Malaysia will attack Somali terrorists again!
-
TS write up was probably politically incorrect. But I thought some thinking might change after 911.
One clear lesson learned from 911 is that small militant groups can inflict heavy damage to civilian population and distance is not a barrier.
Lawlessness in Somalia is a breeding ground for organized militant groups to plot another event. Containment within its border might be a way to go.
Politics aside it might be Singapore interest to get internationally organized a
small patrol forces to escort and keep somalia contain within its border and not to
board too many merchant ships and plant something on it and sail to Singapore.
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
idwar is like a malaysian version of lionnoisy. only that he/she has much better written english and a good grasp of phrasing.
not to encourage a nationalist flame war here but, having trained with malaysian infantry and seen them first hand. for the record, the malaysian RRR 1st batallion. i wouldnt be chest thumping all that here. most of them are ordinary blokes just like our conscripts. and surprise surprise ! their pay is about equivalent too. we have marked differences in the way we operate but if you strip away all the training, gear , tactics,education ,identity and nationality, we arent really all that different.
Just to gently remind you armchair generals something, you may have a bigger tank , a faster jet or a more capable boat. but at the end of the day, the human being operating that isnt really much different on either side of the causeway. we have more in common ground then in difference.
to engage in a flame war about singapore and malaysia is about as productive as comparing the taste of chalk and cheese (not that i want to try that in in any given case)idwar, no offence here intended , but before u talk about how the MAF is ready and raring to jump into action with pirates off the coast of somalia, do remember the asian tsunami relief response. singapore does not lack the capability to project or flex its military muscles. It merely lacks the motive to act.
do not confuse lack of motive with a lack of power or the will to exercise it. very dangerous misconception to have.
im beginning to see more and more similarities btw idwar and lionnoisy, especially in this forum
-
Originally posted by superlibra:
sheesh..... i suggest that everyone stop replying to this thread. idwar can talk and provoke replies from us for all he like, but i'm sure the rest of you guys here are more sensible enough to see through his provokes? Pls stop replying already.. And someone start informing the mods to lock this thread..
Could the reason be, like all malaysian, they talk big but got no fight? hence even rag-tag somalian militia can score...
@rain-coat
Ya agree, except he's more racist, makes me wanna read through lionnoisy's thread...
-
Originally posted by rain-coat:
i thought it was SOF?Yes, they are SOF, where all are from CDOs. SOF is like a 'special unit' of CDOs.
-
When any significanty number of Singapore citizens anywhere in the world are held hostages, the SAF will respond immediately , be it the Navy, SOF or Airforce. But it will be only with the permission of the the country where the "incident " takes place. The SAF has the will , organization , people & hardware to project power on this scale for this kind of "incident".
Singapore flagged ships are flags of convenience. No need to get excited when one is hijacked.
-
Originally posted by Sepecat:
When any significanty number of Singapore citizens anywhere in the world are held hostages, the SAF will respond immediately , be it the Navy, SOF or Airforce. But it will be only with the permission of the the country where the "incident " takes place. The SAF has the will , organization , people & hardware to project power on this scale for this kind of "incident".
Singapore flagged ships are flags of convenience. No need to get excited when one is hijacked.
hello dude. no issues with what you are saying here but i find that really hard to swallow.
can you substantiate it ?
the only two precedents i can think of is the cambodia evacuation and the SQ 93 "hijack" butter knives
incident and both involved exceptional set of circumstances
-
Originally posted by Sepecat:
When any significanty number of Singapore citizens anywhere in the world are held hostages, the SAF will respond immediately , be it the Navy, SOF or Airforce. But it will be only with the permission of the the country where the "incident " takes place. The SAF has the will , organization , people & hardware to project power on this scale for this kind of "incident".
Singapore flagged ships are flags of convenience. No need to get excited when one is hijacked.
You tell that to the shipping line and I see how many will register under S'pore.
Flags of convenience.....are you high or what?
You sure SAF has all it takes to PROJECT power? Prove it. What SAF also depends on are ties.....lack that and I would like to see how you PROJECT.
-
Let's just say we won't stand idly by if a Singaporean crew is held hostage.
We have the wherewithal and the means to hit them hard. It's only a matter of approval.
-
Originally posted by LazerLordz:
Let's just say we won't stand idly by if a Singaporean crew is held hostage.
We have the wherewithal and the means to hit them hard. It's only a matter of approval.
oh approval will come swiftly.. Like Israel, nobody messes with SIngapore and get away with it.
-
No lar, our President will go offer himself as hostage again.
-
hello dude. no issues with what you are saying here but i find that really hard to swallow.
can you substantiate it ?
the only two precedents i can think of is the cambodia evacuation and the SQ 93 "hijack" butter knives
incident and both involved exceptional set of circumstances
sgstarsPardon me , but what is hard to swallow ?
You have already given 2 good examples of what SAF is capable of doing to protect S'pore citizens to substantiate extent of S'pore's commitment in "incidents " involving "exceptional set of circumstances".
-
You tell that to the shipping line and I see how many will register under S'pore.
Flags of convenience.....are you high or what?
