I would be honoured really.
Anyway, looks is certainly, not a criteria for becoming a general
or COA or watever. And LL meaning is that, there is no point
placing SAF generals on a pedestral, even though they are really
competent and outstanding.
I am glad you are honoured to be mistaken for someone who is
unable to read beyond the abilities of a 3 year old and think
beyond that of a 6 year old.
Back to the topic, looks were only raised when someone said
Singapore Idol. Who's to say what is on a pedastal and what is
talking about an officer you like?
I started a thread on BG Tan, after I got upclose and personal
and after working under this officer in NDP. I came away from the
experience feeling admiration and respect for this capable and
intelligent yet humble commander.
In the face of all the nutjobs who make up the majority of the
officer corps in the SAF, it was a pertinent point to me that made
a difference to my work and my views of conscription and defence,
and I believe officers like him are what is keeping the SAF
together, when I think of the usual crap that represents perhaps
99.999% of the officer corps.
He is an SAF officer and this is an SAF forum. Forum is for info
and gossip exchange. So there are people who'd like to trade gossip
on SAF or SAF officers.
