How good is RSAF ?

[kingrant]

If you scroll back to the posts, you'll see that 'toughies' was not a word I coined. Someone I responded to wrote that NSmen were not toughies. Maybe I should have asked him what it meant before I responded. Half way thru the thread, I realised that my usage was different from his, and that caused me some equivocality. Whatever it meant, bros should take umbrage at him, not me. I merely pointed out that given the way battles are fought, where all you see of the enemy is a blip on yr screen within some rectangular cross-sights, you can be shorter, skinnier, and physically weaker than your enemy, and you can still fight a good battle and win sitting behind all that armour at a safe range. So in this respect, NSmen dont have to be tough as rambo. you probably can't get into the tank with all those bulges. What you need is mental toughness but that applies to all arms.

Kingrant does not think that armour are toughies. I am sure armour bros here will take umbrage to that.

 

[kingrant]

Very unlikely. I already ROD from reservist long ago. So you're indeed saved by Providence. Also, then, we believed that we were as tough (mentally) as our potential enemies. Now, it looks like we have gone down the hill with all this defeatist talk.

I just hope u are not in my reservist unit.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear PAP

Two points of disagreement. Firstly procurement done by DSTA. Basically the UK does all defense procurement through DPA or DSTA by any other name. There are sound reasons for taking control of accquisition away from the MIlitary and into the hands of civilians though of course there needs to be military and service inputs.

Secondly the water agreement has been lodged since the first day of independence with the UN together with the Separation Agreement. They are both linked politically, break the water agreement and it is a red line for war as all sides understand clearly.

Thirdly whilst the RSAF might not have been in a war, they train extensively with the US in Red Flag and other major exercises which are meant to be TOUGHER than real war itself hence the value of detachments in the US.



Locke

 

[Ramseth]

Very unlikely. I already ROD from reservist long ago. So you're indeed saved by Providence. Also, then, we believed that we were as tough (mentally) as our potential enemies. Now, it looks like we have gone down the hill with all this defeatist talk.

History has shown that conscripts and reserves can serve well in defence of a common cause they share or for survival. Britain in WW2 and Israel are good examples. Indeed, Japan and Germany in the earlier years of WW2 are good examples of high morale and motivated conscripts, as they heartily believed the crap that Tojo Hideki (in the name of Emperor Meiji) and Adolf Hitler told them. Though later of course, they became disillusioned and demoralised as their cause became a lost cause.

CCP kicking KMT out of mainland China and Vietcong kicking US out of Vietnam are good examples how conscripts, however technically superiorly trained and armed, could lose to makeshift armies of riff raff farmers and laborers in revolt and revolution.

After their misadventure in Vietnam, US abolished conscription. Desert Storm was fought by US-UK alliance of professional soldiers who weren't concerned about any cause right or wrong. They just carry out orders. At manpower ratio of under 1:10, they defeated the entire Iraqi army of more than a million. The Iraqi conscripts had lost faith in their own cause. Compare that to the Iranian revolution ten years earlier. US adjudged that the mass revolutionary fervor was strong for invasion, having learned their lesson from Vietnam well.

In the case of Singapore, the cause to believe in is steadily fading away. To NSmen, on top are white horse scholar colonels, generals and ministers paying themselves hundreds of thousands and millions, below is a country half-filled with foreigners. Why should we sacrifice youth, time and even career opportunities to protect them?

The latest electoral reigister update shows 2.3 million voters whereas the total population of Singapore is above 5 million. Even considering those below age 21 are citizens but not yet voters, foreigners in Singapore number easily above 2 million.

 

[wrcboi]

its time to reduce ns to 12mths and abolish reservist...probably more will want to serve...i dont see y the need for 2 years......3mths of basic...3mths of basic unit training and 6mths of additional training...

 

[boundThunter]

Those who have fought real battles and experienced the blood and gore of war will not brag and boast as much as these young Rambo wannabes with their juvenile fantasies about marching to Johore, zipping this and zapping that and blowing everything that gets in their way.

These Rambo wannabes will be the first to pee and shit in their pants at the sight of limbless bodies, detached heads and the whistle of bullets coming in their direction.

