CariDotMy

 Forgot password?
 Register

ADVERTISEMENT

Author: parking

RM6 bilion untuk kapal peronda baru TLDM - sebijik kapal 1 Billion...?

  [Copy link]
Post time 9-2-2011 12:47 PM | Show all posts
Perbelanjaan sebesar ini mestilah menjadi persoalan byk pihak... Semua nk tau KETELUSAN... Tgk jekla ...
Manami Post at 9-2-2011 12:40


tak yah jauh... kat malaysia nih dah jadi dah... org tengah hanya perlu sediakan `cikbab mongolia' dapat komesen RM500 juta..
Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 9-2-2011 12:53 PM | Show all posts
Reply 261# petola


Tu sebab pembangkang yg mmg kerjanya membangkang apa yg patot nak kena pastikan rakyat tak jatuh dlm lubang buat kali seterusnya.... Kalo kat Jepon, rasanya Menteri Pertahanan at least letak jawatan tu kalo kantui ada unsur2 'KOMESEN' disitu.. X pon mau bunuh diri terus... Tapi sebab ini MALAYSIA, nak persoalkan sikit tentang KETELUSAN pon ada balachi yg pertikaikan.. Alahaiiii... Kalo betul xde unsur2 'komesen' bagai, jawab jeklah apa yg patot.. nak marah2/sindir2/kutuk2 org yg persoalkan tu pasai apa??
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 12:56 PM | Show all posts
kalo 1 bilion satu kapal dah leh taruk laser guided peluru berpandu...tp dorang taruk ka utk kapal peronda ni??..sendiri mau pikir laaa
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:08 PM | Show all posts
kalo 1 bilion satu kapal dah leh taruk laser guided peluru berpandu...tp dorang taruk ka utk kapal p ...
kecimpret Post at 9-2-2011 12:56


oo..nak laser guided ke? tak nak yg jenis fire n forget? nak dok tercongok kat situ dok tala laser kat kapal musuh?
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:15 PM | Show all posts
Nak Halang PATI itu urusan Polis Marin / APMM
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:21 PM | Show all posts
Malaysia Second Generation Patrol Vessel program and the Tony Pua inability to diffrentiate ship class. (Darwin Award to Tony Pua for his ' experties ' in military matters.



Malaysia Second Generation Patrol Vessel program and the Tony Pua inability to diffrentiate ship class. (Darwin Award to Tony Pua for his ' experties ' in military matters.






Anyway everyone have read our beloved ikansadin reports on the Partai Aksi Demokratis cheaper proposal to counter the SGPV. Its funny as hell.. haha oh my. Anyway the issue started when  DAP up in arms trying to slam this project (oh they are trying hard LOL). At one corner this   Liew Chin Tong says it is better to built the ship over seas.... and what he actually propose is to piss inside the income of the people of Lumut whose income directly or indirectly tied to the naval yard. This man have no idea about Economic Multiplier. Darwin Award for him.




Darwin Award for both of you sweet pie




...so now in the middle of this self made embarassment Tony Pua come up with a 'brilliant' comparison between the SGPV and other OPV built oversea. The problem is he refer to the wrong ship class. Which make him the first winner of the DARWIN AWARD.

You can read about the difference of type and class of ship here in brother mumuchi blog.

Also you can read brother Dzirhan thoughts on SGPV and opposition statements here in his FB page. Here are part of his writing. It is very interesting to read.


Reply

Use magic Report

Follow Us
Post time 9-2-2011 01:22 PM | Show all posts
    Unsurprisingly the recent announcement regarding the Second Generation Patrol Vessel program has the DAP up in arms (though noticeably its PR colleagues in PAS and PKR have been fairly quiet on it or maybe I missed something somewhere). I do find it amusing that DAP member Liew Chin Tong said the ships would be better built overseas as it would be cheaper but provided no facts on it and at the same time alienates the people of Lumut where the ships would be built, and there I thought Pakatan Rakyat wanted to win back Perak. I actually wonder if the ships were to be built in Selangor, Kedah, Kelantan or Penang, would Liew still recommend the ships be built overseas?


    Meanwhile DAP MP’s Tony Pua has put out a statement on the purchase of 6 offshore patrol vessels, Pua’s assertions though, particularly in regard to similar vessels comparison are fairly misleading to those unfamiliar with defence issues but which a number of people are likely to buy wholesale.


