We won't take migrants posing as refugees': May tells the UN Britain has a right to control borders

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

We contributed alot to hong Kongsuccess(even more than Singapore) as well(being a crown colony) until we left in 1997 and ceded the country back to China.

Moreover, We did try to keep Singapore safe against the Japanese. You are wrong we valued Singapore alot more than any of our Asian colonies(bar India) back then. Don't forget that Singapore served as priced colony and it was our most important military base in South-East Asia and was the keystone of our imperial interwar defence planning for South East Asia as well as the South West Pacific. Japanese took Singapore due to the failure of our commanders strategy(especially Lieutenant-General Arthur Ernest Percival, who was the one who messed things up and signed the surrender), lack of military resources we allocated to the fighting in Malaya prior to the Japanese invading Singapore(ade it easier for them) amd most of all the vast majority of our resources were geared towards fighting the powerful Nazi Germany(and it's Italian ally) all over Europe, N.Africa, Mediterranean, artic, and Atlantic Ocean. In short ,we were overstretched to our limits. All this combined made the Singapore campaign a catastrophic disaster for Great Britain and to this day it still remains the largest surrender of British-led forces in our entire long war history(over 80,000 troops surrendering). A total embarrassment.

So its not like we didn't want to defend Singapore or something. We just didn't allocate enough resources to defend it and most of our generals underestimated the Japanese and their ability to fight jungle warfare. They paid a huge price for this

Anyway, Britain's only claimable credit in helping singapore is the English language n parliamentary system of governance(besides choosing its location as a colony)

Lee kuan yew is the 1 that made Singapore famous n become a global hub n all these came only after independance.

Btw, i asked my collegue what he thought of UK's contribution to Singapire was n unsurprisingly, his answer was 1 of what i thought- the parliament.

Anyway b ti the topic at hand.

U can read an article on singapore' reffugee policy if u r interested- google 'you have to grow calluses in your heart, or you will just bleed to death'(im using my cellphone now n its a pain in the *** to post links). Its an article detailing how lee kuan yew dealt with the refugee crisis in the during the Vietnam war era and why modern Singapore today is 100% refugee-free.

Doors r fully shut to refugees, but its widely opened n even encouraged for 'high quality' immigrants n by our governments definition of 'high-quality'- it would be your income per annum, because how much u earn determines the amount of contribution u would be able to make to Singapore.

Hence, i got tickled when ppl mention that we have an 'immigration' problem when its all these temporary foreign work permit holders that are causing the unhapiness

 

[waz]

The


The source you linked doesnt match your arguement. We have a huge problem with foreign work permit holders, not migrants.

It matches well, we're talking about population explosion. Could you please tell me from figures how many of these people have gone home, as you said they are now allowed to stay.

However, she did nothing else of significance to propel Singapore onto the world stage. By abandoning Singapore when the Japanese came n took over, Britain's intention of merely using this 'crown colony' for trade n not as a core commitment became evident. Britain even atually tried to get back Singapore after the war was over.Thats also when the independance movement started. All these are taught in our history textbook.

Singapore's global status only began to take root under lee kuan yew after the British left and after the failed merger with Malaysia.

You were not "abandoned", the entire force had been captured and surrendered, many of these men died fighting in the defence of Singapore, many more in captivity at the hands of Imperial army. How can you belittle them?
It's not our fault the Japanese surrendered before Operation Tiderace, though files show that the commanders fully expected the Japanese to fight till the end. The British army was quire busy elsewhere you know the small business of Burma, the war in Europe and conflict in North Africa.
My entire elder generation fought in Burma.

 

[T-123456]

Many other countries invaded and ruled other territories from Greek empire, to Egypt, to Ottoman, to Russian empire etc. Guess they should also have their "what comes around goes around" or whatever that even means?

Three million not enough?

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

It matches well,

Far from it. Read post 41 again. Otherwise, this comment is a form of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

we're talking about population explosion.

define 'population explosion' when u were clearly talking about immigration

Could you please tell me from figures how many of these people have gone home, as you said they are now allowed to stay.

1)I dun work for Immigration and I have not mentioned anything on this particular topic(on how many of these foreign workers have gone home). Thus, you would have to find out for yourself.

2)The 2nd half of this statement is either a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man or is intentionally misleading. You sound like these foreign workers are now Singaporeans.

