Comments from a (typical?) Indonesian

Comments from "Singapore raises concerns as Indonesia names ship after two convicted marines".

[Summary of the posts from the Indonesian:

Anyway, the discussion is getting a little long so just to keep track of what you have said so far:

1) Konfrontasi was NOT declared war, BUT it was a war

2A) Soekarno in his mercy and magnanimity chose to use terrorism with a more limited death toll instead of conventional war where the death toll would have been higher; OR
2B) Soekarno decided that 1 million Indonesian soldiers were no match for 14,000 ang mo troops in a conventional war and decided to go with terrorism as being more expedient, easier, and more affordable.

3) Indonesia supports terrorism as long as a) it is carried out outside of Indonesian soil, and b) is endorsed by the Indonesian government or military.


4) The three civilian lives taken by the Indonesian Marines were NOTHING compared to the lives of the two Indonesian Heroes, and Singaporeans are being too sensitive without considering the overall picture of Indonesia needing to inspire the next generation of soldier who might once again be called upon to sacrifice their lives and honour for Indonesia.

Note: The entire thread is rather boring, so I've done some major edits for readability. The link to the original is provided (above).]



OP · Singapore, Singapore

From Indonesia's point of view they indeed gave their lives for their Countries. For us lives r lost. Matter of perspective

February 6 at 10:46pm

• [SINGAPOREAN commenter].
  

  
  

  Konfrontasi was not a declared war. Indonesia did not even have the integrity and guts to say what they were going to do and do what they say. They didn't have the integrity and honour to properly declare war before carrying out acts of war.
  
  So in a non-state of war, two soldiers entered SG to bomb military targets. BUT they could not hit their primary military targets because they were too well secured. FAIL.
  
  So instead they targeted civilian soft target. That is an act of TERRORISM. Unarmed. Civilian. Non-combatants. Again, no integrity. No honour. Heroic? What's so heroic about targeting unarmed civilians? What's so heroic about killing women? US soldiers who murdered civilians in the Vietnam war have faced charges of various kinds. Sure, not all of them. Just those that they can prove, and those that can't get away.
  
  These two did not managed to get away. So if it were a military operation during a state of war, they would be Prisoners of War. No. They were tried as criminals. As murderers.
  
  They gave their lives? I'm sorry, they gave nothing. We executed them. We took their lives for their dishonourable acts.
  
  Giving their lives would be something heroic like dying to give their comrades a chance to win or survive. Bombing a civilian building? Terrorism. And not even suicide bombers. THAT would be closer to giving their lives.
  
  The best you can say about them is that they were good obedient soldiers. Who when asked to attack civilians did not flinch from their orders.
  
  But heroes? Well, I guess Indonesia is desperately short of people with honour and integrity, These two, will do.
  
  At least, they were not corrupt. As far as we know.
  

  February 7 at 12:57am

• [INDONESIAN commenter]
  

  It was not a declared war, but it was a war that ended up on diplomatic table in Bangkok!

• February 7 at 9:49pm

• [SINGAPOREAN]

[deletia...]

So yes, we understand that Indonesia needed to return all the way to the past to find and remember men who are men, who can heroically bomb unarmed civilians without flinching, who can kill women without qualms, who can be role models for Indonesian soldiers today, so that Indonesian soldiers can understand that if they are ever called upon to do dishonourable deeds, that they remember the most important virtue that they must have is obedience. And the second most important virtue in incorruptibility. And dishonour is just a sacrifice that one must be willing to make for one's country.

So these incorruptible men have served their country twice. Once when they bombed MacDonald House in 1965, and now they are once again being used by the Indonesian Govt and Military to be role models for their soldiers today.

[deletia...]

February 7 at 10:38pm

[DELETED]

• [SINGAPOREAN]
  

  [Deletia...]
  Ok, let me state again: Indonesia has the right to decide who they want to honour and who they want as their role models. Whoever they choose to be their role models or heroes is EXACTLY who Indonesia needs and deserve. Agree?
  
  And I am so sorry that I mentioned the very sensitive subject of your corrupt politicians and caused you embarrassment. I am not bashing them. I'm just stating that I understand why Indonesia needs to honour these two marines. They may well be the last two uncorrupted Indonesians - you know the point you made about no future heroes. I should have realised that the reason why you didn't mentioned the present was precisely because in the present and near past all your leaders are not worthy of honour or being role models.
  [deletia...]
  
  Oh, and if you are going to reply again, could you explain the difference between the actions of the Marines and the Bali Bombers? How is one group a hero and the other group terrorists? There are a lot of questions, but we'll just take it one at a time.

  
  

  February 8 at 12:47am

• [INDONESIAN]
  

  [Deletia...]
  You should take note two things over this matter. First, these two marines got promoted and awarded one of highest honour medals in TNI history as soon as their remains arrived in Jakarta. And yes, 1 million people went on to the street mourned at their funeral
  Secondly,by looking through the archives you should know that it was Indonesia that felt offended by Singapore which arrogantly refusing Suharto plea thus executing the prisoners of war the way drug lords executed.
  [Deletia...]

  February 9

• Bali bombers were not TNI`s members, Indonesia was not at war with any country, and the bomb was in Indonesian soil.
  

