Are we more than prepared for a conflict, if not war?
-
As we can see, heightened tensions in the region due to Pedra Branca and rivalry between the US and Russia over the issue of Georgia, i believe we have to be prepared as in go up one rung from "Standby" to operational readiness.
Our PT/91m MBTs and A4 skyhawks can be upgraded, although it may seem pointless, it is still beneficial to our needs, should we have a inter-pacific war(US landing on Georgia to clear Russian forces and push into Moscow, but i dont think it would affect South Asia.However there will still be hostility from Kremlin.
Conflicts can just be powershoving and flaunting of assets, as shown by Russia and it was very tense if not, nervy when US deployed its chinooks into Georgia to evacuate (or is it deploy Georgian forces from Iraq to thier homeland)?.Had Russian forces shot down a chinook just cause of a trigger happy RPG or Stinger A/A personnell , im sure that US will make a big hoo ha, if not threaten the use of force to clear Russian Forces out.
Right now, the stituation on Georgia is still unknown.The last i have heard is Russian Forces breaking the ceasefire and staying in Georgia.Has Georgian soveriegnity been returned ?
-
Our PT/91m MBTs and A4 skyhawks can be upgraded, although it may seem pointless
Eh,,, PT/91M used by who you know?
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Eh,,, PT/91M used by who you know?
oops. i meant to say SM1. got confused.
-
SM1! Talk about a 3-letter vulgarity!
-
I do believe that the SAF is prepared. They have always been, and will always be. Shit can hit the fan at any time.
-
i tink SAF are ready...
they all teach us although thru simulations
but we are trained-well~~
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
SM1! Talk about a 3-letter vulgarity!
Huh?
SM-1?
-
I believe we are ready. I have seen other Western armed forces at work in other countries. Their training standards are the same. In any case, peace time training only brings the soldier up to a competent level but not to a "honed" level.
What other armed forces do is that prior to executing a deliberate mission or to deploy overseas, they will get all the units together and rehearse and rehearse ... and rehearse. Sounds familiar to us SAF guys !?! These rehearsals will hopefully bring the competency level up. At least, it will iron out the coordination problems and minimise friendly fire incidents during the mission.
However, all these cannot replace combat experience. Which the SAF only has a small number of regulars who have experienced such. This is something the SAF would have to take its chances. Learn fast during the first few engagements and correct and adapt its tactics. Hopefully, we are not KO'd before then.
-
Actually right, SG don't have the military capability to engage in any wars. Defence is already a big headache, much less being the offensive.
-
Originally posted by crimsontactics:
Actually right, SG don't have the military capability to engage in any wars. Defence is already a big headache, much less being the offensive.
mm. so we have to deliver swift knock out blows to the enemy before they attack us?
something like Blitzkrieg?
-
Originally posted by Beaten_And_Damned:
mm. so we have to deliver swift knock out blows to the enemy before they attack us?
something like Blitzkrieg?
Do we have the manpower and equipments to do that?
-
Originally posted by crimsontactics:
Do we have the manpower and equipments to do that?
we lack the sufficient manpower, yes. so either defence/counterattack ?
-
Originally posted by Beaten_And_Damned:
we lack the sufficient manpower, yes. so either defence/counterattack ?
Why don't we just prevent any form of conflict from occuring? -
Originally posted by Beaten_And_Damned:
we lack the sufficient manpower, yes. so either defence/counterattack ?
our open secret doctrine is Forward Defence Strategy...
boy... go read "Defending the Lion City" by Tim Huxley -
Tim Huxley is an idiot!
And the tension between Russia and the West is nothing if you understand the history of the Cold War.
The current situation is minor and temporary at best! In a clash of superpowers, how can you justify SG going up in alert levels?
Have u seriously assessed the likelihood of war between these two titans?
Kids always dream of mega battles like video games. I'm sorry but this isn't something like C&C.
There's something called diplomacy and the realisation that war fuks your country up even if you start it.
-
There's something called diplomacy and the realisation that war fuks your country up even if you start it.
Ideally big powers will resort to diplomacy. Also, rational people ( politicians included ) know that war is a lose-lose situation.
Unfortunately, in reality there are madmen in this world who are politicians & they cant tthink rationally.
Otherwise, we will all not need an armed forces.
-
Originally posted by Beaten_And_Damned:
As we can see, heightened tensions in the region due to Pedra Branca and rivalry between the US and Russia over the issue of Georgia, i believe we have to be prepared as in go up one rung from "Standby" to operational readiness.
Our PT/91m MBTs and A4 skyhawks can be upgraded, although it may seem pointless, it is still beneficial to our needs, should we have a inter-pacific war(US landing on Georgia to clear Russian forces and push into Moscow, but i dont think it would affect South Asia.However there will still be hostility from Kremlin.
Conflicts can just be powershoving and flaunting of assets, as shown by Russia and it was very tense if not, nervy when US deployed its chinooks into Georgia to evacuate (or is it deploy Georgian forces from Iraq to thier homeland)?.Had Russian forces shot down a chinook just cause of a trigger happy RPG or Stinger A/A personnell , im sure that US will make a big hoo ha, if not threaten the use of force to clear Russian Forces out.
