Old Man River

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I would imagine very few participants on either side could pronounce the word, "Strike".

How about the word "occupied?" I expect to see Chinese troops stationed in Thailand before the next elections - to assist the Junta in the event of any internal "strife."

Do you really think the Generals would invite Chinese troops into Thailand? Also, do you really think the Thai military can't handle internal strife?

Just a matter of time before you see Chinese military based in Thailand to better protect the Junta (not to be confused with Thais people) from both external and internal enemies.

This military alliance goes beyond the Junta's "spat" with the USA. It goes to the heart of what is most dear to the Junta - preservation of its power and wealth no matter the cost. Considering the ideology of the atheistic communist Chinese regime, constitutional monarchies and Buddhism are not any more compatible in such as regime than is democracy. This agreement marks a very sad day for Thailand's future as a free nation. Maybe Thailand now should be called "Chailand."

How many Chinese military bases are there in Myanmar?

History lesson....the stage for conflict in middle east is the Israel Palestine conflict not the US.

Fact the Americans do not have a permanent presence in U Tapao.

Fact, Thailand does not have anything the US needs or wants except diplomatic relations.

So whats your factual answer....China or Russia? Hahahah either two are laughable.

The US has nothing that Thailand needs either apart from weapons.

As for your history lesson: laughable

The U.S. is a huge trading partner with Thailand. The current difference of opinion should be just short term.

American foreign policy is mired in scandal, but Christ almighty cosying up to China? With their oppressive regime?

Foreigners here actually support this Junta? Will you guys remain in Thailand if it becomes a complete police state like China?

If that ever happened the Thai's would be leaving as quick as we would.

Well they are Asians dealing with Asians and China really need that rail line for the future movements.

Absolutely China needs that rail line, which will hook China up with Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Singapore (potentially VN as well). Thailand is sitting in the middle of it. China will be one of the main drivers, but they don't have to own it.

American foreign policy is mired in scandal, but Christ almighty cosying up to China? With their oppressive regime?

Foreigners here actually support this Junta? Will you guys remain in Thailand if it becomes a complete police state like China?

If that ever happened the Thai's would be leaving as quick as we would.

Typical US foreign policy. Schizophrenic. They've no problem with Egypt's Junta (who hates the US) or many others but love to drive their friends into their enemy's arms. Thailand does more trade with China and this short-sighted policy will cause Thailand to bond more closely with China to the detriment of both Thailand and the US. If the US State Dept. knew the first thing about Thais, they would know you don't get anywhere with ultimatums. Very disappointing.

Scholars rank US Secretary of State John Kerry dead last in terms of effectiveness.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/wp/2015/02/05/scholars-rank-kerry-dead-last-in-terms-of-effectiveness/

And this is from a newspaper sympathetic to the Obama administration.

Talks between China and Thailand on the Kra Canal are continuing. If this thing ever gets off the ground it could lead to a Canal Zone and it isn't too far fetched to see China directly involved. With 80% of the world's oil going through the Malacca Sraits, China has to be thinking ahead.

And what the HELL has this to do with the USA? Purely a domestic affair.

I guess you've never heard of the term "seeking political asylum".....?

Who is seeking political asylum?

So Panitan ex-Dem is Prawit adviser and Chitpas another ex-Dem was on his bucket list for army spokesperson. So much for not taking sides and reconciliation.

Reconciliation is a 2 way street.

I hear something like this from a lot of anti-American Thais. They seem to think the US wants Thailand and its oil. Yes, oil! Thailand can't supply its own energy needs and the US wants their oil? Frankly, I cannot imagine why the US would want this place. Bangkok is a swamp and despite massive, massive US infrastructure support during the Vietnam War, Thailand has let all the advantages from that infrastructure head start evaporate. Were I an American policy maker, I would want NOTHING to do with administering this place. It's a dysfunctional mess from the standpoint of government. It's a wonderful place in many other respects, but it's just a nightmare to think about governing this place. Iraq was easier.

Thailand has value to China in that it provides land access from southern China and its southern neighbors to Malaysia and Singapore. Hence China's interest in the rail projects.

you got to be kidding right?

why don't we just invite the North Koreans while we are at it.

i wonder if the Thais cleared this with the US military before inviting the commies and their "disaster relief and people’s support exercises" bulls*it?

Don't choke on your apple pie dear boy, but your comments show how very little you know about the exercises your waving the flag about

Some facts

Vietnam

Laos

China

( all communist and all have observer status already in CG

Myanmar - military dictatorship - observer status

Indonesia - biggest Muslim population in the world yes I know you never mentioned inviting terrorists

Still, I don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling about this, especially when it is preceded by the Chinese Head of their DOD to discuss joint cooperation in armament development. Actually, I don't even know what this means, but it doesn't sound like it is related to humanitarian efforts.

