Eric Loh

12 minutes ago, robblok said:

No street protests, is a good thing. But I can't say that the corruption situation has improved, nor has freedom of press gone the right way.

No streets protest???

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/14/thailand-biggest-democracy-protests-in-years-held-as-military-junta-delays-elections

8 minutes ago, BigBadGeordie said:

Steven100 does ????

Only Steven? Peace and stability and No more corruption they claimed. But but Thaksin said some. 

That’s a mighty fall from grace akin to a promise of a managerial position and end up as a janitor. A mighty bending forward to please the boss. 

The authority only have 2 speed - extra quick for political enemies and neutral for their own.  

I will give the ship 6 months before it will sink and rats bail. 

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

New government to be formed this month,

This is the old government with help of the fake election. The same old NCPO faces like Somkid, Wissanu, Anupong and Prawit in the same key positions. Chief faker is still the leader. No change at all. 

59 minutes ago, robblok said:

Yes but your the one that says accept corruption, while I am the one that disagrees with it. In my country corruption is much much lower. Probably much lower then in the US for sure. Why because it gets punished harshly and there are many rules. Rules that have never ever been put in place here because NONE of the politicians want it. So its not a democracy here at all (maybe a starting one but a far far far from good one and it wont change because the politicians dont want it to change)

I said sustained democracy will reduce corruption only for you to twist it around and said I accept corruption. You do have the habit of changing the subject and divert the conservation away to meet your agenda. Anyway if you disagree with corruption, then you should agree with democracy. That’s what I am saying but not getting through to you. Speaking against democracy and speaking well on behalf of the junta that dismantle political institutions and human rights seem to me that you are actually a very confused person. 

54 minutes ago, pornprong said:

This paper studies the influence of democracy on the level of corruption. In particular, does democracy necessarily reduce a country’s level of corruption? The growing consensus reveals that there is an inverse correlation between democracy and corruption; the more democracy and the less corruption.

 

https://esacentral.org.au/images/Saha.pdf

 

Studies have demonstrated that while very high levels of democracy reduce corruption, low to modest levels of democracy actually increase corruption.1

 

http://bseim.web.unc.edu/files/2016/08/6-McMann-et-al_B.pdf

 

The junta has given Thailand low to modest level of democracy, guess why?

(if you need some help, read the red text above)

 

 

When a country has weak democratic institutions and political rights, corruption rate is at their highest like Thailand. Top 10 countries in the world with low rate of corruption are democratic. 

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/least-corrupt-countries-transparency-international-2018/

Sustainable democracy has a better chance to reduce corruption. Seem a simple logic which some here still find hard to understand.

18 minutes ago, candide said:

Actually, since the 2006 coup, the Thai had it "their own way" only during a bit more than 3 years. Lol.

In fact military governments had it their own way much more than elected governments since 1932 and faired badly in so many aspects. They have been spoiled so much that they ought to give elected governments a chance. 

2 hours ago, Chang_paarp said:

Ummm why did he not stand? Were there other issues we are not hearing? Qualifications?

Probably age. He is 86.

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Eric, that is your opinion.. you like to think this way because it justifies having corruption and scandals in the PTP and you can say but its ok to have it.

 

You seriously misunderstand how justice works its not about voting people who are corrupt out its about prosecuting them. Again something you don't like.

 

Lets agree to disagree because we both know you will never admit to how utterly corrupt the PTP is while at the same hand only point fingers to the utterly corrupt junta. Be a bit more balanced Eric it would do you good.

 

*edit* i do agree with the two terms.. 100% it would help.

That's a big diversion from what I posted. Never mind, I don't wish to be drawn into a tedious discursive malarkey with you or your sidekicks.  

47 minutes ago, Chang_paarp said:

How can he make any statements about a party he is not a member of?

A party was threatened to be dissolved because of that. 