You were not "abandoned", the entire force had been captured and surrendered, many of these men died fighting in the defence of Singapore, many more in captivity at the hands of Imperial army. How can you belittle them?
It's not our fault the Japanese surrendered before Operation Tiderace, though files show that the commanders fully expected the Japanese to fight till the end. The British army was quire busy elsewhere you know the small business of Burma, the war in Europe and conflict in North Africa.
My entire elder generation fought in Burma.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Singapore

Hence, thanks for reinforcing my statements, because they didnt and 80000 troops surrendered due to a Japanese general's empty threat. Hence, it's the largest capitulation in British military history.

"The British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, called the ignominious fall of Singapore to the Japanese the "worst disaster" and "largest capitulation" in British military history.[4]"


Like I said, all these were clearly written in our secondary school history textbook. Thus, my knowledge is on Singapore only.

Seriously, u are trying to teach Singaporean history and Singaporean demographics situation to a Singaporean?

Anyway, Britain's only claimable credit in helping singapore is the English language n parliamentary system of governance(besides choosing its location as a colony)

Lee kuan yew is the 1 that made Singapore famous n become a global hub n all these came only after independance.

Btw, i asked my collegue what he thought of UK's contribution to Singapire was n unsurprisingly, his answer was 1 of what i thought- the parliament.

Anyway b ti the topic at hand.

U can read an article on singapore' reffugee policy if u r interested- google 'you have to grow calluses in your heart, or you will just bleed to death'(im using my cellphone now n its a pain in the *** to post links). Its an article detailing how lee kuan yew dealt with the refugee crisis in the during the Vietnam war era and why modern Singapore today is 100% refugee-free.

Doors r fully shut to refugees, but its widely opened n even encouraged for 'high quality' immigrants n by our governments definition of 'high-quality'- it would be your income per annum, because how much u earn determines the amount of contribution u would be able to make to Singapore.

Hence, i got tickled when ppl mention that we have an 'immigration' problem when its all these temporary foreign work permit holders that are causing the unhapiness

ok i jsut go back home(n thus, back to my PC). Here's the link:

http://mothership.sg/2015/05/spores...een-the-same-we-cant-afford-having-them-here/




S’pore’s long-standing position on refugees has always been the same: We can’t afford having them here

For a deeper understanding of Singapore’s long-standing position when it comes to refugees, refer to this piece, “Singapore Slams Door To Refugees” from The New York Times, November 13, 1978:

“You’ve got to grow calluses on your heart or you just bleed to death,” said Lee Kuan Yew, allowing a long pause before he spoke.

Lee, the prime minister was explaining Singapore’s position on permitting Vietnamese refugees to come ashore. It consists of driving back out to sea those who arrive in the small fishing boats in which they escaped from their country and those rescued at sea by passing ships; it allows ashore only people who are guaranteed to be accepted by another country within 90 days.

Last month Singapore instituted another restriction, in which the number of those allowed ashore under guarantee of speedy departure will be limited to 1,000 at any given time. In addition, countries that exceed the 90-day deadline will be penalized by even sharper restrictions. More than 800 refugees are currently awaiting departure from Singapore.


Singapore, which with more than two million people has one of the highest population densities in the world, accepts no refugees for permanent asylum. The same attitude prevails throughout Asia, though perhaps with less justification. But Singapore, unlike countries such as Malaysia and Thailand, rejects even the principle of granting temporary shelter to “boat people” who drift in from the sea. Its patrol craft drive off all such refugees.

“We don’t want to create a Palestinian situation,” said Foreign Minister Sinnathamby Rajaratnam in a a separate interview. “We cannot afford a population of embittered, inchoate refugees.”

Furthermore, letting the Vietnamese boat people ashore in the 1970s was conditional on the fact that they could also stay temporarily for three months:

Lee said that Singapore was prepared to be flexible on the 1,000-refugee ceiling as well as on the 90-day limit if third countries were ready to guarantee that refugees would be accepted for immigration. “We have said that we will take as many people as there are places for them to go,” he reiterated.

“They can be processed here, if that’s the word they use, for medical and other immigration reasons, but I just can’t accept them,” he continued. “It’s not possible.”

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had said on May 15, 2015, that Singapore will not be accepting refugees or people seeking political asylum.

According to a MHA spokesperson:

“As a small country with limited land, Singapore is not in a position to accept any persons seeking political asylum or refugee status, regardless of their ethnicity or place of origin.”

That’s pretty much the stance all along — albeit not in as harsh a tone as the late Prime Minister’s.