    Before going into that sphere though, Pua’s assertion that the Ministry of Defence has a practice to award contracts before well before the terms of contract has been finalized should be addressed. The problem in this is that Pua confuses a Letter of Intent as in regard to the AV8 AFV and OPV announcements as to an actual contract. An LOI is actually a document outlining a preliminary agreement between two parties before the actual contract is finalized and an official notification that the two parties are negotiating.

    In most cases it is also to clarify key points for complex deals and to provide safeguards for both parties if neither can agree on the final terms of the contract, and mostly it is non-binding in contrast to a contract. A potential value is announced by the government in an LOI for various reasons however it often is not the actual value when the contract occurs, particularly in regard to complex arms purchases. The LOI value is actually an indication of how high the ceiling value of the contract will be provided that the company meets all that the government requires or specifies in terms both in terms of technical and delivery requirements and also if the company offers additional services, equipment etc to the government which the government had not considered in the deal but would like to also include in the deal since the company is offering it.

    Basically the government is telling the company that is has X amount of money for the deal provided the company meets all that it wants and if possible offers more, but in most cases this never happens, the company naturally has it’s own idea as to what it will for provide for a particular amount and the result is both the government and company will then negotiate down to a deal satisfactory to both parties. The ceiling value is also there so that for the government, it can allocate and plan accordingly for the future as such negotiations may take months so in essence it is necessary for the government to plan based on the highest possible cost though in actuality this would not occur and the contract price would be less.

    The ceiling value is also necessary for the company in the contract so that it can show to its shareholders, financiers and investors that it has a potential deal valued at such an amount in the works. In the past, under previous administrations, one of the most common complaints of defence companies was that the Malaysian government often would not give any indications publicly of how much a defence deal was potentially worth, which made it hard for companies to justify their efforts to shareholders and investors and also obtain financial backing. Occasionally companies would not be told of the ceiling value but only the requirements and as a result would submit something which met the requirements but be above what the government was willing to pay. Setting a ceiling value offers the company a figure to work around with during the negotiations to meet the potential contract.


Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:27 PM | Show all posts
    Now Pua’s analysis of ship prices is very much the approach of those unfamiliar with the defence field, namely to look on the internet for news reports of contracts on similar type ships and then contrast prices, unfortunately it doesn’t quite work that way for defence contracts for several reasons, first off, the Second Generation Patrol Vessel is a type known as a Corvette warship, however corvette vessels range in weight from 500 tons to slightly above 2000 tons, so in Pua’s case some of the warships he compares are less in tonnage and size than the SGPV’s planned 2,200 tons and 99m length and in the case of the Greek Super Vita, or Roussen class, he has got the comparison wrong as the Roussen class is actually a Fast Attack Craft of 580 tons and 62m in length, so it’s like comparing a mini-Cooper to a 4x4 WD in price.


    Of course naturally people will say why not divide the price by tonnage for comparison but again this is not possible for three factors, firstly, there key differences to ships even if of similar size and tonnage due to the type of equipment they mount such as weapons, electronics, engines etc and their design along with construction material, all of which makes substantial differences to the price. Secondly, is the time of the ships were contracted for, defence prices are not static prices, and citing prices for ships contracts 5 years or more ago do not reflect current prices.

    Finally a contract for a ship or ships is not just for the ships alone but also maintenance, support, training and delivery, hence if you decided to forgo maintenance, support and training options the cost would be lower, a slower construction/delivery schedule could result, depending on the negotiations, being cheaper or costing more in the fact that you have a series of lower payments but adds up to more in the end, pretty much like loans or hire-purchase. In all Pua’s ship price comparisons, it all falls foul of the first and second factors so much that it makes the third factor pretty much moot, Morever his statement that the US built it’s LCS for at a budget 300million USD is wrong, the US may have budgeted such but there had been warnings that the US was too overoptimistic on the price which eventually ended up costing USD637 million and USD704 million respectively for each of the two different design initial ships as shown in this article here :


http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4403369



Just to show the comparison, here are the stats of each ship Pua shows (minus the LCS) in terms of tonnage, size and weapons/equipment capabilities, yes I have not mentioned engines/propulsions but pretty much engines are determined by vessel tonnage so somewhat moot


