After a war..
-
i knew the meaning...all im saying is there is no way other than extensive long term land campaign to reduce the number of MAF regular forces..which what SAF cant afford...hence the guerilla that the SAF face in johor will be definately MAF regulars.
Not unless the MAF run with thier tails in between thier legs, they would have already fought some battles to slow Singapore`s advance. So, there would already have been losses as a result of Singapore`s coordinated assaults from land and air. It is also obvious that our military plans would already accomodate the issue about guerillas. It is only to be expected if you are occupying territory. The ones we can see, we would bomb, shoot missiles/rockets, saturate with artillery, etc. We would have to vigilant for those who cannot see. Of course, we can also infiltrate into the local population as well to know more by then. Like I said, race relations in Malaysia is on a knife`s edge. There will be some who welcome us definitely.
Im not being optimistic. More of a realist where this scenario is concerned. -
Just asking a question here. If singapore is to invade johor and a cease-fire is sought after by the UN security council, then there will not be anymore fighting. Because johor have a higher ethnic chinese than the rest of the states, do you think if singapore conducted a poll to see if the people want to be with singapore or not. And majority agreed to joining Singapore. Would the UN recognize such a vote?
-
That depends on whether the US, Russia and China would go along with it.Originally posted by y33bas:Just asking a question here. If singapore is to invade johor and a cease-fire is sought after by the UN security council, then there will not be anymore fighting. Because johor have a higher ethnic chinese than the rest of the states, do you think if singapore conducted a poll to see if the people want to be with singapore or not. And majority agreed to joining Singapore. Would the UN recognize such a vote?
But allowing this to even happen will definitely mean Asean will be as good as dead forever. Do we want this to happen? -
Do you have any concept of the economic consequences of war? Do you understand Pyrrhic victories? What good is a war if our economy is in shambles? Not least investor confidence plummets, and our extremely foreigner dependent economy will feel the blunt of it.Originally posted by Arthas79:There are no mullahs in SEA. Only wannabe terrorists. But control has been quite effective though there has been lapses in Indonesia.
At any rate, Singapore will only go to war if war is forced upon us. That means we have little choice. These ancillary issues(if they turn out to be the case. SEA`s nationalism is stronger than simple extremist dogma which affects the middle east.)would have to dealt later. When threatened with our very survival, there is little we can do to avoid it.
You might be tempted to say, Singapore`s strategy means that we would shoot first. But the truth is that you cannot hide a war in this age. Especially, in our case.
If a neighbouring country is about to wage war with a country and armed forces the size we have, they would have to pull all thier military resources. The world would know of it. And we would know about it. And we will shoot first before they are ready.
Wannabe terrorists? Good Lord, where have you been living for the last decade? I hardly term the "wannabe terrorists" who killed plenty in Bali, and bombed Jarkata, and ignited fighting between Christians and Muslims to be mere "wannabes" They have proven to be quite well-organised and it has taken the Indonesians much effort to track them down.
Does it matter that there are no mullahs in SEA? There are enough religious elders to issue a fatwa in SEA, never mind that the concept of "Muslim Brotherhood".
It must be all fine and well to throw around words like "waging war". But the war on the battlefield is not the only battle to be fought. There is the economic aspect which many have ignored only to their own detriment, as Germany discovered by 1941. -
Another War movie dreamer?Originally posted by y33bas:After 72 hours after Singapore successfully invaded the johor state of malaysia, a cease fire is sought by the UN Security Council. The border will be sealed up to prevent any in or out flow of civilians. What is Singapore going to do with the new found hinter-land? A new found hinterland would pose new problems to the SAF. Will that area be transferred to the administration of the Singapore Government? What is SIngapore going to do to cope with the new social, economic problems if it acquired johor?
I believe the logic is that if MY decided to walk over SG than the UN would probably help because major economies are at stake to the stabilities of global trade and being a UN member there are obligation within UN Security council.