Right now, the stituation on Georgia is still unknown.The last i have heard is Russian Forces breaking the ceasefire and staying in Georgia.Has Georgian soveriegnity been returned ?
sorry to say.U just wake up?
A4 already went into museum or deep inside storage.
"Standby" to operational readiness.
I think our Standby Force is very operational ready lah.
Following the Sept 11 attacks when security in Singapore was stepped up, the SAF's stand-by forces have been working with Home Team agencies to provide security coverage for significant international events.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/chembiodefence/
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/1999/may/15may99_nr.html
The 42 SAR combat team that was activated is one component of the Army's Standby Force. The SAF Standby Force, which besides the Army's Standby Force comprises RSAF fighter aircraft and RSN strike craft, is ready at all times to respond swiftly to any threat to Singapore's security.
Live rounds are loaded in 5 tons and other assets,APC,tanks.
All vehicles line up........
Do u call them Ready or Standby?
300,000 SAF comprises of about 50,000 Regulars and NS Full time,
plus 250,000 Op Ready NS.
24/7,there are at least few hundredleave the Bases
with live rounds,not heading to range!!
If situation require,Mobilisiation,
If worse,all lights in Expressways will be switched off....just in case.
kmm
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
sorry to say.U just wake up?
A4 already went into museum or deep inside storage.
"Standby" to operational readiness.
I think our Standby Force is very operational ready lah.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/chembiodefence/
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/1999/may/15may99_nr.html
Live rounds are loaded in 5 tons and other assets,APC,tanks.
All vehicles line up........
Do u call them Ready or Standby?
300,000 SAF comprises of about 50,000 Regulars and NS Full time,
plus 250,000 Op Ready NS.
24/7,there are at least few hundredleave the Bases
with live rounds,not heading to range!!
If situation require,Mobilisiation,
If worse,all lights in Expressways will be switched off....just in case.
kmm
every country would say they are ready. what defines them as ready is really the capability to respond to such threats in the shortest possible time. it is also really the intelligence that plays a part in spotting potential threats and mobilise the armed forces in time.
so its really no use copy and pasting and telling others what they already know. im sure many folks here have been through NS and they know how operationally ready the SAF is.
-
i see this as 2 fold and it isn;t about if SAF is ready.
civilian leadership play a critical role as to when do we make that critical decision to "jump in"
military leadership on planning and executions. I mean is it going to be the similar screw up like the Mas Selamat case?
You can have all the scenarios but they are just scenario.
-
I think it is not only that SAF or civilian leadership needs to be ready. The entire nation needs to be ready.
-
Ermmm…all of you are talking about war, looks like it too simple. You’ll as NSmen should know the actual tactical mobilization in the hand of your General and they know the difficulties.
500000-army need to cross the boarder and the only land access are 1st link and 2nd link and do you know, all over 692 km2 of Singapore been registered as artillery and missile target 200 or 300 km away without you knowing where it came from. Drone? Can it see through tropical jungle?
Further more, no need to think about 1st and 2nd link entrance since its a artillery target and it will be disappear once the war begin.
Yep, you got SAF with so-called mighty tactical firepower, but without seeing the target what you gonna hit. The problems with SG is, with limited land the firepower can be centralized within small area compare to MY.
I do advise the Singapore youngsters, war is cruel and the best thing is to avoid it. If you need to know about tactical. We can discuss to give you’ll the best and true picture of real war between Sg and My. Just let me in with my opinion here.
-
Further fm my view, war is not the option in civilized world. Its bitter than you guys ever think.
If you’re talking about your military power might, it means nothing when you read about Serbian VS NATO war. The combination of Israel doctrine including the mobilization of air strike, artillery, and tanks with infantry is no use during recent Lebanon war isn’t it?
Most of their air strike didn’t effective when it came to tunnel or heavy jungle war and you need to consider SU30MKM, MIG29N and other aircraft also . Even their Merkava 111 and 1V which been admire worldwide as one of the finest tanks been destroyed with Mentis M and RPG29. Hesbollah guerilla never use tank to destroy Merkava. They only use tank hunter infantry, which consist 2-4 people.
If you’re talking about MY, they got special force infantry specialized to hunt the tank with 1st class weapons more than Hesbollah. If you read recent defense article, the era of tank as “king of the battlefields” been obsolete long time ago.
I didn’t talking about PT91M MBT because during Serbian war VS NATO, most of their tanks survive fm air strike and that why US never dare to use M1 Abramas tank in Serbia. You got what I mean. With artillery shells (always highly mobilized to prevent detection) and tank hunter infantry rip out most of the Leopard tanks all the way. At the end, PT91MBT came out fm nowhere for face-to-face fighting.