Second Generation Patrol Vessel (Proposed): Corvette/light frigate class 2,200T max displacement, 99m max length, Armament (plus associated sensors for weapons): 76mm main gun, possible 20mm/30mm cannons, Anti-Ship Missile, Anti-Air Missile, Anti-Submarine Weapons, helipad/hangar for ASW helo


Contract date: 2011 or 2012, USD329 mil per ship (expected to be lower at actual contract)
Main Role: Frontline Warship for Malaysian waters plus EEZ claims,
Ancillary role: Annoy Indonesia by being in border waters claimed as Indonesian waters, also annoys opposition by planned construction and fact that it built by Boustead Naval Shipyards acronym to BN Shipyards (BN being normally used for Barisan Nasional govt. party)


Ireland Roisin class: Offshore Patrol Vessel 1700t, 78.9m. Armament: 76mm Main Gun, 2 .50 cal machineguns, 4 7.62mm General Purpose Machine Guns, no helo deck/hangar.

Contract date and price: 1997 USD34 million
Diff to SGPV: 700t lighter, 11m shorter, No ASM,ASM capabilities, AAW only guns no helo deck/hangar, (what do you expect for USD34 million) more than 10 years ago contract price
Main Role: EEZ patrolling, Search and Rescue, Maritime enforcement
Ancillary role: Proving Irish are still relevant outside Rugby, St. Patrick’s and Irish Jokes

German K130 Braunschweig class: Corvette 1840t, 89m. Armament: 76mm Main Gun, 2 27mm cannons, RBS-15 anti-ship missile, Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) anti-air missile, minelaying capability, helideck for naval helicopters but hangar only large enough for 2 UAVs.


Contract Date: 2001 – Pua says US108m a ship, actual is USD185m
Diff to SGPV – 300t lighter, No ASW capabilities, cannot carry naval helo due to hangar size, has Minelaying capability (not Malaysian req as indiscriminate weapon, we might dmg/sink US or China ship by mistake which would be a bad thing for us), contract signed 10 years ago
Main Role: Anti-surface warfare ship designed to operate beyond German waters together with Coalition fleet.
Ancillary Role: Scaring the French when it cruises in the English Channel.

New Zealand Protector class: Offshore Patrol Vessel, 1900t, 85m. Armament: 25mm Naval cannon, 2 x.50cal MGs, helideck and hangar for Super Seasprite helo with torpedo, bomb or depthcharge.




Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 9-2-2011 01:30 PM | Show all posts
    Contract Date: 2004 – USD70.5 mill or NZ$91mil but not final cost as NZDF states final cost will go higher, Pua fail to mention or unaware of this only cites NZ$91mil
Diff to SGPV: 300t lighter, 10m shorter, 25mm gun only and AAW capability restricted to such, anti-ship and anti-sub capability only contained within helo
Main role: Maritime enforcement, EEZ patrolling, limited wartime role.
Ancillary role: Protecting Middle Earth from seaborne invasion

Israeli Saar V class: Corvette, 1275t, 85.6m. Armament: 25mm Phalanx Close in Weapons Systems, Barak anti-air missile, Harpoon anti-ship missiles, anti-submarine torpedoes, helicopter hangar and helipad.

Contract date: Early 1980s –USD 260million Pua’s figures is correct but neglect to note that with Israel enjoying special relationship with US, the figure may be subsidized somewhat in the building of these ships in the US and I am not sure that even a phone call by the PM’s wife to Michelle Obama would get us that price for these ships. On a more serious note, the SAAR V also benefits from vitually all of the electronics and combat systems along with the Barak missile being Israeli produced, which in turn keeps cost down
Diff: To SGPV: Close to 1000t lighter, 25mm CIWS capability over SGPV but no main gun, likely built at discounted price.
Main Role: Frontline warship for employment within Israeli waters
Ancillary role: Inviting attacks by everyone who hates Israel.

Greek Roussen class (Super Vita class): Fast Attack Craft, 580t, 62m Armament: 76mm main gun, 2 30mm cannons, Exocet Anti-ship Missile, RAM anti-air missile, no helo/helipad


Contract date: 2000 – approx USD108 million per ship –Pua’s figure correct but this is much smaller ship than SGPV
Diff to SGPV: almost 1,700t lighter, no helo/helipad, no anti-sub capability
Main Role: Fast attack craft
Ancillary role: discouraging Turkey in the Aegean.



