Why does Singapore not declare neutrality?
-
Tibet was also a neutral country, with no army.
Its a pity, the British in India, observed their sovereignty, but the Chinese did not.
Whats there to prevent Malaysia from "taking back what belongs to them."
Mahathir was saying The Tengku made a mistake in expeling Singapore out of Malaysia, and the Pedra Blanca case brought up the issue that the Sultan of Johor misunderstood the British and only intend to lease out the island, not give it up.
-
Originally posted by caleb_chiang:
They should get mercenaries instead...
Agree with you on this.... Our Singapore guys arent physically fit these days. and loyalty isnt really there too... (and most of them are really ripping the govt off with lots of operations - Wisdom tooth operation, Heart operation, knee cap operation... etc....) and since we are so eager getting foreign talent in... shouldnt we get mercenaries from China?
I went to China months back and this female tour guide was telling me the best jobs in China is soldier or tour guide....she initially wanted to follow her dad's footsteps.. but ended up as a tour guide.... i guess if they become mercenaries.. their loyalty level would in fact be much higher than our Singapore guys... (Australia or New Zealand next?)
I guess if we have mercenaries from China coming in and saving guys from 2 years of NS, probably view on PRC foreign talents would be a lot different than it is now. -
Mercenaries are engaged on a contractual basis. They are like contractors doing a job.
Singapore should look into the French model of the Foreign Legionaires.
After a tour of duty of 10 years, give them citizenship.
-
Even if possible, there is no benefit to taking back Singapore. It will only add to racial tensions in Malaysia and undermine the political structure within Malaysia. Malaysia is still very much inter-linked with the outside world. It still needs export markets for its oil revenues and manufacturing production. Invading Singapore only serves to isolate Malaysia. Having enjoyed the living standards of an open economy, asking its citizens to renounce that for the sake of a resourceless Singapore is political suicide. The issue of "loyalty" doesn't even arise.
-
Originally posted by caleb_chiang:
They should get mercenaries instead...
and what's stopping from the invading country to pay them twice the amount to walk away?
-
Lichtenstein isnt surrounded by muslim countries.
-
Originally posted by troublemaker2005:
i like to fight. in war i have a chance to fight. not like chao ah beng fights.
Spore should gather all the chao ah beng and send them to fight, since they are the gangsters, they are known to be a good figther right? PPle sure scare of them.So mindef should recruit chao ah beng to defend the country.
-
Originally posted by likeyou:
Spore should gather all the chao ah beng and send them to fight, since they are the gangsters, they are known to be a good figther right? PPle sure scare of them.So mindef should recruit chao ah beng to defend the country.
nope. now the chao ah bengs are only good in army keng. when they see enemy, they chao keng flee more,like it.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Tibet was also a neutral country, with no army.
Its a pity, the British in India, observed their sovereignty, but the Chinese did not.
Whats there to prevent Malaysia from "taking back what belongs to them."
Mahathir was saying The Tengku made a mistake in expeling Singapore out of Malaysia, and the Pedra Blanca case brought up the issue that the Sultan of Johor misunderstood the British and only intend to lease out the island, not give it up.
i am not updated really. so Tibet now belongs to china or not? HongKong. walkover after 1997. No army. lots of gangs and criminals, the movies even glorifyies it. so lots of cops. but cops can battle streetwars, not countyr wars. The chinese always wannted to kick some japanese arse, but...japnese still has an army fo defecne (after ww2) and lucky for them if some of their people scorned, thy have US. Taiwan has afucking small army as compared to china. a small fucking one that can bite if china wants to walk in by land. during ww2 japanese find invading malaya much a breeze as compared to singapore. although singapor was small but we put up a much better g=fight and show. we could have held on longer and make more pages in tthe history of japnese invasion of the small island if it wasn't for shortage of war hardware. no battleships to defend our seas, poor untrained comoners, mixed race soldiers. people claim that we should point our guns inland since there is a chance that the japs will take a direct approcah via johore, but standing in the point of britisjh commanders then what is the pint of doing that? beside charging at the enmy with rifles and bayonet the range of those gun can hardly hit any japanese targets. theywere better pointed at the sea just. it willmake some history if they can take donw any japnese warships entering form that channel. even if a country is neutral, that does not mean that she need not have a regular army. -
Originally posted by mancha:
Mercenaries are engaged on a contractual basis. They are like contractors doing a job.
