Signup
LoginRecent Posts by deathmaster
-
-
my general impression is that guys don't really mind how old their girl is. just so long as they don't look too bad.
the issue lies more with the girls, who are brought up in a society which once frown on jie-di lian. most of the girls i noe arn't agreeable with dating someone younger than them, not to say marry someone younger.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Try applying these points to Israel. Small area, surrounded by the opposition, little defensive depth, built up infrastructure, not too much by the way of primary industries, yet the facts bear out that they've not only defended themselves from Syria, Egypt and other countries, they took the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
We can if and but till the cows come home, but the facts already tell us that we're by no means forced to roll over and expose our bellies.
don't neglect the fact that israel, though urbanised, it is not like singapore.
singapore is much much smaller, with everything concentrated in a city. Israel still have some countryside as buffer.
and yes, the israelis have won alot of wars with syria, egypt etc. but those are very short wars which ranges from days to weeks.
if the agressor decided to drag on the war, with reference to the War of Attrition by Egypt from 1968-1970 (3 yrs), israel lost alot of territory. like taiwan, without the protectorship of the USA, these tiny states facing large powerful enemies can never survive on their own.
bravery and skill can only take you so far. in the end, everything will still boils down to resources.
-
-
-
just quit and find another job. friend so what? it is still acceptable if he make u work for slightly lower pay.
but when he takes advantage of your help and take u for granted, it is time to give up the relationship, now that you know exactly what sort of person he is.
and btw, i think u really need to make some effort to cut to at least 100kg. 160 kg at 32 yrs old is no joke. with that kind of workload, you may die of heart attack at the workplace. not worth it man.
-
-
-
Originally posted by av98m:
so?isn't it funny that a country under the constant threat of invasion has reduced its NS duration to half that of singapore's.
i last heard that they are going to further reduce it to 3-6 months, smthing like the malaysian NS. the taiwan ns will then become something for the youth to get aquainted with.
defence will be the responsibility of the regulars.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
I disagree with you on this point from two angles.
I do believe that our military does act as a deterrent, but substantiation of my point would probably constitute violation of the Official Secrets Act. Yes, I know it sounds like a cop-out, but I'm not about to buy myself a whole lot of grief on account of an Internet discussion. Suffice to say that because of geographic constraints, Singapore does not have much defensive depth and the game plan accounts for this.
As for resistance making the invader more vicious, well, Singaporeans left the fighting to the British in WW2, and to be frank I can't see any way to view the Japanese as having gone any easier on the population as non-combatants during the invasion. IMHO, that theory simply does not hold water, and to be blunt, I propose that it's better to die on one's feet than live on one's knees.
well, i agree that our military is only a deterrent. nothing more.
you can easily scare off potential aggressor with all those high tech toys. but in an actual war, you think those toys are going to keep functioning? eventually we will run out of ammo, parts etc. look at idon and m'sia. they have the raw material to manufacture ammo, but not singapore. we have to purchase all our equipment from abroad, directly or indirectly.
and to the hell with the geneva convention. to date, i haven seen any country which fully abide by the convention. hospitals and schools are still bombed.
imagine if they "accidentally" take out one or two hospital, with our sluggish efficiency in the healthcare sector, medical treatment will be horrible.
they also just need to knock out a few strategic chokepoints on the roads and railway. with so many underground tunnels twisting under our roads, it is impossible to repair a road in a matter of days. look at the nicoll highway incident. it took months to rebuild the road, even in time of peace. all it takes is a few bombing here and there to destroy the transport network. it is no longer the they-bomb-a-hole-we-fill-it-up-with-dirt kind of situation you see in less developed countries.
and then it will seriously affect troop mobilization. how fast can your troop be mobilize when the mrt and bus services are not working? how fast can you move your troops around when there are enormous craters at important crossroads, effectively cutting off traffic?
how long can you go without food and water? (our food is also imported. and i doubt that merchants would want to sail into a port directly threatened by war)
in other words, beyond its superficial capabilities, the saf is just a paper tiger.
-
-
-
Originally posted by ExtraVehicular:
In case it escaped your notice, I repeatedly state my very low view of patriotism and fighting for arbitrary causes in my post. I'm not about to go lay down my life for a drawing on a map. The choice between being a rabid patriot and a 'traitor' is a false dichotomy.
Besides, it's highly unlikely that any would-be invader would rape, burn and pillage their way through Singapore since there's too much infrastructure at stake for them to simply discard it all.
@ Gedanken: I'm of the opinion that our military isn't a much of a deterrent. Singapore is ill-equipped to wage the kind of intense urban warfare (i.e. fighting for the kitchen and getting shot at from the bedroom) that would be necessary for us to resist any invader. Who are we kidding? The moment war breaks out, we're going to face a great deal of trouble in bringing in resources to continue the fight. Also, after our inevitable capitulation, any invader would be more inclined to be vicious with the civilian populace if they had previously faced dogged opposition from our troops.
You do raise several good points in your second paragraph. Yes, military service is not without its benefits, but in my view, it still penalizes the male section of the populace quite unfairly. Instead of getting the freedom to choose, we're forced into bondage for the two years, and the supposed compensation doesn't come anywhere close to offsetting the effort demanded.
Also, gender equality and feminists can go jump off a cliff if males are still the only ones expected to defend their country.
finally someone who realised that the "modern warfare" tactics are not so modern after all.
we are living in an age where insurgent can take out a heavily armoured tank with a well position hand grenade. wth. (in iraq, they send people to manually place hand grenades under stationary tanks. knocking out multi-million-dollars high tech toys with an extremely low tech equipment.)
-
-
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
which student so garang go and ask out of syllabus question?
no lor. this really exist even in normal students.
there is sometimes conflict in the syllabus, where the contents of the H1 syllabus may be laid upon the foundations of the H2 syllabus.
and i guess the story by firepig applies to me here. took h1 econs during the first 3 months of JC. then we were told to write an essay, which somehow includes some aspect of H2 stuff which we were not taught.
in the end i drop the subject for history, which is more skill base.
-