Sources : http://malaysiamilitarypower.blogspot.com/



Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:32 PM | Show all posts
Sharikat Limbongan Kapal Cha Cha Marbah propose new SGPV design



by ikansadinmknorang...he tried to be politically correct...but for parody sake...what the hell...






holy schmoly...!!



credit to mr.kurien....superpower...hahaha


Lumut : Sharikat Limbongan Kapal Cha Cha Marbah Sendirian Berhad...a local shipbuilders wholly owned by Partai Aksi Demokratis had proposed to the government on their design of Second Generation Patrol Vessel (SGPV) for RMN.

The design are to compete against Bustad Naval Shipyard own design which had been announced yesterday would cost RM6 billion which will be build locally with order of 6 vessel.


Dato Tony Puah...Partai Aksi Demokratis defence anaLyst said their version of SGPV - Sumpah Ganas Power dan Versatile warship are much cheaper and simpler for the navy to operate and they can order up to 1000 ship compared to BNS proposed design of 6 ship which cost 6 billion ringgit.

" We wont apply FFBNW concept on our design because it is not economical and they are commercially a loss for our forces...plus i also proposed that we can use the old guns from ex Rahmat class Frigate as main naval gun...mercun roket from People Republic of China as principle anti ship missile and Aspidah anti aircraft system...i also want our design to be made 100% eco friendly with hybrid engine and materual plus the ship is built in our country for industrial leap forward" Tony Puah said to press at the Lumut today.

However...RMN in later news release said the proposed design from the shipyard had been rejected.

RMN public relations officer in his statement said.." Cmon laaa....this is blasphemy...when i saw this proposed design i already know it is the magical work of photoshop...i had doubt these guys could even built a fibreglass boat for heaven sake" he said.

The proposal..dubbed the KrengKongKeng class SGPV will cost RM 300 000 each...altogether with advance weaponry and engines...hull design are taken from the infamous Somalian trawler which had seen action and in service with various Somali pirate group...the advance design will only require eco friendly material and recycled item...


MINDEF now are reviewing and evaluating the proposal from the shipyard to be unconsidered.




- pernama -



Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:35 PM | Show all posts
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:36 PM | Show all posts
Curlasssstttt kapal krengkrongkreng Sumpah Power Ganazz + Versatile classs neh..

Pakai tested design of somalian trawlers and currently in use by somali pirates lagik kawww!!!

Bodo ka apa mindef nak reject proposal neh






Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:44 PM | Show all posts


CIRI KAPAL PERANG CIPTAAN TONY STUPID PUA !

1) kapal perang ini dinamakan TONGKANG CARRIER
2)spesifikasi panjang 800cm, lebar 300 com
3)kapasiti 1 orang yang layak mengawal kapal. (dipanggil admiral)

4) persenjataan
-cukup merbahaya
-peluru berpandu dari kapal ke udara (jarak 800 km)
-pertempuran di permukaan mampu menembak 80 kapal sekali gus
-keupayaan menenggelamkan kapal selam (muahahaha)


5) radar
-sistem radar terlalu canggih
-mampu mengenal penyakit pilot pesawat yang melintas di udara


6) spesifikasi peluru jarak dekat
-tony pua perlu berkata 'ta ta ta ta' dari mulutnya setiap kali peluru dihala ke sasaran


7) harga
-belum ditentukan lagi


8) jaminan
- jaminan dan keselamatan anak kapal dijamin oleh nik ajis
-sekiranya terkorban, jalan menuju ke syurga terbuka luas.
-tak kisah anak melayu,anak cina,anak india..
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:46 PM | Show all posts
Bertindak sebelum terlambat



Utusan Malaysia 20 Januari 2010 (Khamis)

Oleh DR. MOHD RIDHUAN TEE ABDULLAH



Kenyataan bekas Perdana Menteri Singapura, Lee Kuan Yew minggu lalu, mengenai kenapa negara sekangkang kera itu memerlukan pertahanan yang begitu kuat sepatutnya menjadi iktibar kepada kita semua. Kenyataan tersebut dikeluarkan ketika pegawai-pegawai kadet Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia ditauliahkan oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Kuan Yew merujuk kepada Malaysia dan Indonesia sebagai ancaman utama kenapa negara itu perlu pertahanan yang kuat.

