Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
Harlequin:
Mdm Koh, let me try in my broken English.
I doubt it is because like someone mentioned, even South Korea, faced with the perpetual threat of North Korea, spends a lower portion of their GDP on defence. I think that we should look at other small nations to see how they maintain sovereignty without having to invest billions in defence.Mdm Koh:
[quote=\"limlim\"]
But how do you know that it is not already the minimum?
I guess none of us here is expert in military to judge on that.
I am very pro-NS, but I have my reservations about how the money is being spent. Hopefully the ministries can be more accountable to the public. Spending that does not help our defense goals should be cut.
I am surprised that so many of us still have virtually blind faith in our defence after Mas Selamat escaped from a toilet window and could not be found for months. We have always spent a lot of defence but a crippled guy managed to get away. So don't fault me for being skeptical about the latest increase in military spending.
And anyone who doubts that a country that does not have billions of dollars at its disposal cannot win a war should read about the Vietnam War.
In short, warfare and national security is not always about spending loads of money. If it were, there would be no 9/11.
First, it depends on the GDP size of the country. lesser in percentage of GDP does not mean lesser in dollar term.
Then, like Limlim said, the size of the military/army, the smaller the pool the higher needs of advance technologies. When in needs, the sheer size of the male citizens of South Korea and China that can be mobilized is nothing SG can compare. Our surrounding nations all are with much bigger population than us, while we are waiting for our ah boys to grow into men,
Maybe now we know the alliance of SG with Brunei.
Then, the \"threat\", the spending of defense much rely on how much our \"threats\" are spending, it's relative; like what Hilary Clinton mentioned 2weeks before her retirement.
As for the accountability issue, national defense is top classified, it can never be done like an open book for audit, much of the part of the spending that civilian like us to know it's already quite open, 3Boys and a few others had posted the links here.[/quote]Let me provide some data/number to give you some perspectives:
2012 SIPRI military expenditure database
China \t$129,272,000,000 (Spending)\t2.1% (% of GDP)
Taiwan \t$8,888,000,000(spending) \t2.1% (% of GDP)
Now look at Singapore and neighbors' 2012 defence spending
Singapore \t$8,302,000,000 (spending) 3.7%(% of GDP)
Indonesia \t$5,220,000,000 (spending) 0.7% (% of GDP)\t
Philippines $1,486,000,000 (spending) 0.8% (% of GDP)\t
Malaysia \t$3,259,000,000 (spending) 2.0% (% of GDP)\t
By looking at these figures, I know we are not spending the minimum.\t
Now you tell me, is it necessary to spend so much when all our neighbors are spending so much lesser?
Please don't forget that our neighbors have much much much bigger coaster areas to defense versus a tiny red dot! -
Just relax:
I do not think looking at % in relation to GDP is accurate. For example Brunei our close neighbour spends more than 6% of its GDP on defence, a higher % than Singapore and Brunei is smaller in size. But does that mean Brunei has a larger military or more weapons etc. than Singapore or needs more protection than S. Korea?
I doubt it is because like someone mentioned, even South Korea, faced with the perpetual threat of North Korea, spends a lower portion of their GDP on defence. I think that we should look at other small nations to see how they maintain sovereignty without having to invest billions in defence.Mdm Koh:
[quote=\"limlim\"]
But how do you know that it is not already the minimum?
I guess none of us here is expert in military to judge on that.
I am very pro-NS, but I have my reservations about how the money is being spent. Hopefully the ministries can be more accountable to the public. Spending that does not help our defense goals should be cut.
I am surprised that so many of us still have virtually blind faith in our defence after Mas Selamat escaped from a toilet window and could not be found for months. We have always spent a lot of defence but a crippled guy managed to get away. So don't fault me for being skeptical about the latest increase in military spending.
And anyone who doubts that a country that does not have billions of dollars at its disposal cannot win a war should read about the Vietnam War.
In short, warfare and national security is not always about spending loads of money. If it were, there would be no 9/11.
So ask yourself the question, why would a fellow ASEAN member smaller than Singapore spend a higher % of its GDP on defence :?
I am surprised you are mentioning Mas Selamat in the same breath as defence. Mas Selamat escaped because the prison officers were careless and the security lax. The GURKHA guards were disciplined. Completely irrelevant to our defence. You cannot seriously be making a case based on a terrorist escaping from prison :yikes:
Defence today does not just involve large scale war as in Vietnam but also anti-terrorism operations, cyber-warfare operations, peace-keeping operations, mobilization and training of soldiers for protection of key installations in Singapore, all of which were never part of the original idea of a standing military force. The military of today has to deal with multiple threats, multiple scenarios, unseen enemies (terrorists, cyber warfare).
9/11 is a perfect example of lack of co-operation between U.S. agencies because their laws prevented the CIA and FBI from sharing information. There was also inter-agency rivalries over budgets. FBI was to deal with internal threats and the CIA with external threats, the U.S. military was never involved and so their defence budget is irrelevant to the 9/11 issue. The U.S. has other agencies to deal with terrorism and cyber warfare because they have large resources. For Singapore the military is expected to deal with all threats to national security with the police and other agencies playing a support role. The Total Defence doctrine identifies various aspects but the military carries the heaviest burden.[/quote]Your Brunei figure is wrong. 3.1% is the % of Brunei GDP is lesser than Singapore
-
In 2010 Brunei with a population of 405,000 had 3.2% of GDP, Singapore with a population 10x Brunei had 3.7% in 2010. That is why % of GDP is inaccurate. A small country like Brunei living in the same part of the world spends proportionately more than Singapore. There must be a reason. Deterrence.
