How good is RSAF ?

[wrcboi]

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

i dont see y cant they reduce to 12mths where there are so many countries are doing it

 

[blueblobster]

Yes, its scary to think that Kingrant has planning experience, either that or he is just a boldfaced liar. I can confirm yes to 1. and maybe to 2. The RSAF have experimented with airlifting of armour. We do have the ac for that and a couple of armour models that can be airlifted, but definitely none by helo.

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

I would have expected the RSAF to experiment with airlifting of armour. We do all kinds of experiments during peacetime.

However, I'm doubtful we will ever have the operational capability to airlift entire armour units into hostile territory as envisage by Kingrant. Besides our amphibious capability are pretty decent on paper. There is no need to airlift tanks into Malaysia. I believe that if the RSAF does airlift, it will be to further places like Brunei.

 

[blueblobster]

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.

I'm curious. Which unit did you do your planning for?

The US already had the ability to clear your "monsoon jungle" at that time. It wasn't the lack for technology on their part but rather the ingenuity and resilience of the Vietnamese that made things hard for the US.

Even if the US had the Patriot missiles during the Vietnam War, it would NOT have made any difference to the outcome. The Patriot missiles in not designed to "fall on people or cripple them" (to borrow liberally from your words).

 

[kingrant]

It was the blind bombing from the air using napalm with the American's unfamiliarity to fight in a jungle guerilla war and therefore mopped them up that undermined their ability to win a early war. I wonder what capability the U.S "already had" that could clear the jungle and didnt use. I can't believe the US President was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands of Americans than using the state of art weaponry, if it meant cutting the war effort short. The US homefront was already badly demoralised by the publicity of the war on TV. In a way, it has been described that the political and military wills were subverted by the media and TV. Not so much the viet's resilience or ingenuity.

The Patriot can penetrate concrete up to 20 ft deep. Which part of Vietnam's jungle tunnels were that deep in concrete? In Iraq, they could target up to a resolution of 10 metres from up high. It's for bomb shelters not people. Of cos, ultimately people die.

The US already had the ability to clear your "monsoon jungle" at that time. It wasn't the lack for technology on their part but rather the ingenuity and resilience of the Vietnamese that made things hard for the US.

Even if the US had the Patriot missiles during the Vietnam War, it would NOT have made any difference to the outcome. The Patriot missiles in not designed to "fall on people or cripple them" (to borrow liberally from your words).

 

[kingrant]

If SAF soldiers have taken their training seriously, I believe they can achieve the mission with minimum casualty. If you have whining wimps amongst you as yr section mates, then good luck to you. Can modern warfare make it anymore less tough for the infantry to do a mopping up after bombing them? Of course not, it is not a tea party or a walk in the park. But SAF soldiers are soldiers; they have been trained (I hope) and I expect them to be able to mop up. Without blood? No way. Or would you rather attack before bombardment? Of course, you can DIE in any war. Even in a tank. Or a fighter jet. Or hiding in yr trench.

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?

 

[Ramseth]

If SAF soldiers have taken their training seriously, I believe they can achieve the mission with minimum casualty. If you have whining wimps amongst you as yr section mates, then good luck to you.

That's the worrying part...

 

[blueblobster]

It was the blind bombing from the air using napalm with the American's unfamiliarity to fight in a jungle guerilla war and therefore mopped them up that undermined their ability to win a early war. I wonder what capability the U.S "already had" that could clear the jungle and didnt use. I can't believe the US President was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands of Americans than using the state of art weaponry, if it meant cutting the war effort short. The US homefront was already badly demoralised by the publicity of the war on TV. In a way, it has been described that the political and military wills were subverted by the media and TV. Not so much the viet's resilience or ingenuity.

The Patriot can penetrate concrete up to 20 ft deep. Which part of Vietnam's jungle tunnels were that deep in concrete? In Iraq, they could target up to a resolution of 10 metres from up high. It's for bomb shelters not people. Of cos, ultimately people die.

I suggest you invest in some good books on the Vietnam War and the event that finally turned the American public against it.

Wow! Thanks for the revelation about the Patriot. I never knew the same missile used in the Gulf War in the anti- aircraft, anti - ballistic missile role could perform bunker busting duties as well. Perhaps I was wrong about you. You indeed have solid battalion/ brigade or even division planning experience.

 

[blueblobster]

Can modern warfare make it anymore less tough for the infantry to do a mopping up after bombing them? Of course not, it is not a tea party or a walk in the park.

First you asked how tough can it be. Now you are agreeing with me that it's tough.

 

[boundThunter]

America lost because they were too chicken to unleash the full potential of their war machine.Think Russia, China, World...