Dalam bersedia menghadapi ancaman tersebut, negara anak didik Yahudi ini membelanjakan RM35.5 bilion untuk pertahanan pada tahun lalu, tertinggi di Asia Tenggara dan mungkin juga di Asia. Berbanding negara sebesar kita, sejak lebih 23 tahun yang lalu, perbelanjaan pertahanan negara membabitkan RM180 bilion sahaja. Purata perbelanjaan pertahanan setiap tahun hampir 2.5 peratus daripada KDNK negara antara 1987 hingga 2004. Bermaksud lebih lima tahun, belanja pertahanan Singapura bersamaan lebih 23 tahun belanja pertahanan kita. Lihatlah betapa jauhnya kita ketinggalan dalam aspek pertahanan negara.

Perbelanjaan pertahanan merupakan yang kedua terbesar dalam bajet negara sehinggalah krisis kewangan global melanda Malaysia pada 2008, menyebabkan ia diatasi oleh perkara lain dalam bajet 2009. Namun begitu, perbelanjaan pertahanan kita telah meningkat lebih lima kali ganda dari RM2.09 bilion pada 1987 kepada RM11.013 bilion pada 2010 (enam peratus belanjawan negara).

Jumlah ini masih kecil berbanding dengan negara jiran yang sebenarnya itulah ancaman kita. Apakah kita tidak takut dengan ancaman baru hari ini. Tidakkah terlepasnya Pulau Batu Putih menjadi pengajaran kepada kita? Saya yakin, pulau tersebut masih menjadi milik kita, jika pertahanan kita mengatasi negara Singapura. Malangnya, kita terus bersangka baik dan memberikan 'khidmat percuma' seperti isu air kepada negara 'sejahat' itu. Pernahkah mereka mengenang budi?

Menurut Kuan Yew, tanpa pertahanan yang kuat, tidak akan wujud Singapura. Negara ini akan 'dimakan' oleh negara-negara jirannya, dirujuk Malaysia dan Indonesia.

Dari segi perancangan strategi dan keselamatan, saya tidak nafikan jawapan tersebut. Tetapi dari sudut lain, jawapan ini amat bongkak dan sombong. Beliau tidak sedar, tanpa pertolongan Malaysia, tidak wujud Singapura. Namun, sifat ultra kiasu telah mengatasi segalanya. Negara ini telah berjaya keluar daripada kemelut ketakutan.
Hari ini, kita pula takut kepada negara sekecil itu yang begitu bergantung air kepada kita. Itupun mereka masih menang. Kita kelihatan masih kalah, walaupun harta itu kepunyaan kita.

Singapura adalah sebuah pulau Melayu yang terletak di kepulauan Melayu. Jika ditakdirkan Tunku Abdul Rahman bertindak menangkap Kuan Yew dan mengadakan perintah berkurung sebelum berpisahnya Singapura dari Malaysia pada 1965, sudah tentu pulau tersebut hari ini milik kita.

Tetapi adakah Tunku bertindak sedemikian? Walaupun pada ketika itu, kita mampu untuk bertindak, kerana kuasa polis dan tentera masih berpihak di tangan Melayu?

Saya fikir Tunku berfikir panjang sebelum bertindak. Inilah sifat dan toleransi Islam yang perlu dihargai. Saya yakin, jika tidak ada pertimbangan ini atau jika pemimpin kita ketika itu tidak Islam, mempraktikkan sistem komunis, sudah lama Kuan Yew dihumban ke dalam penjara.

Hari ini beliau berlagak sombong dengan kenyataan yang langsung tidak mengenang budi. Apakah kita masih terus mahu berlembut ibarat menarik rambut dalam tepung? Zaman berlembut sudah berakhir. Saya tidak pasti apa pandangan Tuan Guru Nik Aziz yang begitu ghairah menyambut Kuan Yew sebelum ini.

Kita sepatutnya bertindak sezalim Kuan Yew, yang menghumban golongan yang menentangnya ke dalam penjara kerana kewujudan mereka dikatakan mengganggu ketenteraman dan perancangan Singapura. Maka tidak hairanlah orang Melayu Singapura seperti Dr. Lili Zubaidah yang cerdik tidak mendapat tempat di Singapura, hanya kerana tidak sekapal dengan Kuan Yew.


Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:47 PM | Show all posts

Jika Malaysia bertindak sedemikian kepada pembangkang hari ini, apakah perkara ini dapat diterima? Tetapi perkara sebegini adalah biasa di Singapura. Kenapa kumpulan hak asasi manusia ini tidak bangun menentang tindakan Kuan Yew?

