Blog 3: Is NS necessary?

National service is where Singaporean or permanent resident (PR) males aged 18 years are conscripted and called up to join the army and serve national service for 2 years or so. After that these men will have to go for reservist training for about 13 years to ensure that they stay up to date with the army and do not lose any skills they have learnt.

Is national service really needed? Singapore is one of the top 20 richest countries in Asia so why do need a citizen army? Why can’t we just pay a mercenary army to protect and defend our country? Here is what I feel about national service.

National service is referred to by many as the process where boys become men. This is true in certain aspects. In national service, men aged 18 from all walks of life will serve national service together, men of different races, different backgrounds and different ways of life. In national service, these men will share the same experiences, go to the same field camps, march in the hot sun together, get punished together and do everything together. In this case, it is the shared experience that counts. These men will learn to live together, tolerate each other and learn to get along. These men bond are instilled a sense of nationalistic pride and this is a critical component in nation building and creating a common identity.

As we all know, Singapore is a small country. The trouble with abolishing national service is that there would not be enough people in the regular army to defend the nation. Some of you may argue, since Singapore is so rich, why not go employ a mercenary army to defend the nation? Well, it also has its own problems. For example, mercenary armies are paid to provide service to the country. However, since they are easily swayed by money, they can be offered an even higher amount and then Singapore would be in trouble. National service would also mean that less would be spent for the government as through the allowance system, there are more monetary funds available for spending on more advanced and up to date military technologies. This would make the army more efficient in defending our country.

National service celebrated its 40^th anniversary last year. This means that all the previous batches are able to be deployed as troops in case of any threat Singapore receives. This greatly increases our man power, making our army both efficient and effective.

In conclusion, I feel that national service is good and it should be carried on. In recent years, there have been many people who have complained about national service, many more people deferring national service. I also feel that national service is time consuming, and we start work or pursue our studies 2 years later than the rest. But this is your country you are talking about. Where did most of you grow up in? Who provided the citizen benefits for you? Where were you born and where did you grow up? This is our country. Why can’t we just sacrifice some of our time to defend our country? Where has our sense of patriotism gone? What happened to our values? These are questions you should think about before going against national service. After all, Singapore is a place we call home and it will always be worth defending.

blog 3 reading

Rejected: Teen's 5 appeals to defer NS

Section:	Home
By:	ESTHER TAN
Publication:	The Straits Times 11/08/2008
Page:	B3
No. of words:	678

Mindef turns down SIM student's pleas to sit for first-year exams first



SINGAPORE Institute of Management (SIM) student Samuel Tan Chee Hong will not get to sit for his first-year examinations at the end of this year.

By then, the youth, who turned 18 last month, will have been called up to begin his national service (NS).

Samuel joined the private educational organisation in the middle of last year, finished a six-month foundation programme and started his course in computer science at the start of this year.

But, last month, he received a letter from the Defence Ministry telling him to report for NS next month.

He has made five failed appeals to Mindef asking for a deferment. At first, he pleaded for a deferment until the end of his three-year bachelor's degree.

When that was turned down, he made four further appeals seeking a three- month deferment to allow him to at least complete the first year of his course.

All have been rejected, even with support from Aljunied GRC MPs Cynthia Phua and Lim Hwee Hua.

Mindef's replies to him all carried the same reason: Male Singaporeans aged 18 and due to enlist will be granted a full deferment from NS only to pursue educational qualifications up to 'A' levels, a polytechnic diploma or equivalent qualifications such as those from the Institute of Technical Education.

NS deferment to pursue a university degree has not been allowed since late 2005, said Mindef spokesman Darius Lim.

At the Budget debate in 2006, Second Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen explained that, with more educational opportunities available now, pre-enlisted males can start their courses at any time of the year. This means many more Singaporeans are able to start university or other courses locally before they reach 18.

Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean also reiterated Mindef's stance in Parliament last month. "Allowing such students deferment would be unfair to the vast majority of their peers studying in junior colleges, polytechnics and other institutions who do not have the same opportunity to be deferred for their university studies."

Samuel's father, Mr Roger Tan, said his youngest of three sons had started the SIM course knowing there was a chance he would not get to defer. "But we didn't want to waste time waiting for him to hit 18 before he started NS. It was a risk we had to take," said the IT manager.

He could have enlisted earlier, as teens aged 161/2 can apply for early enlistment. But his father did not want him to do that: "Boys that age are too young, immature and slow to learn. The risk is too high and they will be more prone to accidents."

An SIM spokesman said the credits Samuel obtained in his first three quarters of the year will still be valid when he finishes his NS in two years' time.