I love how this discussion is always framed from "USA needs Thailand" with zero consideration for vice versa.

What exactly does the USA need Thailand for?

Thailand has everything to lose and little to gain from China. Do these numpties imagine the Chinese will move their manufacturing to thailand in volume to replace japanese or USA investment.

Thailand will lose massively if it goes all out to befriend China and move to disavow its friendship with the USA. This junta needs to wind its neck in fast or the USA might just take these threats seriously and just realign itself with someone else in the region to replace thailand.

Then listen to the wailing from the amaart and junta supporters that they no longer get courted by the USA and have to kowtow in Beijing. The mainland Chinese won't be nearly as nice or financiallt beneficial as doing business with the USA.

"What exactly does the USA need Thailand for?"

Absolutely nothing at all.

You can use that argument for just about every other country in the world.

Does anyone know what time it will be shown on True? Thanks.

5:30am. Kickoff in the 6-6:15 range.

IMHO the coup occurred when it did due to the arms caches being found and their perceived intended use. If that was allowed to occur, it would have been much more difficult for the army to step in pursuant to your comments. As you will recall, Gen. Prayuth tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, but when it became obvious that discussions wouldn't work and the threat of a civil war was elevated, he rightly took action.

Hence, I agree with your ultimate reason, but don't rule out the importance of "innocent protesters being killed" as it relates to its timing.

1. The arms caches were found after the coup, so you cannot state they triggered the coup.

2. the general tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, that is true, as long as "numerous times" means a couple of days. Did he really think the political problems of this country could be solved in days, after months and months of protests and both sides digging in? He also promised to stop the violence in the south within a year, why did he not promise to stop that in a day or 2, or a week if it is so easy?

3. hope the general has more patience with anything else in life before determining if discussions would work. Some agreements are made after years of negotiations, he gives up after a couple of days.

4. "innocent protesters being killed" and "timing", interesting 2 words in one sentence. How many people were killed the hours before the coup took place? And how many had already been killed? I can understand that when 20 people die in a shootout the army steps in to take control, but in fact there was not more violence right before the coup than weeks before the coup.

1. Do you really think they declared a coup and then tripped over them?

2. Discussions were ongoing. I don't have a diary.

3. Re the south, I have no comment. Please feel free to enlighten.

4. Please confer with your friends re innocents being killed and celebrations.

1. it is very suspicious, i agree. Many theories are going around about this. Anyways, keep in mind that knowing the whereabouts of a stash of arms is no reason for a coup. There are easier ways to bring it to the attention of the right people then taking control of a complete country and toppling a government.

2. you don't need a diary as this has been covered extensively in the media including the number of days the talks lasted. Nobody is denying the accuracy of that media coverage

3. not sure what to enlighten you about. You are unaware of the problems in the south or you are unaware the general said he will have the problems solved in a year?

4. I don't understand what point you are trying to make. I was referring to the "timing" part while you bring in "celebrations" out of nowhere.

Understand.

1. It is impossible to say if valid, but pictures were online prior to martial law being declared. The coup then came later.

2. I am convinced that Gen. Prayuth was trying to avoid a coup. There were reports it would occur months earlier, but he nixed it. He is far from the coup monger some want to make him out to be.

3. Some on TVF are alluding to the need for the coup for reasons which can't be discussed. I'm fence post sitting on this, but the timing of a possible civil war would have provided a reason to step in. It did allow the army to do some police related housekeeping.

4. On how to handle the south, I don't have a clue. Over the years, it appears authorities think they know, but solutions don't materialize. This administration is part of a long line who have had trouble finding solutions.

IMHO the coup occurred when it did due to the arms caches being found and their perceived intended use. If that was allowed to occur, it would have been much more difficult for the army to step in pursuant to your comments. As you will recall, Gen. Prayuth tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, but when it became obvious that discussions wouldn't work and the threat of a civil war was elevated, he rightly took action.

Hence, I agree with your ultimate reason, but don't rule out the importance of "innocent protesters being killed" as it relates to its timing.

1. The arms caches were found after the coup, so you cannot state they triggered the coup.

2. the general tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, that is true, as long as "numerous times" means a couple of days. Did he really think the political problems of this country could be solved in days, after months and months of protests and both sides digging in? He also promised to stop the violence in the south within a year, why did he not promise to stop that in a day or 2, or a week if it is so easy?

3. hope the general has more patience with anything else in life before determining if discussions would work. Some agreements are made after years of negotiations, he gives up after a couple of days.

4. "innocent protesters being killed" and "timing", interesting 2 words in one sentence. How many people were killed the hours before the coup took place? And how many had already been killed? I can understand that when 20 people die in a shootout the army steps in to take control, but in fact there was not more violence right before the coup than weeks before the coup.

