going by the official number of 50K being in uniform at any one time, take away the 2 years cohort of NSFs of maybe 20+K, all we left with is only 25K "professional" men under arms, that your idea of a large volunteer force?
so u advocating use have 3month basic training as real soldiers can are those can live thru a war?
my opinion a bit different, i believe better trained soldiers have a better chance than a person who was shanghaised into the army. NVA is only less eqquip than the US army, they no less well trained than the america G.Is. i repeat again, soldier dont just need only to know how to shoot, he need the training to know how to make use of the terrrain to advance toward the enemy position in a safe manner. i admit being under fire will make everybody react differently but training allow the soldiers the knowledge of knowing what to do when under fire.
and also, i disagree an officer can be produce with only 1 year training. It take at least 3 years to produce a proper officer with sufficient knowledge and skill. That why i believe in a professional officer corp back up with a professional NCO corp. i wan to streamline the conscription, better to get rid of ppl who cannot be bother with NS after the one yr conscription, make them pay the national defense tax. But as they already served one yr conscription, then they are also part of the reserves to be call up in the event of a national war.
unlike the police volunteer who were paid less than $3per hour because police want only patriotic ppl in their force. i dont believe patriotic mean volunteer must suffer monetary loss. KNN, they pay themselves so high yet appeal to patriotic volunteers to work for pittance. ppl who volunteer after ORDed should pay an allowance that correspond to a full time soldier of the same rank get per month. scrape the make up pay scheme and pay an allowance to the volunteers. insurance and medical benefits be given to volunteers and a graturity of maybe $20K at the end of 15-20yrs service. volunteers should ar least train 2 days a month, on weekend to hone their skill and a 5-7 days per year for a proper excerise in the field so it about 25-30days per yrs in total. first it not expensive and the volunteers career are not affected as training happen during the weekend and taking annual leave of 5 days should not be a problem too.
We are moving further and further away from your original post, which I had commented on. Anyway it is good to discuss whatever issues you have brought up. The gist of your statements focuses on individual performance and training and the result in your opinion is that these NS soldiers are not good. That is perfectly understandable as they were forced to undergo military training for 2 years.
Then you elaborate on their training which to me is irrelevant as per the above. You then stressed that a good soldier, in your words, "dont just need only to know how to shoot, he need the training to know how to make use of the terrrain to advance toward the enemy position in a safe manner." A very simplistic statement as we all know battles are not won just because of the reason you gave. Can we stop discussing on individuals otherwise we get bogged down by details?
Now back to your first para. 25K regulars augmented by about a million citizen soldiers (active and reserve) to defend Singapore with another million citizens to help I would say is quite a formidable force.
You state, "
so u advocating use have 3month basic training as real soldiers can are those can live thru a war?" Did I made such a statement? Please show me as I know I did not. What I said about the Vietcong is an example that valor, fierce patriotism, bravery, sacrifice cannot be earned by training. Those qualities that win wars are outside of the classroom.
I never mentioned 3 months which you said I did. I said a minimum of 1 year is all it takes to train an officer from scratch. There are advance courses available should there be a requirement for an officer to go up further through the ranks. Then there is also the 13 years cycle for all NS soldiers after full-time NS. All training can be reduce if TPTB wishes, but we have to generate enough noise for that to happen.
In saying we get proper officers with sufficient knowledge and skills after they have been trained for 3 years is quite thick. You did not give any reasons why we need such officers. Are those officers combat, service or logistics? Again let us not go into such a discussion as your line of thought is not focused. Now you want to bring in new subjects such as the police, salaries etc, etc. We will never be able to conclude any discussion if you wander off in a tangent.
Suffice to state your reasons how NS training can be reduced to a more acceptable period and how we can go about it. Nothing should be written in stone that cannot be adjusted to suit the situation we have today. Singapore should changed what was planned and executed more than 40 years ago, as now we have modern equipment and training methods unlike the yesteryears. This I think we do agree on.