 

[waz]

Far from it. Read post 41 again. Otherwise, this comment is a form of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

The issue is about how many people have come to Singapore and the clear angst it has caused amongst your population.

define 'population explosion' when u were clearly talking about immigration

Population explosion through through immigration, via foreign workers.

1)I dun work for Immigration and I have not mentioned anything on this particular topic(on how many of these foreign workers have gone home). Thus, you would have to find out for yourself.

2)The 2nd half of this statement is either a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man or is intentionally misleading. You sound like these foreign workers are now Singaporeans.

Ok that's fine, so how can you write that these people haven't settled, that the problem is short-term, when you can't even answer how many have gone back home, in reference to the numbers given in the articles. I never said they were Singaporeans, I asked the simple question how many have gone home.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Singapore

Hence, thanks for reinforcing my statements, because they didnt and 80000 troops surrendered due to a Japanese general's empty threat. Hence, it's the largest capitulation in British military history.

"The British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, called the ignominious fall of Singapore to the Japanese the "worst disaster" and "largest capitulation" in British military history.[4]"


Like I said, all these were clearly written in our secondary school history textbook. Thus, my knowledge is on Singapore only.

Seriously, u are trying to teach Singaporean history and Singaporean demographics situation to a Singaporean?

Reinforcing what? You clearly said that you were abandoned, and I showed you were not and now you're claiming I support your statements with my posts. The empty threat from the Japanese general!
Do you realise that 50,000 Commonwealth troops died in the defensive operation in Malaya, before the order to retreat to Singapore was signalled? Brave men, injured and unable to move were massacred by the Japanese e.g. Parit Sulong Massacre. The Japanese Imperial army wasn't in the habit of issuing "empty threats".
If this is what you've been taught in your text books, I truly pity this sad state of affairs, as you seem to hold men who laid down their lives in defence of your land in contempt.
I'll remember the next time I meet the many Singaporean university students, who still come here in their droves to study in London, and make a point of it to tell them about the sacrifices of Commonwealth soldiers.

@mike2000 is back

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

The issue is about how many people have come to Singapore and the clear angst it has caused amongst your population.

wow im flabbergasted . U have to reread post 41 again and u're going to need a dictionary(no sarcasm here)

Population explosion through through immigration, via foreign workers.

same thing- reread post 41 with a dictionary on hand. if u understood it, then again, u r using a form of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman by carefully adding 'via foreign workers' at the back this time.

Ok that's fine, so how can you write that these people haven't settled, that the problem is short-term, when you can't even answer how many have gone back home, in reference to the numbers given in the articles. I never said they were Singaporeans, I asked the simple question how many have gone home.

Seriously re read post 41- it refutes every single point that u r trying to bring across. Yes u didnt say indeed, becos if understood post 41, u wouldn't even had asked this question.

Reinforcing what? You clearly said that you were abandoned, and I showed you were not and now you're claiming I support your statements with my posts. The empty threat from the Japanese general!
Do you realise that 50,000 Commonwealth troops died in the defensive operation in Malaya, before the order to retreat to Singapore was signalled? Brave men, injured and unable to move were massacred by the Japanese e.g. Parit Sulong Massacre. The Japanese Imperial army wasn't in the habit of issuing "empty threats".
If this is what you've been taught in your text books, I truly pity you, as you seem to hold men who laid down their lives in defence of your land in contempt.

I'll remember the next time I meet the many Singaporean university students, who still come here in their droves to study in London, and make a point of it to tell them about the sacrifices of Commonwealth soldiers.

This was another piece of luck for Yamashita, who was well aware that his attack on Singapore was an audacious bluff. He had 30,000 men, and knew that he was outnumbered by about three to one. His army would never survive a long, drawn-out campaign—he did not have either the men or the supplies for a prolonged effort. He was chronically short of gasoline for his tanks and ammunition for his guns. If the British put up a determined resistance, he would run out of both. His senior supply officer warned him that his attack would probably fail.

Nevertheless, Yamashita would not listen; he had an idea of his own. He ordered his artillery to shell the enemy as though his gunners had an endless supply of ammunition. He wanted General Percival to think that the Japanese troops were being reinforced, and that new supplies of men and ammunition had been sent.

The ruse worked. Percival thought that the Japanese barrage was as fierce as anything he had experienced on the Western Front between 1914 and 1918. He had limited his own gunners to 20 rounds per day, and reached the conclusion that Yamashita must have an enormous supply of shells to put up such a bombardment. Actually, Yamashita’s supply of artillery ammunition was as low as Percival’s.

