The best strategy to defending Singapore Island

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It’s a choice that the PAP don’t want to make and what they decide will be policy. Because it is a vote loser and guarantees the loss of another 2 to 3 more GRCs to the opposition.

There are many things the SAF can do to improve capability and readiness without SPENDING money ineffectively by catching a larger poorly trained pool of people (that we don’t dare to use for war, on day 1 to day 21). Because, at present the SAF don’t make use of our NSFs effectively nor are they as well trained when compared to the Israelis who go into battle regularly — eg 1. our NSF shoot budget for live fire (bullets and ammo) is too low — eg. 2 our OCS and SCS training period compresses and puts very young people to lead in a manner that reduces unit effectiveness (these people should not be serving 22 months, instead they should revert to 30 months minimum).

If Singapore wants to offer NS to women, make them volunteer to serve 30 to 36 months (depending on vocation) and have it as competitive selection, where 50% are rejected (IPPT gold preferred, min standards for IQ tests, additional leadership tests at selection and other factors that make an effective solider) and another 20% who don’t perform well at BMT (in their Sit test and ACTP), end there. The remaining 30% invest real money to make them operational (with ADF’s shoot budget or other advanced vocation or rank training) and really be willing to deploy them. There are many highly technical vocations that needs longer service periods for these women can serve in, that the SAF needs, given proper training and time to mature in their role. We need more effective use of these selected people (and also offer this scheme to top performing NSFs boys), instead of more unmotivated people.
Regardless of how advanced it thinks its attitudes are, I do wonder what the response in NZ would be like if NS was ever reinstated here and women were included? The amount of whinging that would come from young people and their parents would be significant enough as it was, but having daughters doing the same, I don't know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Regardless of how advanced it thinks its attitudes are, I do wonder what the response in NZ would be like if NS was ever reinstated here and women were included? The amount of whinging that would come from young people and their parents would be significant enough as it was, but having daughters doing the same, I don't know.
Whinging is universal in any NS system but there are parental concerns, on sufficient safe-guards, that are very real.

The IDF processes about 5 rape cases a year (based on reported data from 2007 to 2009) before considering other sexual offences. As a parent with daughters and a son who completed 22 months of NS, I do not support NS for women in Singapore.

It just takes 2 to 3 reported rape cases for AWARE to take up a strong and effective campaign to disband any women for NS idea in Singapore. IMHO, the current political risk to reward ratio does not favour NS for women in Singapore. Imposing conscription on women is a good reason for most women to oppose NS; which is detrimental to the commitment to defend.

The SAF does a good job in trying to protect women who serve as regulars but it will be next to impossible to protect all, if an universal NSF scheme for women is implemented. If training is realistic, there will be deaths and injuries too. It is a cost Singaporean parents have to bear to support NS — it is already very difficult to notify NSF parents of deaths (about 4.5 per year) or serious injury — I cannot imagine having to do such notification to NSF parents for a serious sexual offence (physical harassment or rape), committed against someone’s daughter due to conscription legislation.

During my NS days the young officers of a company, teamed up and uncovered evidence that their CSM was mis-using his power to coerce 2 NSF men to commit sexual acts. This CSM was sent to jail after the proper judicial process. It was horrifying to discover that such misuse of power occurred to create victims and it took courage for the team of 2LTs to decide to protect men under their command to stop it before a 3rd victim (via their efforts to gather evidence).

Speaking from slightly dated real world data, between the years of 2007 and 2009, the IDF Women’s Affairs Office reported four categories of complaints that were received in that office. The office reported that: “56% were physical harassment; 28% were verbal harassment; 13% were peeping; and 3% or 15 were rape.” Lisa M. Schenck, an Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Professorial Lecturer in Law, and Senior Adviser to the National Security Law, collected data about reports of, “verbal abuse, peeping, and physical harassment, investigations of physical harassment (but not non-touching harassment), and indictments.”

Sex offense reports in the IDF have been gradually increasing. While reports are generally increasing, the percentage of reports being investigated has stayed relatively stable; and the percentage of investigations resulting in indictments has steadily decreased.

It is hard to say definitively whether the rise in sexual offense reports is due to an actual increase in assaults or whether, “it merely reflected rising awareness of the subject, resulting from a comprehensive IDF campaign to root out sexual harassment in its ranks.” With sexual harassment legislation being passed and high profile military court cases regarding sex offenses being publicized, the reason for an increasing number of complaints within the IDF could be a result of growing awareness to the issue.
 
Last edited:

0bserver

New Member
Besides the points that OPSSG brought up, which are very good and pertinent points, there is also the problem of if both parents are called up, who is going to take care of the kids back at home? Or worse, if both are killed in action, what's going to happen to the kids? At least if one parent is left behind, there is still a caregiver to take care of them, albeit with greater difficulty.

There is also the problem of motivation. If a father is on the front lines thinking he is doing it to protect his family back at home, even if it is just his wife and daughter, he might be willing to fight, but if he knows that his whole family, wife, daughter and sons, are ALL going to be thrown into the meat grinder, there is going to be a drive to simply dump it all and evacuate with his family since there is going to be no safety for any of them.

As for peeping.. *cough* let us just say that Nee Soon camp had a female platoon for females that sign on. Expect distracted guys wherever they are. lol. I remember their building had a steel gate on the staircases going up that was locked every night pass 2000hrs to prevent intruders. Females in training camps are more like inmates in a prison than trainees, unfortunately for their own protection.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Besides the points that OPSSG brought up, which are very good and pertinent points, there is also the problem of if both parents are called up, who is going to take care of the kids back at home? Or worse, if both are killed in action, what's going to happen to the kids? At least if one parent is left behind, there is still a caregiver to take care of them, albeit with greater difficulty.

There is also the problem of motivation. If a father is on the front lines thinking he is doing it to protect his family back at home, even if it is just his wife and daughter, he might be willing to fight, but if he knows that his whole family, wife, daughter and sons, are ALL going to be thrown into the meat grinder, there is going to be a drive to simply dump it all and evacuate with his family since there is going to be no safety for any of them.

As for peeping.. *cough* let us just say that Nee Soon camp had a female platoon for females that sign on. Expect distracted guys wherever they are. lol. I remember their building had a steel gate on the staircases going up that was locked every night pass 2000hrs to prevent intruders. Females in training camps are more like inmates in a prison than trainees, unfortunately for their own protection.
There would likely be restrictions on how many immediate family members could be on active assignments should any male and female national service be required.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Besides the points that OPSSG brought up, which are very good and pertinent points, there is also the problem of if both parents are called up, who is going to take care of the kids back at home? Or worse, if both are killed in action, what's going to happen to the kids? At least if one parent is left behind, there is still a caregiver to take care of them, albeit with greater difficulty.

There is also the problem of motivation. If a father is on the front lines thinking he is doing it to protect his family back at home, even if it is just his wife and daughter, he might be willing to fight, but if he knows that his whole family, wife, daughter and sons, are ALL going to be thrown into the meat grinder, there is going to be a drive to simply dump it all and evacuate with his family since there is going to be no safety for any of them.

As for peeping.. *cough* let us just say that Nee Soon camp had a female platoon for females that sign on. Expect distracted guys wherever they are. lol. I remember their building had a steel gate on the staircases going up that was locked every night pass 2000hrs to prevent intruders. Females in training camps are more like inmates in a prison than trainees, unfortunately for their own protection.
Well that must be a cultural thing then. In my own experience the female barracks in the RNZAF and RNZN were just another building(s) on the base like any other buildings. They were allowed male visitors until 10 pm but only to a common lounge room. In reality where there was a will between consenting individuals there was a way. I remember encountering more than the occasional servicewomen in male barracks, so it went both ways. However if we did have someone who harmed one of the females, generally barracks justice would be dealt out to the offender.

I went to sea with a woman who wasn't allowed to transfer to a seagoing branch because it wasn't allowed at the time. Being a Reserve unit we bent the rules and she was a better seaman than many in the branch. She was supposed to bunk down in a separate cabin with a female officer, but it worked out that the officer bunked down in the four bunk wardroom and she bunked down in the eight bunk junior rates mess. A basic common sense system was worked out for when privacy was needed for changing, showering etc., and it was never violated. If COMAUCK had found out about it, there would've been hell to pay, but it worked for us.

So it comes down to culture and respect. Don't get me wrong. There are still cultural and respect issues within NZDF regarding treatment of women, but they are nowhere as bad as they were.
 

CheeZe

Active Member
So, my understanding of the points raised by those who disagree with my position is that women should not serve NS because:
(a) there is no military necessity to do so since we cannot even use our current manpower efficiently and Singapore is not facing imminent danger from its neighbors
(b) it is political suicide for the PAP and heaven forbid they lose another GRC
(c) mistreatment of NSwomen will cause increased friction in society

I find the idea that NSmen don't have enough bullets to shoot due to budgetary reasons while the SAF can afford a quartet of F-35s to be sad yet hilarious.
 
Top