But in a reverse scenario which is unlikely One must ask :
Why would the UN security council allow SG to walk over to MY and justified our claim? The same logic behind why would they allow MY to walk over SG.
In simple term, Russia and PRC, and all other mujahadin nations would not want to change the status quo of the littoral states along the strait to be pro – USA. Nato countries would most likely stand on a moral high ground and not interfere. UN Security Council would be paralyzed. Without UN security council approval how long do you think SG can hold on to JH.
In short Â…without a political resolution in KL there is no sense in stopping at JH? I think the notion of prolong occupying JH is politically suicidal. U have to consider all other aspects such as the impact on SG economy such as inflation, currency devaluation, foreign currency reserved dry up. Sg Citizen may not want to spend their hold life fighting. Military dealing with foreign fighter in JH and SG.
And what would happen if after 72 hours we are still fighting?
So why fight? Its expensive in every aspect. -
Un would not recognize. and we would not get the full suport either.Originally posted by y33bas:Just asking a question here. If singapore is to invade johor and a cease-fire is sought after by the UN security council, then there will not be anymore fighting. Because johor have a higher ethnic chinese than the rest of the states, do you think if singapore conducted a poll to see if the people want to be with singapore or not. And majority agreed to joining Singapore. Would the UN recognize such a vote? -
People just read off numbers like: "SAF can mobilise 300,000", Or "RSAF outnumber RMAF 4 to 1 in aircraft etc"...
While this is great for a lightning strike but occupation the "after the war" is a different thing altogether.
Look at Iraq.
Forget about numbers. The old Iraqi army is technically extinct. Zero. There is no danger of air-strikes nor do US troops have to face enemy armour in Iraq today.
Yet, the body bags keep filling up with US soldiers everyday. M1A2 Abrams tanks are wrecked. Apaches shot down.
Forget about 3G it will be quite medieval.
That, my fellow SGers, is the price of occupation.
If we invade MY without a good moral reason, and then stupid enough to want to hold territory....neighbouring Islamic peoples will be thanking Allah for finally giving them a legit excuse to "have a go" at the high and mighty Singaporeans.
Their otherwise shxtty lives will suddenly have meaning. SAF troops in MY may as well be wearing a sign that says "Shoot me, I'm Singaporean". -
Do you have any concept of the economic consequences of war? Do you understand Pyrrhic victories? What good is a war if our economy is in shambles? Not least investor confidence plummets, and our extremely foreigner dependent economy will feel the blunt of it.
I mentioned this in a preceding post. We would not simply declare war;war is thursted upon us. This scenario is predicated on that assumption.That means we would have no choice but to force the issue. How do you know the economy will be in shambles? Do you not think that the government has already considered that possibility? It would be ludicrous to empty Singapore of men completely.
At any rate, the economy takes second place in the order of things under such dire circumstances.
This is a last resort. War would be the only viable option available by then. Especially, if negotiations, protracted or not, fails. And especially against an imminent attack when negotiations are out of the question where the enemy`s intent for conquest is resolute and unwavering. We have no choice but to defend ourselves in a similar manner.Wannabe terrorists? Good Lord, where have you been living for the last decade? I hardly term the "wannabe terrorists" who killed plenty in Bali, and bombed Jarkata, and ignited fighting between Christians and Muslims to be mere "wannabes" They have proven to be quite well-organised and it has taken the Indonesians much effort to track them down.
In the context of what i wrote, this is comparatively lesser in magnitude than the quagmire in the middle east. They have been effectively routed and controlled in Malaysia, singapore, Australia, etc.Does it matter that there are no mullahs in SEA? There are enough religious elders to issue a fatwa in SEA, never mind that the concept of "Muslim Brotherhood".
Religious elders cannot simply issue a fatwa. The head of the muslim organizations of nations can. And niether of them are leaning towards extremism. They could not do so because they are more rational and answerable for thier actions; not only to thier flock but to the very government who feeds them.