Malah ramai ultra kiasu di negara ini yang begitu memuji Singapura. Hanya kerana mereka sekapal. Bayangkan jika kita bertindak seperti mana Singapura bertindak, akan hebohlah satu dunia bahawa Malaysia mengamalkan sistem regim komunis dan mengabaikan hak asasi manusia.

Kuan Yew bertindak mematikan orang yang diistilahkan 'tidak berguna' (duds) walaupun mereka dipilih oleh rakyat. Golongan ini, pada beliau tidak perlu berada dalam Parlimen dan kerajaan. Tindakan Kuan Yew langsung tidak dipertikaikan oleh ultra kiasu di Malaysia.

Kuan Yew begitu disanjung dan mendapat pujian ultra kiasu saban hari kerana dikatakan berjaya memajukan Singapura. Mereka sanggup lupakan 'kekejaman' beliau hanya kerana sekapal. Justeru, kita perlu berhati-hati dengan kelicikan golongan ini sebelum terlambat.

Terlalu bertoleransi juga tidak sepatutnya berlaku. Dengan sebab itu, dalam pemerintahan Islam, ada unsur demokrasi dan ada unsur autokrasi. Jika tindakan seseorang boleh menjahanamkan agama dan negara, maka tindakan nekad perlu dilakukan untuk menjaga kepentingan awam.

Saya fikir sudah sampai masanya negara kita mengambil pendekatan berhati-hati sebelum terlambat. Memang kita memerlukan Singapura. Johor Bahru akan bankrap tanpa Singapura.

Tetapi kita perlu fikirkan pelan jangka panjang supaya tidak terlalu bergantung kepada Singapura, walaupun tidak dinafikan pulau itu juga terlalu bergantung kepada kita. Kita mesti ingat, bahawa pulau itu mendapat sokongan Yahudi, sedangkan kita tidak.

Jika ditakdirkan kita putuskan Tambak Johor, negara kecil itu masih lagi boleh survive sebab sekutu mereka masih ramai yang akan membantu. Negara kita bagaimana?

Justeru, projek Koridor Iskandar hendaklah dirancang dengan betul supaya jangan terlalu berharap kepada Singapura. Jangan biarkan mereka membeli tanah dan harta negara kita sewenang-wenangnya. Saya amat bimbang Johor akan menjadi Singapura kedua kerana pimpinan mereka amat licik. Lihat sahaja apa yang berlaku di Pulau Pinang.

Saya masih teringat kata-kata isteri Kuan Yew, mendiang Kwa sebelum meninggal baru-baru ini. Pesannya kepada Kuan Yew supaya jangan mempercayai orang Melayu dan Malaysia. Dalam kata lain, sampai mati pun, mereka masih tidak mempercayai kita. Apakah kita masih terus mahu bersangka baik?

Masa bersangka baik dan bermain dengan mereka sudah habis. Kini adalah masa untuk kita bekerja untuk berhadapan dengan mereka. Jika mereka boleh menyediakan RM35.5 bilion untuk pertahanan negara sekecil itu, sudah tentu kita perlu berbelanja lebih daripada itu. Jika tidak, kita akan 'dimakan' satu masa nanti, percayalah.

Saya pernah membuat kajian mengenai republik itu ketika membuat program ijazah sarjana pengajian strategi dan keselamatan. Ternyata memang sukar untuk kita menyainginya. Ketua Pengarang Kumpulan akhbar ini, Datuk Aziz Ishak pasti bersetuju dengan saya sebab kami mengambil kursus yang sama.

Justeru, Perdana Menteri, Menteri Pertahanan, pakar strategi dan semua panglima angkatan tentera, sepatutnya memikirkan dan bertindak untuk merangka strategi, apakah langkah terbaik yang perlu dilakukan untuk berhadapan dengan Yahudi kecil ini sebelum nasi menjadi bubur?

Kita perlu ingat, pemimpin Pulau Pinang difahamkan selalu ke sana untuk mencari idea. Apakah mungkin nanti akan wujud Singapura kedua, ketiga dan sebagainya?

Bertindaklah sebelum terlambat kerana masa tidak menunggu kita. Jangan terlalu banyak berpolitik, sehingga wang habis, akhirnya bidang pertahanan terabai. Musuh sedang melihat kita. Mereka sedang menunggu peluang untuk 'masuk' pada ketika waktu yang sesuai.

