Conclusion: Peesai is NOT Worth Defending!

[makapaaa]

<TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"></TD><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgF noWrap align=right width="1%">From: </TD><TD class=msgFname noWrap width="68%">LauZoeTay <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgDate noWrap align=right width="30%">5:30 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT noWrap align=right width="1%" height=20>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname noWrap width="68%">ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%" rowSpan=4></TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>8724.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>http://amortal.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/is-singapore-not-worth-defending/
Is Singapore not worth defending?

In Defence, Nursing Homes, Politics, Singapore, Society on 2009/03/01 at 7:11 pm

“Is Singapore not worth defending?” Hehe… someone asked me this funny question, which I have never bothered to think about before. Since he asked, I shall say something to satisfy his curiosity.

Did I say ‘funny’? Yes, I felt tickled because this guy asked in a negative way. If one had wished to solicit a positive response, wouldn’t it be better to ask a question in a positive or neutral manner? For example, “Is Singapore worth defending?”

NOT WORTH? These two words immediately direct me to think of why “Singapore is not worth defending and / or indefensible”. These are the reasons I came up with within an hour. Some of the reasons may require further elaboration. Please don’t blame me for being negative; you asked for it.

Physical Size.

Singapore is too small in terms of physical size. One tactical nuclear bomb can easily obliterate it to smithereens. Nowadays, it is not difficult for people to buy such a weapon in the black market. That’s why the US is so afraid of the Al Qaeda.

The island has no depth. That means it can be easily over-run by an invading force within a very short period of time, once a line of resistance is broken and penetrated.

Singapore has no hinterland, which means there is no room for the maneouvering of forces, civilians and logistics. And there is no place for the civilians to hide except underground, which offers very limited space. Congestion will be our main problem. This will give rise psychological negative effects and serious spread of diseases in times of war. Where can we keep our sick and wounded safe? Which hospitals?

Singapore is surrounded by coastal waters all round. A piece of land area like this is very difficult to defend militarily. Troops will have to be deployed all-round the island in a linear fashion, thereby weakening the strength of our forces. Yes, the concept of forward defence - which happens to be also a strategy of the Indonesian Armed Forces - may be considered, but we still have to ensure our back doors are secured, is it not? What kind of forces would be left behind to guard the back doors? Half-baked, half-drunk beer-drinkers with huge tummies from Dad’s Army?

There are too many flats and high-rise buildings. When any of these buildings collapses, due to bombings, it would easily create chaos and panic amongst the populace living within the vicinity. Moreover, fighting in a built-up area is a very tedious and hazardous affair. It is a double-edge weapon, neither advantageous to the attacker nor the defender. AND, there will be heavy civilian casualties.

Population Size.

One quarter of our population is made up of foreigners, who will not be around when a war starts. Permanent residents will not be loyal to the country. They will not fight to defend Singapore. Period.

Whatever is left is only about 3 million people. After discounting children, women, aged and the physically impaired, only about 350,000 people can be effectively utilized to defend the state. This is insufficient to make up a force strong and versatile enough to fight a protracted war.

We cannot run away from the probability that any war that starts between Singapore and a neighboring country will be a long and protracted war, similar to what has been happening between Israel and the Arab Nations in the Middle East. Once the Pandora box is opened, all hell will break loose!

A national service conscripted military force, though well equipped and well trained, but inexperienced and tender, is still unlikely to win over a relatively more experienced, hardened and aggressive invading force with numerical superiority. Attaining air coverage superiority may help but it cannot be the decisive factor. Neither can superior technology be an insurance for strategic victory and long-lasting peace.

Leadership.

When leaders consider “Welfare as a dirty word” and seriously go about effecting this concept, they cannot and will not be able to attract followers who will be willing to die for them. If, during peace time, there is no welfare. How then can there be welfare during times of war? Would the followers entrust their lives into the hands of such kinds of leaders? The answer is obvious. NO!

Our so-called ‘leaders’ are not natural leaders. They cannot easily command the respect of the people in times of crisis. They can be considered as good administrators and, may be, good technocrats and managers too. But definitely not leaders in the truest sense of the word. Most of them are so-called ’scholars’ with multiple scholarships and degrees - spending most of their prime time in schools and universities. Some of them don’t even know how to socialise and require SDU’s assistance to find them a partner or wife. And scholars, through the past donkey years in history, have been considered mostly as bookworms. How can one expect bookworms to even be a mere semblance of a leader? Just look at them. How many of them have that sissy feminine look and behaviour instead of the strong and tough look of a real man?