Of course, you would get decrees which look out of sync with today`s world from time to time. But if you are living in a region where the majority of the people are muslims and the religion(if not all religions in varying degrees)as a whole is trying to accomodate globalization within itself, what would you expect? -
Are you suggesting that we allow the MAF to set up shop on our island? Whatever makes you think they would leave? That will never happen. This is the equivalent of letting a robber dressed in a black outfit and armed with a knife into your house; when you can close the door because it looks better when you report the matter to the police.
I believe the logic is that if MY decided to walk over SG than the UN would probably help because major economies are at stake to the stabilities of global trade and being a UN member there are obligation within UN Security council.
As explained before, wars do not happen overnight. You would need to moblize troops, equipment, etc. You would need to send out orders to your troops for an extended deployment. You would need to pull your elite legions from all over the country. Allocate supplies. Buy supplies. Repair equipment. You would need to march your forces to designated areas. And much more. You cannot do all of this within the blink of an eye. This will take time. There will be more than enough intelligence to show-prove it. It is no secret that we place intelligence gathering very highly in our order of priorities.
War and occupation are completely undesired. But if it is thrusted upon us(where there are no options for negotiations or upon failure of such negotiations), we would have to take up arms and do it.But allowing this to even happen will definitely mean Asean will be as good as dead forever. Do we want this to happen?
Interesting. ASEAN is a dead talking shop. It has always been. They are undecided mostly and confused. The only time it resembled something meaningful was when it was headed by a Singaporean diplomat. The US presence in SEA, if not the presence of other major powers, is more important than ASEAN itself. That is how weak it is. -
Are you suggesting that we allow the MAF to set up shop on our island? Whatever makes you think they would leave? That will never happen. This is the equivalent of letting a robber dressed in a black outfit and armed with a knife into your house; when you can close the door because it looks better when you report the matter to the police.[b]
Did I said that SG allow MAF to walk over ? nope. Self defence
I believe there is no room within UN to agreed any country to pull the first punches. I am tempted to say Unless the 1st strike party could provide a justifiable evident and convincing premise to start a 1st strike which I donÂ’t think so. A UN resolution would be almost close to none.
The "logic" with UN punitive would start with Economic Sanction together with the threat of force. We saw collective security come into play during the liberation of Kuwait, but that is when all the Gold has been taken and oil field has been burn. -
Guys can we assumed for now that the scenario which the thread starter have illustrated did happen. What do you suggest we could and should go about it?
I wish to find out if there is anything else which i have left out or could have been done better. Thanks
-
like hong kong? land belongs to us till certain amount of years?
-
i rather not, ours forever would be a better thing.Originally posted by cydus21:like hong kong? land belongs to us till certain amount of years?
i always wondered, if somehow we had managed to stay in malaysia and the party that was headed in the PAP won power, what would malaysia be like now. -
We have always said that our force is a deterrance force, to prevent anyone from trying anything funny. To push our neighbours back to their own boundary will be the only thing we can do, much less go right into Johor. To push into Johore and beyond will make it seem as if we are now the agressor.
That is, unless the US claims Malaysia to be part of the new Axis of Evil. -
believe there is no room within UN to agreed any country to pull the first punches. I am tempted to say Unless the 1st strike party could provide a justifiable evident and convincing premise to start a 1st strike which I donÂ’t think so. A UN resolution would be almost close to none.
As I have explained, wars do not happen overnight. There will be more than enough evidence to show proof a country`s intent; mobilization of forces, equipment, orders, movement of forces, construction of defensive facilities, etc.
Add this to Singapore`s current geographical circumstances and the picture becomes even clearer. Incidentally, a lot of decisions which are in our favour is swayed by this fact.
Do not be fooled. The UN is a tool of great powers and the `rich and famous'.