Singapore City also came under attack from Japanese bombers. Civilians were suffering higher casualties than soldiers in the field. Japanese antipersonnel bombs slaughtered city residents—eyewitnesses reported the drains on each side of the narrow city streets flowed with blood. “The roar and crash of cannonade and bursting bombs which are shaking my typewriter and my hands which are wet with the perspiration of fright,” wrote American reporter Yates McDaniel, “told me without the need of official communiqué that the war which started nine weeks ago 400 miles away is now on the outskirts of this shaken bastion of empire.”

Percival likewise did not need an official communiqué to assess his situation. By February 14, Yamashita had ferried his tanks across the strait and had also built a pontoon bridge linking Johore with Singapore Island. Percival began to consider whether he should continue fighting or surrender. He was low on food, supplies, and ammunition, and was not sure how long he could hold on against the attacking Japanese and their seemingly limitless supply of everything he was lacking.

Percival did not know it, but Yamashita was experiencing the same problem. Some of his officers advised him to fall back to the mainland, resupply, and attack again with fresh supplies of men and ammunition had been sent.

The ruse worked. Percival thought that the Japanese barrage was as fierce as anything he had experienced on the Western Front between 1914 and 1918. He had limited his own gunners to 20 rounds per day, and reached the conclusion that Yamashita must have an enormous supply of shells to put up such a bombardment. Actually, Yamashita’s supply of artillery ammunition was as low as Percival’s.

Singapore City also came under attack from Japanese bombers. Civilians were suffering higher casualties than soldiers in the field. Japanese antipersonnel bombs slaughtered city residents—eyewitnesses reported the drains on each side of the narrow city streets flowed with blood. “The roar and crash of cannonade and bursting bombs which are shaking my typewriter and my hands which are wet with the perspiration of fright,” wrote American reporter Yates McDaniel, “told me without the need of official communiqué that the war which started nine weeks ago 400 miles away is now on the outskirts of this shaken bastion of empire.”

Percival likewise did not need an official communiqué to assess his situation. By February 14, Yamashita had ferried his tanks across the strait and had also built a pontoon bridge linking Johore with Singapore Island. Percival began to consider whether he should continue fighting or surrender. He was low on food, supplies, and ammunition, and was not sure how long he could hold on against the attacking Japanese and their seemingly limitless supply of everything he was lacking.

Percival did not know it, but Yamashita was experiencing the same problem. Some of his officers advised him to fall back to the mainland, resupply, and attack again with fresh supplies of men and ammunition. Retreating, however, would have meant loss of face. Yamashita pounded on the table and screamed that withdrawing was out of the question. The artillery barrage and the push to the south would continue. He did not want to give the British a chance to recover, and hoped they would not discover how short his supplies were.

Percival was equally aware of how dispirited his army had become and of his opponent’s apparent overwhelming confidence and fighting spirit. To make matters worse, Singapore’s water supply had almost been destroyed by the bombing, and the city faced an epidemic because of the unburied dead that lay in the streets.

On the morning of February 15, Percival received a message from General Wavell, who was in Java. The communiqué urged Percival to continue fighting, but Wavell also said, “When you are finally satisfied that this is no longer possible, I give you discretion to cease resistance.” He went on to advise Percival, “Before doing so, all arms, equipment and transport of value to the enemy must, of course, be rendered useless.”

Percival had already reached the conclusion that further resistance was futile, and sent three of his officers to Japanese headquarters to make arrangements for a surrender. Lieutenant Colonel Ichiji Sugita, who served as Yamashita’s intelligence officer and was fluent in English, met the officers and, after a brief exchange, sent a message back to his headquarters that the British wanted to give up. Yamashita replied that he accepted the surrender and would meet with the British commander at 1800 hours.

Actually, Yamashita was not sure if Percival really wanted to concede defeat or if this were a British trick. He knew that Percival had a much larger army, which included Indians, Australians, and Gurkhas. Offering to surrender might just be a ploy to buy more time—consolidate a stronger defensive position, or possibly arrange for a Dunkirk-style evacuation. That was the sort of thing Yamashita might have done, but not Percival—he did not have the drive or the imagination.

Yamashita chose the Ford Motor Company’s assembly plant as the site for the surrender talks. It was the largest building on the island, with room to accommodate as many Japanese reporters, photographers, and newsreel cameramen as possible. Percival arrived punctually at 6 o’clock. Yamashita kept him waiting until nearly seven. After a few preliminaries, the two sat down at a long table in the middle of the room.

