candide

However, as I mentioned in other posts, they need the approval of one third of Senate members in order to pass an amendment to the constitution. So they won't be able to change the selection system with the current Senate, which means the next Senate will be selected according to the Junta's constitution and will be stacked with pro-establishment Senators.

This subject has been discussed several times. It's not the government who will select the new Senators. The way to select them is written in the constitution. https://www.ect.go.th/ect_en/download/article/article_20210806135906.pdf 200 new Senators will be selected by selection committees, according to the process described in the Constitution. The composition of the selection committees is prescribed (ex. it includes the heads of agencies). It is not clear who will appoint the selection committees, probably the EC. So as usual, appointed people will appoint each other. Due to the political "colour" of the EC and the other agencies members, we can expect a dominantly pro-yellow establishment new Senate. The key issue is then how many pro-yellow establishment Senators they will be able to select. They will probably not be able to get a 100% pro-establishment Senate. It is important because any amendment to the constitution will require the approval of at least one third of the Senate.

Double post

As you mention, a middle of the road policy can only fail. There are only two viable options. One is to join the single market, and do like Norway or Switzerland. It won't provide more benefits than being inside the EU, but would at least avoid the current failure. The other viable option is an ultra-liberal and ultra-globalist disruptive policy as advocated by some economists. Lower taxes, lower custom tariffs, lower worker protections, lower social subsidies, etc... in order to stimulate business and attract investment. Thatcher policy on a larger scale, combined with extensive globalisation. It can be very successful from an economic point of view. But then there is the social consequences attached to it. And we can all guess how they would be. Is UK ready to pay that social price?

So UK won't benefit from an improved system either.

That's the most likely scenario. If PPRP is dissolved, former Thaksin allies may join PPT, while the others may join United Nation. I don't see the core yellow PPRP members willing to join PPT, as well as being accepted there.

200 new Senators will be selected by selection committees, according to the process described in the Constitution. The composition of the selection committees is prescribed (I remember it includes the heads of agencies). Link provided in the post above by eisfeld. It is not clear who will appoint the selection committees, probably the EC. So as usual, appointed people will appoint each other. Due to the political "colour" of the EC and the other agencies members, we can expect a dominantly pro-yellow establishment new Senate.

Evoking "we didn't win"! Lol! Me stupid I thought it was the yellow-green establishment which never won any free and fair elections since 1996. PT did win elections, and the red shirts protested in order to have democratic elections. Abhisit never won elections. Abhisit has been the puppet of the military. The main reason he opposed the Junta was that, instead of putting him as PM like in 2008, they decided to put themselves as PM.

In Thailand, It's usually not elected people who appoint appointed people. As a general rule, appointed people appoint each other (with approval from high above). In this particular case, there is a precise process described in the constitution, they won't be appointed by the government as usual (the link has been posted in one the threads. They will be appointed by selection committees mainly composed of appointed people. It is not very clear who will appoint the selection committees, but I bet it won't be the government.

Well, certainly not same case as Abhisit. They did dissolve the House and organise elections. The fact that elections have been partly blocked by protesters and ultimately nullified was not their intent. They did not delay early elections, and after the first elections were nullified, they planned new elections with the EC as early as possible (July). Do you have a source about the fact the government situation was illegal in May. I don't remember this argument having been evoked for the coup. One thing is sure, Suthep's idea of a government was illegal according to the Constitution. There was nothing in the Constitution allowing it. About the nomination of a new army chief in 2010 https://www.dw.com/en/thailands-new-army-chief-takes-office/a-6066746

The courts won't agree with your analysis...

In Thailand, an elected government doesn't control the judiciary.

2006 and 2014 were bloodless because protesters were on the same side as the army. The army was not going to oppose them as they did with the red shirts. I agree with your last sentence. However, it was not Abhisit's incompetence. He was told to do it, in order to wait for the appointment of the new army chief in September. There was one red-shirt big protest in May in 2014 but they remained at the periphery and did not march into the city center.

The red shirts wanted elections because the government was not representing the will of the people (since part of the House was banned by the yellow courts). Abhisit was not chosen by voters. So it was democratic to ask for elections. When the legitimacy of a government is strongly contested for good reasons, the democratic behaviour is to organise early elections, as Yingluck did, and let the democratic vote decide. There was a particular reason for the red shirt to want early elections, and for Abhisit to reject it: the nomination of a new army chief in September. You know who was appointed, I guess (BTW, the same guy who was commanding the regiments who fired at protesters). As to the caretaker government being allegedly illegal: - you may remember that the yellow protesters blocked the first attempt at elections under the benevolent eyes of the army. So this situation has been caused by the yellow-green network itself, - if it was really illegal, the yellow courts would have removed them. The courts were looking at any ground to oust them, and they have not been able to do it. The protest coup failed (Suthep's mobs were spreading thin), the judicial coup failed (they were not able to oust the whole government), so the only way to block elections planned for July was a military coup.

Different times... - In 2010 and 2014, the army was cheered by the good people of Bangkok. However, the "good people" in Bangkok voted MF this time. Even members of the Hi-So or their children voted MF. There will be absolutely no support from the Bangkok population to a coup. It's very different from 2010 and 2014. They cannot fire at them like they did with the Issan 'buffaloes' in 2014. - remember who now commands the army forces stationed in Bangkok. It's an unpredictable.situation.

Exactly, that was the red shirts protest. So when the red shirts protest to get elections, the army fights them (and eventually kills them). And when the yellow shirts (or assimilated, PCRD) protest in order to overthrow a legally elected government and block elections, the army sides with them, and eventually make a coup.

That's what DeSantis says. Disney's financials are not bad. https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/the-walt-disney-company-reports-second-quarter-and-six-months-earnings-for-fiscal-2023/

Actually China can benefit much from a weakened Russia. It is definitely against Russia using nukes. Too much disorder for them.

That was about his oath, not about the constitution itself.

Stirring the pot..

I guess the FBI wanted to hastily make a public announcement in order to hastily influence elections.. Oh wait! July 5, 2016 Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Yet, the Durham report also confirms that the so-called Clinton's attempt was not used by the FBI. In short, it did not influence the FBI. Moreover, according to Durham: “In sum, the government's handling of the Clinton Plan intelligence may have amounted to a significant intelligence failure and a troubling instance in which confirmation bias and a tunnel-vision pursuit of investigative ends may have caused government personnel to fail to appreciate the extent to which uncorroborated reporting funded by an opposing political campaign was intended to influence rather than inform the FBI,” Durham said. “It did not, all things considered, however, amount to a provable criminal offense.” https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/joe-biden-briefed-clinton-plan-tie-trump-russia-durham-report-concludes

After Russia loses, they will also have others subjects to worry about.... China courts Central Asia as Russia falters The Kremlin’s obsession with conquering Ukraine has left a vacuum in Central Asia that China and Turkey are more than happy to fill. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/china-central-asia-russia/

I am not sure numbers are so relevant. Even small nuclear countries such as France or UK, have enough missiles to destroy the 50 largest Russian cities.

Here are the funders. Do you have anything to substantiate your claim that they are "trying to destroy the US"? https://influencemap.org/funders