When the next MRT suicide or teow low comes up, please view the bloodied and dismembered bodies. It will help to cut out all this fucking rubbish about marching to Johore, blasting Indonesia and Khaw Boon Wan and Irene Ng's relatives back to the stone age, etc.

Yes, I named KBW and IN deliberately. This is to remind the Rambo wannabes that just as the Malaysian have their Malay families and cousins in Singapore, Singapore Chinese too have their Chinese families and cousins in Malaysia.

Thanks for the write up. A sensible post to knock some grey matter into some alpha males here who seemed to be lacking in their heads...


History will show us wars are never hunkydory.
War is the last resort and not for rambo wannabees to provoke and yaya about.
War is sweet only to the inexperienced (of war).--Erasmus.

 

[johnny333]

Argument last so long. Look like NS really brain wash almost all Singaporean male, if war really happen I will be the 1st batch run out from the island. Not worth fighting for. Win or lose most of the population is death.

But, but,......, don't you want to protect your pigeon hole & your CPF :p

 

[Papsmearer]

The sea is buffer enough against any Indons' aggresions and Malaysia, with their ethnic compositions and shared history is more a friend than a foe. But as in any relationships, nothing lasts forever, a friend today could be a deadly foe tomorrow and that is the reason why good neighbourly relationship in between them are so important but the civilians mannerism of Singaporeans are really shitty and leaves much to be desired with their own brand of higher than thou mentality towards their neighbours in particular.

Therefore the concept of "speaks softly but carries a damn big stick" is so important because Singapore has no ability in invading and pacifying except through the usage of soft power and the doctrinal poison shrimp's strategy; you step on my head, I will poison you to dead.

A very strong deterrent is an absolute necessity.
Let those paper generals have their toys and pays.

Good foreign relations is the first and best line of defence. War is the failure of diplomacy. I have always wondered why Sinkies have this ugly S'porean image when they go overseas, and why they have the holier than thou attitude. Indons and Malaysians earning less than a S'porean have a better quality of life. Nothing for S'poreans to be proud of.

The poison shrimp strategy is the old strategy. That has been changed for quite a long time now. The new strategy is to not wait to be eaten before poisoning the enemy. The strategy is for the SAF to be offensive in nature, and pro active and pre-emptive.

 

[Papsmearer]

No argument there that we shld always keep good rel'ships with our neighbours at the same time preparing for surprises by keeping a deterrent image.

The seas as buffer are not enough since we are already much too close for today's missile ranges. So if we we have to be quicker on the draw. When? It's a judgment call.

Certainly, we need a healthy balance between being excessively humble and self-effacing and being unafraid to have a strong self-esteem. At times, the govt crows too much, the media parrots too much, and our citizens grate on our hosts' nerves when they become tourists.

The sea is the almighty buffer. If they cannot cross the sea, they cannot set foot in S'pore. U can pop all the missiles u want, there are ABM systems in place, and we have excellent counter missile systems.

 

[Papsmearer]

The ludicrous turning off the tap is an invention of Little Emperor. He has succeeded in persuading Singaporeans simply because Singaporeans share the same unfortunate racist attitudes towards the Malays, i.e. that they are useless, corrupt, lazy, drug addicts, can't and will not honour agreements, etc.

Rest assured the Malays will not turn off their taps and starve our Peng Kang Hill heatstroke veterans and their families. It is against their culture, their ethnic pride and their religion. They will be condemned no less by the OIC and the Muslim world if they do that and bring Islam into disrepute. Also, don't forget, they have more than a half a million of their Malay cousins here.

Don't believe everything that Little Emperor tells you. That fucking arsehole will say and do everything to create constant fear and a siege mentality amongst Chinese Singaporeans so that they will continue to support him and his cronies and lapdogs lest they starved or be run over by the Malay "hordes" from within and without.

Word. What he said.

 

[Ramseth]

Good foreign relations is the first and best line of defence. War is the failure of diplomacy.

