Comments on: Our bloated defence budget: What is the perceived threat?

By: gunfighter

gunfighter — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:09:47 +0000

@James Chong, thanks for your comments. You have made very valid observations with regards to the capability of the RMAF and their new acquisitions. Also very valid is the closing of the gap. I personally see this mini arms race as one that Sg will eventually lose out. Thus a different and more robust strategy is called for. As for the news about SINDEX, I think you should not pay too much attention to the Indian media. They played up the same hype when they trained against USAF F-15Cs a few years ago. In both exercises, there were indian propaganda. And for the USAF, they were then trying very hard to justify for their F-22s. Except between allies and close friends, no Air Force will compromise their full capabilities.
It is also not aircraft vs aircraft but how one wages the air campaign that really counts.

By: James Chong

James Chong — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 08:57:10 +0000

A very interesting article but in reality, I do not think that Singapore’s defence budget is “bloated”. In fact, I feel more should be done to maintain your country’s “superiority” vis-a-vis the only real “threat” to its survival, Malaysia.
It is true that relations between the two neighbours have been good since 1965. Even during the “stormy” years when Mahathir Mohamad was still PM of Malaysia, relations never degenerated to levels where force of arms may have been used.
But one can never be sure about how things might pan out in future. A far right, extremist, Islamist government might take power in Malaysia one day and it will be too late to do anything as long range rockets and bombs start falling on Jurong. Let us hope that will not happen since I am Malaysian also.
However, whenever I read things written about Singapore’s defence in blogs by her people, they range from “being able to defeat Malaysia in days” to a defeatist ” why bother fighting”.
To me, the extreme views on both ends of the spectrum are silly.
As for the superiority and confidence of the Singapore Armed Forces, I think the policy makers in your country would know that Malaysia has been closing the gap significantly over the years, especially in the realm of airpower.
One of the most significant purchases made by the Malaysian government in recent years are the Sukhoi-30 MKM jet fighters from Russia.
Let us look at the first, the Sukhoi 30 MKMs. These are VERY capable air superiority fighters. There has been a big debate about how Singapore’s late model F16C/Ds will match up against them. Well, here is some news for Singaporeans. During the Sindex air exercises in 2007 (or is it 2006, my memory fails me), Republic of Singapore Airforce (RSAF) F16C/Ds were pitted against Indian Airforce Sukhoi 30s, and RSAF F16s were quite badly beaten. The Indian press which covered the event said India can now rest a bit easier now since the Pakistan Airforce flies older and less advanced versions of the F16, the A models.
I do not know if this has set alarm bells ringing within the Singapore defence establishment but it might have been one of the reasons the RSAF is now going for larger orders of the F15 Strike Eagle (originally 12, now opting for 24). On top of that, the RSAF has also made known its intention to have at least 100 JSF F35s as part of its long-term force levels. These might seem excessive but given the potential threat and the need to maintain the islands republic’s superiority gap, they are necessary.
The Malaysian airforce are taking delivery of 18 Sukhoi 30 MKMs. That is not a very large number but let us not forget the other two also lethal factors in the Malaysian arsenal – the Mig 29s and F/A18s. (17 of the former and 8 of the latter). These are backed up by a dozen or so British-made Hawk 200s. If a war were to break out today (assuming the F15SGs the RSAF ordered are not in Singapore yet) and if Singapore cannot take out these Sukhoi 30s in pre-emptive strikes (ala Israel’s 6-Day War of 1967), the republic’s air force will NOT be able to gain air superiority over her Malaysian enemy. In fact, I feel that the Malaysian airforce might MORE than hold her own.
As for the “why bother fighting” school of thought, well, history has not been kind to defeated peoples.

By: gunfighter

gunfighter — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:09:48 +0000

@all, this is only one part so pls be patient. I assure all that I have done more than my fair share of NS. I do not advocate the dismantling of the SAF. That is like leaving your newest laptop on your car seat in a public car park. Dont tempt others.

There are several points that I want to make:(1) Misguided mission for the SAF, at least the publicly stated ones (2) Bloated budget ($11.45bn). How much is enough and how much is too much? (3) Exposing ppl unnecessarily to inherent risk involved with prolonged NS and military training.

I use easily accessible public domain publications that may not be the most accurate or updated, but permit a logical comparison anyway.

In defense planning, there must be a threat, whether perceived or real. Without one, the planning would come to naught. Preparing for war is not only about building up our military against another military. There are many historic examples where the smaller “weaker” nations have won against larger more powerful ones. If half of us don’t believe in NS, can we win in a war?

@Lim Chin Siong, I concede your point on the internal strife theory. History has proven you absolutely right esp in SE Asia. However, the build up of our air force and the navy is not justified by this reason. I agree though on inculcating the siege mentality in Singaporeans.

@John Tan, Georgia was a massive miscalculation by the Georgians (and the Americans) and even if they have doubled their defense budgets over the last 10 years, they would not have been able to stand up to the might of the Russians, assuming the latter had the will to do it.