  
  The marines got plain and clear order to hurt the enemy`s economy by destroying economic facilities which was the bank. Singapore is lucky, Soekarno didnt want to go conventional and all out war. otherwise it would be tens if not hundreds of thousand civilian causalties.
  Stop with your bashing, your arrogant attitudes are well known in Indonesia.

  February 9

• [Singaporean]
  

  I am well known in Indonesia? You flatter me.
  
  Soekarno didn't want to go conventional all out war because he was merciful? Wow. That is a side of Soekarno no one has ever seen! Or reported. Really. If you were to ask anyone who knew him, what is the one word, you would use to describe Soekarno. "Merciful" would not be that one word.
  
  Not even if you gave them 5 words. Or 10. Maybe 20. Or 50. Or most likely, they will laugh. You have such a sense of humour. Detached from reality. Delusional. But so funny, you are.
  
  But really, historical records indicate that Indonesia could at best prosecute a limited action land war in Borneo/Sabah. There were many good reasons for targeting Sabah/Borneo. One reason was: no need for a lot of landing ships and amphibious assault crafts.
  
  You know what they say about Indonesia's military forces right? 1 million soldiers. 2 sampans.
  
  [Deletia...]
  
  And I have to say your reply to my question about the difference between the Bali bombers and the soldiers in 1965 was very succinct:
  
  "Bali bombers were not TNI`s members, Indonesia was not at war with any country, and the bomb was in Indonesian soil."
  
  So basically, you are saying that Indonesia supports terrorist acts as long as they are NOT on Indonesian soil, and/or are conducted under the explicit orders of the TNI. I must say you are VERY Honest. Some people might say TOO honest, but really, what do people know?
  
  (Actually, others say "too stupid to be dishonest" and "good candidate to be a TNI recruit." But people can be so insulting. I do hope you are not offended. You do seem rather sensitive about these things.)

  February 9

• [Indonesian]
  

  There were about 14.000 British, Australia and NZ offshore ready to go all out war against Indonesia on your behalf, It was a war.
  If coalition of NATO can killed hundreds of thousands civilians in 2 countries alone in 21 Century, What could make you whining abot 3 civilians of a retard arrogant country like yours?
  Today every country got its special forces that are trained with sabotage, including Indonesia, do you want them to sabotage your banks once more time and burn you city country?? Well, take your dance floor.. cause i kinda tired noticing that retard Singaporeans keyboard warriors are boasting showing their eagernes to war against Indonesia, just keep bitching!!
  You singaporean sound like a bunch of old women, bitching day and night!

  February 9

• [SINGAPOREAN]

  
  

  You know, your comments would have more weight if you were more consistent. First you say, not a war. Then you say, it's a war. So which is it?
  
  And 14,000 Brits, Aussies, and NZ troops? Only? What is that against 1 million Indonesian soldiers right? C'mon! Indonesia is the Best! 14,000 britz, aussies and NZ soldiers? - they can't even communicate with each other!
  
  You can't seriously be telling me that Indonesia was afraid of 14,000 Ang mos? Dun tell me the silly rumour about the 2 sampans are true?!?! In 1965. I have been telling people it is not!
  
  And what happened to the mercy and magnanimity of Soekarno? Which reminds me, so which is it? Soekarno CHOSE not to go conventional war (in his great mercy for Singaporeans), or Soekarno was AFRAID of 14,000 ang mo troops? (As you are now implying? Really, you should show more respect for your historical leaders, especially a strong man like Soekarno. I am assuming the "two sampans" are rude, disrespectful joke)
  
  And yes, combat engineers do have to carry out sabotage. In a declared war. Against Military installations. In uniform.
  
  In an undeclared war, they are unlawful combatants.
  
  Against civilian targets, they are unlawful combatants.
  
  Out of uniform, they are unlawful combatants.
  
  Actually, today, we would call them terrorists.
  
  [Deletia...]
  
  And I am so glad you put the perspective of three dead civilians in SG against the "hundreds of thousands of dead civilians" by NATO coalition (i dunno what you're talking about but I assume you have checked your facts). I mean that was a VERY relevant example (I assume), and showed your (and by extension Indonesia's) sensitivity to this issue. Truly commendable. And honest. Stupefyingly honest, I must say. Or stupendously honest. (One of these adjectives. I always get the words beginning with 'STUP...' mixed up. )
  
  Anyway, the discussion is getting a little long so just to keep track of what you have said so far:
  
  1) Konfrontasi was NOT declared war, BUT it was a war

  
  2A) Soekarno in his mercy and magnanimity chose to use terrorism with a more limited death toll instead of conventional war where the death toll would have been higher; OR
  2B) Soekarno decided that 1 million Indonesian soldiers were no match for 14,000 ang mo troops in a conventional war and decided to go with terrorism as being more expedient, easier, and more affordable. 

  
  3) Indonesia supports terrorism as long as a) it is carried out outside of Indonesian soil, and b) is endorsed by the Indonesian government or military. 

  
  4) The three civilian lives taken by the Indonesian Marines were NOTHING compared to the lives of the two Indonesian Heroes, and Singaporeans are being too sensitive without considering the overall picture of Indonesia needing to inspire the next generation of soldier who might once again be called upon to sacrifice their lives and honour for Indonesia.
  
  Did I miss out anything?