as not to go too far? I think its a no win situation when it comes to such issues.
some people actually believed that water torture (even in training) means spraying water
-
Just a clarification on this. All commandos do go through POW training though they don't call it CSC. The instructors are ranger cadres which mean they have being through POW in Ranger course.Originally posted by SpecOps87:Posted this earlier on.Please do not be surprised I tell you this.The scholarly smartasses have allowed the SAF to allow Commandos who have not even went through the CSC to serve as Instructors,so how is it man?Shows you how bright they are.This is inside info from my colleague.
Thank you. -
if there is, this is simply being unprofessional. 'nuff said.Originally posted by Poopie-Head:Agreed.
but the question is: are they the first ones to do such training? could it be that this is some kind of an unwritten code or method of training, passed down through the ages? "Common practices" ? -
look. if u're gonna kill someone in training, WHY NOT JUST GUN HIM DOWN? thats realistic eunf for u ain't it?Originally posted by Poopie-Head:exactly.
some people actually believed that water torture (even in training) means spraying water -
You're abit exaggerating here. Read Goondu74's posting.Originally posted by HENG@:look. if u're gonna kill someone in training, WHY NOT JUST GUN HIM DOWN? thats realistic eunf for u ain't it?
Of course they are not trying to kill anybody here. Who would want to?
Gunning? That's a HIGH chance of killing someone, and even in real scenerio u might not want to kill a POW if u are trying to extract information from him.
There should be a line drawn, to keep the trainees moderately safe. Where to draw the line is difficult to determine. Sadly, the line was crossed and resulted in a loss of a life.
Do you think that gunning or other methods of causing grevious hurt should be in the training? Any sane person would say no, since the trainee's life is at risk.
What other methods to simulate POW torture then, with considerably lower risk? If the training is too lax, do you think it will have any significance at all?
One of the ways to torture a POW is using water. Just like what kwlee has pointed out, dunking a trainee's head into the water might have been done many many times without any loss of life. This might have resulted in the particular form of 'simulated torture' to become a norm part of the training.
Please take note that I am not saying I support such harsh training.
Rather, I have doubts that these few trainers are the ONLY ones to do this. Too bad they are in the limelight now, and all fingers are pointing at them.
Ever watched a good movie titled 'A few Good Men'? Similar setting, very nice show -
i don't care about anyone's stand. I don't give a Fuck about reasoning and rationale. All I know now is that there is unprofessionalism in the SAF and thats what caused my friend's death. So the SAF gawd damn do something about it, and cut this sort of crap out. Or everytime someone tells me the SAF is a professional armed force, I'll laugh and tell them to wake the Fuck up.
-
that is just marketingOriginally posted by HENG@:i don't care about anyone's stand. I don't give a Fuck about reasoning and rationale. All I know now is that there is unprofessionalism in the SAF and thats what caused my friend's death. So the SAF gawd damn do something about it, and cut this sort of crap out. Or everytime someone tells me the SAF is a professional armed force, I'll laugh and tell them to wake the Fuck up. -
some people here wana tok rational here?Originally posted by Goondu74:i dunno where i stand on this issue, if they want to simulate POW treatment, how not to do stuff like dunking and torture? U think think the enemy will ask u nicely to extract info? On the other hand, how do u control the instructors so as not to go too far? I think its a no win situation when it comes to such issues.
ok..lets tok abt it...
let me ask u guys a question..do u guys seriously think that u are able to train to endure torture???
the existing of CST is only to simulate wat kind of torture exist..prepare the soldier for it mentally..NOT KILL THEM!!!
how not to go to too far? simple..dun do it...common sense rite?
u prefer a living soldier or a dead one? -
nobody gets train to endure a real torture, not even for the real war...however, we still need to prepare mentally and physically wat...simple analogy is, if the CST can dunk heads till dead, why not operational training for rifle company include shooting a bullet on the butt?? r u telling me ur enemy will shoot u with a water gun instead of m16?? the guidelines which controls the instructors have always been there...just take a look at the 2 f**k faces...u think they are train for a real pow?? u think they will ask for more when they kana whip in prison ?? ....some red heads have such ego minds that they decided to exercise it within the saf instead of their enemy...Originally posted by Goondu74:i dunno where i stand on this issue, if they want to simulate POW treatment, how not to do stuff like dunking and torture? U think think the enemy will ask u nicely to extract info? On the other hand, how do u control the instructors so as not to go too far? I think its a no win situation when it comes to such issues. -
it seems that everytime the media highlights this issue, the same arguments get thrown up all over again.
i think its rather pointless to go through the same tedious exercise again and again, other than ruffing a few feathers and souring relationships between forumnites. if i do not see anything new here, i may have to choose to close this thread for the sake for everyone's sanity. -
The fact that many SAF "Training" are not written and described SPECIFICALLY. Many times they are not written or spelt out clearly. Why? Think about it.
