National Defence Duty

[Blackyv]

This idea is pretty hard to argue against - but as always I would have two conditions

1) Same salary top-up must apply as to Singaporeans - i.e - cannot lose out financially by serving (especially if there is a basic training period)

2) It should not be "make work" service, but rather something that is (or is preparation for) something genuinely useful. (reason I say this, is that if it is "make work" it is wasting my time and your money - just to make people feel "better" - which is pointless and counterproductive, if it cannot be useful then the money is better spent elsewhere)

 

agree with both conditions........ must be "trained" to defence their family and home here to have a purpose, not some wayang holiday break...

[Gukubird]

Is there still a need for national service? We have a MP whose national service is to save children.

The rest of the FT to build home, make job, revive Singapore economy, that's their national service already

That's what the ruining party will say

Edited February 14, 2013 by Gukubird

[Scion]

asking PR to serve NS is a very tricky situation

imagine SG has a conflict with a country (any country, you guess)

will you armed the PR (imagine huge quantity) with weapons?

 

 

PR can already join SPF and carry guns liao

so dun be surprised next time a beijing-accent or tagalog-accent mata attending to you when you poh mata

[Picnic06-Biante15]

Or start a "foreign legion" kind of thing?? Perhaps one day it may even be "elite" enough to attract volunteers ...

 

better don't, wait they (foreign legion) turn around and attack us ....

[Soya]

This is what a lot of people are fed up about. Our politicians can only think in terms of $$.

 

Any problem, just throw $$ at it and it will go away.

 

 

Worse part is the problem was created by them in the first place. The public did no wrong as they simply played by the rules laid out. But when things dun work out as planned, the public gets punished for the politicians mistakes by being taxed extra. :angry:

 

Instead, we shld have a "Stooopid Policy Tax" where politicians get taxed instead for every bad policy they come up wif.

 

[Picnic06-Biante15]

PR can already join SPF and carry guns liao

so dun be surprised next time a beijing-accent or tagalog-accent mata attending to you when you poh mata

Certis-CISCO and AETOS only ........

[Picnic06-Biante15]

Fear of them carrying arms, let them serve in Civil Defence (Fire Fighting, DART and Ambulance) ...

[Scion]

NS is for show lah, if others wanna makan us, just throw 1x 10megaton nuclear ICBM here whole island gone, got army for fart? Purely by numbers how can we win? Its one thing to be prepared on paper, another to fight a real war. We have zero real war experience except on paper.

 

your head

seems like you have learnt nothing in the importance of national defense

[Scion]

Certis-CISCO and AETOS only ........

 

nope... PRs can apply to become normal full-time policemen

 

i came across the SPF criteria in the career@gov

 

it states singapore citizens/PRs can apply

[Dfx16]

Something i terribly wrong with our government

1st they propose 6.9m population, now they propose pay $ to siam NS for this group of unwelcome

 

 

Lately someone i know of (PRC collegue) think he's not more then 25 yrs old finished his NUS here, got his PR and now he's applying to be a citizen here

For his case, mid 20's if he got the S'pore passport does he need to serve NS ?

[Darryn]

Lately someone i know of (PRC collegue) think he's not more then 25 yrs old finished his NUS here, got his PR and now he's applying to be a citizen here

For his case, mid 20's if he got the S'pore passport does he need to serve NS ?

 

That's a very interesting question - and it has two parts

a) Should he be expected to?

b) Will he have to?

 

[Duckduck]

your head

seems like you have learnt nothing in the importance of national defense

 

so wat u think r d chances of a conventional ground war here? Its more likely terrorist, cyber warfare or nuclear IMO.

[Chucky2007]

For NZ, (keeping it simple) - all you have to do is prove that your parents were New Zealanders - it doesn't matter how old you are when you apply.

 

(I would have to check, but I also think that you only have to prove that you parents WERE New Zealanders, even if they have since taken up different citizenship)

 

Does anyone know, let's say I have sons, and they take up NZ citizenship (as per their birthright) but still have SG Citizenship as they are born here etc - do they still need "permission" to relinquish their IC, or can they just ignore it (and risk being arrested next time they fly through Singapore) Wonder what would happen in that sort of situation?