1. Do you really think they declared a coup and then tripped over them?

2. Discussions were ongoing. I don't have a diary.

3. Re the south, I have no comment. Please feel free to enlighten.

4. Please confer with your friends re innocents being killed and celebrations.

IMHO the coup occurred when it did due to the arms caches being found and their perceived intended use. If that was allowed to occur, it would have been much more difficult for the army to step in pursuant to your comments. As you will recall, Gen. Prayuth tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, but when it became obvious that discussions wouldn't work and the threat of a civil war was elevated, he rightly took action.

Hence, I agree with your ultimate reason, but don't rule out the importance of "innocent protesters being killed" as it relates to its timing.

1. The arms caches were found after the coup, so you cannot state they triggered the coup.

2. the general tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, that is true, as long as "numerous times" means a couple of days. Did he really think the political problems of this country could be solved in days, after months and months of protests and both sides digging in? He also promised to stop the violence in the south within a year, why did he not promise to stop that in a day or 2, or a week if it is so easy?

3. hope the general has more patience with anything else in life before determining if discussions would work. Some agreements are made after years of negotiations, he gives up after a couple of days.

4. "innocent protesters being killed" and "timing", interesting 2 words in one sentence. How many people were killed the hours before the coup took place? And how many had already been killed? I can understand that when 20 people die in a shootout the army steps in to take control, but in fact there was not more violence right before the coup than weeks before the coup.

The US, as well as many other countries leasers and politicians are fully aware of why the Junta are never going to step down until after the "event" , unlike us, they are allowed to discuss the reasons, it's been printed in many broadsheets by now, and yet some farangs here still believe it was to stop more bloodshed!!

Nobody knows what was said in the privacy of these meetings, for all we know the US could have been telling the PTP to refrain from acts of violence, let the Junta control everything because the longer Martial Law continues, then there's more chance of discord and potential for said violence.

Prayut's nose was put out of joint, nothing more, he's correct in what he said, his coup is more than likely one of the reasons why there was no meeting, his subsequent clampdowns on media, and other areas are also factors to take into consideration.

You are so right about the reason for the coup. There are so many regular contributors to Thai Visa forum who offer their opinions as 'experts' on Thailand, and with thousands of posts, who suggest that the army took control to stop "innocent protesters being killed" or to "wipe out corruption". What nonsense, the Amart ordered the army out because of their fear of what may happen after "the event" as you describe it.

IMHO the coup occurred when it did due to the arms caches being found and their perceived intended use. If that was allowed to occur, it would have been much more difficult for the army to step in pursuant to your comments. As you will recall, Gen. Prayuth tried numerous times to get all sides to talk, but when it became obvious that discussions wouldn't work and the threat of a civil war was elevated, he rightly took action.

Hence, I agree with your ultimate reason, but don't rule out the importance of "innocent protesters being killed" as it relates to its timing.

No, Danny Russel did not meet with Prayuth, because Danny Russel is not a diplomat. He is a staffer promoted into a diplomatic position, and he needs to be immediately recalled. By his own admission, when he was appointed to the post in July 2013, he had only worked as a White House staffer, and had never left the four walls of his office. He's a disgrace to both the U.S. and to the diplomatic community. As a U.S. citizen, I am embarrassed by his behavior.

Russel is not a diplomat, and is not a disgrace. He was carrying Washington's message. Don't shoot the messenger.

IMHO, pre-coup, diplomats exercising diplomacy would have served the U.S. well. At least getting a modicum of understanding of the situation should have been expected given the US's long history of understanding of Thailand and its coups and also having designated Thailand as a non-NATO ally.

Blame it on whoever, but there was an apparent disconnect in information flows from the ground level to U.S. decision makers. Hence it appeared to some that In time, everything would revert back to as before, but the civil war didn't materialize and this has left the US supporting a side that has no way to get back.

Now a return to democracy in whatever form should allow a Thai US relationship to move on, but it will never be the same. China has been welcomed through the front door. Some distrust between Thailand and the U.S. will exist that wasn't there before.

If you want to counter China, you don't provide situations with your allies that gives China access through the front door, especially not in their own backyard. The biggest negative for China is that their system sucks, but for countries in need, a lot of time passes until this gets realized.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Not just a snub but a full on reprimand in the lecture that US State Dept Official Russell gave at Chula Uni today. I bet the yellow shirt PDRC academics in the audience were seething.

"We are concerned about the significant restraints on freedoms since the coup," he said. "Ending marital law throughout the country and removing restrictions of speech and assembly – these would be important steps as part of genuinely inclusive reform process that reflects the broad diversity of views within the country."

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1422273247&typecate=06&section

.

