unauthorised training caused the death of a national service

last SG · 2003-10-16T21:49:40+00:00

a lot of bad things happening there huh? including being banned from best unit competition..

35MM Gunner SG

if u derive pleasure from tat then theres nth more 2 say
let one's actions speak for one's self

Cool

35MM Gunner SG

deleted

Cool

wuming78 SG

the word was not used in this figurative sense. mr teo chee hean used it more to describe the action.

NathanG5 SG

precisely time have change..what u have describe is last time..the past..
the one abt promoting to CPL..my unit also kena...but too bad..they cant do anything to that guy..the promotion was drop..due to valid reason from his MP...his family need his support as a bread-winner..he is the only guy in the family(his father already pass away)..he went to his MP 4 time..
the worst is..when we were fighting for OFF day..that guy got most of it..
reason y he got it..he told the officers that it was his dad death anniversary...he give this excuse twice..so i guess he got 2 dad Laughing
n nobody bother to stop him..cos he is leaving the unit soon also..

Gedanken SG

Well spotted, wuming. In the interestes of brevity I used “doused” instead of “doused with the intent of showering”, as it was in context – I am remiss.

dumbdumb! SG

i stand with bear with this dude... i mean... we hv to see why that fella had to die. if its under the hands of a officer bully... then.. tt guy deserve punishment... cause its got nothing to do with whatever fcuk training to protect the country.. its a bully case.. the officer bulled cause he felt big doing it, and it caused someone death.. talking abt death to protect the country is just hiding the fact that the trainer was a bully. and to die under his hand is a waste. and it isn't worth it

[email protected] SG

so u implying u are macho?

Gedanken SG

Heng, 35's a legend in his own lunchbox. What he's doing is talking the talk, but as a Pes C2, I don't know how much of the walk he can walk. Laughing Life sure is good when you can sit behind your desk and pontificate about how tough "we" really should be. If the sh*t ever hits the fan, our boy will be shuffling papers thanking his lucky stars that he's not taking the heat.

The irony of this is just sickening.

Xprobe SG

Laughing

mfscrewu SG

Read up a bit about the CST incident. First of all, I am not here to argue who is right and who is wrong. Afterall, a precious life have been lost. It is really pointless to discuss that. However it would be more constructive to suggest ways to implement CST in a safer manner.

Been a recce trooper (God, I miss my bike even though it was crappy), I have been through CST and there are number of ways that the instructor will "torture" a POW. Stress positions, face to face with a huge German Sherpard, pour icy water down the trainee during interogation and plenty of other ways. Most memorable one was a bamboo stick stuck behind the knees and asked the trainee to bend backwards. That was excruciating pain. However, the course did make me realise that the mind is stronger than the body. So for me, I agree that the tough training should continue, despite the setbacks that has occurred.

It is unfortunate that a trainee died during the course (I am not mentioning the Rank/name not because I don't respect the dead, but out of respect for his family to prevent more grief that is already surrounding them now). Heads have already started rolling and investigation is currently undergoing. So lets leave it to MINDEF and the police for the time being.

I shall start the ball rolling on suggestions.

1) Have a MO (NSMEN or NSF) attached for the CST. Having a medic is no longer adequate as the medical training provided might not be sufficient for the medic to recognise the symptoms of near drowning when water treatment is conducted. Afterall, even in an actual POW situation, a POW that is alive is more valuable than a dead POW and this has often been depicted in an actual POW camp as well as in movies.

2) Before setting the trainees off on the training exercise. Medical examinations must again be conducted to ensure that trainees are not in a poor state of health before start of exercise.

3) Instructors should discuss with CDO head honcho and S3 branch and brief them on what are the techniques they will be using before start of each course. Review at the end of each course should be conducted by the CST training wing.

Hope that with constructive suggestions put forward by people, SAF training can be conducted in a safer manner.

espanol_man SG

by mfscrewu:
"the course did make me realise that the mind is stronger than the body. So for me, I agree that the tough training should continue, despite the setbacks that has occurred."

"Hope that with constructive suggestions put forward by people, SAF training can be conducted in a safer manner."

HEAR HEAR !!! i agree man!

Icemoon SG

35mm, I think you should try to set the record straight. It's sad if your view on this incident taint your relationship with the rest, ie. they'll always view you as a REMF and a cold-blooded fellow.

Perhaps you'll like to answer these few questions. Others can answer too.

1). Do you think the instructors are legally wrong?

2). All along, what do you think is the state of mind, ie. mens rea, of the instructors? Mens rea is a legal term, do a search on googles. Mr. Green Specifically, do you think they did it with good intentions but acted like sadists or were they mad and real sadists to begin with?

3). Do you think the POW treatment [those with physical contact and manhandling] should be scrapped? Or should we make them legal but with safety checks?

4). Do you think the instructors are remorseful? Put yourself in their shoes. If a trainee died and others nearly died, will you brush them off as training accidents?

35MM Gunner SG

1st off i'm not here 2 offend n e 1 or 2 make enemies
all i did wuz 2 post my pt of view

regarding ur qns

1) its not right 2 say whos wrong and whos right as we outsiders 2 tis incident dun know wat REALLY went wrong
sure findings have indicated tat its da fault of da instructors but i'm sure deep down theres more 2 it than just tis

2) my opinion is tat da instructors might have been 2 passionate n enthisiastic bout their job resulting in their being over zealous

3) i personally dun tink tat it shld b scrapped totally
may b in future we can have a staff officer 2gether wit da safety officer present 2 supervise when tis cse is being conducted
if it pleases may b some 1 outside of CDO?????