 

I am thinking of the cases that have been reported that cannot "give-up" pink IC till after you have served NS

If your sons who are also singaporean, gives up Singapore Citizenship before age 12, and at the same time, approval to revoke SG citizenship cleared by MINDEF, then don't have to serve NS.. else past that age of 12, wanna give up citizenship also have to complete NS first.

 

But seriously I think serving NS is good.. my clients who is very very rich PR, love it that his son serve NS, he said that his son learned humility and became down to earth and able to socialize with people from all walks of life through NS

[Hiphiphoray]

OMG......typical P8P soultion.

 

The solution is always Money.

 

Is that their slogan or what???????

 

If you cant solve it, then profit from it.

 

 

[S4vtec]

Something i terribly wrong with our government

1st they propose 6.9m population, now they propose pay $ to siam NS for this group of unwelcome

 

 

Lately someone i know of (PRC collegue) think he's not more then 25 yrs old finished his NUS here, got his PR and now he's applying to be a citizen here

For his case, mid 20's if he got the S'pore passport does he need to serve NS ?

 

 

First generation citizens do not need to serve NS. Only 2nd generation males are conscripted

[Darryn]

If your sons who are also singaporean, gives up Singapore Citizenship before age 12, and at the same time, approval to revoke SG citizenship cleared by MINDEF, then don't have to serve NS.. else past that age of 12, wanna give up citizenship also have to complete NS first.

 

But seriously I think serving NS is good.. my clients who is very very rich PR, love it that his son serve NS, he said that his son learned humility and became down to earth and able to socialize with people from all walks of life through NS

 

I'm divided on the issue - I think that kids learn a lot, and that military is a great and honourable career choice.

 

I do object on principle to the compulsion part of it though, and ultimately I think it should be his decision to make.

 

I also object that he "cannot" give up citizenship - age 12 is too young to decide which country he ultimately wants to follow, and it is not a decision I should be making for him. Let's say (for the sake of the argument) that I were to take my 10 year old kid back to New Zealand, so he grows up there, attends university etc etc, and then at age 21 decides he wants to be a New Zealander - but he has to serve 2 years NS first in Singapore - does that make sense? To me, NO, but others might think differently.

[Hiphiphoray]

By right, Army Officers need 3 years to train and commission.

 

Our local ones take a mere 9 months.

 

Critical important roles carrying guns can do it, why not nurses ?

 

 

Nursing is not a very good role for NS - nurses have 2-3 years of training before they are qualified.

 

To my mind, NS should also not be a "labour replacement" tool, (i.e - replacing people that would otherwise be employed) and for this it doesn't matter whether the person serving is PR or whatever.

 

Just to add fuel to the fire though, and from the point of view of someone who is a PR so I have a rather vested interest.

 

I think that the commitment calculation is a little different for someone that comes to Singapore and gets awarded PR as a mid career professional than for someone who is 18-20 and does not yet have dependents. I know that it is something that I very much thought about when going through the process.

 

As it stands today, with a wife and two kids, I would not be in a position today to do two years of incamp training, I wouldn't want to be away from the family on such a regular basis for so long. If that meant giving up PR, then so be it - that's what it would mean. At age 18 or early 20s, when I wasn't in such a situation it would have been a little different though.

 

Does that mean that PR should be made to serve in a "9 to 5" type capacity where they go home everynight? Or is that favouratism? I don't have an answer or a solution for that.

 

[Scion]

so wat u think r d chances of a conventional ground war here? Its more likely terrorist, cyber warfare or nuclear IMO.

 

national defense has more than just physical weapons and troops

 

externally, it has deterrent effect

 

internally, it instills a sense of belonging to the people... we serve our NS because this is our land, and we want to defend and protect it

 

of cos, i admit the meaning of NS is rapidly eroding due to the massive influx of foreigners (imagine the local proportion down to only 55% in 2030), but the establishment of SAF was initially well-intended and meant to rely on ourselves

 

anyway how many countries in the world have nuclear-armed ICBMs? for what reasons will they, as superpowers, choose to nuke us?

our foreign diplomacy so far has maintained good relationships with most of other countries