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.
 

CheeZe

Active 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.
 

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:

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.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Part 1 of 2: Is this an attempt at generating propaganda or based in intelligence accessments?

1. Thankfully some Ministers, like Dr Ng, are building bridges and making the SAF relevant; to externalise Singapore’s security concerns with regard to a change of government in Malaysia. As a small country, it is in our interest to get along with Malaysia. I believe that Singapore’s security will be improved if all our Ministers were more focused on what they need to do, instead of trying to scare up a bogey man, unless they have actual intelligence on Malaysian plans for more hostility at 2018 levels.

2. The United States Department of State Country Reports on Terrorism 2019 stated that Malaysia remained a “source, transit point, and, to a significantly lesser extent, destination country for terrorist groups including ISIS, Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), al-Qa’ida, and Jemaah Islamiya.”
(a) I wish Malaysia to be more serious about counter-terror cooperation in the region. In 2016, Malaysia suffered from an immigration scandal when the immigration department sacked and suspended officers who caused deliberate lapses in its security system. As many as 37 officers were found guilty of interfering with the Malaysian Immigration System (MyIMMs). The MyIMMs is linked to Interpol’s I-Checkit system to enable authorities to verify within seconds if a passport had been reported lost or stolen. The system was deliberately switched off in two major international airports in Kuala Lumpur. When this happened, passports were stamped manually, and as a result, travelers were able to evade security and passport authenticity screenings​

(b) The 9/11 Commission Report also highlighted the fact that in 1999, four of the 9/11 attackers — Tawfiq bin Attash (Khallad), Abu Bara al-Yemeni, Nawaf al-Hazmi, and Khalid al-Mihdhar — had been sent to Kuala Lumpur before heading for the United States. Apart from making Malaysia merely a transit point, two of them stayed longer to study “airport security and conduct casing flights” (flights to determine targets).​

(c) The Vibes (an overseas safety information posted on Japan's embassy in Malaysia), urged Japanese citizens to avoid visiting places that are "easily targeted by terrorism." While the warning was issued to Japan nationals in Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar, if I were in Indonesia, Malaysia or the Philippines, it pays to be just a little more careful. According to the alert, these places include "western-related" facilities, such as restaurants, hotels, and tourist facilities.​

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.
3. Ministers in Singapore say and do things that make you go, why? I see that often. It so ridiculous — it’s a video upload of military training in Malaysia — it is perfectly normal for the Malaysian Army to conduct training to seize choke points like bridges.

4. Unless the minister explains with involved reasoning, the solution is to laugh along with our Malaysian friends at these Singaporean Ministers who seem not sincere. Just as deterrence relies on mutual understanding, so is peace. The peaceful people to people relations is not to be taken for granted.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Part 2 of 2: Is this an attempt at generating propaganda or based in intelligence accessments?

5. On 11 Sep 2021, Rodzi Md Saad, Malaysia’s director general of Majlis Keselamatan Negara Malaysia (MKN), as a VIP paid a visit to Malaysia’s Abu Baka Maritime Base — opposite the formerly disputed Petra Branca — in an AW-139 helicopter (9M-PMD).

6. Nothing wrong with a Malaysian VIP visiting their own base, right? Except for a minor detail on this 9-11 visit. The Royal Malaysia Police helicopter, 9M-PMD, flew over Pulau Tekong’s air space for about 2 minutes — which is home to Singapore’s Basic Military Training Centre.
(a) Flight tracking data shared by Alert 5 and Mike Yeo showed that the Malaysian helicopter deliberately crossed into Singapore airspace. Even if the Malaysian pilots had ignored the suite of modern navigation systems in 9M-PMD and flown by pure visual flight rules, according to Mike Yeo’s calculations, the Malaysians would have seen they were flying across the median line of the Johor Strait and over land, at Pulau Tekong. They were intruders flying at 170-180km/h in Singapore air space for about 2 minutes — a typical micro-aggression to test the RSAF’s reaction time and find out more about our ROEs and TTPs.​
(b) Singapore scrambled 2 F-16s armed with AIM-9Xs and AIM-120-C7s around 9.20am, Singapore time, when 9M-PMD flew over Pulau Tekong. The RSAF’s air sovereignty fighters had about 4.5 minutes of reaction time (from the time the AW139 changed course 13 km away from our borders) and when they reached Pulau Tekong/Singapore airspace. Given that the total reaction time from change of direction to departure was 6.5 minutes — I understand why the AW139 helicopter did not get a verbal warning.

7. 100% justified that the RSAF scrambled F-16s on Saturday morning (Sep 11) in response to "a potential air threat", as the Ministry of Defence said. The scramble was due to 9M-PMD actually crossing into (and not merely approaching) Singapore airspace. "After ensuring that our security was not compromised, we stood down our aircraft," said a ministry spokesperson. This was response to queries about a report of a Malaysian police helicopter that flew into Singapore airspace. The spokesperson did not provide details of the "potential air threat". I see Malaysian attempts at mis-direction on what they do wrong onto others as being not only unhelpful but destructive of trust.

8. It’s disappointing to watch the Malaysian officials and some of their citizens lying, when the RSAF had a firing solution via a radar track of 9M-PMD. In this case, it is reasonable for the RSAF to elect not to fire a SAM missile at the Malaysians for this 2 minute long intrusion on 9-11, without conducting a visual intercept.
 
Last edited:
Top