20 apaches long bow? Why they don’t use it in Serbia? Its because of missile since apache need to stay still before they start firing target isn’t it. A soft static target for missile since latest tank doctrine move along with air defense battery + infantry equipped with short range missile
Your Generals must be realize it why Serbian been called as BALKAN and Balkan advantage 3 times more in MY.
Recently, MY brought 2 Scorpene submarine to strengthen their army. You’ll should read about Falkland war and how 1 sub marine can possibly change the entire war.
Guys. Yes. When we describe about war machine (tanks, aircraft, surface platform etc), it got a lot of remarkable advantage and specification but when it come to real war, its performance far fm we imagine.
Say no to war but yes to peace. We might fight muscle to muscle if we met in 1st link because of disagreement but it doesn’t mean we need to go for war. Learn how Israeli soldiers and Lebanon civilian cry during the war.
-
Originally posted by Sontosontorions:
Ermmm…all of you are talking about war, looks like it too simple. You’ll as NSmen should know the actual tactical mobilization in the hand of your General and they know the difficulties.
500000-army need to cross the boarder and the only land access are 1st link and 2nd link and do you know, all over 692 km2 of Singapore been registered as artillery and missile target 200 or 300 km away without you knowing where it came from. Drone? Can it see through tropical jungle?
Further more, no need to think about 1st and 2nd link entrance since its a artillery target and it will be disappear once the war begin.
Yep, you got SAF with so-called mighty tactical firepower, but without seeing the target what you gonna hit. The problems with SG is, with limited land the firepower can be centralized within small area compare to MY.
I do advise the Singapore youngsters, war is cruel and the best thing is to avoid it. If you need to know about tactical. We can discuss to give you’ll the best and true picture of real war between Sg and My. Just let me in with my opinion here.
dude. what you just said could be summarized into :
above all, the soldier should pray for peace.
that was really convulted, really really hard to read.
but it isnt the way in singapore. in singapore, odds are if you picked 10 guys above the age of 21 off the streets, 7 served two years conscripment in the armed forces. the other 3 probably served in the police or fire brigade or administration within the armed forces.
if you realise, we exist in a conundrum of possibilities. logically, if you think about singapore as a jigsaw piece, we wouldnt fit into our part of the world. too many complications, too many differences in the core. case in point, we wouldnt exist if not for the intereference of external events and players. some would like to call it, living on "suffrage" of the region. It isnt a warrior ethos in society, but moreso of how you understand defence
in that same manner, we are probably closer to Meiji japan and its "strong army, strong nation" concept. defence not only as a physical concept, but multi layered.defence of the national idenity and psyche.
go figure, if you understand it you'd get it. if you dont, its pretty hard to convince you that we arent a nation of war mongerer's.
-
When I start writing a few hrs ago, I thought I’m only talking to young NSmen who really eager for war. A reflection from their military training to builds self confidence probably and nation as a whole. Seems somebody really understand it and that what I’m trying to say indirectly.
Yes. One of the messages, all soldiers and civilian too, should pray for peace. We had gone through a lot of war before, communist, confrontation, Japanese, Portuguese and British. It’s long enough and we can’t bear a new scar.
In other point of view, that’s the psychology mold how Singaporean built up its society. I mean no harm when I told them the reality of true war. At least they realized what should happen during war to add on some respect into young NSmen of their “enemy “.
Over confidence always brings careless but respect make them more careful and efficient soldiers isn’t it?
Further more, what I’m trying to say is, all war’s machine got it own weaknesses and depending to it’s alone as a measurement for true wars always brings loses at the end.
-
Seems to me the only person really happy to go to war and flaunt "military might" in here would be lionnoisy.
But in all people in here have their head screwed on correctly, we go our job as soldiers for the precise reason that we hope that we will never have to do our job for real.
But then again if push comes to shove you've have to do what you're trained to do to the best of your capacity.
Though if we wanted to point out bare facts I must say that your whole thesis on how jungle warfare trumps technology as a force multiplier is poorly written in the sense it relies on the "vietnam media" bias.
Simply put it is the unrealistic and unreasonable expectation that simply because you have superior technology you will be able to pwn your enemy completely, with encountering difficulties or taking as losses as "proof" of failure.
This theory is greatly flawed for the simple reason that technology is just a tool, something that you use. What matters in war is how you play your cards. Vietnam was not an indication of the inability of the American soldier or military to fight (in fact they've have been through more brutal battles in WW2 and Korean) but the inability of its political leaders to give the soldier a mission they could actually win the war with.
Also the worst example to quote is Lebanon. While the war was a media victory for Hezbollah, due a lot in part of the Israelis being slow to come up with their own side of the story, it was actually a military disaster for them. They actually took heavy losses fighting the IDF. The engagement was much like the Tet offensive: a military disaster but a media victory. Most telling was the reluctance of Hezbollah to go round 2 after that incident, for they were running low on matyrs.
At the end of the day technology is a card to play, unless you are lionnoisy who thinks that bigger guns and better stuff means you just rush in to pwn everyone. But if push comes to shove any military would rather have the better stuff.