Ketika itu, jika mahu berjihad sudah terlambat. Apakah mungkin senjata batu boleh berhadapan dengan jet-jet pejuang dan kereta kebal seperti yang berlaku di Palestin? Sedangkan Allah SWT mahukan kita mengambil iktibar daripada kejadian lampau yang ditunjukkan.

Keruntuhan empayar Islam Othmaniyyah sudah cukup menyayat hati kita semua. Begitu juga keadaan di Iraq, Afghanistan dan Palestin hari ini. Apakah wajar kita hanya memerhati tanpa membuat apa-apa tindakan. Ya, kita wajar membantu tetapi pada masa sama, jangan abai kepentingan kita.

Perbelanjaan yang kurang memberikan impak kepada keselamatan hendaklah dikurangkan seperti perkara yang bersifat ceremonial, supaya kita dapat berjimat dan wang tersebut boleh disalurkan untuk pertahanan.

Jika tidak, saya bimbang, bila sampai masanya Allah SWT tarik semua nikmat yang dianugerahkan kepada kita seperti minyak dan gas. Kita akan menyesal seumur hidup. Hari ini seolah-olah kita terlalu bergantung kepada hasil minyak, sedangkan negara kita masih kaya dengan hasil lain.

Saya ingin cadangkan supaya kita ambil semua hasil keuntungan minyak ini setiap tahun untuk membangunkan pertahanan. Jika keuntungan Petronas lebih kurang RM50 bilion digunakan untuk pertahanan, saya yakin dalam jangka masa lima tahun, Malaysia muncul menjadi negara hebat di Asia dan mungkin di dunia.

Apapun, kita tidak boleh terlalu bergantung kepada minyak dan gas sebagai sumber pendapatan utama negara. Sampai masanya minyak dan gas akan habis. Apakah ketika itu negara kita akan menjadi papa kedana?

Jadi, fikirkan sumber lain untuk menjana pendapatan negara kerana sumber minyak pasti akan habis. Sementara minyak masih ada, tumpukan usaha membangunkan pertahanan negara. Sebagai persiapan awal, kurangkan berbelanja ketika pilihan raya kecil DUN Tenang. Fikirkan masa depan negara. Kita tidak perlu mengeluarkan perbelanjaan yang begitu besar untuk pilihan raya sekecil ini.

DR. MOHD RIDHUAN TEE ABDULLAH, Pensyarah Kanan, Kumpulan Penyelidik Politik dan Peradaban Islam, Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia.



Sources : http://ridhuantee.blogspot.com/



Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 01:50 PM | Show all posts
Future BNS SGPV





Reply

Use magic Report


ADVERTISEMENT


Post time 9-2-2011 01:59 PM | Show all posts
normally ape yg malaysia beli... singapore akan counter balik beli spt sukhoi - f15... tu belum kira yg singapore ada, malaysia tak mampu counter dgn yg setaraf/canggih.. terpaksa beli yg murah2 spt bazooka vs apache je eheheheh
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 02:02 PM | Show all posts
Boustead Naval Shipyard





Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 02:39 PM | Show all posts
hang pc dah masuk....abis la ....segala pengetahuan dan maklumat akan dikongsi...harap penyokong tegar pakatan rakyat bersabar ehhh
Reply

Use magic Report

Post time 9-2-2011 02:54 PM | Show all posts
Reply 181# dCrook


    yob kita pernah kene gak....F18....dan kita gak belajar dari kesilapan....dan kita memahami bahawa setiap kapal ada lah berbeza...dan harga nya berbeza gak....

tony phua nie dia nak belik kete mercedes mata belalang tapi harga nak cam harga kete kancil.....

salah satu ahli parlimen pembangkang dalam Malaysia yang paling kurang cerdik apabila tak buat semakan beza antara kapal..memalukan negara jerk dia nie....
Reply

Use magic Report

You have to log in before you can reply Login | Register

Points Rules

 

ADVERTISEMENT



 

ADVERTISEMENT


 


ADVERTISEMENT
Follow Us

ADVERTISEMENT


Mobile|Archiver|Mobile*default|About Us|CariDotMy

29-9-2024 06:17 PM GMT+8 , Processed in 0.254673 second(s), 30 queries , Gzip On, Redis On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

Copyright © 2001-2021, Tencent Cloud.

Quick Reply To Top Return to the list