4) i've said b4 no 1 in their rite frame of mind wans 2 take away some 1s life
i believe they r feeling da pressure now and they r sure havin low morale
they have oredi been suspended and who knows wat will happen
so may b we shld cut them some slack

ps: i heard those involved have or will b discharged (tis is just hear say)

last point:
as i've said earlier i'm not here 2 make enemies or offend n e 1
i'm now being da bigger man and i hereby offer my apologies 2 who eva feels he is offended
its up 2 u 2 accept or not
and like i've said in an earlier post
if u wish 2 make personal attacks and hurl insults tis way
hey tats ur wish if it makes u happy
and tat can only say so much

Cool

Viper52 SG

Have tried to stay out of this thread as I thought I've said what already needs to be said, but this post of yours really astounds me, and I really have to concur with some of the things Gedanken and others have said about you.

The difference here, is this. The friends of the instructors still know them. 2SG Hu's friends knew him, no thanks to the "instructors".

Who's more deserving of sympathy here?

they did go over board when conducting trg but thousands have gone thru da same ting some even worse

Considering 1 died and 6 were injured to require hospital treatment, what makes you so sure what the previous batches gone through are worse? Were you there?

did it occur 2 u tat they (instructors) r actually prolonging their lives (trainees)?????
tis cse wudnt have evolved if SAF din tink theres a need 4 CST
and ys tat?????
coz of wats happening ard us tat calls 4 it

Again, you show a lack of understanding of the issue. I don't think anyone here is saying theres no need for CST. I for one think its necessary, and even think it should be madatory for all soldiers (albeit toned-down ones for non-frontline troops etc).

What we are condemning is the fact that in their attempts to replicate "realistic training", they killed a fellow soldier, and injured 6 others. Is it deliberate? I seriously doubt so. Did they get carried away? Most likely. But should they go unpunished because of this? NO! Call it making an example of them, but those guilty in this case MUST be punished, to mae sure others in their position will take extra case not to get "carried away", inadvertent or not.

How do you prolong someones life when you have already taken in away?

laser51088 SG

just a word from me. . .

Gedankan, stop hurling personal insults at 35mm, REMF or not. Attack what he says, and the points if necessary, but i think personal insults can be left out. . .

35mm gunner, sometimes, we need to remember that all of us have heart as well. . . the fact is that the casualty rate for that partiuclar training is unacceptably high. arguing that the instructors were right is moot. it would be more prudent to

1. Review the way in which that course and similar courses are carried out in SAF, make modifications if necessary, ensure the guidelines and restrictions reflect and restrict what actually happens during course

2. Review role of instructors in general and find out if they have been given too much power or inadequate training, etc. if no, then find out what actually caused those particular instructors to take action that resulted in a death. if yes, then maybe some people should start shaking up the entire way inwhich all training is carried out.. .

- also to ensure that instructors roles are clearly defined and that they do stick to the guidelines as far as safety is concerned. instructors should not be allowed rights and 'powers' that are officially forbidden. however, must at this time state that safety guidelines should not limit creativity or initiative of instructors.

while it is expected that instructors will now adhere closer to the 'book' at least for awhile, SAF brass must also ensure tat vigilance does not fall after a period without incidence.

addtional:
perhaps some independent body is needed to check on the SAF if similar incidents occur. however, this may also not be practical since much of what takes place is vital to national security when the peace is threathened. at the end of the day therefore, the SAF had better keep itself in check because no one else can without compromise on security.

my two cents. once again, reiterate i haven't serve NS, these are just personal opinions. whack if desired.

i can do it SG

how to be one?

the Bear SG

steriods, single digit IQ... and that's about it...

i can do it SG

i need to carry this

Gedanken SG

Very sensible ideas, which generally cover the scope of remedial action that needs to be taken. Just a few points:

1) There are a few pros and cons to this. The real strength of this suggestion, IMHO, is that an MO has the rank to intervene if things look like they are headed in the wrong direction. However, given the range of training activities that go on at Hendon, you would probably need a section, if not a platoon, of MOs to provide adequate coverage. Given that, we may have to stick with the Safety Officer route.

2) This raises the question of what course of action needs to be taken if the trainee is deemed unfit to attend the exercise. Would that trainee automatically be out of course? That would be the sensible thing to do, but it could get some noses out of joint and would of course affect the trainee's course completion schedule.

3) Technically speaking (emphasis on "technically"), such an approach is already SOP, given that course structures need to be subject to review. However, it would be more the rule than the exception that the course looks nothing like the way it is described in documentation. I would suggest a modification, in that an officer or NCO, who is not part of the training team and who is appointed by the CCO, follows and observes the course, providing a critique at the end. What is really required is a change in culture, where details (rather large ones in this case) are not glossed over in favour of maintaining a political balance. In such a critique, it would be handy to employ the Israeli Air Force's policy in after-action reviews, where the explicit understanding is that for the duration of the review session, rank is left at the door.

[email protected] SG

/awards laser UN peacekeeper medal

« Previous Page Next Page »