Thats your version of deterrence .. my version is that
if he does win, he won't be around to enjoy the fruits of victory,
either because he is no longer around or the thing which he wants
is no longer there.
My idea of deterrence is the story of a samurai who wants to cross
the bridge the same time as a peasant. The samurai being more
higher in ranked wants to challenge the peasant to a fight. So the
peasant knows that he will die if he fights, yet he wants to cross
the bridge .. so he learns a fighting stance that will lose the
fight, but will guarantee that samurai dies as well. Once the
samurai knows that the peasant is willing to die, the samurai, who
has more to live for, backs off.
That is my idea of deterrence.
And thank goodness its not our defence planners idea of deterrence
as well, because your idea of deterrence would not only ensure
Singapore's defenders will die defending Singapore, all our family
members as well what we have worked so hard to create will end up
in one huge wasteland SHOULD THAT DETERRENCE FAIL.
You seem to be happy to accept that if deterrence fails, you'll
happily see Singapore laid waste to, and everyone dies. I'm sorry,
but if deterrence fails, I'd rather give it a crack to try to keep
my family alive.
Actually, my idea is for SINGAPOREAN PEOPLE to survive .. I
care nothing for infrastructure .. so forward defense is not my
preference as a good strategy as it involves sending lots of
soldiers (aka Singapore citizens) to die in a foreign
land.
Rubbish...if we sit in here and wait for the enemy to come like you
suggest, the likely result will be a siege where we will be pounded
into the dirt or we'll have a deathmatch in the streets. Either
way, A LOT of Singaporeans will die and the country laid waste
to
If there was a third party who wish to invade Singapore via
Malaysia, our first policy will be to make peace with the
Malaysians and integrate our forces to something like NATO , not
invade them just fo the sake of our security. Thats like using
someone elses body to block a bullet. That person will not be very
happy. .. However, I don't see that we have noble intentions
towards the north anyway. .. and from all the posts, we have plenty
of people who are antagonistic towards Malays, Malaysians, etc ..
so no point trying to convince me that the potential enemy is a
third party.
In fact, during the last war, it was the defenders of Malaya who
fought a rear guard action from the north all the way to the south.
If there is a third party, we definately need the Malaysians to
fight a rear guard action or to divert the enemy partially towards
KL .. friendship is definately more important than a forward
defence. And I can truly say that I am definately more friendly
towards the north than many of the members here.
By that same token, you are a lot friendlier to Malaysians than a
lot of Malaysians are towards Singaporeans in general. Theres an
anti-Malaysian undercurrent here, but the feeling is not one-sided,
and worse still, a lot of the same kind of opinions expressed here
are expressed by politicians and the mainstream press over there?
So why pick on the forummers here alone for such sentiments?
While we're on the topic of the last war, it does show the folly of
attempting to make a last stand in Singapore proper
If you turn your statement around, that justifies the
entire Malaysian arms purchases. They have been sucking hind tit
for last 30 years. Its now time for them to
modernize.
Sure, and most here accept that fact, what we're picking on is
their assertions that it is to counter "pre-emptive" strikes, which
are comments obviously directed southwards towards us(especially)
and Australia.
And you don't get how porus the mersing line is do you ..
if you can tell me how we can defend the mersing line which
strecthes from Mersing, along highway 50 down to Batu Pahat and
keep infiltrators from attacking our rear areas. That is 100km in a
straight line. That line divides Johore into 2 .. that southern
portion has MOST of the johore population. And you can tell me that
whoever we send up north to defend that line will not face attacks
in front, behind and at the flanks?
I have spoken out against the Mersing Line strategy in this forum
before, but I also feel that its the best strategy in the
circumstances in the absence of a better one and a certainly whole
lot better than your "Singapore Deathmatch" option
My idea of deterrence is like the samurai story
above.
And as Gun said, its half-baked