Vietnam had to win because if they lost, where the fuck are they going to go to ? Sembawang was full, I remembered.


All these silly bunkerbustingpatriot_aka_iamzeroingonyoumightymissile's talks just made me ROTFLMAO many times over. What a welcoming Easter Day !!!


Happy Easter Day !!!

 

[Ramseth]

America lost because they were too chicken to unleash the full potential of their war machine.Think Russia, China, World...

Vietnam had to win because if they lost, where the fuck are they going to go to ? Sembawang was full, I remembered.

Yes, US didn't send full force to Vietnam because of they're tied to the E/W Germany standoff and N/S Korea standoff. Vietnam was fighting full force defending homeland. In fact, most of the soldiers sent there were conscripts who just completed their BMT, NCO and/or OCT courses. The Rambo story about a Vietnam veteran who returned to the US and could outfight police and army troops is just American version of romanticisation mixed with lamentation, just like Chinese versions of Huang Feihong, Huo Yuanjia or Chen Zhen. Lamentation of the humiliation suffered and romanticisation with exaggeration for some imagined saving grace.

 

[cocobobo]

i love these kind of threads.... all the ex-navy seals former pilot/general/master war tacticians come out to give their 2 cents...

 

[Sideswipe]

I thought the biggest foreign policy mistake from the American POV was not dividing China into 2 in 1949. If they did that, the Korean and Vietnam war wouldn't happened and there will probably be no superpower China to challenge their superiority now.

 

[Ramseth]

I thought the biggest foreign policy mistake from the American POV was not dividing China into 2 in 1949. If they did that, the Korean and Vietnam war wouldn't happened and there will probably be no superpower China to challenge their superiority now.

China had no inherent internal divides for them to divide. Neither Chiang Kai-shek nor Mao Tse-tung would allow that too. It's either one or another for all of China. Chiang lost, and US was fortunate enough to save Taiwan for him with air and naval superiority across the straits. On land, there's no way that US could or would try to help Chiang to secure even a few more provinces. The death toll would be too horrendous to absorb.

 

[Sideswipe]

China had no inherent internal divides for them to divide. Neither Chiang Kai-shek nor Mao Tse-tung would allow that too. It's either one or another for all of China. Chiang lost, and US was fortunate enough to save Taiwan for him with air and naval superiority across the straits. On land, there's no way that US could or would try to help Chiang to secure even a few more provinces. The death toll would be too horrendous to absorb.

Mao would stop at the Yangtze on April 1949 if American declared their intentions to support Chiang regime. Stalin would stop Mao from crossing Yangtze if the Americans got involved. Mao had no courage to continue the war without support from Stalin and if Americans stood on Chiang side. There were rumors that Stalin would like a divided China. Truman govt were full of communist sympathizers leading to the decision to abandon the Chinese nationalists.

 

[kingrant]

I know it must be very tough for yr generation, even a mopping up op is expected to be a tea party. But it would not be tough for me. I expect blood, gore, even death in war. If you are properly trained and conscientiously doing yr reservist, it wont be a walk in the park but you'll make it. Is that too tough?

First you asked how tough can it be. Now you are agreeing with me that it's tough.

 

[kingrant]

Good. Let's see what books have been misleading you all this while.

I suggest you invest in some good books on the Vietnam War and the event that finally turned the American public against it.

Wow! Thanks for the revelation about the Patriot. I never knew the same missile used in the Gulf War in the anti- aircraft, anti - ballistic missile role could perform bunker busting duties as well. Perhaps I was wrong about you. You indeed have solid battalion/ brigade or even division planning experience.

 

[Muthukali]

It's to blow the hell out of Peninsula Malaya, Sumatra and Java.

True, I second u......

 

[Cestbon]

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

What will be left after war?
Pigeonhole mostly wil be flatten to ground and CPF(S$) will be worthless like banana money.
So what is worth fighting for. For me is life, the best bet is fly away before war start.

 

[blueblobster]

i love these kind of threads.... all the ex-navy seals former pilot/general/master war tacticians come out to give their 2 cents...

I'm not here to give my 2 cents. Only to expose BS.

 

[blueblobster]

The Rambo story about a Vietnam veteran who returned to the US and could outfight police and army troops is just American version of romanticisation mixed with lamentation, just like Chinese versions of Huang Feihong, Huo Yuanjia or Chen Zhen. Lamentation of the humiliation suffered and romanticisation with exaggeration for some imagined saving grace.

Very well put. Watching Ip Man, I got deja vu midway. Having watched Fearless and countless versions of Jinwumen, I know how Ip Man is going to end.

I was thinking then of how to put this phenomenon into words. But you described it far better than me.