rabo

What has Abhisit done to hurt Thailand or for that matter the poor of Thailand. I can think of numerous improvements for all since he has been PM.

What I am not at all happy with Abhisit it is the way he conduct this conflict, escalation instead of defusing the situation: the risk of an insurrection is very high today as analysts underline and as published by Webfact.

[clip]

At the beginning it was easier, now it is far more complex with the Army split as the Country. Today, it is the paradox, Anupong has the key to Peace or War. The Abhisit stubbordiness is driving Thailand on the edge of the abyss.

When you have the fire.

In the first second you can stop it with a glass of water

In a minute, you need a bucket

After you need the Fire brigade and the help of God...

I think the two issues really must be separated, 1)Thaksin and his cohorts/militia and 2) The rural/urban economic divide in Thailand. They are completely separate issues except where Thaksin has used the country's historical "problems" for his own purposes.

Look at Abhisit's actions over the last 2 years. Study all of Thaksin's sorted history. Can you honesty look in the mirror and say "I believe that Abhisit is the person responsible for driving Thailand to the brink, I do not believe that Mr. Thaksin is responsible for driving Thailand to the brink"

Which ever one it is, that's the problem that needs to be solved first.

Yes, because of the way he is handling the conflict -

Ihave exposed my point of view previous page and I repeat it:

[repeat of previous post]

Ha, you looked away from the mirror before you could say it, you got no farther than the part about Abhisit. HA.

I imagine it's frustrating fighting for good and social justice yet no one seems to listen. I am a full supporter of the "rural" red, I married a family of about 100 of them and have helped them through a generation (OK, maybe not 100 in the beginning). I'm just a bit less concerned on the social justice right now as there is a wolf at the door threatening to burn the city, purposefully killing people, and blowing up the power transmission lines feeding a city of 16,000,000 people. Kindly lets take care of that problem, and then I will join you in your efforts to implement western social justice in this wonderful Kingdom.

yoshiwara is calling everybody supporting the Red Shirt , Thaksinist

Question:

How can we call the supporters of Abhisit?

Suggestion: the abyssits

Because of the direction they are driving thailand

What has Abhisit done to hurt Thailand or for that matter the poor of Thailand. I can think of numerous improvements for all since he has been PM.

What I am not at all happy with Abhisit it is the way he conduct this conflict, escalation instead of defusing the situation: the risk of an insurrection is very high today as analysts underline and as published by Webfact.

[clip]

At the beginning it was easier, now it is far more complex with the Army split as the Country. Today, it is the paradox, Anupong has the key to Peace or War. The Abhisit stubbordiness is driving Thailand on the edge of the abyss.

When you have the fire.

In the first second you can stop it with a glass of water

In a minute, you need a bucket

After you need the Fire brigade and the help of God...

I think the two issues really must be separated, 1)Thaksin and his cohorts/militia and 2) The rural/urban economic divide in Thailand. They are completely separate issues except where Thaksin has used the country's historical "problems" for his own purposes.

Look at Abhisit's actions over the last 2 years. Study all of Thaksin's sorted history. Can you honesty look in the mirror and say "I believe that Abhisit is the person responsible for driving Thailand to the brink, I do not believe that Mr. Thaksin is responsible for driving Thailand to the brink"

Which ever one it is, that's the problem that needs to be solved first.

The wife's brothers have just arrived in Bangkok to join the Red protest.

Believe me, you would not fuk with these guys.

I really hope there are no yellow/red clashes. It would get very nasty very quickly.

Why, are they mafia or hoodlums or is it they just like to make trouble?

Nope non of the above, just hard working country boys with an absolute commitment to the Red socialist cause.

"Good Ol' Boys" from rural Thailand.

What do they think of Taksin?

if the yellows are so against corruption as they say they are, why are they not demonstrating against the dems with the two recent rulings of corruption by the EC? Maybe because they played a part in putting them in power and one of their top brass being foreign minister.

Hypocrites of the highest order.

.

Maybe it's because the EC ruling is only a recommendation to the Constitution Court to make a ruling. The Democrats have a right to defend the case first and only then will the Constitution Court make a decision. The Democrats may well win because the contribution was made in between the 1997 constitution and the 2007 constitution and thus was not illegal, or so the argument goes

.