Singapore should look into the French model of the Foreign Legionaires.
After a tour of duty of 10 years, give them citizenship.
no. this is a very unwise for singapore. -
Originally posted by Junyang700:
Agree with you on this.... Our Singapore guys arent physically fit these days. and loyalty isnt really there too... (and most of them are really ripping the govt off with lots of operations - Wisdom tooth operation, Heart operation, knee cap operation... etc....) and since we are so eager getting foreign talent in... shouldnt we get mercenaries from China?
I went to China months back and this female tour guide was telling me the best jobs in China is soldier or tour guide....she initially wanted to follow her dad's footsteps.. but ended up as a tour guide.... i guess if they become mercenaries.. their loyalty level would in fact be much higher than our Singapore guys... (Australia or New Zealand next?)
I guess if we have mercenaries from China coming in and saving guys from 2 years of NS, probably view on PRC foreign talents would be a lot different than it is now.
our submarine torpedo tube 'fire' button in english leh. we have to train them to read first so they know how to press the 'fire' button. -
Originally posted by nfshp253:
I wonder why Singapore doesn't declare neutrality, so that we can maintain peace with every other country (except for Malaysia :)) If Singapore declares neutrality, we can abolish the wasteful SAF and save on financial resources which can be used for economic development. And all males can save 1.5 years and graduate from University or enter the workforce quickly. Imagine how much more money you can earn in those 1.5 years?! In the post WWII era, no one will go for any land or air combat anymore except for America against the Middle East. Has any Asian country broken into a war in recent years (Not counting the Vietnam War, and that was America's problem again)? Neutrality means no army (like Liechtenstein), and means more resources for the development of the country! Look at Liechtenstein, it has the world's highest GDP (PPP) per capita!
have any countries in history declared netuality and NOT been attacked?
pl show me actual examples .
2. I think u cannot.
3. dunt be naive. Imagine without SAF---
---water may be cut off
---yankee just send a CV Battle group , asking SG release michael Faye etc
4. Do u expect UN or USA will save our axx?
Ha ha!
-
TS , kindly compare the demographics and size of Singapore, an island, and Liechtenstein..
-
any one control SG, is as good as controlling Japan, China Korea etc.
Why?
Most of their oil must passing thro Sg Straits!
what is the strategic importance of
Liechtenstein? Almost none.
-
At present Singapore control Japan, China, Korea etc?
-
If you wanna declare total neutrality, you better have damn good defensive terrain and a damn zai armed forces. Cos no one is going to come and help you!
And please, our SAF is to defend Singapore, not attack Malaysia. Strategic objectives are different. If it was to attack Malaysia, why until now still haven't attack?
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
If you wanna declare total neutrality, you better have damn good defensive terrain and a damn zai armed forces. Cos no one is going to come and help you!
And please, our SAF is to defend Singapore, not attack Malaysia. Strategic objectives are different. If it was to attack Malaysia, why until now still haven't attack?
A caveat, our military is not for attacking other countries, but from its equipment procurement and training doctrine it almost certainly looks like it intends to do the fighting on foreign soil ala. force projection.
The reasons are obvious, what's the point of simply camping in a small island that is mostly in arty range of any potential enemy. Any savvy enemy would not see the immediate need to invade Singapore, but merely camp on his own side and keep lobbing shells and blockade the straits, rendering Singapore quite helpless if it lacks a viable form of force projection to push these threats away.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
A caveat, our military is not for attacking other countries, but from its equipment procurement and training doctrine it almost certainly looks like it intends to do the fighting on foreign soil ala. force projection.
The reasons are obvious, what's the point of simply camping in a small island that is mostly in arty range of any potential enemy. Any savvy enemy would not see the immediate need to invade Singapore, but merely camp on his own side and keep lobbing shells and blockade the straits, rendering Singapore quite helpless if it lacks a viable form of force projection to push these threats away.
Yuh huh. The best defence is a good offense, especially when you don't have defensive depth. If things go belly-up, it would be really handy to have Johor as Singapore's version of the Golan Heights.
