7/02/2013
Singapore soldiers in Afghanistan
‘TRINKOT (WNA, 23 Jun): Maj. Gen. Ravinder Singh, Chief of the Singapore Army, visited Afghanistan yesterday and met with the ISAF leadership and his forces in Uruzgan, the alliance said in a statement
Singh called on Gen. Joseph F. Dunford, commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and expressed his appreciation to ISAF for the support rendered to Singapore troops during their six years in Afghanistan….’
The full article above was posted in TRE and there were some discussions as to where Singapore soldiers were serving in Afghanistan. Some were not comfortable with our involvement in the American affair and feared being dragged into the war of terrorism and becoming a victim by association with the Americans. Some called it a price to pay for the protection the Americans were giving to us and allowed us to live in peace in a region that can become troublesome for all the wrong reasons and for the slightest unseen provocations.
We should be grateful to the Americans for offering us the protective umbrella. The question is how far should we go to reciprocate the goodwill? Would our offer of allowing the Americans to use our military facilities here be good enough for what they did for us? Or must we go so far as to send our soldiers to fight or support the American military adventures everywhere? This contribution to the American adventure is not so safe as it seems as it opens us to attacks by the American enemies as we will be seen as American accomplice participating in the same evil deeds. Our hands are tainted by the blood of the victims of American aggression.
What is the value of our offer of military bases? I think this is not a small matter knowing how important it is to the American to have a friendly and ready base to operate from. We are probably the most dependable ally the Americans can count on in the region. Is this not enough? We are helping the Americans to project their power to protect their interests in the region. This is not a small contribution and in many ways worth much more than dragging us into Afghanistan and compromising our safety and security.
Do we have other options other than the Americans as our protector? Can another superpower offer us the same protection without forcing us into a difficult and dangerous situation? We are serving the American strategic interest with the facilities we offered them. Our participation in Afghanistan is peanuts to the Americans. They don’t really need us there except to implicate us and fix us up, so that we cannot detach ourselves from their bloody acts of war.
Do we have the bargaining power to negotiate with the Americans on how far we should go with them? Do we have an alternative power to replace the Americans without our arms being twisted like what the Americans did to us?
Basically, what choice is there for us? Yes, standing on the head of the Americans means we can talk louder and punch above our weight. Is that worth being compromised in dicey situation that we are in now? If we are not with them we are their enemy!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Offering military facilities to the Americans is already telling the enemies of the USA that we are with them.
Conflicts with North Korea, PRC, we are also deemed to be with them.
The Islamists take it as we are an accomplice to the USA.
Interesting time ahead for Singkapore.
Asean countries in conflict with PRC already telling us for Ah Sian's solidarity, we must also be for them to bash China.
I think PAP govt is very strategic one, so there must be very good strategic reasons why Sinkie troops are sent to Afghanistan, tio bo?
In fact just like some other matters, the reasons may be so sensitive that it cannot even be publicly discussed.
Of course, those ignorant of matters will question with their simple mind why this and why not that, etc etc. But it is the PAP who knows better. Or else how could PAP be so strategic as to be able to fight and win every election? And just like Sinkie troops for Afganistan issue, those simple minds will also question why ah?
is it really to protect singapore or to protect 1 leeder against any downfall ?
That's why PAP is the govt mah. As such, they know something which ordinary Sinkies don't know lah.
If you are smarter and knows better than PAP leaders, why are you not the PM?
Don't say PM, why not even become the CEO of the company where you work?
An ordinary Ah Lian had defeated PAP before.
Next to defeat PAP will be Ah Beng. And Ah Beng not even a graduate some more.
Hi Anon 8:49,
Thank you for your enlightened discourse. The ignorant and simple minds here would be very grateful if you could share your wisdom with them. You speak like you are someone in the know.
Please, please enlighten us, the simple minds.
Very simple lah. Maybe because big brother US ask for it lah.
When your big boss ask you to do something which you can do, do you say no?
I hope this enlightens.
Like the Pinoys slamming China, shooting Taiwanese to create troubles in the South China Seas?
A fox told a tiger that it better believed it(fox) was no chicken and if the tiger did not believe, all it had to do is to follow behind(the fox) to see for itself(the tiger). Indeed as they moved around, all the other beasts were scared. 狐假虎威 meaning making use of other(s) can never ever be a safe bet.
In the Above Fable, the fox ended up as everybody expected and knows.
Playing around with godfather and big brothers and pretending to be nice will naturally and ultimately be seen as prostituting. And when the hole gets too loose and stinky, the pretense of orgasm will not make others happy. It will only upset or offend those being patronised.
In most countries, ex-military background candidates are made defence minister.
Ours is an ex-surgeon instead.
Why?
My guess is in a war, the casualty rate is expected to be highly elevated so we need a medically trained doctor to direct the rescue efforts, severely high casualties and able to make fast decisions on the procedures for those left with one arm one leg or even no leg.
Chicken or egg? Which should come first? A military chief who is a trained soldier with vast military background, experience and pedigree and able to minimise casualties in a potential war or a military chief who is a highly trained surgeon who has almost next to nothing military background and almost zero knowledge on art of war but a sure guarantee to provide sound medical advice when there are high casualties coming in with arms or legs dangling or bullets riddled albeit still breathing bodies?
In Sinkieland, military boys are brought and put into the Cabinet, not because they are good national administrators orpeople managers. All the Ex-military men have got the Arsenal and the Uniformed men to back them up.
Beware of how You vote, putting your vote for Ex-military Candidates could very well mean voting to have a gun pointing at your OWN HEAD one day.
We are advised to take average over 24 hour PSI readings for haze and not which hour.
So for military casualties, we should also take average over how many days casualities?
If a few Bill Gates were to become Sinkie citizens, I think the average wealth of a Sinkie will go up a lot, tio bo?
That's the "official" deployment.
No one has yet mentioned anything about the "unofficial" troops who might be there.
If ever there is a war fought between China and the US that drags Asean into it fray, red dot could just disappear with one nuclear missile strike.
And there goes all the million dollar homes, reduced to radioactive waste and sunk into the sea.
Of cos americunt or any cunt will always win by offering people no choice. They always managed to screw their opponents before they can strike a simple chord.
US and China should stop all the silly games of power but work together and bring good will to the whole world.
'But it is the PAP who knows better.'
- the above statement is a myth, someone from pap said they do not have good foresight.
Post a Comment