Amazing how some people not only advocate but seem to relish in violence and talking up the violent abilities of one group versus another. I wonder if these people are actually in Thailand or why they are bitter enough to want to see more people get hurt which of course wont involve them from behind the keyboard and beer glasses and their fantasy existances.

Probably more of a Western mentality. In truth, none of the Thai's in any of the factions harbor such bitterness or anger. Not Thai style.

There may be another way. Suppose the Army suits up, M-16s at the ready, and confronts the Yellow Shirts and loudspeakers them to disperse...and they do disperse, peaceably.

Then they turn around and go to the Red Shirts and say, OK, the Yellow Shirts demonstrated illegally, we told them to disperse, and they did.

Now you disperse, or we will take immediate action, using all available weapons.

And if there's a proper run on the bank, the bank (having been notice, isn't that nice) will load up on its stock of ฿20 notes, and count them out individually because the counting machines will be broken. Whoever doesn't get their money by closing time will have to wait till the next day...and the next...and the next. That technique saved a fair few banks during the American Great Recession.

And ฿10 billion? How many tens of billions has the central bank used to keep the baht strong? As someone said, peanuts, no problems.

So, let's say there's a thousand Red Shirts out there in the protest venue, each having say, ฿10,000 in 20s in their (very) bulging pocket. Will they stay awake all night to make sure nobody takes it while they're asleep? Because they won't have time to go to another bank and deposit it. It should be very interesting in the next few days.

Your second excellent idea of the day, both very Thai style. Assuming the banks were open 8 hours a day, it would take 69 years to dispense the money if they counted slowly.

"Oh, sorry, we have only one teller today, the others got stuck in the red jam"

"No que ticket, sorry you must go the the back of the line at Sukhumvit 31"

Yes But, what's the truth? Pictures don't lie (maybe)

Here was my cut on it yesterday,

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Army-Pl...95#entry3515995

I wanted to know if the nation would really do that. This morning they published the original full resolution (big) image from their camera which pretty much proves it was an attempt to discredit the nation. The original "fake work" is on a Thai site at pantip.com. The reference is in my post.

The term cannon fodder is irrelevent here, period. The term can be used for both sides, so there's no point in using it.

Breaking News! Government hands out salaries to army and police on streets! They are being paid to be there! Breaking News! Yellow Shirts are being handed out money at the airport! They are being paid to be there! Would never see it, would you? Why? They already live in Bangkok and can be paid via their bank accounts.

If the genuine rural Reds want to win, they need to block off the roads and the borders to the agricultural provinces and do their trading there. Declare an independant state, sell their produce at ten times the current trading prices, and levy a tax. If they don't sell, they have all the food they need. The repressors cannot touch them. The new territory will be theirs by de facto. After a few months, Bangkok will grind to a halt. No honey, no money.

Good work. Now you are calling for a civil war and the break up of a unified nation whose peoples share a common culture and have no animosity towards each other, and, are economically interdependent.

Any better ideas?

That may have been a bad move by the government, but you need to put it in perspective.

The government did not censor all news. They didn't censor 'free' international press.

They shut down one TV station that was airing lies (doctored video/audio) and inciting violence.

A TV station like that would have been shut down in any western country within days.

The government shouldn't be censoring ANY news. People can decide for themselves what to believe and what not to believe. A government respectful of human rights respects a person's right to judge truth, check sources, etc. There is now not a SINGLE television station in the Thai language that is not pro-govt. There's not even a station a reasonable person could judge as NEUTRAL. I admit I am relying on my wife on this last point, though.

Also, we have a station in the US, FOX News, that broadcasts lies and doctored video everyday, and they haven't been shut down. And they shouldn't be shut down! They dig their own grave.

I also disagree with your assertion that Red TV has incited violence. Inciting violence in my opinion would have to actually involve encouraging people to go and cause bodily harm to people who are not attacking you.

"Bring empty bottles and we can fill them up with petrol and burn Bangkok to the ground" is not inciting violence?

I'm sure there are plenty of similar threats to innocent people.

Is that the official stance of the producers of Red TV? Did they continue to broadcast it over and over? No, and all of their viewers apparently figured out that this was a ridiculous statement made in the middle of a live broadcast. I haven't seen anybody around Bangkok attempting to burn anything down. Did Red TV keep rebroadcasting this statement? No. If the other stations rebroadcast this clip during their newscasts, should they be shut down as well?

Watching too much TV?

Some people posting here are describing the poor as "cannon fodder", but what exactly do they mean? Is "cannon fodder" bullets used by the army which paid for by workers' taxes? Who fires the bullets from the guns used by the army which is paid for by workers' taxes? Soldiers do, and these soldiers get paid. It's their job. I don't think the Reds on the streets have careers in street protesting with a salary and pension plan. They don't get a shield, a weapon, or a protective uniform. They are nobody's "cannon fodder". Would you be "cannon fodder" for 1,000 baht for a four-week street protest? Or might you have a genuine cause to want to stand up and fight for your rights? These people are there because they want to change a system which fails and represses them. All this "cannon fodder" talk is rubbish and an insult to them quite frankly. They have brains and feelings. Don't distract from the real issues.

"Cannon fodder" simply refers to Mr. Thaksin's willingness to put large numbers of inocent people in the firing range for his own political purposes. The term has nothing to do with the nature of the people who are being used as "Cannon Fodder".

RE: Fake NATION Image not fake

[......] The image on the right posted on page 15 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Army-Pl...html&st=365 definitely fake (extra people filled in), but now, who did it? When I follow some links I come to a website http://www.pantip.com/cafe/rajdumnern/topi...0/P9134000.html that has a full page study on various fake images. A red site I assume. Some of their points seem a bit dubious to me.

The fact that they have the before and after images is quite suspicious. I also note various images were taken at different times of the day. Particularly the images that have umbrellas were earlier in the morning perhaps when there was still some rain.

Comparing images with umbrellas with later images that have a lot of people can be very deceptive simply because umbrellas and peoples heads are very different in size, thus the sense of high density and low density are very different.

I also note that the image on pantip.com of a large crowd (said to be fake) is different than the one in the nation.

The image posted here on page 15 are early morning pictures that have umbrellas and few people (the one of the right being the fake one). I'm also suspicious why anyone would want to fake the early morning picture that has fewer people, and of course how do they have the before and after of the same image if they did not make the fake?????????? They also make some claims about the photo shop version name "CS3" being shown in one of the images (i.e. on a handrail and on an umbrella), which makes little sense to me.

So, who did it? My guess is the red shirt supporters are making the fakes, OR (get this one) maybe BOTH!

Anyway, the case can be settled if anyone can find the fake right image on page 15 on an actual nation webpage. If not, then I think this is just more fake red propaganda.

my point really was that there wasn't anywhere near 5,000 people at this event. If you look at the pictures on nation's facebook page and the fake 'before' picture. Take a green vehicle(back left) as point of reference. The vehicle really isn't very far back in the crowd. Look at the before pic and see how far the green vehicle is back in the shot. There are more people in the nation's pic but this is due to the crowds filling up. I believe the 'before' and the nation's are real but if you took the nation's pic from the same viewpoint that the 'before' was taken it would look much less impressive. Its actually quite a small area up to the green vehicle, just condensed with people. I would reckon about 1000 to 1500.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/...n-30127345.html

Jucel,

I understand your point exactly and I too initially thought the NATION image was indeed fake, mostly because of the crown density issue. If the nation is showing fake images I want to know. However, trying to resolve the various images I began to realize the early morning "umbrella" images and the latter images of peoples' heads creates a natural optical illusion. In one image, the mind judges "density" from the sea of umbrellas and in the other from the sea of people's heads. This optical illusion was probably the starting point for the pantip "analysis" but they went on to make the fake right hand "umbrella" image, etc.

That's kind of dumb as it gives away their hand. If the NATION faked the right hand image then how does pantip.com have the left-hand image????

All said and done, I would agree that 5000 seems too high, but then again we don't see the whole croud. I was more interested in the war of lies and who was lying.

Cheers.

look at the nation's pic. there is a green van at the back. ok, now look at the before pic. the green van is still there. look at the after and it has been covered up with photoshop!!!!!!!

Where are these pictures, can't find them.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3878...id=328167122854

the others are on pages of the forum - called before and after

Thanks. Well, I spent some time to try and investigate these "fake" images.

The image on the right posted on page 15 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Army-Pl...html&st=365 definitely fake (extra people filled in), but now, who did it?

When I follow some links I come to a website http://www.pantip.com/cafe/rajdumnern/topi...0/P9134000.html that has a full page study on various fake images. A red site I assume. Some of their points seem a bit dubious to me.

The fact that they have the before and after images is quite suspicious. I also note various images were taken at different times of the day. Particularly the images that have umbrellas were earlier in the morning perhaps when there was still some rain.

Comparing images with umbrellas with later images that have a lot of people can be very deceptive simply because umbrellas and peoples heads are very different in size, thus the sense of high density and low density are very different.

I also note that the image on pantip.com of a large crowd (said to be fake) is different than the one in the nation.

The image posted here on page 15 are early morning pictures that have umbrellas and few people (the one of the right being the fake one). I'm also suspicious why anyone would want to fake the early morning picture that has fewer people, and of course how do they have the before and after of the same image if they did not make the fake??????????

They also make some claims about the photo shop version name "CS3" being shown in one of the images (i.e. on a handrail and on an umbrella), which makes little sense to me.

So, who did it? My guess is the red shirt supporters are making the fakes, OR (get this one) maybe BOTH!

Anyway, the case can be settled if anyone can find the fake right image on page 15 on an actual nation webpage. If not, then I think this is just more fake red propaganda.

This morning, the NATION has refuted the iReport chaims by publishing the original uncompressed version of the image in question and..... it's not altered or fake.

Thus the fake, altered images floating around, presumably originating from the pantip.com website, are just more Thaksin camp lies and distortions aimed at the international media.

Case closed.

look at the nation's pic. there is a green van at the back. ok, now look at the before pic. the green van is still there. look at the after and it has been covered up with photoshop!!!!!!!

Where are these pictures, can't find them.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3878...id=328167122854

the others are on pages of the forum - called before and after

Thanks. Well, I spent some time to try and investigate these "fake" images.

The image on the right posted on page 15 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Army-Pl...html&st=365 definitely fake (extra people filled in), but now, who did it?

When I follow some links I come to a website http://www.pantip.com/cafe/rajdumnern/topi...0/P9134000.html that has a full page study on various fake images. A red site I assume. Some of their points seem a bit dubious to me.

The fact that they have the before and after images is quite suspicious. I also note various images were taken at different times of the day. Particularly the images that have umbrellas were earlier in the morning perhaps when there was still some rain.

Comparing images with umbrellas with later images that have a lot of people can be very deceptive simply because umbrellas and peoples heads are very different in size, thus the sense of high density and low density are very different.

I also note that the image on pantip.com of a large crowd (said to be fake) is different than the one in the nation.

The image posted here on page 15 are early morning pictures that have umbrellas and few people (the one of the right being the fake one). I'm also suspicious why anyone would want to fake the early morning picture that has fewer people, and of course how do they have the before and after of the same image if they did not make the fake??????????

They also make some claims about the photo shop version name "CS3" being shown in one of the images (i.e. on a handrail and on an umbrella), which makes little sense to me.

So, who did it? My guess is the red shirt supporters are making the fakes, OR (get this one) maybe BOTH!

Anyway, the case can be settled if anyone can find the fake right image on page 15 on an actual nation webpage. If not, then I think this is just more fake red propaganda.

look at the nation's pic. there is a green van at the back. ok, now look at the before pic. the green van is still there. look at the after and it has been covered up with photoshop!!!!!!!

Where are these pictures, can't find them.

Sure. 35 years later. On the corpses of how many people, do you reckon? Cambodia also an "interesting" example of what can happen when totalitarian "red" movements prevail.

Such a fair example of your open mind:

You choose to open the discussion on Viet Cong, then realising it is not the good example you jump to Cambodia!!!!

Concerning the vietnam, French and US we have lost the war there because they were fighting for their Country.

French we have started the war particularly under the lobbying of capitalists like Michelin (Rubber plantations), at the end of the French Vietnamese war....we have discovered that those capitalists have sold most of their vietnamese assets for reinvesting in South America, Our soldiers were continuing to fight and are dead believing they were protecting their interests.....This is one facet of Capitalism. Sharks!!!

How does Vietnamese history relate to the current problems in Thailand? Besides, your example of a nation fighting for their country is wrong. North and South Vietnam were never a single unified country until the French became involved. Then the French chopped it into administrative regions.

So the headline at the top, saying Government ready for more talks with Reds means the machine guns will do the talking?

It is the red leadership under instructions from Thaksin who prefer petrol bombs to negotiations.

you forgot to mention that this would not be happening if the ligitmate government (red shirts) were still in power

i am apolitical....

"Under instructions from Thaksin"................what proof has this idiot got ? Why are people allowed to print such inflammatory stupid bloody guesswork.............It should NOT be allowed past admin !

If you are really that new to Thai politics I would suggest some research on the internet first. If you can understand some Thai you might see if you can find a clip of one of Thaksin's video phone ins, if not just read the "atmosphere" of the video. There's an enormous amount of "proof" about Thaksin's organization and leadership structure.

it's amazing that this army can't even surround a hotel and remove some fat middle aged men from a room without incident. If the army can't protect the country against a bunch of farmers with sticks, what the heck would they do if say someone like Cambodia decided this would be a nice country to have? I wonder how many countries out there are looking at Thailand as possible fair game, seeing how helpless they really appear. Maybe the moral of the story is, image is just that, all show and no substance. Time to get it together and prove it has what it takes to protect the women and children, or maybe the women and children should do it instead?

The problem is that the government and the army/police are trying to avoid mass casualties. If the Cambodians (in an extremely hypothetical situation) were to invade I think the Thai army would have no qualms about slaughtering them. On the other hand, you have to wonder how they are unable to arrest even one of the crooks calling themselves "leaders" of the red shirts. Personally, I think Abhisit is making the best of what is an impossible situation, and I'm sure he wishes he had something more effective than the Keystone Kops to rely on.

Unfortunately, this will likely all end with Abhisit resigning and probably moving overseas where he can probably make a good living under far less stressful circumstances. Thailand will have lost one of it's most intelligent, and educated Prime Ministers in decades and will end up with someone of the caliber of a Samak Sundaravej or a Chalerm - just what the country really deserves, so it can remain the underdeveloped, corrupt, laughing stock it seems to want to be. I used to love Thailand and respect its people. The last several years since the election of Thaksin have made me reconsider.

Well said.

The government is not fighting back, because it is not actually fighting. Like the saying ''when your back is against the wall you really fight back." I'm sure Cambodia or anybody would find that if Thailand were under serious threat they would defend themselves with strength.

There is no reason for an educated and compassionate gentleman like Abhisit to use more force than is neccesary.

I have my own feelings about why the hotel arrest incident was 'bungled' , specifically that it wasn't.

The police knew that Mr.So-Called-I-Am-An-Honest-Red-Spokesman-For-The-Rural-Poor-And-I'm-Here-To-Overthrow-The-Decadent-Bangkok-Elite-With-Their-Fancy-Hotels-And-Big-Lunches, was infact staying in one of those enemy elite hotels and stuffing his fat, lying face with foie-gras, he had gone straight from 'revolutionary' to being 'the new boss,same as the old boss' but had forgotten the actual middle part, the actual successful coup part & had gone straight for the after-coup self-indulgence, prematurely. Mr Abhisit could not have bought better Tv coverage than what was shown in the 'bungled' raid.

Abhisit and the police knew he was there, with his face in the swill, and they couldn't think of anything more hilarious and damaging to the Red's so-called cause, than to see one of their heroic anti-elite leaders fat a$ tumbling ungracefully from the 3* elitist fancy hotel on every public TV set from here to the deepest Amazon.

It is the first time I've seen Abhisit smirk for ages, yesterday, and I'm not surprised.

Interesting theory and the additional images of a hand-grenade and timer would fit your theory, too. One could further argue that Abhisit et al would not want to create an emotional flashpoint by actually capturing the leaders.

But alas this is Thailand and I don't think so. Reports I read have two groups of police involved, a large undercover group that had taken residence in the hotel and a smaller second group that showed up later presumably after the first group tipped their hand by asking for the access keys for the red leaders' rooms.

I thus assume the first group was pulling off the operation and the second group, maybe friends of the red leaders came in, busted up the operation, and helped the potbellied reds escape. They later posed as "captured police" while sitting and laughing it up for while, and were then free to go.