Since the start of the year, five other SIM students have had to stop their studies to enlist for NS. So far, all returning students have not had to pick up new modules to replace the old ones, the spokesman said.

When contacted, a Mindef spokesman said it considers two main factors when facing a deferment request.

One is the need to preserve equity in terms of educational attainment before NS. The second is the need to enlist NS-liable males for rigorous military training "while they are young and fit".

Mr Tan, 54, said his son was asking for a three-month delay and would be only half a year older upon actual enlistment.

"Even with a full deferment, he would only be 20 years old upon the completion of his degree course. He'll still be young and fit then," he said.

"democracy brings out stability"

Let me begin by establishing what democracy and stability refer to. Democracy refers to a system of government where political sovereignty is retained by the people and exercised directly by citizens or through their elected representatives or a government for the people, by the people. The ideas of ‘majority wins’ and ‘power to the people’ are the main ideas that are upheld in democracy. I feel that democracy creates stability in the society as the people get to choose what they want for themselves.

What does stability refer to? It refers to a government bringing the country to “equilibrium”, where there is economic, social and political stability. Stability generally comes about when there is little or minimal problems in terms of social, economic and political state.

Democracy provides people with freedom, the liberty to choose or do what they want. This is especially important in achieving stability. In terms of economic stability, people must have the right to choose who they want to trade with and people who come to trade can make their own choices and not be bound by any trading laws. To create social stability, there must not be any conflicting ideologies with the government. Democracy does create social stability by allowing the people decide what they want by asking for change through their political representatives.

Democracy is also able to create political stability. The people are allowed to express their views freely through their votes by choosing what they want for their society, whether it be amendments made to policies or during the country’s general elections, thus, bringing out political stability. However, for democracy to work, there must be certain criteria. The people would have to be literate or have a good understanding and acceptance of democracy. If the society is not like this, the minority would be unhappy with the results of the elections and cause trouble.

Also, having full democracy would be “tedious” for the simple reason that for every change that the government makes to any policy, they would have to make a vote and the people would have to decide, making it a time and resource consuming style of governance. Going back to the must have criteria, since democracy brings out economic, social and political stability, people would have access to education this would increase the literacy level of the people. This increased literacy level would mean that the people would easily gain acceptance of democracy. So, this “criteria” issue would be solved.

In conclusion, I feel that democracy creates stability in a country as the people would be able to choose what they want to satisfy them, thus creating a country that has little problems in terms of social, economic and political state.

“I don’t care”

Article taken from: http://newslink.asiaone.com/user/OrderArticleRequest.action?order=&_sourcePage=%2FWEB-INF%2Fjsp%2Fuser%2Fsearch_type_result.jsp&month=01&year=2008&date=14&docLanguage=en&documentId=nica_ST_2008_7861670

The article I found is about a survey done by the Straits Times to see how many teens actually know anything about the US presidential race. Shockingly, about two-thirds of the students interviewed did not know anything about the US presidential race as they simply “did not care”. Statistically, Of those aged 15 to 17, three got Obama's gender wrong, 14 tagged John Edwards to the wrong party, and four think Hillary and Bill Clinton are siblings.

It seems that teenagers of the 21^st century are beginning to adopt this “I don’t care” attitude. There is also a prejudice for those who are both well informed (and also most of the time getting reasonably good grades) and they are called “muggers”. This attitude can be seen from one of the everyday things that we do: crossing the road. When my mum “chauffeurs” me from place to place, we often encounter teenagers in school uniform crossing the road without looking out for traffic. This adoption is bad, and it is spreading.

Why and how is this happening? These days, teenagers are having a more “free” lifestyle, as their parents give them a lot of freedom to do whatever they want. This would obviously spoil them as they would only care about themselves, leading them to not caring about anything that does not concern them. This type of attitude would be seen as “cool” and friends would then also adopt this attitude leading to a passing on of the “I don’t care disease”.

Well, personally I feel that this should not be the case in our modern society where information is so easily obtainable and people are more sensitive towards how others treat them. I also feel that this attitude that teens are adopting is sometimes quite selfish as this would lead to only being concern with things that concern themselves. For example, if your mother asks you to clean your room up so she can mop the floor, a typical teenager would not care as he/ she would think that his/ her mother cleaning the room does not concern him/ her. Therefore, one can conclude that this attitude brings out unhappiness and selfishness. This could also lead to the downfall of the person in life, where the teenager does not care about his studies and fails his examinations. Instead, we should be more concern about others needs, putting others before self, thinking if our actions would affect others and also love yourself and always give it your best.

Thinking about the statistics revealed in the newspaper, I just simply cannot imagine what the next generations of leaders would be like if all of them have the “I don’t care” attitude and if they do not bother to change.