Academic performance does not automatically equate to good leadership. Such people can only be excellent academicians, civil administrators, technical advisers or research consultants but rarely good national leaders, like MM Lee and his old guards in the days gone by.

Our ‘leaders’ are not able to effectively motivate our people. They are very good at giving orders and excellent in demanding people to do their will because of the authority empowered upon them by law or regulations. With the help of the efficient and effective civil service, they seem to perform well. Take the civil service away from them and they will be left in suspense. They are not really good motivators with persuasive personalities. Most of them can’t even speak convincingly and fluently. That is why the PM himself commented that even MPs also cannot grasp or understand many of the policies made. Some of them can’t even speak confidently. We could see them fumbling with their words and pronunciations during many parliamentary debate sessions. This could be the reason why many of the MPs did not speak out as frequently as they should be. Probably because of their fear of exposing their own weaknesses?

Our ‘leaders’ don’t seem to be able to lead by example. Most of the time they tell us what to do but they don’t walk the talk themselves. They told us to accept lower pay but in the same breath they raised their own pay sky high. A very glaring point is the ministerial and top civil servants’ shameless salary schemes and bonuses. In addition, some of them also have many side incomes such as multiple directorships, consultancies and chairmanships. Even during times of economic recessions and difficulties like now, they still continue to draw the world’s highest pay for public offices, despite a 20% ‘pay cut’ (or is it freezing of salary for this year only?).

The day the top public office holders demanded, acquired and collected their million dollars in salary, thereby inadvertently putting themselves in the category of ‘get-rich-quick’ millionaires, was the day they lost their effectiveness in their persuasive power. They became hypocrites, so to speak; and lost their moral standing and our respect.



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[makapaaa]

Historical Baggages.

Singapore is only a city state. It cannot be considered as a country like other normal countries. It has been artificially created through the accident of history and political maneouvers. Malaysia will one day ‘claim’ back her ‘prodigal son’ when she becomes militarily and economically strong enough. This should not be an illusion.

We have declared ourselves as an independent state but we are still not that independent actually. The Malaysian railway line, that pierces through the heart-centre of our island and split it into two, is forever a symbolic tell-tale sign that we are not yet independent. Take a visit to the Tanjong Pagar Railway Station and you will see in huge plain letters at the entrance: “Welcome To Malaysia!” A location right in the middle of our city is Malaysia? How can that be? Shouldn’t it be: “Welcome To Tanjong Pagar Railway Station”? And who is the MP for Tanjong Pagar? Does that not imply something curiously wrong or even sinister?

Anyway, what is so great about independence? Wouldn’t it be better for the majority of our people if we were to merge again with Malaysia? Of course, our top people would not want this to happen because they would stand to lose a very huge stake. However, we as commoners have nothing much to lose but many things to gain. We can roam freely in a very much bigger piece of real estate with more landscapes and sceneries to view at our leisure. We will have more beautiful sandy beaches to spend our weekends with our love ones. And if the cost of living in a certain city is too high for us to cope, we can either move to another city or relocate to the country-side to live a simpler life. If we are out of job and have no money to pay our utility bills, we need not constantly fear that our water and electricity supplies would be cut off. We can simply dig a well or go to the river or stream to get our water supply. We won’t die of hunger and thirst.

The recent remark made by MM rings a bell loud and clear in my ears: “Singapore is not a master of its own economy!” Economy is our life-line or our livelihood. If our livelihood is dependent upon the mercy of other countries, how can we consider ourselves as being independent? The fact is: We are still very dependent! Moreover, with globalisation going at full steam, this dependency and inter-dependency have become even more enhanced and pronounced, isn’t it? And why are we also talking about the urgent need for ASEAN to be an economic bloc?

Values.

We cannot fool ourselves that we have already reached nationhood status. We have not! Though the effort for nation-building had started very well in the early 1970s, through the determined and persistent efforts of Dr Goh Keng Swee and the old guards, these efforts have been diluted by later leaders who aim to “attain economic progress at all costs”. Even though we keep singing “One Nation, One People” during national days, the undertone within most hearts is “To Each His Own”. Economic progress came with a price. That price is “Selfishness”. Selfishness breeds greed. Greed then breeds all sorts of evils and sins. The present collapse of the banking systems in the world and the distrust of professionals in this time of depression is a clear confirmation of how greed brings about the downfall of men, organisations and nations.