Laws are rules that a Society gives to itself.

How does "Society" give the rules/laws to itself?

De we assume that "laws" are always good laws. Laws can be written and "imposed" on society by those who have the power to make them..and for the sole purpose of protecting the lawmakers.

Without getting all philosophical, No.

The laws in question here are clauses written into the constitution after the coup that have severe penalties for political and electorial corruption aimed at stemming the rampant levels of corruption that plague the country.

You can bet that some politicians and political parties were/are not happy about these laws. However, such laws are necessary if Thailand is to advance its infant democracy. Some have legitimately complained that the laws are too strict. Others have complained because they curtail their corrupt practices.

I would just like to mention that not a single English international news source has adopted the word "terrorist" to refer to the redshirts. Many have mentioned that Abhisit referred to them thusly but none has adopted the word to refer to the reds outside of the references in Abhisit's speeches.

3 examples (now that I know we CAN actually link to other sources besides the Nation, Yay!)

Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63F0CX20100416

"The government has promised to crack down on what it terms "terrorists" whom it blames for Saturday's killings"

New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/world/asia/17thai.html

"Mr. Abhisit said the move was necessary because the protesters had been infiltrated by what he called terrorists who were threatening national security. "

BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8625847.stm

"He had announced that the police were there to take "decisive measures against terrorists" - the government's word for an alleged protest hard core."

That's probably because the red's are not the terrorists, they are rural farming people. That's understood here in Thailand and I assume the savy international media would follow suit.

The reference to terrorists applies to Taksin's militant wing trained under Gen. Khattiya and maybe others we don't know about. These are the ones that have threated to "hunt down" Abhisit and the ones that tried to blow up the primiary electical pylons feeding Bangkok, a *real* terrorist attack that would have led to significant loss of innocent life. How many hospital emergency rooms are there in Bangkok?

And there is still the open question of who planned and executed the assassination attempt on Sonthi L. - not that I'm in any way a fan of the man or his agenda. The weapons came from Lopburri.

That's a good point and a key point in trying to understand what forces are really at play now. However, Sondhi himself says he knows who did it. Again there is the question of how much you can trust anything, but this is a strong "data point". From a page on wordpress. You can easily find the page by googling any group of about 8 to 10 words.

People's Alliance for Democracy, or PAD, leader Sondhi Limthongkul said the mastermind and moneybag of his assassination attempt is someone who lives abroad, with some people in the Department of Special Investigation, or DSI, and the military hiring the assassination team, which is made up of three soldiers and one policeman.

He said most of the soldiers involved in the plot are from the Special Warfare Unit in Lop Buri and they want to silence him for his efforts to expose corruption.

I would just like to mention that not a single English international news source has adopted the word "terrorist" to refer to the redshirts. Many have mentioned that Abhisit referred to them thusly but none has adopted the word to refer to the reds outside of the references in Abhisit's speeches.

3 examples (now that I know we CAN actually link to other sources besides the Nation, Yay!)

Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63F0CX20100416

"The government has promised to crack down on what it terms "terrorists" whom it blames for Saturday's killings"

New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/world/asia/17thai.html

"Mr. Abhisit said the move was necessary because the protesters had been infiltrated by what he called terrorists who were threatening national security. "

BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8625847.stm

"He had announced that the police were there to take "decisive measures against terrorists" - the government's word for an alleged protest hard core."

That's probably because the red's are not the terrorists, they are rural farming people. That's understood here in Thailand and I assume the savy international media would follow suit.

The reference to terrorists applies to Taksin's militant wing trained under Gen. Khattiya and maybe others we don't know about. These are the ones that have threated to "hunt down" Abhisit and the ones that tried to blow up the primiary electical pylons feeding Bangkok, a *real* terrorist attack that would have led to significant loss of innocent life. How many hospital emergency rooms are there in Bangkok?

Red shirt's democracy = we can protest, but you can't !!

Yellow shirt's democracy = we potested, ruined the tourist industry, took over international airport, had no Police or Army stop us - but red shirt's can't

Oh, OK then, the red's leadership can destroy the country, kill people, and blow things of too. Good point.