You sure SAF has all it takes to PROJECT power? Prove it. What SAF also depends on are ties.....lack that and I would like to see how you PROJECT.
only 16 and very lonely
Obviously, you do not know the purpose of registering a ship under a flag of convenience. It is purely for commercial reasons and does not entitle the ship to protection from the country it is registered under. I am not high - you are just dumb.
Being 16 and very lonely, it is no surprise that he /she is clearly ignorant that SAF can project power. The only issue is the extent of the power that can be projected. If you look at the weapons systems SAF has available, one can clearly see major elements of its expeditionary capabilties. Operationally, its power to project its forces quickly has been to some extent already tested during the tsunami disaster.
-
Originally posted by Sepecat:
Pardon me , but what is hard to swallow ?
You have already given 2 good examples of what SAF is capable of doing to protect S'pore citizens to substantiate extent of S'pore's commitment in "incidents " involving "exceptional set of circumstances".
no issues or hard feelings here at work bro.
those were FLAWED PRECDENTS not good examples. i dont contest the means and manpower to carry out such ops. but i challenge the definition that it was willpower to do so. i think its more of circumstances that forced SAF's hand.
for instance.
cambodia was in a state of anarchy. meaning no government , no body of power or party of power was in control or substantiative control of the country at that time. there was a COUP going on.
airport wasnt manned or controlled. our charlie 130s landed without APPROVAL.
SAF could only act because there wasnt anybody in charge in cambodia at that point. remember's asean treaty of non-interference ? the circumstances of nobody in control allowed SAF to intervene. it wasnt exactly some kind of entebbe raid where they went in facing hostile opposition to rescue "hostages" . present threats but unlikely to be challenged or shot at. there's a difference between a "envisaged threat scenario" and a "actual operation situation"
good chance that the coup might go on a bit longer and grow into a civil war. but that didnt happen. i guessed the SAF was taking the pessimistic view of things and intervene in the event of worst case scenario and evacuate because of civil war possibly breaking out.
you dont see the same thing happening in bangkok in the 80s junta / student demonstration thing or even as recently as myanmmar and the 1997 jarkata post suharto racial riots.
SQ 93 hijack incident wasnt exactly a perfect example of SAF being very gung ho and wanting to take action. it was again, a circumstancial response. if you noticed, sending in commandos was pretty much the last resort.
IIRC, the terrorists gradually escalated the seriousness of their threats right ? they first pushed a steward out of the aircraft and subsequently a stewardess. we neogotiated with them first.
they grew bolder and bolder and even asked for more ridiculous requests such as the freeing of 2000 palestinians from israeli jails. like we had any connection or ability to do that.
when that was refused, it was then they threatened to "blow up the aircraft". at that point, it was known that they were armed with BUTTER KNIVES and the information about the bombs could not be ascertained. no one knew if they were serious and whether they really had bombs, hence the red berets/SOF went in. the circumstances of us being unable to confirm the bomb threat lead to the action.
now for a quick comparison, remember the hostage incident at the iranian embassy (iirc, not too sure which embassy) during the margret tatcher era.
margret tatcher simply refused to neogotiate with the terrorists. she simply ordered the SAS in and they did their job. dont mean to paint the SOF/red berets in any bad way (all credit to them), but it simply isnt the same case in sq93 incident.
even in the asean tsunami response, it all hinged on the circumstances again. we were the only nation whose fleets were less than 3 days sailing time away who could provide the heavy lift assets and supplies to the area. the US navy assets and ships only came in after us as they required transit time from yokohoma IIRC
it depended alot on the receptivity of the host nations. the Indons , lacking in heavy and medium lift choppers appreciated our LST's carrying aid and our choppers flying in stuff in meluaboh. Thailand, on the other hand, had alot of personnel of its own in the area. after a week (or two, cant remember) , they told us they they had shifted from disaster search and rescue to recovery and rehabilitation. Our Super P's then flew home. in comparison, our boys in indonesia stayed for nearly 2 months and the drawdown was singaporean initiated, as we felt the NGOs were doing a good enough job and didnt need us there anymore.
now look at cyclone nurgis and our response. no action taken because the junta was not receptive and circumstances didnt allow for us to project or deliver aid.
-
questions. When SG govt decided to go into Cambodia to bring foreigners out did we alert MY and Thailand? or any other nations? Did we send fighters to escort ?
i am sure our local counsel general had provide local info and not land blindly.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
No lar, our President will go offer himself as hostage again.
old already lah.. no more value! -
Originally posted by Sepecat:
Obviously, you do not know the purpose of registering a ship under a flag of convenience. It is purely for commercial reasons and does not entitle the ship to protection from the country it is registered under. I am not high - you are just dumb.
Being 16 and very lonely, it is no surprise that he /she is clearly ignorant that SAF can project power. The only issue is the extent of the power that can be projected. If you look at the weapons systems SAF has available, one can clearly see major elements of its expeditionary capabilties. Operationally, its power to project its forces quickly has been to some extent already tested during the tsunami disaster.
Purely for commercial purposes? No....
For commercial purposes? Yes....
Do you even know what I'm driving at?
And PROJECT what power I ask again. I told you.....PROJECTION is just one part.
Again do you know what I'm driving at?