"Broad diversity of views?" Amb. Kenney seemed to be concerned only with the views of YL's government.

China opens its arms and doesn't care either way and this is China's backyard.

Kenney seemed to be concerned only with the views of an elected Thai government. As was President Obama.

ObamaAbhisit.jpg

But now it's all sides. The writing was on the wall before. Now China is in the picture and it's all sides. You would think this is the first coup in Thailand.

Not just a snub but a full on reprimand in the lecture that US State Dept Official Russell gave at Chula Uni today. I bet the yellow shirt PDRC academics in the audience were seething.

"We are concerned about the significant restraints on freedoms since the coup," he said. "Ending marital law throughout the country and removing restrictions of speech and assembly – these would be important steps as part of genuinely inclusive reform process that reflects the broad diversity of views within the country."

http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1422273247&typecate=06&section

.

"Broad diversity of views?" Amb. Kenney seemed to be concerned only with the views of YL's government.

China opens its arms and doesn't care either way and this is China's backyard.

In my opinion it was a good and fair decision, based on facts and not political sentiments.

As about the ongoing reconciliation process, I believe it will take many years to cure the wounds the previous politicians have inflicted to the Thai people.

But I'm confident, with the good strategy and intention of this Government, that this can be achieved.

I would have preferred the impeachment not taken place and rather the case go through the judicial system as it is now. This is the normal process for alleged crimes of this nature.

Aaawww ... poor babies don't like the truth getting out about the real "Thainess" ... with the explosion in recent years of social media and people publicly (in reviews, blogs, forums, facebook etc) being able to vent their frustrations, the Thai's are somewhat lacking when it comes to accepting and actually dealing with the criticism and complaints and the fact that they are far from perfect and perhaps they actually need to fix things properly instead of just saying they will do something.

One day they'll realize that "foreigners" aren't stupid (on the whole) and "we" don't (generally) just take it up the < profanity removed > and say nothing about it. And the effects of this are being seen here more and more, day by day. Yes, people will "always" come here, but those numbers are dropping off a lot, and those that do come here and encounter these many scams, problems and issues WILL say something about it, won't come back, and neither will their friends, families or anyone else who reads about the numerous negative things about Thailand.

The day they realize this however is a long, long way away.

The fact that they can always blame things on other foreigners makes it easier to accept - it wasn't us so it must be them.

The rule of law can only be respected when all segements of society respects it, including the military. The rule of law has no validity when the military forces its own "rule of law" onto the Thais people through military coup, abolishment of the constitution, martial law, and military dominated government. Under NCPO's Articles 17 and 44 of the Provisional Charter, democratic rule of law CANNOT exist.

It would seem that as far as Ms. Yingluck is concerned 'rule of law' has died as it dared to rule against her.

Her attorneys are getting their rhetoric ready for the criminal courts.

Yet another planted bias article by the nation.

You'll see how much their at the crossroads come the next election!

But some on here truly salivate at the thought that they will never happen.

Shame

Who will finance it?

Just my objective point of view

Thai junta's victory over Yingluck has proven Thai democracy one giant step backwards as Thai people fails to achieve a legal representation of their interests in a convincing way.

It is your subjective point of view as it is your opinion.

My subjective point of view is that Thai people failed to achieve a legal representation of their interests in a convincing way with the 2011 election, given 1/3 of the registered voters didn't even bother to show up and the Phuea Thai party got less than half of those that did show up.

The junta had nothing to do with that. One of the things the new political system will try to achieve is to get more people interested in elections at the grass root level.

yes it will be "you can vote for any of the candidates in your constituency as long as they are yellow" and THAT is what is going to happen (eventually). The ammart will put in laws and a constitution which blocks dissent and protest and ensures only there 'on message' stooges get elected

binjalin is dead right and a lot of posters here will soon get the Government they want and deserve.

Well done.

A couple of years later, 30 million disenfranchised Thai voters will make their voice heard and you won't like it.

Look at:

S. Korea.

H.K

Phils

Japan

Any country you care to name.

At some time in the future, the military will have to cede control.

At that point, expect ructions.

And it's got sod all to do with Thaksin or Yingluck.

When the military cedes control it will be to an elected government. Some people will want to get involved and some will sit on the sidelines and complain. So it goes.

Very selective Robbie nz considering it was worldwide news how the yellow dems stopped the voting public from even getting to to a polling booth to even get their chance to vot which was not only legal but constitutional at the time.

Yet you seem to ignore this fact and really it doesn't natter which side you happen to support or what outcome that election may have had the fact is under the law it was leaf a land what's happening now is not.

If an election was held and the yellow dems got in and thrown the PTP out no problem at least it was done by the people for better or for worse.

So, if both sides were allowed to stop the other, what kind of democracy did Thailand have? Don't you think election reforms are needed.