Monday, November 02, 2009

Loyalty and National Service

There are many "loyal" Singaporeans who support the need for National Service. I do not know if they have sons that are about to enter full time NS and have to compete with new citizens for jobs later.

I am also loyal to Singapore and support National Service. But I like it to be done in a manner that is fair to our male citizens. Read my letter to the Straits Times that was not published.

I also wish to ask our "loyal" Singaporeans to read this article by Seah Cheang Nee.


Anonymous said...

Despite I am an officer during my army days, I am against of NS, regardless of whether PR need to serve or not.
But I learn a lot of things, make a lot of friends and transformed from a boy to a man during the 2.5 yrs
My take is that 2 yrs is still too long. Why not make it 1 yr?

Vincent Sear said...

You're an officer and you should know. Three months BMT plus nine months OCS is already one year.

I'm against PRs serving NS in SAF or even Police. I don't trust PRs to bear arms for and in Singapore. They're fundamentally foreigners.

I'm also against the idea of making new citizens who're of younger ages serve NS. Nobody of sane and sound mind and with the means to be internationally mobile would take up citizenship then.

However, I'm also against the policy of guaranteeing one generation of children born to new citizens free of NS obligation. Born in Singapore as citizen, should bear the responsibility of protecting Singapore.

Anonymous said...

I have served NS some 10 years back as a corporal, i think NS boys are nothing more than than foreign labor, aka "Ban Gar Lah"

While i have learnt much from NS, the opportunity costs is very high. Singaporean males lose out to the females in their studies and career in later part of their lives

I am now a father and have a son. Yes i hope that the NS system changes. I do not wish my son to go through the same. i feel if NS were to make compulsory, Singaporean females and new citizens should also take part.


Anonymous said...

Those who go OCS should serve 2 yrs since NSF officers enjoy more privileges and higher "pay", it is a price to pay for being an officer. Anyway old man had said before - there is no free lunch in S'pore. Other ranks should only serve 1.5 yrs max.

Same applies to ICTs, NSmen officers to serve 13 yrs cycle while other ranks only serve 10 yrs cycle max.

IPPT standards for NSF and NSmen officers should be higher than other ranks since officers suppose to "lead and excel by example".

Put aside cheap labours, what about injury or even death during NS training?

M'sian males are still boys since they no need to serve NS?

Anonymous said...

All Officer should be regulars.
That should solved the problem.

Vincent Sear said...

I think that human fitness is human fitness regardless of rank. Anyway, officers and commandoes do SOC with FBO, while other ranks do it with SBO. There's a difference in requirement of fitness already.

Officers don't have a 13-year cycle and 40-year-old liability limit. They're liable till 50 years old. IPPT is fitness measure good for up to age 35 only. Officers beyond that age are usually in command duties, requiring more brains than brawns.

One thing I'd like to see changed is the enlistment and deferment of officer cadets. They should be allowed to proceed to university studies after 3-month BMT, then return to OCS upon graduation. They'd be more educated and matured befitting of an army officer, instead of some silly JC kids cartoon 19-year-old officers we've been seeing for decades.

wjsim said...

Correct me if I'm wrong. In the earlier days, is it true that people who have a place in Uni will study first before completing their NS? It is because recently just too many people are going to Uni hence they have to limit deferment to PSC scholars and doctors.

To make NS liable males more attractive to future employers is to simply give the employers tax cuts or rebates for hiring Singaporean males. Honestly, if I'm the boss, it only makes sense to hire PRs and foreigners who will not disrupt their work to serve NS. Hard to work out if there's no carrot.

Vincent Sear said...

I heard that the deferment system in the early days wasn't very systemised and there were case-by-case variations, posting bonds etc. However, after the Tan Wah Piao case, there're strictly no more deferments except for scholars and doctors.

Anonymous said...

I never seen my officers doing SOC with FBO, may be they did it in their OCS only?

Junior officers (Cpt and below) who are not senior appointment holders (OC and below) only serve 10 yrs cycle and finished their ICTs before age 40.

If normal IPPT (all 5 stations) still a must for NSmen till age 39, there is no reason to give concessions to officers above age 35 for lower or equal IPPT standards, they should maintain higher IPPT standards than their men.

If officers don't have the brawn, he will go down first on a battlefield before he can put his brain in good use. How do officers lead if they don't have better fitness than their men?

Fitness is the basic requirement for a soldier, if not better ask SAF to scrap IPPT altogether.

Anonymous said...

Officers or non-officers, their opportunity costs are just as high

I think the issue of Singaporean females and the new citizens not serving NS disturbs me somewhat

And yes, if foreign workers are injured or killed, they are compensated by the Work Injury Compensation Act. For NS boys and NS men, i am not sure what governing act do they seek protection under? I heard for non-officers who died, at burial, they promote you to officer. Who cares?


Anonymous said...

I supported NS.However,it can reduce to 1 year for male and 0.75 year for female.For new citizen is to serve civil defense.

Blog Archive