Yamashita came right to the point—he wanted Percival to surrender immediately and unconditionally. Percival tried to stall, asking if he could give his answer on the following morning or, when that was curtly rejected, at 11:30 that night. But Yamashita was adamant. He did not have enough ammunition to carry out the attack with which he threatened Percival. He told his interpreter, “I want to hear nothing from him except yes or no.” Percival had no choice but to agree. When asked if he accepted unconditional surrender, Percival simply said “Yes.”
Although he showed no emotion, Yamashita must have been not only relieved by Percival’s surrender but also absolutely elated. When the general had visited Germany, he had been told by Hermann Göring that Singapore could hold out for a year and a half, and that it would take five divisions to overwhelm its defenses. Yamashita had accomplished the feat in 70 days with three divisions.

Yamashita had his improbable victory, and he had humiliated the British. Singapore was the worst defeat in British military history, beyond anything that happened during the Napoleonic wars, the American War of Independence, or World War I—and Yamashita wanted the world to know it. He ordered the entire British garrison paraded in front of his conquering army and Japanese news photographers, before marching them off to prison camps. As far as Yamashita was concerned, this was a fitting end to the campaign. The inferior British had been handed the decisive defeat they deserved.

Singapore was only one of a string of easy Japanese triumphs during the early months of the war. Guam was captured from the United States on December 10, only three days after Pearl Harbor, and Wake Island surrendered on December 23. Hong Kong fell on Christmas Day, and Manila surrendered on New Year’s Day. Borneo, with its oil fields, was seized on January 19, and the American garrison on Corregidor surrendered on May 6. It had been a heady six months for the rampaging Japanese.

http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-singapore <== read pls i beg u before u sound more n more ridiculous trying to rescue ur own arguements with more n more self-given 'facts' on what u personally think it is, when history is not what u thought it was.

I'll remember the next time I meet the many Singaporean university students, who still come here in their droves to study in London, and make a point of it to tell them about the sacrifices of Commonwealth soldiers.

u dun even have to because they probably already knew(if they;ve got a good memory or is a history buff like i am) for like i said- it's all written in our secondary school history textbook.

 

[waz]

wow im flabbergasted . U have to reread post 41 again and u're going to need a dictionary(no sarcasm here)- i dont fool around with mods.

Right, so work permit holders and immigrants, one is given permeant residency the other isn't, all I asked is how many of the work permit folks, foreign workers if you like, have been sent home, which you haven't answered.

same thing- reread post 41 with a dictionary on hand.

I'll need more than that, because you seem to be changing the goal posts with every reply.

w
Seriously re read post 41- it refutes every single point that u r trying to bring across. Yes u didnt say indeed, becos if understood post 41, u would even had asked this question.

Listen mate, if you're going to write about me using a dictionary, at least use one yourself to spell "because" properly, and stop writing in text speak e.g. "U". I really don't care, all this was put up in response to your silly post about the UK becoming a caliphate, something which you wouldn't dare discuss.





[/Quote] Reinforcing what? You clearly said that you were abandoned, and I showed you were not and now you're claiming I support your statements with my posts. The empty threat from the Japanese general!
Do you realise that 50,000 Commonwealth troops died in the defensive operation in Malaya, before the order to retreat to Singapore was signalled? Brave men, injured and unable to move were massacred by the Japanese e.g. Parit Sulong Massacre. The Japanese Imperial army wasn't in the habit of issuing "empty threats".
If this is what you've been taught in your text books, I truly pity you, as you seem to hold men who laid down their lives in defence of your land in contempt.
I'll remember the next time I meet the many Singaporean university students, who still come here in their droves to study in London, and make a point of it to tell them about the sacrifices of Commonwealth soldiers.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

I have no idea what you tried to do here.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Right, so work permit holders and immigrants, one is given permeant residency the other isn't, all I asked is how many of the work permit folks, foreign workers if you like, have been sent home, which you haven't answered.

Post 49. 4th sentence.

I'll need more than that, because you seem to be changing the goal posts with every reply.

Define 'changing the goal post'.







Listen mate, if you're going to write about me using a dictionary, at least use one yourself to spell "because" properly, and stop writing in text speak e.g. "U". I really don't care, all this was put up in response to your silly post about the UK becoming a caliphate, something which you wouldn't dare discuss.