I agree. Contrast the two longest land borders in the world, the US/Canada border and the China/Russia border. One is completely unguarded militarily, the other is holding down millions of trrops from both sides.

 

[Papsmearer]

In my scenario, I believe that Singapore will have to fight its battle in Johore if it were to effectively repel an invading enemy from the north that is beyond M'sia. This enemy need not be Malaysia, so Malaysia becomes a war zone as well as the buffer. I am not confident that M'sia can hold, and that it wil be overrun if we dont take steps to defend our lines, which I insist should be brought forward in Johore and even possibly up to KL. This southern buffer must be secured by us once the airforce have dominated the air space overhead. It remains to move our artillery fwd too. hence we need tanks and armour to be moved up as well. Airlifting armour is not impossible with modern C17s and Russian Antonovs fixed wing transporters, but you are right maybe we dont have the assets (yet) as they are still very new. Anyhow, the distance is too small to deploy them. Therefore we roll the tanks into Johor via the land links or by landing ships, crashing up the coastline. We sit on M'sian soil and stare down the barrels of the advancing enemy from north of M'sia. By moving up the arty bases you extend their range. What I said was that infantry does the mopping up after our bombardment, so it can't be that tough, right? Conversely, if you then call the people in tanks toughies, I am neutral on that. Maybe they are. But the point is the infantry job is made less tough if our advanced chaps have done a good job.

PS. Ok my error - you dont need toughies at the last stage: that's what I meant.

Infantry does mopping up after the bombardment? It must be a new military strategy. I always thought that arty supported infantry, not the other way around. Can't be that tough? Have you heard of Monte Cassino? U think the enemy will stand out in the open and let you blow them up with your bombardment? If this is the case, the Vietnamese would have been defeated very easily. Have you heard the terms "entrenched", "dug in", etc.?

 

[Papsmearer]

its time to reduce ns to 12mths and abolish reservist...probably more will want to serve...i dont see y the need for 2 years......3mths of basic...3mths of basic unit training and 6mths of additional training...

They can't do 12 months, 24 months is the minimum number of months. Its a question of mathematics.

 

[Ramseth]

Perhaps my good friend Cpt. (NS) Goh would disagree with me, but I'd suggest all regulars above S/Sgt. rank. Reservists S/Sgts. WOs and COs are OK provided that they came from serving at least 5-year regular contract service backgrounds.

 

[Papsmearer]

Dear PAP

Two points of disagreement. Firstly procurement done by DSTA. Basically the UK does all defense procurement through DPA or DSTA by any other name. There are sound reasons for taking control of accquisition away from the MIlitary and into the hands of civilians though of course there needs to be military and service inputs.

Secondly the water agreement has been lodged since the first day of independence with the UN together with the Separation Agreement. They are both linked politically, break the water agreement and it is a red line for war as all sides understand clearly.

Thirdly whilst the RSAF might not have been in a war, they train extensively with the US in Red Flag and other major exercises which are meant to be TOUGHER than real war itself hence the value of detachments in the US.



Locke

I thought you said 2 points of disagreement, how come got 3? Forgot to count? The UK formed their version of DSTA because their military botched so many defence contracts due to incompetence, cost over runs, etc. They are hardly a good example to use. Better to ask yourself whether the best armies in the world i.e. the US and the Israels have an agency like DSTA? Ask yourself why a professional org. like the RSAF cannot do its own plane buying and evaluation.

Err, u need to check your history. I don't why u always come here with such inaccurate statements. The water agreement was lodged since the first day of independence with the UN? Independence was in 1965, the water agreements were from 1961 and 1962. They were in place several years before independence.

Agreements are broken all the time. That is why there is an international court of law in the Hague. No where in the water agreement does it say that war will happen if its broken. The Malaysians could have raised the prices in '86 and '87, but did not do so. What gesture has S'pore shown other than people like you threatening war?

Please, Red Flag is bullshit. I can't believe u are using that as a guage of the RSAF's ability. That is just plain stupid. U are telling me that in a conflict in SE Asia, the RSAF will perform like it did in Red Flag? I see. Are we borrowing the US air commanders? Are we borrowing their command and control personnel and equipment? Are we borrowing their combat experience, their leadership, their air tasking and strike package expertise? The RSAF units participating in Red Falg look good because all the non S'porean assets and personnel were in positions to make them look good.