-
Originally posted by caleb_chiang:
They should get mercenaries instead...
Yeah ,start something like the 'Foreign Legion' and all sons of FT should serve here.Last time got Hokkien peng so this concept also should not be a problem.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
A caveat, our military is not for attacking other countries, but from its equipment procurement and training doctrine it almost certainly looks like it intends to do the fighting on foreign soil ala. force projection.
The reasons are obvious, what's the point of simply camping in a small island that is mostly in arty range of any potential enemy. Any savvy enemy would not see the immediate need to invade Singapore, but merely camp on his own side and keep lobbing shells and blockade the straits, rendering Singapore quite helpless if it lacks a viable form of force projection to push these threats away.
I really think I was referring to strategic objectives. Our goal is defensive in nature. Of course, the military's strategy to achieving defense is through offensive operations.
This reflects a "Defensive realist" theoretical perspective where a state arms up "sufficiently" to deter threats. "Sufficiently" is allowed a degree of ambiguity towards quantitative and qualitative interpretation.
The reverse, which I was trying to dispel, was that of "offensive realism" where a state arms up and continues to do so, so that it can seek to secure itself through maximizing its power (ie. owning most of the power).
In the case of South East Asia, Singapore does possess a significant majority of military power in balanced quantitative - qualitative terms. So offensive realism can say that we secure ourselves vis a vis malaysia and indonesia via overwhelming military capabilities. However, from a defensive realist perspective, I am saying that we are not actually capable of completely capturing and annexing Malaysia, let alone Indonesia. Hence, our military force is only "sufficient" at promising extremely devastating punches to deter any potential threat from them and thus, our strategic objective is defensive in nature; structured to deter.
-
That might be a bit too Clausewitzian for the common foot soldier to appreciate, Shotgun. Your typical NS man is more interested in serving and fucking off than in understanding the difference between following a 3SG's orders to shoot and diminishing or eliminating the opponent's will to fight.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
any one control SG, is as good as controlling Japan, China Korea etc.
Why?
Most of their oil must passing thro Sg Straits!
what is the strategic importance of
Liechtenstein? Almost none.
they can try taking a detour around the indonesia islands
and expect . . possible . .you know. why causeway remains a casueway? and don;t we toy with toll bridge ideas har? so that the nearest port stays at tanjong pagar mah. why move train staion away from tg agar har? we all can see why. sg even sacrfice our used to be beautiful west coast for ports... -
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
A caveat, our military is not for attacking other countries, but from its equipment procurement and training doctrine it almost certainly looks like it intends to do the fighting on foreign soil ala. force projection.
The reasons are obvious, what's the point of simply camping in a small island that is mostly in arty range of any potential enemy. Any savvy enemy would not see the immediate need to invade Singapore, but merely camp on his own side and keep lobbing shells and blockade the straits, rendering Singapore quite helpless if it lacks a viable form of force projection to push these threats away.
singapore is too small to defend. and in times when an enemy declares war on us we will not sit back and fortify our defecnes here in the mina islad. we move out to attack. this is the very classical forward defend strategy. so yeh of any on tries to attack us, we will move out. we have to. so much for singapore not taking the offensive. i waitng for that day. even if i die i don;t mind doig some suicide tunt and take out some key enemy iinstallations or targerts. just let them know if there's a crazier fuckatrds than teroorist in singapore, they are reading the post from one of tthem -
Originally posted by Gedanken:
That might be a bit too Clausewitzian for the common foot soldier to appreciate, Shotgun. Your typical NS man is more interested in serving and fucking off than in understanding the difference between following a 3SG's orders to shoot and diminishing or eliminating the opponent's will to fight.
probably wondering what;s for night snack. my time got kaya buns, taosah buns, sometimes got white bread with thick kaya and guyew. those were the days i missed -
SAF is to protect the Lee Family and keep them in power initially............so the M'sians can't invade and remove them............
impossible to protect S'pore since we're way too small and surrounded by M'sia on 3 sides....................
main purpose of SAF is to attack M'sia 1st...............that's why they train in open terrain abroad........
now........the SAF is to put S'pore in the limelight.............by sending people overseas like Afghanistan etc etc............
why leh ??? so LKY's son can impress his jewish masters and let him continue to be S'pore's governor......