War is about winning, not about how you play the game

Another good use of ‘turn coats’ is to infiltrate enemy lines to spy on them. You masqueraded as the enemy behind enemy lines to gather intelligence on them. Then you went back to your own side and reported what you saw.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

SUPP makes a 360-degree turn

After thumbing its nose at the Taib government, party makes an about turn and decides it needs its two candidates in the state cabinet

(Free Malaysia Today) - KUCHING: The Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP) has made a 360-degree turn. Last month, after its poor election showing, it said it wanted nothing to do with Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud’s government.

The Central Working Committee (CWC), at a meeting last month, decided not to recommend any of SUPP’s elected representative to serve in the cabinet of Taib Mahmud after the party’s dismal showing in the election.

That decision nearly tore the party apart. But at today’s CWC meeting, it unanimously agreed that Wong Soon Koh and Lee Kim Shin should represent the party and the Chinese community in the new cabinet of Abdul Taib Mahmud.

(Read more here: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/05/28/supp-makes-a-360-degree-turn/)

******************************************

Okay, that was what Free Malaysia Today reported today. I am not too sure, but I think they meant a 180-degree turn. If you do a 360-degree turn then you have not turned anywhere. Only if you do a 180-degree turn do you go in the opposite direction or backwards from where you were originally going. But then I suppose if you make two 180-degree turns then it becomes a 360-degree turn -- if that was what Free Malaysia Today meant.

Since the 2008 general election the terms ‘frogs’ and ‘turn coats’ have been used quite a lot to describe those who have changed sides or are perceived to have changed sides.

The use of the term ‘frogs’ may be because frogs hop and those who hop to the other side are then called frogs. But then people who change sides may not necessarily hop to the other side. They could saunter, stroll, walk casually, glide, skip, run, or whatever, to the other side. So maybe ‘frogs’ may not be quite the right word to use.

‘Turn coats’, on the other hand can mean many things.

This is the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of ‘turn coat’: As the dominions of the duke of Saxony were bounded in part by France, one of the early dukes hit upon the device of a coat blue one side, and white the other. When he wished to be thought in the French interest he wore the white outside; otherwise the outside colour was blue. Hence a Saxon was nicknamed Emmanuel Turncoat.

It used to be a tactic in the old days for soldiers to be given coats with their army’s colours on the outside and the enemy’s colour on the inside. This was so that when they spotted the enemy they could turn the coat inside out.

The enemy soldiers, seeing that the other chaps had their same colour coat, would come close. Then, once you could see the whites of their eyes, you would shoot the unsuspecting enemy dead.

This was basically a trap to lure the enemy close so that they can be killed. And you had to get them quite close to be able to kill them with those very unreliable flintlocks.

So, ‘turn coat’ is not just about changing sides or defecting. It is also about fooling the enemy into thinking that you are on their side so that they can be lured into a trap and killed.

Another good use of ‘turn coats’ is to infiltrate enemy lines to spy on them. You masqueraded as the enemy behind enemy lines to gather intelligence on them. Then you went back to your own side and reported what you saw.

This worked during the civil war between the Royalists and Republicans during the time of Charles I. The Republicans or Parliament’s army wore orange sashes. And the fighting was everywhere -- in York, Birmingham, Reading, Oxford, etc. -- so there was no clear ‘frontline’.

The Royalists lifted the sashes from the dead Republican soldiers and infiltrated the Earl of Essex’s army. They then reported back what they saw so that Charles I could decide on his military strategy. Charles I, in fact, had spymasters working for him and their job was intelligence gathering.

Of course, this works well when both sides look the same and speak the same language and dialect. But if it were the Japanese fighting the Americans then this would not work as a Japanese could never pass for an American never mind what uniform he wore.

So, yes, sometimes it is good to have ‘turn coats’ in your army. ‘Turn coats’ make good spies and help with the planning of military strategies. Today, of course, in the age of technology, you have other more useful ways of spying on the enemy. But when the battle lines are not clear and you never really know who is fighting whom then ‘turn coats’ are a very useful tool in warfare.

Another good use of ‘turn coats’ is to send thousands of your men over to the other side to infiltrate the ranks of your enemy. For example, like during the Royalist-Republican civil war in England, many Royalists marched from London with the Republicans.

Then, when the Royalists met the Republicans on the battlefield, the infiltrators attacked from the rear and sandwiched the Republican army in between and slaughtered them. The fact that the Republicans outnumbered the Royalists two-to-one made this diversionary tactic necessary. When you lack the numbers you need to use a good strategy and dirty tricks to win the war.

We saw this in the last general election in Kelantan. Umno spent millions to send thousands of Kelantanese living and working in the West Coast back to Kelantan to vote. They were, however, mostly opposition supporters. So when they went back to Kelantan they voted for the opposition and not for Umno. And Umno financed this whole operation -- to send ‘turn coats’ back to Kelantan to vote for the opposition.

Considering that Pakatan Rakyat is ‘outgunned’ compared to the massive Barisan Nasional machinery we can’t beat them in face-to-face combat. So we need to use all sorts of strategies and tricks to beat them. And ‘turn coats’, misinformation, disinformation, ‘red herrings’, diversionary tactics, etc., will need to be used to the hilt.

And we do not need heroes in a war. A dead soldier can no longer serve the cause. We should not die for our cause. We should make the other bastard die for his cause. As General Douglas MacArthur said: your job is not to die for your country. Your job is to make the other bastard die for his country.

And these are some other sayings of General MacArthur:

Only those are fit to live who are not afraid to die.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

We are not retreating - we are advancing in another direction.

You are remembered for the rules you break.

A general is just as good or just as bad as the troops under his command make him.

Age wrinkles the body. Quitting wrinkles the soul.

In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.

Never give an order that can't be obeyed.

Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

The best luck of all is the luck you make for yourself.

They died hard, those savage men - like wounded wolves at bay. They were filthy, and they were lousy, and they stunk. And I loved them.

I am concerned for the security of our great Nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.

Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervour - with the cry of grave national emergency.

One cannot wage war under present conditions without the support of public opinion, which is tremendously moulded by the press and other forms of propaganda.