-
3Boys:
Isn't it obvious that you are indeed arguing for the sake of arguing. You argued so much and now you agree with me that GST is not necessary for the majority to benefit!!!! This is exactly why people are NOT happy with GST as it does incur high cost of living for majority and most majority didn't get the benefit of having good growth of GDP. Now, you know why people are NOT happy! In fact, GST/low income tax implementation only benefits the very rich and the very rich obtained all the benefits of good GDP growth as well as low income tax!Janette, you clearly do not read my posts, your last question on GST
, my viewpoint is there already, it's not necessary for the majority to benefit, if by benefit you mean that they should be getting back more in rebates than they pay in taxes. That completely defeats the purpose of raising taxes. One of the objectives in introducing/raising GST was to rebalance the proportion of taxes drawn from income and consumption, this is clearly stated, and in many countries the top income tax rate sand GST rate are fairly comparable, whereas in Singapore it's still tilted in favor of income tax by the ratio of nearly 3:1.
You might want to consider who you are calling argumentative or blinkered. It's worth taking a look in the mirror(s).
I do not agree with your statement \"many countries the top income tax rate sand GST rate are fairly comparable, whereas in Singapore it's still tilted in favor of income tax by the ratio of nearly 3:1\". Why? This is because the VAT/GST are exempted for basic food, basic necessities and health care and medicine and their GST/VAT in reality is much lower. So, you can't compare by just using their face value of VAT/GST. -
Just relax:
In 2010 Brunei with a population of 405,000 had 3.2% of GDP, Singapore with a population 10x Brunei had 3.7% in 2010. That is why % of GDP is inaccurate. A small country like Brunei living in the same part of the world spends proportionately more than Singapore. There must be a reason. Deterrence.
I gave you 2012 data and you die die still want to use 2010 data! LOL
OK, it's ok since the number does not change much.
Isn't Taiwan's population about 5X Singapore's, 0.015% China's and yet they are in the war threat zone all the time but they had only 2.1% GDP which is same as China's % of GDP. Singapore is not even close to any of the same situation as Taiwan but spend 3.6% in 2012. Why le? Our so called neighbors (by 3Boys's definition) spend lesser than Singapore and even little amount as compared to their population! -
So the escape of Mas Selamat is the fault of the Gurkhas and not a problem of national security? Mindef is Mindef and the terrorist escape is not its problem?!? Wow.
-
Mdm Koh:
So the escape of Mas Selamat is the fault of the Gurkhas and not a problem of national security? Mindef is Mindef and the terrorist escape is not its problem?!? Wow.
not even want to mention another embarassing incident when one of our warship, with its expensive radar system, collided with a cargo ship on South China sea costing the lives of a few crew members. This all happened during peace time...and with a cargo ship only, is not even a hostile opponents.
The conlcusion: whatever lapses manifesting in the ground level reflects very much on the incompetence at the upper level. As the chinese saying goes, \"as the upper pillars aren't straight, so the lower pillars become bend.\". -
JannettLee:
Say, if you got $100 cash.. you buy a $5 piggy bank and keep it.
By looking at these figures, I know we are not spending the minimum.\t
Now you tell me, is it necessary to spend so much when all our neighbors are spending so much lesser?
Please don't forget that our neighbors have much much much bigger coaster areas to defense versus a tiny red dot!
If, you got $10,000 cash, will you keep in the same $5 piggy bank or invest in $500 safe?
The more to safe guard, the more to invest in safeguarding it.. nothing wrong mah.
Next, they got much bigger land.. whereas this tiny dot is ALL we have.. all the more we must safe guard it. There is no where to run to unlike those bigger countries can still fight on their land.
Hence, SG must invest in a lot of advanced early warning systems such that any battle will be fought far away as much as possible once a threat is detected. -
limlim:
I had given Taiwan versus China scenario (as a reference for Singapore verus its neigbors) and also given the analysis of Motorola HP versus i-phone 4. Why need to spend money on new version of iphone/Samsung when all our neighbors are having Motorola HP (some even have old version of big da ge da HP, looked at what they are spending and buying)? Isn't adequate and sufficient advanced system for your to deter any battle?
Say, if you got $100 cash.. you buy a $5 piggy bank and keep it.JannettLee:
By looking at these figures, I know we are not spending the minimum.\t
Now you tell me, is it necessary to spend so much when all our neighbors are spending so much lesser?
Please don't forget that our neighbors have much much much bigger coaster areas to defense versus a tiny red dot!
If, you got $10,000 cash, will you keep in the same $5 piggy bank or invest in $500 safe?
The more to safe guard, the more to invest in safeguarding it.. nothing wrong mah.
Next, they got much bigger land.. whereas this tiny dot is ALL we have.. all the more we must safe guard it. There is no where to run to unlike those bigger countries can still fight on their land.
Hence, SG must invest in a lot of advanced early warning systems such that any battle will be fought far away as much as possible once a threat is detected.
If you want to flight with those BIG brothers, then you can forget about it. No amount of defence budget (not even 100% GDP) is sufficient for you because they can really destroy everything that you have without even need to send out any soldier if you really piss them off ! That's why Taiwan/South Korea are smart to spend minimum and work with strong alliance/diplomacy. Work on the diplomacy part la rather than spend those unnecessary money.
Reserve those money for our health cares in view of the aging population that is going to hit us hard. -
Are you saying Taiwan and South korea spend less than Singapore in absolute terms?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics
