|Citizens of the United States protested against Vietnam War conscription|
Whenever anyone from the public tries to push for NS to be removed, you may receive a generic responses from the current authorities or MINDEF spokesperson or another current government figure.
Sometimes it is not just NS that is called to be removed, but the onerous 10-year plus ICT. This requires male men to be called back for 2 plus weeks every year throughout their most active years (20-40 years old).
These generic responses fall under the following 3 categories:
- Total Defence - Usually you get a full explanation on Total Defence, about how there are 5 aspects of defense in Singapore, and a 3G SAF, and how it is technologically advanced.
- There is no explanation at all on why conscription is necessary or why it is 24 months. There is no link between a Total Defence explanation and why you need NS!
- Answer the question why NS is needed and why 10-years ICT is needed please!
- Why is there a threat in the first place?
- Well, George Bush did convince the USA to go to war with Iraq for 8 years over a PERCEIVED threat. So, are PERCEIVED threats always real?
- The government can totally convince us to serve 3 years of NS to protect ourselves against the rise of terrorism by saying there is a BIG IMAGINED hairy threat. The perceived threat argument is not an argument!
- This sounds more like a convenient excuse for making conscription necessary.
- Why not have females serve?
- Why make it 2 years and not 6 months?
- Why do Reservist men need to return every year for 10 years? Why not make them return once every 5 years?
- Why for PR's to integrate do we make it not compulsory for PR's to serve NS too?
- Why do we still need persistent call-ups every year for 10 years. 2 weeks a year hurts a person's schedules, job performance and job hunt?
- Why disadvantage males economically, allow them to start families later, and tear the social fabric?