@yuiop, define effective land campaign. Something along the line of Vietnam, Operation Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom? Win the battles but lose the war? I pass. High tech weapons? I think the 2006 Israeli-Lebanon war is extremely illuminating.

@Bacteria, you have a very good point which I will allude to later. This may not however be a good long term national strategy.

By: anti-conscript

anti-conscript — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:27:28 +0000

yuiop,

haha cheers, guess we can nvr speak on the same wavelength, anyway I’ve got my solution already. (already out of my ex country)

By: bacteria

bacteria — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 07:45:03 +0000

Indonesia and Malaysia are both moderate countries.
Plus we are their bankers and therefore not in their self interest to attack us. Now, if Malaysia/Indonesia ever become extremist (which you know is really unlikely if u have actually lived there) … religious nuts will attack even if we double our defence budget (as pointed out by Dragonkid).

how much is enough? Even if we halve our DB, we still outspend our neighbours. History has shown that smaller motivated professional armies *always* beat\thrash larger armies of unwillingly conscripts. and it was the professional north viet regulars who defeated the better equipped American conscripts in Nam.

I too have completed all my obligations. In a combat unit. Best unit too. But to be homest, didn’t think we would be much use in actual battle (esp as reservists). So kids who are passionate about our security, please petition to have a all volunteer professional army and professional generals (and not those waiting to join a stat board\GLC). And save urself from wasting 2++ (incl reservists) years of your prime.

By: wholuvsg

wholuvsg — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:03:45 +0000

aiyah, it’s clear that no matter how much ppl dun like the amt of $ spent on it, strong defence is a must. all SAF needs is to cut short the NS timing….which was cut from 2 1/2 to 2…, and ICT timing also….3 weeks, ppl sure defer….2 weeks already so long liao….

By: randommindlessness

randommindlessness — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 09:20:55 +0000

Dear Kid John Tan,

If counter-strike can hone your skills, then I suggest you play Call of Duty as it’d probably teach you more about guns and war policies more than that silly red crosshair and what you think camping is about.

Also, for a guy who has not been into NS to see how incompetant foolish human beings work in there, your thought about 10 hours flight time for our pilots will be for naught.

I’m quite sure our air force receive a significant portion of the budget, and I’m also quite confident in it’s abilities as our pilots are fine picked and selected properly.

But for everything else from wasting food and water due to stupidity and eating buffets in outfields due to ego, I see no reason to respect a part of our armed forces.

And you think the author is naive and shouldn’t compare us with other countries of different geopolitical interest. Then tell me what is the base we should use for comparison, or rather, if you prefer, not compare at all and pride ourselves in what our armed forces is all about.

Looking at you makes me think you’ve been fed propoganda since young, but you’re with a good track mind to know that it’s good to expect the unexpected. But dissing someone else’s article due to personal opinion is plain rude, and if you’re serious about being 16 and not serving NS. I suggest you look forward to it, and hope you do good within the system, and change the many atrocities within it.

Also, I suggest the next time you think someone else’s article is bull shit, I suggest you go through and understand what the article’s trying to say before making silly assumtions of the writer. He still hasn’t mentioned anything of reducing NS period or dismantling of the army.

Oh and one final thing, please try not to bring games into such conversations…it makes me think that you’re the type who will put tactical knowledge from Command and Conquer into such conversations.

By: yuiop

yuiop — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 08:35:37 +0000

Dear anti-conscript & like-minded people,

1. DB & National Service
Sorry, cannot give detailed answer, cos saya not Defence Minister. But my pri 1 calculation tells me that based on a same size military, regular > expensive than conscript. Last I checked, a sizeable military is still needed for an effective land campaign (unless you live in fantasy LALA land & believe in the hi-tech bulls**t where “a few rambos will do the job”). If you still don’t understand, don’t worry, your P1 teacher will teach you next year.

2. Saya only critic… no smart suggestions. But I dislike people act-smart, publish super long article but no substance.

Your idea of reduction of ORNS period reminds me of a scene in “Something abt Mary”, where the hitch-hiker says that his super-idea of “6-min Abs” is much better than “7-min Abs”. Why don’t you straight away propose total reduction of ORNS to zero. That way, your imaginery soldiers can take IPPT when they are sleeping, and replace sit-ups with 6-min… no 1-min Abs workouts.

3. Hmmm… ok joke… can pass.

Cheers.

By: Sylvester Lim

Sylvester Lim — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:53:08 +0000

The fact is that there is little accountability of how the money is spent. How much of it goes to Singapore Technologies given that this year is not going to be a good year for exports and their books need to reflect positive numbers? After all, the directors of these companies have to produce results. Where the money comes from does not matter even if it is from the taxpayers. This money could have been better spent on Education and Singaporeans welfare such as Job Training etc

By: infp

infp — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 23:35:49 +0000

perceived or not perceived? hmmm…

whether something is a threat or not is up to how someone, or some party, perceives it. for example, a hardcore paranoid person will probably perceive everything as a threat, even the sky.

my point is, a threat is a perceived thing. there is no inherent attribute called ‘threat’ in the thing itself, whether be it a country, person, animal, sky, stone, etc.