[clip]

You might be a bit careful with your insidious and inciteful commentary. You must know that you are in the middle of an extremely dangerous and potentially tragic situation of historical proportions. No one in this country, Abihist, the shady politicians, the aloof army generals, the elite, the red country folk, the black guards, or even Seh Daeng himself (whom a friend of mine knows very well) would ever consider the kind of hatred you post here. I have been married to a *really* big northeastern family (read red) for 18 years, none of whom could imagine that which you insinuate is fact.

No insult or injury intended, just my concern for the Kingdom and its people. Perhaps a bit macabre, but what is really going on is fascinating beyond imagination, and you are missing it!!!.

Before posting I thought to ask some of my family, who are staying with us for the holiday, what was the general feeling about Abhisit. They thought most people (probably more redish) did not like Abhisit's government and wanted him to leave. They said they did not dislike Abhisit personally and admired his honesty and western style direct approach to doing things. They said with some admiration, "You know, he was educated over seas!". There you go, a real Thai answer. Love him, get him out now!

BTW I'm pro country folk and vehemently opposed Taksin. Can't comment on the "reds" as they are a mix of many things.

You don't have to like what I said, agree with it…or read it. In my opinion, Abhisit could have prevented the deaths on both sides by agreeing to dissolution of parliament and calling for elections…immediately. Elections are coming anyway and for me, the value of life is worth more than his nine month timeframe. And, being his decision as PM, I think he should take full responsibility for the outcome.

I think he used excessive force from the very start and I don't understand why the use of Snipers is so unimaginable. Do your family members and friends seriously believe that Abhisits military, capable of dropping tear gas from helicopters on the elderly and on women with infant children in their arms is incapable of using Snipers? And how would tear gassing old people and babies not be considered hatred? Also, every Army I can think of has Snipers… and this one decided to use everything in their arsenal except Snipers? I remember just yesterday, people were called crazy for saying that the Army may have fired live rounds at Redshirts…

There is an enormous amount of historical data concerning the use of Snipers for psychological effect. This is actually only one of the Snipers common battlefield uses. The desire for a demoralizing psychological effect is why I believe the Army could have used Snipers. This demoralizing effect was also their objective when blasting the psychological warfare music.

Wikipedia

Psychological warfare

Due to the unexpected aspect of sniper fire, high lethality of aimed shots and frustration at the inability to locate and attack snipers, sniper tactics have a significant effect on morale. Extensive use of sniper tactics can be used as a psychological strategy in order to induce constant stress in opposing forces.

One may note that by many aspects (constant threat, high "per event" lethality, inability to strike back), the psychological impact imposed by snipers is quite similar to those of landmines, booby-traps, and IED's.

We obviously differ in opinion and that's OK. But, I can't understand why you are not more concerned about the possibility that Thaksin's private militia purposefully started shooting up both sides to insure the fall of the government, which he has so clearly been working towards.

But let me ask you a question. Who do you think tried to Kill Sondhi Limthongkul by spraying his van with 200 rounds of automatic weapons fire? Do some research and find out what is the prevailing opinion/analysis.

I didn't ask any of my relatives how they felt about the Army purposefully killing innocent people with secret snipers, for obvious reasons. I did ask one of my nieces what she thought about the Army throwing tear gas out of helicopters onto the crowds (verbatim). She said some people felt that there was no need to use teargas while others thought there was. She said throwing it from helicopters and tossing it was much better than the way the Somsak government used the shooting kind of tear gas a point blank rage, which caused at least one death. She was also pleased (in a sense) that Aphisit's government tried hard to follow international standards for applying crowd control measures.

Some of their answers are surprising, particularly how well thought out they are.

As I am from the west, to me having another coup makes no sense

But from the Thai wife they thingk different

Parliment is doomed if it does

Doomed if it does not

Red shirt are doomed if they get what they want, as it is not democracy

Yet doomed if they don't as this is what they want

We are now in a no win situation

Only way we can possibly win is if the silent minority come out and say what they want

Most of her friends say "they not worry us, where we are" "So not our worry"

Sorry I didn't copy your whole post, although it was very interesting. However, I think your wife has also touched on one reason that Thailand gets into many of these situations. Like she said "It's not our problem" so, no need to do anything. I always get "reuang khao", their problem. When it becomes a problem then you get mai pen rai, so just accept it.

