GPGT - Singapore's outsized defence spending

TopGun

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
44,489
Reaction score
6,921
They have been pouring money into ST logistics, ST kinetics, ST engineering etc. but our defense industry still way behind other nations such as Japan and S.Korea... not seeing the returns...

What kind of returns are you looking at?
 

Microprocessor

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
848
Have u read our history with malaysia? You know there are times where Malaysia leader threaten to turn off the water whenever they have minor disputes with us even though we have a water agreement? Its was so bad that lky have to tell Dr M if they turn off our water , we will come take it ourself.

If we don't have a army that outweigh malaysia, do you think Malaysia leaders will be scare of Lky words?

Its also why our army always train to fight in conditions similar to malaysia landscape and not Indonesia. Our army is an offensive force cause we need to secure our water supply in Malaysia.

"Singapore was so determined to protect its water supply that former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew purportedly said he was prepared to send troops if Malaysia ever decided to cut off the water supply."

https://theaseanpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/theaseanpost.com/article/water-war-words-0?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM=#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=17237847227825&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://theaseanpost.com/article/water-war-words-0
I think it’s cheaper and also fairer to just pay abit more for the water then to spend so much more in buying fighter jets and its associated maintenance and operational costs to ensure water supplies while refusing to pay more to supplier and threatening military action …
 

LWZ

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2016
Messages
35,955
Reaction score
13,211
NSmen are expensive.

calling just one EDMWer back for 2 weeks ICT costs 10k of make-up pay expense.
 

Soracak

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
20,274
Reaction score
8,172
so many arguing for the need for self defence when the real question is "how much defence budget is enough"? As long as u keep raising the spectre of war, u can justify any budget u want at the expense of all else.

Also "how many companies u want to see destroyed by ex generals before we put a stop to this nonsense"? Are we that militarily compliant we are willing put useless men in power, or are the miw that scared of a coup?
 

kreja

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
8,320
Reaction score
2,618
Ya nsmen so overpriced. Should force them all to get ippt gold, pass range and soc to make my money's worth. All should look like how Chris Evans look in Captain America.
 

Mechafanboy

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
11,966
Reaction score
8,940
What kind of returns are you looking at?

S.Korea produces lightweight fighter jets which they export to other countries. Poland produces Self Propelled Artillery which are sold to Ukraine. German makes their own Anti Air defenses. France is also an industry heavy weight.

Singapore ???

Sink all these money into our defense sector, but what we get in return? Personally, I think most of the money are wasted on JLBs in the local defense industry.
 

Eliwood

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
7,165
Reaction score
2,940
I think it’s cheaper and also fairer to just pay abit more for the water then to spend so much more in buying fighter jets and its associated maintenance and operational costs to ensure water supplies while refusing to pay more to supplier and threatening military action …

U know if it happens once it will happen again and become a bottomless pit right?
 

TopGun

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
44,489
Reaction score
6,921
S.Korea produces lightweight fighter jets which they export to other countries. Poland produces Self Propelled Artillery which are sold to Ukraine. German makes their own Anti Air defenses. France is also an industry heavy weight.

Singapore ???

Sink all these money into our defense sector, but what we get in return? Personally, I think most of the money are wasted on JLBs in the local defense industry.

Unfortunately, we don't have the local demand nor industrial base to design and mass produce many types of weapons.

We ever sold the Bronco to UK and ships to Thailand, and hardware aside, ST does export sizable amount of ammunition.

Those countries you cited... are magnitudes bigger than SG and facing different type and intensity of threat. SK is technically at war while Poland's history speaks for itself.
 

Elnoxv

Master Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
4,262
Reaction score
6,659
Have u read our history with malaysia? You know there are times where Malaysia leader threaten to turn off the water whenever they have minor disputes with us even though we have a water agreement? Its was so bad that lky have to tell Dr M if they turn off our water , we will come take it ourself.

If we don't have a army that outweigh malaysia, do you think Malaysia leaders will be scare of Lky words?

Its also why our army always train to fight in conditions similar to malaysia landscape and not Indonesia. Our army is an offensive force cause we need to secure our water supply in Malaysia.

"Singapore was so determined to protect its water supply that former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew purportedly said he was prepared to send troops if Malaysia ever decided to cut off the water supply."

https://theaseanpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/theaseanpost.com/article/water-war-words-0?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM=#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=17237847227825&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://theaseanpost.com/article/water-war-words-0
I am well aware of the history but the situation today is quite different from the past. Back then, Singapore's dependence on Malaysia for water was a critical vulnerability and LKY's assertive stance was aimed at safeguarding the country's survival.

However, times have changed. Singapore has invested heavily in water self-sufficiency, with technologies like desalination and NEWater, reducing the reliance on external sources. Additionally, the global political environment, the development of international law, and diplomatic relations make military action over such disputes highly unlikely today.

While the historical threats were real and understandable in that context, the idea of launching an attack now over water supply is highly unlikely scenario. is it not? :ROFLMAO:

Diplomacy, international pressure, and legal mechanisms would come into play before anything escalated to that level.
 

grevq80o

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
5,970
Reaction score
3,544
Bar chart of Military expenditure per capita in 2023 (US$) showing Singapore’s outsized defence spending



https://www.ft.com/content/a8ff87ff-a99f-4b7b-9ef8-682b287b4b8b
SAF is SG ministers in training. ofcuz very expensive la. They have to pay so many candidates for minister evaluaton , while in the cabinet they pay only real ministers... You don't pay properly, they no keen.
 

Mechafanboy

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
11,966
Reaction score
8,940
Unfortunately, we don't have the local demand nor industrial base to design and mass produce many types of weapons.

We ever sold the Bronco to UK and ships to Thailand, and hardware aside, ST does export sizable amount of ammunition.

Those countries you cited... are magnitudes bigger than SG and facing different type and intensity of threat. SK is technically at war while Poland's history speaks for itself.

Singapore just don't have the expertise to compete with other nations. The Bionix and Primus were the height of our achievement and things just stagnated after that.
 

enigmastar

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
11,337
Reaction score
5,578
I think it’s cheaper and also fairer to just pay abit more for the water then to spend so much more in buying fighter jets and its associated maintenance and operational costs to ensure water supplies while refusing to pay more to supplier and threatening military action …
Its not refusing to pay more. Its paying according to a signed treaty that both party agreed to. What make you think we pay more now, they in future will not force us to pay more again. By letting them use water as a threat , they can always it as a threat to make us do what they want us to do. We will cease to function as an independent nation if we allow Malaysia to use water to threaten us, that is why we need a strong army to deter them.
 

RSKeisuke

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2000
Messages
28,765
Reaction score
2,579
i just feel that using per capita amount isn't really a fair way.
You have to see the risk factor.. neighbouring countries, geo-location
.. take NZ as an example. they are spending so little mainly due to geographical reason
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top