The best strategy to defending Singapore Island

0bserver

New Member
Is the purity of the race still a requirement today? I have a very strong dislike for racial purity arguments because they are implicit of racial superiority theory. Whilst comrade Xi Jinping, currently resident in Beijing, may believe in the racial superiority of Han Chinese, it makes him no better than Adolf Hitler or members of the Klu Klux Klan who asserted their racial superiority and thought that their shit didn't stink either. But it did stink and racial superiority in any form is a hateful philosophy that breeds nothing but hate and death.
You got it the other way round. It's not if you want to keep your race pure but what the enemy thinks of your race and what steps they will take to ensure that it no longer exists.
Not to mention values were more conservative in the past when people believed that women that were raped were 'tainted' and had trouble getting married, especially if they had kids from the incident.
Of course that was 50 years ago and values have changed since then but as an example of what the situation was like then, you can look up the 1998 Indonesia race riots and the rapes that happened during the time when the military was involved in the incidents as well. And they did this to their own people, not their 'enemies' where anything goes. It'll be worse in a free for all war.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
You got it the other way round. It's not if you want to keep your race pure but what the enemy thinks of your race and what steps they will take to ensure that it no longer exists.
Not to mention values were more conservative in the past when people believed that women that were raped were 'tainted' and had trouble getting married, especially if they had kids from the incident.
Of course that was 50 years ago and values have changed since then but as an example of what the situation was like then, you can look up the 1998 Indonesia race riots and the rapes that happened during the time when the military was involved in the incidents as well. And they did this to their own people, not their 'enemies' where anything goes. It'll be worse in a free for all war.
No I haven't got it the wrong way around at all.

You have to look at the racial purity argument from the context of its meaning and who is pushing the message. Someone who advocates wiping out an enemy because of their race is not a racial purist. They are a race xxxx hater - a racist per se who sees the other as something to be destroyed. A racial purist is someone who says that thou shalt only procreate with pure bloods of thy own race. To procreate with someone of another race is an abomination.

To me its the people ruling and in charge who can make the big difference in shaping the conduct of the military and para military forces in wartime. Nazi Germany is a classic case and the difference in treatment between the occupied Western European nations and those to the the east of Germany. Same with Western Allied POWs and Russian POWs. There was a big difference in how the Germans treated Russian POWs in WW1 and WW2. After what the Nazis did in the Soviet Union to the civilian population, I understand the resultant Soviet illegal activities in Eastern Germany as they drove the Wehrmacht back. I don't condone it, but being Māori I certainly understand it.
 

0bserver

New Member
No I haven't got it the wrong way around at all.

You have to look at the racial purity argument from the context of its meaning and who is pushing the message. Someone who advocates wiping out an enemy because of their race is not a racial purist. They are a race xxxx hater - a racist per se who sees the other as something to be destroyed. A racial purist is someone who says that thou shalt only procreate with pure bloods of thy own race. To procreate with someone of another race is an abomination.
Note carefully that I did not say that the enemies were racial purist, I said that the 'racial purity' of the opponent's race is a target that they would go after. Big difference, especially when I never used the term racial purist. Your description of a race hater would be accurate and one of the weapons they use to achieve their goals is mass rape. That is an unfortunate historical fact that genocidal wars tend towards these type of tactics.

Go look up my posts and see if I ever called our possible opponents 'racial purists'.
 

CheeZe

Active Member
These ideas of "racial purity" and women as HVTs are nonsense in the context of modern Singapore's national security. There is definitely relevance with regards to racism from social perspective but it's not a defence issue. Nor, do I believe, has it ever been one in terms of Singapore's history from pre-colonial to present. We don't perceive women as inherently more valuable than men. If anything, the continued inherent patriarchal nature of the various ethnic groups continues to show quite plainly.

EDIT: I wish to make it plain that I don't believe there is anything such as "racial purity" and that it is pseudoscience concocted to justify European racism.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
So, back to "Why not women in NS?"

I still haven't really seen a reason why we shouldn't have women perform NS.
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 I strongly suspect that it will guarantee 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.
 
Last edited:

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:
Top