No, you're inferring that we have a "cowboy" army, & that's incorrect. The lesson plans & TSR's are in place, available for consultation.I feel very sad that such an unfortunate incident occured, however, i must admit i oso feel sad for the instructors - IMO they are just some scap goats.
No, there's no scrapegoat. You can't blame it on individual ignorance (only complacency, & that's a reach itself if they weren't drunk &/or has gone through the course themselves before), or rely alone on the safety officer present to judge whether standards have been compromised.
You can fault the system breakdown or miscommunication about the proper training recommendations but, please lah, that doesn't excuse the actual sadistic behavior (dunking the poor fellow repeatedly & stamping on a senior-officer's rank).FYI, not all NS deaths are reported in news. I'm quite surprised that they chose to let this case get so much focus. In fact, my sister's ex-colleague's son died in NS just days after this incident, but no such publicity.
They needn't be. MINDEF has several tiers of formal investigative procedures; Teo Chee Hean mentioned them when he spoke in Parliament about the 3 SAF deaths last year.
The most basic is the SIB investigation & internal Commission of Inquiry, which took place for the BMTC recruit who collapsed during IPPT. Next up is the Higher Board of Inquiry, which was convened for the Ranger-course attendee who collapsed during the 5km run.
There's also an independent Committee of Inquiry (chaired by a senior civil servant), which was done for the CST case. MINDEF is completely out of this jurisdiction, & my own experience of it - with my unit's M113 explosion from 1986 - was that the press would have access to its report. Generally though, the full SIB & COI details won't be made available to the public, beyond the announcement of its results & whether any SOP has been breached.
The CST case is big news cuz MINDEF also followed up by conveneing a Higher Board of Inquiry plus a Coroner's Inquiry, as well as cooperating with the Police with their own CID investigation.some people actually believed that water torture (even in training) means spraying water
Here's what TCH said in Parliament (just like what I tried to point out to Gerdakan some time back):
"The Committee of Inquiry found that the trainers had not followed the approved lesson plan for this training exercise. According to the lesson plan, the trainees were only to be doused with water with the intent of showering them. The lesson plan specifically prohibits physical contact and manhandling of trainees, and states categorically that instructors should never force water treatment into the body. Submerging the head of a trainee into water was not authorized.
"However, instead of being doused with water, 2SG Hu had his head submerged in water four times. As a result he aspirated water, had breathing difficulties and collapsed. He was treated promptly by a medical orderly at the scene and evacuated to the Singapore General Hospital, but despite the medical treatment he died.
Besides 2SG Hu, other trainees also had their heads submerged in water. As a result 6 aspirated water and required medical treatment. The Combat Survival Training had been conducted in an unauthorized way.
This is an extremely serious lapse in the conduct of the training. It should never have happened."
Hope this clarifies, as far as how extreme the specific drill was supposed to be. -
Wuming78,
I'll like you to keep this discussion active, if you don't mind; it's too much of a national talking point. Clamp down only if it leads to a string of new threads, or if we start getting into the libellous "conspiracy" arguments.
To the others: Hey, guys - calm down. It's going to be a month-long trial, with the likelihood of the public getting increasingly appalled by certain relevatory details & also the attempts at rationalizations/justifications on the part of the defense.
Getting this off my chest: My hunch is this tragedy will also go down as the SAF's own Ribbon Creek parallel. [The latter was a 1956 incident when a 31-year-old two-war vet-cum-new DI marched a Marine rookie platoon into a marshy creek, causing 6 of them to drown in their FBO. Revisionist studies downplayed the "drunk" accusations, saying he did drink on the night but not enough to get tipsy.] Both are monumentals case of bad judgement that shook the entire armed forces to the core.
While the specific perpetrators must be punished for their abuse, I hope the Commandos, if not the bigger SAF itself, will profoundly rethink the attitude (not just the method) of its training. Yes, CST course should be rigorously realistic & "welfare" tends to be such a dirty word within the military, but the current public backlash reflects a genuine concern for safety - & dignity - of the trainees.
Does repeated dunking really simulates POW treatment "better" than spraying powerful waterjets, when heavily-panting trainees would've uncontrollably resisted swallowing water in either case? Your body would've violently struggled by instinct, so why the further debasement as long as the certain mental "lesson" - it's certainly not a physical skill - has gotten through?
It's simple: Beyond professionalism, Singapore also wants a SAF to be a reflection of our values & ideals - rather than a private army's or some sort of mythical elite toughness. That's accordingly reflected in the SAF Core Values &, relevant to certain people, the Officer's Creed. Apparently, the existing standards aren't enough to bring certain rouge elements into line.