We are a migrant society. Being a migrant society, there is a deep-rooted tendency to migrate whenever things turn out disappointingly. With globalisation and the advent of the Internet, the world has not only become smaller but also more inter-linked and more interdependent. Singaporeans travel freely and work and study in many foreign countries. They are exposed to foreign influences and values, and become more adaptable to different conditions and environments. As a result, more and more young and promising local talents are moving out of Singapore - some have settled down in other countries permanently. This means that our roots are not entrenched deeply enough. We can easily be uprooted anytime.

There is little or no sense of belonging. Although the government has been trying extremely hard to instill a strong sense of belonging among Singaporeans, some government policies and ministers’ uncalled for and thoughtless remarks run counter to this effort, thereby sabotaging what the previous governments had been doing. How can there be a sense of belonging if people like KBW can “suggest” to us to send our sick old folks to stay in JB nursing homes just because they are cheaper? For that matter, everything in JB is cheaper; so why don’t all of us stay in JB? If your parents are staying in JB and there is a war between Singapore and Malaysia, which side will you defend? Simple logic will tell us to defend our parents, wherever they may be, isn’t it? So, if ministers won’t even be bothered with ethical and moral values, where will these values come from?

What kind of values are being imparted nowadays? “You must concentrate all your efforts to score four A’s in your A-level examination, and get a President Scholarship plus a SAF Scholarship. Once you get those, the rest of your life up the ladder of meritocracy is smooth sailing. You will be groomed by unseen hands that will guide you through your path to the Pyramid Club. Just don’t rock the boat or bite the hands that feed you. Then you can easily become a top civil servant in the Administrative Service or an instant Minister over night. Even if you failed to be elected by the people twice, you still can become a Minister through the back door. Not to worry, nobody can do a damned thing about it. Simple as that.” All other values are secondary. See?

Has MOE succeeded or failed in its role and responsibility in nation building? I am inclined to think it has failed miserably many times over. Because there is no consistency. Each time there is a change of Minister or Head of Department, some drastic changes take place. This is very disturbing, unsettling, upsetting, and disruptive. There is no continuity. Policies simply changed overnight without in-depth studies into possible future impacts ten or twenty years down the road. By then whoever came up with a failed policy would have been promoted and/or posted to another glorious post. Nobody would go after him for his failure. As a result, the culture of infallibility has crept in and nobody is willing to take direct ownership for blunders that occurred under his sphere of influence and responsibility. A very good example is the Mas Selamat’s fiasco. So, how can nation-building, which requires a prolonged consistent sustaining effort, be successfully implemented? Who will take full responsibility to see it through?

Morale.

The morale of our people and our troops is an extremely important factor in any war. I am afraid to think how our people and troops will feel if war is eminent? Would our leaders be able to motivate our people and troops to sacrifice their lives for the country? This is a very big question mark.

From the way things are going, it looks like the morale of both our population and NSmen is at its lowest, due to economic factors and the recent MINDEF vs the parents of the NSF who was found unconscious in camp while on duty. The fact that MINDEF or SAF can go all the way to court, in order to defend the indefensible argument of a soldier’s duty is only from 0800 hours to 1700 hours, is a clear indication of penny-wise pound-foolish attitude/behaviour of policy and decision makers at very high levels. How then can MINDEF or SAF expect the soldiers and their parents to have high morale in time of crisis/war?

While our ministers are fattening their own bank accounts with millions of dollars every year, wages of the common people are deliberately kept low through the foreign talents and foreign workers schemes, for the purpose of “economic progress at all costs”. This has seriously affected the morale of our people down the line. The ministerial pay issue will never go away in the hearts of our people. From the frequency of references to ministerial pay in the comments sections of most of the topics of discussion that have surfaced in the blogosphere, one can easily conclude that this is a very thorny issue which will never go away until and unless the ministers come to their senses and do the right thing to gain back the respect of the citizens.

Preferential treatments to the elites, the white horses, the so-called ’scholars’ and senior party members have been going on for the past few decades. This is an indisputable fact. Though many a times, certain leaders have tried to convince us that this is not so, people have eyes to see. You can’t lie. A preferential treatment has to be physically executed. You can’t hide. People are going to see it right in front of them with their own eyes and feel it with their own hearts. You simply can’t deny. And this seriously affects the morale of many people.

I deliberately left out two very important considerations. What can those be? Think for yourself! If I talk too much some people may come after me.

Conclusion.

So, is Singapore worth or not worth defending? You tell me. I need just one true leader to come out and convince me.

I think a more practical question to ask is: “Should I sacrifice my life and die for Singapore?” This question is more personal. You can easily grasp it. It is easier to examine; easier to swallow; easier to digest; easier to conclude; easier to decide. But that is another topic for another time