PDA

View Full Version : response to richardwang :no illusions about Singapore/SAF strength.



hopeful
29-11-10, 10:10
I guess Singapore will learn from Swissland - with a strong army but not get too invoved into either side.
It is exactly because Singapore is so small, she is in such a unique position to be the nutual country in major global conflicts. I've given a deep thought about this before I took up Singapore citizenship. And I've talked to many people. There are just so many interests virtually from the whole world. So it is not wise to attack Singapore. I know the history of Japanese invasion, but that was before Singapore becomes an independant country.
Singapore has a strong Air Force and Navy. She is ready for a counter strike when the main island is attacked. That's why GIC has properties everywhere in the world, and Singapore Armed Force has base in many countries.
I don't want to see a war (my son is going to the army in 2 years), but I am not afraid of a war either. ALL my assets are in Singapore, and I am bullish for Singapore even when world wise conflicts happen. But we need to act as smart as the Swiss. They actually get much richer after WW II.

Thanks,
Richard
Singapore is just a bone to be contended by the big neighbours, Indonesia & Malaysia. However each side is unwilling to let the other have Singapore. So Singapore is free as independent country.
Government is smart to play off the neighbours against each other.
For example, the Malaysia-Thailand Canal. That would be good for Malaysia but bad for Indonesia. So Indonesia pressured that Malaysia to drop the idea. Singapore then reaped the benefits from status quo.


It is just there are no nationalistics leaders like Sukarno anymore, the current leaders are more interested in $$ in their pocket.
Imagine if either neighbours threatened war, but don't actually go to war, creating a long period of uncertainty. What would happened to investors' confidence in Singapore. Would they pull out?

And by threatening war, would reservist be mobilized? and how many of them would be mobilized. That is the amount that would be taken out of the workforce. Who would replace them? Foreign workers and foreign talents? That is a joke, isn't it. Singaporeans preparing to lay down their lives for FW/FTs, who doesnt have to serve NS. Employers would also be more likely to hire FW/FTs as their work won't be disrupted due to being mobilized.
So for those Singaporeans against high class or low class or both FW/FT, it is too bad that you have to protect those who have taken over your jobs.

Can the economy sustain reservists' mobilization for long?

Singapore's SAF strength is just an illusion. It can win battles, but will lose the war. Singapore simply has no strategic depth.

Imagine if either neighbours are belligerent, and station artillery units in Batam or JB, guns pointing towards Singapore.

Mines are dirt cheap. Would ship passed through Straits of Malacca if mined? The chances of hitting a mine is small but mines are mainly for psychological warfare.

Artillery pieces are dirt cheap too, compared to an airplane. Just fired a few barrages in the 5-10 minutes before being destroyed by counterfire. What would that do to multi-billion dollar Jurong Island petrochemical industries, with all the flammable chemicals?

And if Singapore annex Batam, JB, what would that do to population demographics. More Malay/Muslims than Chinese. Think about Israeli Arabs in Israel. In a span of decades, Israeli Arabs would outnumber Israeli Jews.
Even now, most Malaysians applying for PRs are Chinese. This is to balance the more babies born by Singaporean Malays.

What can Singapore do?
1) Play off Malaysia and Indonesia against one another
2) Neighbouring leaders are interested in $ in their own pocket.
3) Have more FW/FTs. They act as human shields. Their governments would take action publicly to protect their citizens.
4) Have more fixed foreign investments. Foreign companies like Shell would pressure respective governments to protect their capital investments.

Of the 4 points, point 2 is the most important. Corruption has taken root. So it is easy for neighbouring leaders to be "persuaded" or "dissuaded" from acting aggressively against Singapore. Just ensure that their leaders have a stake in Singapore's prosperity. How? Use a little imagination.
A lot of countries are reported to have "hidden" , "special" funds that are not reported. Governments have been taken down because usage of said funds for personal purposes.

If point 2 is not taken care of, points 1, 3,4 would only delay.
A neo-Sukarno could just threaten war, without ever firing a shot. This would drive investors out, money out, until there would be only a little of human shields left. In the meantime, the economy goes down the drain. Would Singapore has a first strike policy when artillery guns are pointed at Singapore?

Last point to note:
Does anybody knows what happen to the GIC, Temasek, and CPF funds if Singapore were to be invaded.
Who would control the billions?
Singaporean overseas, can they withdraw their CPF from Singapore embassies by denouncing their citizenship? Of course by then the S$ may well have depreciated a lot.
In fact, if Singapore were to lose, there would be some people who would become very rich by acting as management/trustees for the GIC, Temasek, CPF funds. And government in exile, would they control the funds as well, with no oversight? So these may be the very people who wants to see Singapore lose, as their wealth would increase exponentially.

If I have nothing, I have nothing to lose. But now that I have a stake in Singapore, I am actually very much afraid of war.

And please have no illusion about SAF ability to win a war.
And having many bases are useless if the forces cannot reach the battlefield. even worse if the forces from overseas are defeated piecemeal.
Treaties are fine during peace times, can sign as many as you want.
Just remember NATO's moral support of Georgia. and remember countries annexed by Germany during WWII before crossing the line by invading Poland.