Now the USAF in a conflict will perform as well as it did in Red Flag. Why? The same pilots, commanders, aircraft, assets, etc. participating in Red Flag also fly in whatever conflict the US enters. Can'tsay the same for the RSAF.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear PAP

Firstly defense procurement screw ups happen whether it is run by civilians or run by the Military. Ever heard of World War II US Torpedoes and the Naval Ordnance board. The UK are well regarded professionally as experts in their field with good equipment, screw up asides.

Water agreement lodge during independence as they were deposited with the UN along with the seperation agreement. That is history for all and the link for all to see and hence red lines.

Red Flag not only trains individuals to a higher level of competence it trains mission level competence and system level integration competence. Whilst we may not have all the bit's for system level integration competence aka US Sats Intel etc , we do have some C3I capability in that regards

Red Flag offer Singaporeans participants to develop individual and mission level competence to an extent not matched by any other air force in SEA. Not withstanding the various detachments in the US which draw on US Combat experience.




Locke

 

[kingrant]

Not sure for US/Canada it was a question of diplomacy. Canada just doesnt have a decent defence force really. They just relied on NORADS. Now you know why Canada wont dispute - US does all the work. Canada is well, pleased. In fact, US wished the Canucks coudl do more.

I agree. Contrast the two longest land borders in the world, the US/Canada border and the China/Russia border. One is completely unguarded militarily, the other is holding down millions of trrops from both sides.

 

[kingrant]

Before an attack, arty rains bombs on enemy. Esp if they are dug in. Arty fire is directed via the airforce, naval, and long range guns and tanks. Infantry then only mounts the attack after the enemy has been 'softened'. This strategy has been around for years.

The vietnam war was more complicated. It wasnt just underground tunnels. There was also the monsoon jungle and swamps. To cut it short, if the US had those Patriot missiles that fell on Saddam then, the Viets might well have been crippled if not lost. Saddam's hideout was much deeper than those by Uncle Ho/Vo Giap's . The US used napalm for carpet bombing and strategy then was to defoliage and burn off the trees so they can see better, not penetratrion.

Infantry does mopping up after the bombardment? It must be a new military strategy. I always thought that arty supported infantry, not the other way around. Can't be that tough? Have you heard of Monte Cassino? U think the enemy will stand out in the open and let you blow them up with your bombardment? If this is the case, the Vietnamese would have been defeated very easily. Have you heard the terms "entrenched", "dug in", etc.?

 

[kingrant]

Good foreign relations is the first and best line of defence. War is the failure of diplomacy. I have always wondered why Sinkies have this ugly S'porean image when they go overseas, and why they have the holier than thou attitude. Indons and Malaysians earning less than a S'porean have a better quality of life. Nothing for S'poreans to be proud of.

Agree with each of yr individual statements, but put together, I cannot agree that nice congenial street level diplomacy will mean good peaceful foreign relations. I have no trouble to relate with the ordinary Malaysian but that doesnt mean at govt -to-govt level, it is the same honkydory slap-on-the-back tell-a-dirty-joke relationship.

The poison shrimp strategy is the old strategy. That has been changed for quite a long time now. The new strategy is to not wait to be eaten before poisoning the enemy. The strategy is for the SAF to be offensive in nature, and pro active and pre-emptive.

What I have been saying. War doesnt just happen overnight. There is an escalation of tensions. You shld know DEFCON levels.

 

[blueblobster]

What I said was that infantry does the mopping up after our bombardment, so it can't be that tough, right? Conversely, if you then call the people in tanks toughies, I am neutral on that. Maybe they are. But the point is the infantry job is made less tough if our advanced chaps have done a good job.

PS. Ok my error - you dont need toughies at the last stage: that's what I meant.

Unlike your initial shock and awe bombardment which is performed far away from the enemy, your "mopping up" is the stage where soldiers actually DIE in combat. Can't be that tough?