If Singapore has to pick a side, it will choose principles, says Chan Chun Sing

[5adisticD3vil]

good on paper nia
if US and China show hand, force you to take a side, either you with me or against me
i want see how you snake your way through

dun choose, you think you still can get on the good side of the winning team?
lol

 

[wwenze]

first to open leg during ww2......

It's either that or first to send citizens to die...

 

[xdivider]

It's either that or first to send citizens to die...

thats y i wun trust its neutrality. cos in the end its always either i die or u die and u die is always better........

 

[kreja]

World War I (1914–1918) – Neutral Countries

These nations remained officially neutral throughout the war:

Switzerland

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

Spain

Netherlands

Luxembourg (invaded and occupied by Germany but did not resist militarily)

Portugal (initially neutral, joined Allies in 1916)

Albania (collapsed into anarchy and was occupied)

Mexico

Argentina

Chile

Switzerland, notably, maintained a strict policy of armed neutrality.


World War II (1939–1945) – Neutral Countries

Several countries again declared neutrality, though some faced occupation or internal conflict:

Successfully Neutral Throughout WWII:

Switzerland – maintained strict neutrality, despite being surrounded by Axis powers.

Sweden – remained officially neutral but exported iron ore to Germany.

Ireland – stayed neutral and did not allow British military use of its territory.

Portugal – neutral but maintained diplomatic relations with both sides; part of the Iberian neutrality with Spain.

Spain – under Franco, remained non-belligerent; supported Axis in some ways but never entered the war.

Turkey – neutral for most of the war, joined the Allies in 1945 mainly as a symbolic gesture.

Vatican City – neutral, but in the heart of fascist Italy.

Liechtenstein – neutral with little involvement.

Andorra, San Marino, and Monaco – also nominally neutral microstates, but some experienced occupation or internal tension.

Neutral But Later Invaded or Pressured:

Belgium, Norway, Netherlands, Luxembourg – all declared neutrality but were invaded by Germany.

Denmark – neutral but invaded by Germany in 1940.

Key Notes:

Neutrality didn't always mean safety; some neutral countries were drawn in by invasion, internal pressure, or economic coercion.

Switzerland is the best example of consistent neutrality in both world wars.

Yes, Sweden is a member of NATO. On March 7, 2024, Sweden became the 32nd member of the alliance, officially joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

 

[klim668]

Is he trying to send a msg to Trump administration? He's got balls man.

 

[wwenze]

World War I (1914–1918) – Neutral Countries

These nations remained officially neutral throughout the war:

Switzerland

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

Spain

Netherlands

Luxembourg (invaded and occupied by Germany but did not resist militarily)

Portugal (initially neutral, joined Allies in 1916)

Albania (collapsed into anarchy and was occupied)

Mexico

Argentina

Chile

Switzerland, notably, maintained a strict policy of armed neutrality.


World War II (1939–1945) – Neutral Countries

Several countries again declared neutrality, though some faced occupation or internal conflict:

Successfully Neutral Throughout WWII:

Switzerland – maintained strict neutrality, despite being surrounded by Axis powers.

Sweden – remained officially neutral but exported iron ore to Germany.

Ireland – stayed neutral and did not allow British military use of its territory.

Portugal – neutral but maintained diplomatic relations with both sides; part of the Iberian neutrality with Spain.

Spain – under Franco, remained non-belligerent; supported Axis in some ways but never entered the war.

Turkey – neutral for most of the war, joined the Allies in 1945 mainly as a symbolic gesture.

Vatican City – neutral, but in the heart of fascist Italy.

Liechtenstein – neutral with little involvement.

Andorra, San Marino, and Monaco – also nominally neutral microstates, but some experienced occupation or internal tension.

Neutral But Later Invaded or Pressured:

Belgium, Norway, Netherlands, Luxembourg – all declared neutrality but were invaded by Germany.

Denmark – neutral but invaded by Germany in 1940.

Key Notes:

Neutrality didn't always mean safety; some neutral countries were drawn in by invasion, internal pressure, or economic coercion.

Switzerland is the best example of consistent neutrality in both world wars.

Norway is neutral, hence get invaded

Switzerland really neutral? Lol. This is 2025, with internet people aren't as ignorant anymore.

Switzerland is as neutral as Singapore isn't a laundry room.

Might as well say why all the middle east countries stayed neutral and weren't invaded.

Neutrality is one thing, relevance is another.

 

[maikumgong]

Ah chan skilled politician man, he really power

 

[Sen Sen]

 

[moonlighter_sg]

Whatever principles he is talking about, eventually still must pick a side.

 

[Ubi-Warrior]

Not what amdk want to hear! Pick your side, front or back?

Not what "either side" want to hear methinks.

Are not both pushing their "principles"

 

[Ubi-Warrior]

Whatever principles he is talking about, eventually still must pick a side.

Hard Truth!!

 

[Lemonkey]

NS taught me if you cannot fight them, join them.

 

[crunsik]

Also same as monitoring

 

[David Lai]

nobody will wanna talk abt principles.

unless its ruled by $$ & cents…

 

[AndroidComa]

he meant if singapore was given a choice to pick a side
i think when things turn ugly
you are not given a choice
there will be no principles
there is only fire power

 

[Jirachi]

It doesn’t matter what he says. If he is a PAP member, everything he says is wrong. If today CCS is from the WP, we will see very different reactions.

 

[cpuer]

LW眼光独到，陈防长 好棒棒！

 

[cpuer]

This SLR2025 might jutst be the watershed moment for DM Chan man, up a few notch for his DPM role. OYK, meh meh show LW what you have under your sleeve, mai tu liao.

 

[wwenze]

It doesn’t matter what he says. If he is a PAP member, everything he says is wrong. If today CCS is from the WP, we will see very different reactions.

If today CCS is from the WP, he wouldn't be minister, because there is no oppo minister.

What ceteris peribus hypothesis you want debunked next?

 

[_eMuu_]

Both side also are of principles that uphold an integrated global economic and security order, underpinned by law and sovereignty.

So which side do we choose?