The "logic" with UN punitive would start with Economic Sanction together with the threat of force. We saw collective security come into play during the liberation of Kuwait, but that is when all the Gold has been taken and oil field has been burn.
If you manipulate them right and are good buddies with the powers that be, you will get a better reception. Which is what diplomacy is for anyway. 
-
Take all stuff said for this topic with a BIG pinch of salt.
-
Originally posted by CM06:Take all stuff said for this topic with a BIG pinch of salt.
Yes...kids today love violence and C&C
SAF is actually an insurance policy, not a hi-tech toy to show off with.
But comes with premium inclusive 2 yrs of your life....
Still all we need is a loss mouth to wake everyone up..recall in Dec'02, Malaysia FM Syed Hamid was quoted by media as saying "Singapore has only two choices -- compromise or go to war".
Scary huh?
I love History. -
Albar is the Malaysian PM`s poodle. Remember how he was like during Mat-hatter`s reign? He has sinced toned down his rhetoric under a more rational and sane PM in Badawi. During the height of the Indo-Malaysian crisis, he was quoted as saying that god himself would intervene if both latter countries confront one another.
The SAF is indeed an insurance policy. But it`s much more than that. The SAF gives power and leverage to our diplomactic influence and drives. That power and leverage is a sub-set of how much powerful the SAF is at a given point of time. -
After a war with M'sia? First thing is to ensure that not a shred of the present govt that started the war exists.
-
Blitzkrieg of Asia....
Lightning attack all the way into the heart f MY -
Like what the others had said, yes SAF might have be able to mob 75,000+ soldiers and RSAF 4-1 ratio but thinking of of we do a lighting strike all the way to the capital,isn't is costly to do so??? We are going to suffer serious losses and lose land too. It might be cheaper to juz hold on to johore and dig in to defence ourselves...
-
IMHO..... we will take the whole of JB in under 1 weeks.... then ask for cease fire under the UN....Willingly return 3/4 of JB back to Malaysia if they will agree to a peace talk..... then we hold on to the 1/4 of JB under the excuse of using it as a DMZ.
More or less what the Korea are doing..... very uneasy peace. We will always be under the threat of terrorist attack. Therefore not really worth the effect unless Malaysia attack us 1st. -
Unfortunately, those are the only options. Only an idiot will opt for the latter.Originally posted by Gun:
Yes...kids today love violence and C&C
SAF is actually an insurance policy, not a hi-tech toy to show off with.
But comes with premium inclusive 2 yrs of your life....
Still all we need is a loss mouth to wake everyone up..recall in Dec'02, Malaysia FM Syed Hamid was quoted by media as saying "Singapore has only two choices -- compromise or go to war".
Scary huh?
I love History.
History exists for fools to repeat it and silly delusions of grandeur are as stupid as the person who creates them. -
Just my humble, uneducated opinion.
Reference China.
In 1962 (I think) - After border tensions and small scale battles (and a myriad of other issues), China invaded India.
However, China withdrew after achieving its publicly-stated (limited) objectives did not hold any Indian territories apart from those in dispute.
This is an interesting lesson for us:
If China had held on to Indian territory, they would still be fighting today.
But they didn't.And an uneasy truce remains to this day.
Next...
Reference Israel.
After the 6-Day War in 1967, Israel held onto large parts territories captured from the Arabs including Egyptian territories.
in 1973 Egypt launched the surprise attack Yom Kippur War that at first almost succeeded in defeating Israel.
Not only was Egyptian honour regained, but Israel also returned all Egyptian territories in a peace deal with Sadat.
And they have a peace that lasts till today.
Lesson from history is very simple: you hold on to territory, you won't be sleeping much.
If we "first-strike" anyone, we should state certain limited objectives publicly at the start of hostilities, and then withdraw after this "meaured blow" is struck and start peace talks. -
Singapore won't hold much ground. We won't want to.
However, our insurance policy is the ability to strike deep, fast and hard. Very deep.