The government has not yet been formed and already sinking fast. Every day we hear the junta leaders dire warnings to their stakeholders trying to keep the uneasy coalition intact. Even their own appointees in the upper house need to be warned. What's happening? Think the curtain will fall on these bunch of undeserving generals as the new broom sweeps clean.   

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I supported the coup that is right, but changed my mind after they did not leave. In the past they always did. If the PTP was less corrupt then there would never have been enough support to dislodge them. So you can say what you want basically corruption is the reason and to think that (for now with exception of FFW) the other politicians are not in it for themselves is laughable. 

 

Until the money is taken out of politics this will go on forever.

For all your good intention, money will never ever be taken out of politics in the past and in the future. Get over it. Corruption should never ever be the yardstick for democracy. Get over that too. 

Even squeaky clean Singapore has corruption in their politics and yes it involve money. Japan, South Korea too have serious political corruption and scandal. Democracy allows the people to have the empowerment to vote these corrupt people out or the independent justice system will bring these wrongdoers to rightful justice.

It will help Thailand get rid of corrupt political leaders if they can include in the constitution to limit the tenure of prime minister to 2 terms. I hope future constitution will include this clause as a way to end corrupt and power crazy leaders. 

25 minutes ago, lemonjelly said:

Some insight 

 

 

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Asia-Insight/All-the-king-s-men-Thai-military-power-shifts-away-from-Prayuth

 

 

As I said earlier, he is dispensable. His usefulness and his protector have expired. Only the manner of his exit. 

49 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

And this is exactly why the threat about another coup is uttered now. As even Prayuth will understand that surviving a censure debate with help of the senate, will make him a lame duck, until the next censure opportunity 

The man has a short fuse and lacking wits and I think it’s an off the cuff remark. You know he can’t initiate a coup without the army backing. He no longer has that direct command of any military force. Plus he don’t have the backing from incumbent elites who are casting worried eyes on

the declining economic situation. In fact I see him dispensable and looking for an exit strategy. Just my worthless 2 cents opinion and wishing hard he will go peacefully????.

56 minutes ago, robblok said:

Would be nice but I think its wishful thinking. Besides if they name the PM but don't have a majority then what. On the other hand watching him explode if he loses would be worth it. 

Not too wishful Rob. The junta bloc only has a very slim majority in the lower house. The censure debate is solely a parliament function and if a few of the disgruntled pro junta MPs cross over to the pro democracy bloc, Prayut will be in trouble. But the caveat is the fully appointed upper house that can vote him back as PM. The opposition bloc will have to be very certain of their action or it may backfired. 

IMO if he reach an impasse whether the cabinet or street disturbances. the elites will rather seek a neutral PM or just maybe a national government till the next election . The coup threat is just an empty threat because he do not have that authority. If he bow out, that will be equivalent to him exploding as you implied 

The opposition bloc do have one chance of removing Prayut out through a censure debate. I think they are waiting for the opportune time to have sufficient disgruntled MPs; perhaps after the cabinet formation and the fallout soon after. Under the constitution, only the lower house vote. However the opposition still have to win over some senators. If not, the junta loyal senators can nominate him back as PM. The opposition bloc will lose that once-in-a-year censure opportunity. 

48 minutes ago, webfact said:

Talk of coup rears its ugly head again

Who will permit another coup. Prayut is just a water boy. Those who have given approval for past coups are either gone or incapacitated. 

19 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Well, somebody must love the junta a bunch - otherwise they wouldn't have voted them back in again.

 

 

Those who voted the junta are possibly be those who downplay the brutal attack against Sirawith and post derogatory remarks like "injuries to activists are always followed by bank account numbers for money transfers" or "which activists should be next?". Then they are those who posted comments telling doctors not to be so quick to give Sirawith treatment, suggesting the activist could be kept in his suffering for humour sake". These sad and weak junta supporters were out in full force defending the military and the junta and theorizing that Sirawith plotted his own attack. Nothing but sardonic remarks from the typical brain-dead junta apologists.