Beyond the SOP revamp, the Marines also underwent 2 fundamental transformations: 1stly, a general positive reinforcement of the close-knit Brotherhood ethos ("taking care of its own", aka West Point) & 2ndly, the more specific creation of the Drill Instructor's Creed. Perhaps we can similarly add something along these lines. -
i thanx Moxie for posting such an intelligent post...
i apologise for the harsh word use..i swear to protect the integrity of Sgt Hu n the whole SAF...it was only a year ago when this issue was posted back in Military Nuts me n Heng was on the offensive back then..n i believe we will again..cos its a matter so close to our heart..
i still remember one of my close fren toking abt this case a year ago..it still pisses me off when i think abt it..this is how stupid Singaporean can be...this is wat he said..."that guy a Gdsmen..Gdsmen all buay gan..thats y he die"...
n i always hear the similar thing again n again...does it matter wat Berets we wear to be "Aye Gan"??? arent we all human? arent we all wearing green??
does it matter which unit we are from??
pls to all civilian who never don green before..say thanx to the soldier sitting next to u..even if u know he is a clerk...
to all Bro In Arms..say hi to the comrade in the same bus with u..even if u know that he is a driver...
once again brilliant post Moxie.. -
true, it is everyone who make up the armed forces, not jus the cdo unit or guards. Every1 has their part to play.Originally posted by NathanG5:i thanx Moxie for posting such an intelligent post...
i apologise for the harsh word use..i swear to protect the integrity of Sgt Hu n the whole SAF...it was only a year ago when this issue was posted back in Military Nuts me n Heng was on the offensive back then..n i believe we will again..cos its a matter so close to our heart..
i still remember one of my close fren toking abt this case a year ago..it still pisses me off when i think abt it..this is how stupid Singaporean can be...this is wat he said..."that guy a Gdsmen..Gdsmen all buay gan..thats y he die"...
n i always hear the similar thing again n again...does it matter wat Berets we wear to be "Aye Gan"??? arent we all human? arent we all wearing green??
does it matter which unit we are from??
pls to all civilian who never don green before..say thanx to the soldier sitting next to u..even if u know he is a clerk...
to all Bro In Arms..say hi to the comrade in the same bus with u..even if u know that he is a driver...
once again brilliant post Moxie..
Quoted :
It has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wing
can ultimatily cause a typhoon halfway around the world.
SOLDIERS UNITE... -
i would love to see all them elite soldiers stuck in clerk jobs. see how they like it. no playing with guns, only paperwork.Originally posted by kwlee:true, it is everyone who make up the armed forces, not jus the cdo unit or guards. Every1 has their part to play.
Quoted :
It has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wing
can ultimatily cause a typhoon halfway around the world.
SOLDIERS UNITE... -
I speculate, as with the Nicholl Highway collapse, the litigation process will blunt out the emotional distress over time. Wish I could attend the trial - I took leave for Abbas Saad's in the mid-90's (out of curiosity). The next best thing would be following the daily revelations via the different newspapers, which can be cumbersome since they don't always report every detail.
Guys, I appreciate the postings but please don't anyhow hantum - okay? Read closely what the papers reported before commenting, since they already contain plenty of "WTF?" controversial statements by themselves. Like the COI admission that unauthorized dunkings had taken place since '98, became unwritten SOP since Y2K, then actually intensified from placing trainees' heads under running tap water to submerging them in a shallowed-filled washing bay to dunking in a one-metre tub to, in Hu's case, "stopping him from surfacing to breathe" (Today tabloid).
To correct a further misposting, the specific charges are "causing death by a rash act" (Hu Enhuai) & "causing grevious hurt by a rash act that endangered a life" (Ho Wan Huo).
It's not murder, manslaughter or culpable homicide.
FYI The Singapore Statutes Online lists the following punishments for the said offences (the "grevious hurt" one is my attempt at approximation; there's a bundle of them):
"Causing death by rash or negligent act.
304A. Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both."
"Causing grievous hurt by an act which endangers life or the personal safety of others.
338. Whoever causes grievous hurt to any person by doing any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine which may extend to $1,000, or with both."
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_getdata.pl?&actno=1872-REVED-224&date=latest&method=part&segid=888373002-001939#888373002-002165 -
I stumbled upon this page regarding maltreatment in the cdo.Happened years back...very jia lart.Wonder is it part of their training?
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw99/90210ben.htm
Any1 free to gif comments? -
wah lao those f@rkers deserved to b hanged
-
Originally posted by gnoik:I stumbled upon this page regarding maltreatment in the cdo.Happened years back...very jia lart.Wonder is it part of their training?
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw99/90210ben.htm
Any1 free to gif comments? 
Where did u actually find these info?