Is it surprising that 16 million Bangkokians have been silent and only 30,000 of maybe 20,000,000 eligible rural participants came to protest after massive payments, transportation, and other incentives?

^tell that to the lad who lost half his head.

No Doubt, shot by a black shirt sniper.

Cheers, Rick

Thanks for another dose of your bandwaggon anti-redshirt propaganda.

Of course, you are ignoring the 4th element... the specialized group of elite Army Snipers that were inserted by Abhisit for the shock and awe effect. In case you missed it, the entire free world watched while Abhisit introduced a severely disproportionate amount of force from the very beginning. Shock and awe was his desired effect and employed from day one.

Shock and awe: technically known as rapid dominance, is a military doctrine based on the use of overwhelming power, dominant battlefield awareness, dominant maneuvers, and spectacular displays of force to paralyze an adversary's perception of the battlefield and destroy its will to fight.

As we have seen in the many videos, it was all fun and games until the boys in black gave the government a taste of their own medicine and shut down Abhisits killing machine. I'm sure you can respect the fact that it's not easy to dominate a super human 500 baht a day crowd of redshirts! I'm sure you can also respect the fact that some of the redshirts murdered by the Army were Bangkokians. From every account I have seen, only the Army killed people that were unarmed and last time I checked, killing unarmed civilians is murder.

For those that will surely dispute the shock and awe argument, please get over your hatred long enough to look at what Abhisit brought to the fight. Fueled by his hatred for redshirts he brought helicopters, armored personnel carriers, shotguns, Kevlar body armor, gas masks, pistols, TAR21/M16/SAR21 assault rifles, tear gas, thousands of troops in full battle-rattle, shields, water cannons, psychological warfare music, and elite trained Army Snipers.

And what was this incredibly dangerous force Abhisit was up against?

The redshirt crowd, with their bare hands, blood, bottles, sticks, motorcycle helmets, surgical mask, rocks, umbrellas, loudspeakers, slingshots, flags, tiger balm, clappers, and somtam! … thousands of elderly, mostly female, so-called uneducated country folks that spent weeks in the scorching sun, refusing to surrender or stand still to be slaughtered.

Abhisit chastised the army for their failure to inflict enough violence for his liking. Meanwhile, the redshirts kept giving the army their weapons back and asking for nonviolence... and consistently providing aid to injured troops. The Army responded by using those same weapons against the redshirts again. In my opinion, bad karma was stacking against the Army from day one. Most of them didn't want to be there in the first place and resisted Abhisits immoral orders. For many, their will was broken before it even started and Abhisit was hardly enough reason for them to sell their souls.

You might be a bit careful with your insidious and inciteful commentary. You must know that you are in the middle of an extremely dangerous and potentially tragic situation of historical proportions. No one in this country, Abihist, the shady politicians, the aloof army generals, the elite, the red country folk, the black guards, or even Seh Daeng himself (whom a friend of mine knows very well) would ever consider the kind of hatred you post here. I have been married to a *really* big northeastern family (read red) for 18 years, none of whom could imagine that which you insinuate is fact.

No insult or injury intended, just my concern for the Kingdom and its people. Perhaps a bit macabre, but what is really going on is fascinating beyond imagination, and you are missing it!!!.

Before posting I thought to ask some of my family, who are staying with us for the holiday, what was the general feeling about Abhisit. They thought most people (probably more redish) did not like Abhisit's government and wanted him to leave. They said they did not dislike Abhisit personally and admired his honesty and western style direct approach to doing things. They said with some admiration, "You know, he was educated over seas!". There you go, a real Thai answer. Love him, get him out now!

BTW I'm pro country folk and vehemently opposed Taksin. Can't comment on the "reds" as they are a mix of many things.

Well the mysterious 3rd party...... yet to know if it was military/reds/unknown to blame. However the reds were singing/dancing in the streets and seemed caught off guard by the violence that ensued. Their assumption rightfully would be the military attacking them, so they responded in kind with rocks, sticks, petrol bombs.

Now I see. Your supposition is that the first shots were fired by the mysterious 3rd hand and caught everyone off guard, and then both reds and army went into a reactionary mode to the gunfire. Yes that does sound plausible. I would suspect that was the reaction the 3rd hand was looking for.