dttk0009

"Not to mention that behavior like that can get you into serious trouble in Thailand"

again, you patronise me. As though I've no idea about the differences in culture in this part of the world!?

An appropriate, mature response to being ripped off is what?

To be happy about being ripped off?

To *pretend* to be happy about being ripped off?

To walk away as though you weren't ripped off?

I kind of usually do go for the last one, but on this occasion, I thought the insult to me was especially obvious, so I returned a small part of that in a small gesture!

I guess I would interpret a mature response as saying 'Sorry, that's too expensive for me.' or simply saying nothing and moving on. Sorry if I don't find you bird flipping appropriate. And again, I'm not patronising you. I understand you have experience in this corner of the globe as a resident. Don't think that I'm being condescending when I'm merely pointing out the obvious.

@dttk0009 - see the first line of my post ( "Having spent 8 years in Cambodia, I'm no newbie to Asia"),

so I'm "obviously" *NOT* "unaware of the fact that haggling is a part of Thai culture, especially in marketplaces" if I've lived in S.E. Asia for nearly 10 years!! Do you haggle for *everything* you ever buy while here?

And while I have never personally enjoyed haggling for prices in any part of the world where I've been that it's prevalent, I do understand and accept the practice. However, one of the basic premises is usually, don't bother trying to fool the buyer too much if it's clear they already know the going price and your product very well! Otherwise you'll likely lose the sale completely. Having seen the guy in front of me *not* even haggle in order to pay an already above average price of 30 baht, how much sense does it make for the vendor to then even try to double that? I have eyes and ears and I'm stood right there! It's a total insult to any person (whatever nationality, culture etc) to act as though I should be stupid enough to just go with being charged double what the guy next to me, just that second, paid.

That's all on top of the point by Randee, that yes, it's pretty ridiculous being told you should expect haggling over a sausage

I have, of course, many times successfully bought sausages (or other various street snacks) in Thailand, not to mention noodle and rice dishes... yet I have NEVER, EVER, in nearly 10 years, felt it necessary or commonplace to haggle over such items.

So please don't patronise me by telling me I should as though I don't know any better.

I'm not patronising you, I just think your response to the vendor was over the top. Not to mention that behavior like that can get you into serious trouble in Thailand, especially now when everyone's still emotionally on edge. Typically I would have ignored a comment like yours but someone actually commended your actions so I had to give my 2 cents. Just doesn't seem like an appropriate, mature response to being ripped off to me. That's all.

Not really. He's obviously unaware of the fact that haggling is a part of Thai culture, especially in marketplaces. If he doesn't understand how to haggle or deal with 'outrageous prices' then he has the freedom to shop somewhere else. Then again, flicking off a shopkeeper who's desperate to make back the money he's lost because of the redshirts doesn't earn him any merit points either. He's pretty much just a giant tool for doing so.

YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAGGLE OVER SAUSAGES ON STICKS!

Says who? The guy you quoted didn't even try. I would have told the guy I'm not paying more than 30. If he won't drop the price it's a missed sale for him, who cares? The guy next to him will easily sell it to you for a quick profit. If you want to have an impact on his pricing then show it with your wallet and spending power by not buying from him, smiling and moving on, not by acting like a juvenile punk who throws around rude gestures. Doing things like that makes you look like an idiot, not the guy who's trying to rip you off, and in the end has zero impact because hey, it instantly justifies his blatantly high pricing.

it sounds like the whole episode was very stressful, all he wanted to do was get home.

that was probably the last straw that made him lose his temper. im guilty of that sometimes.

i take your point about haggling and making an impact etc. i didnt go near the place intentionally for all the reasons he mentioned.

and i try my hardest to avoid haggling situations because ive got better things to do with my time and

im too impatient to do petty haggling. i only buy from places that display prices.

but as for haggling over a sausage how freakin ridiculous is that!!!! Look how ridiculous it sounds!!

"Haggling over a sausage"

To be fair, I have seen people haggle over stuff less valuable and over an amount as minimal as 5 baht. Like I said earlier, the guy is probably desperate to flip a profit after last month. I'm sure he doesn't enjoy it either but he must feel it necessary. I can't say that I've ever been super overcharged on food before. Maybe in amounts of 5 baht but never double. That comes across as a drastic measure to me.

Not really. He's obviously unaware of the fact that haggling is a part of Thai culture, especially in marketplaces. If he doesn't understand how to haggle or deal with 'outrageous prices' then he has the freedom to shop somewhere else. Then again, flicking off a shopkeeper who's desperate to make back the money he's lost because of the redshirts doesn't earn him any merit points either. He's pretty much just a giant tool for doing so.

YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAGGLE OVER SAUSAGES ON STICKS!

Says who? The guy you quoted didn't even try. I would have told the guy I'm not paying more than 30. If he won't drop the price it's a missed sale for him, who cares? The guy next to him will easily sell it to you for a quick profit. If you want to have an impact on his pricing then show it with your wallet and spending power by not buying from him, smiling and moving on, not by acting like a juvenile punk who throws around rude gestures. Doing things like that makes you look like an idiot, not the guy who's trying to rip you off, and in the end has zero impact because hey, it instantly justifies his blatantly high pricing.

Having spent 8 years in Cambodia, I'm no newbie to Asia, and have had many very pleasant trips to Thailand - as a tourist and client (on work trips). I've now lived in Bangkok for 11 months and I must confess, I am seeing more and more every week I live here of a quite different complexion to Thailand than all the years I'd visited before. The duplicity I find 'popping up' on a regular basis is really starting to erode the love and respect I'd always had for Thais the many years before.

I live in Silom and had a walk down my soi to see how things were going at the "Together We Can" 'Walking Street Fair'. I have had plenty of sympathy for the small business and working Thais that would have suffered loss or damage these last 2 months, so I went down there thinking I hope they're getting something from this...

WOW! I couldn't believe my eyes! The whole of Silom Rd. was ABSOLUTELY PACKED! Not just with thousands and thousands of people, but with hundreds of stalls. Four banks of stalls - one on each kerb and a double-sided one in the centre verge - ran all the way from Rama 4 to at least Narathiwas Rd! In between these tightly packed lines of stalls, on the actual road, there was barely room to swing your elbows, while being carried along by a stream of people squeezed in between. I was astonished at several things, none of which made me particularly happy:

- There was plenty of effort put into putting up the stalls but I could see absolutely no consideration given to the safety/risk factors of having hardly any access or egress in between them.

- Thousands of people, yet no police or medical services to be seen

- Hundreds and hundreds of sellers, yet, I cannot possibly imagine more than half would have been possibly been ones that would have been from areas especially affected/damaged such as Siam square - which was what the whole thing was 'sold' as being in 'aid' of. So I can only suppose a large number were there knowing it would be a great opportunity to cash in on the 'national unity' charity sentiment the event was marketed as.

- Yes the vast majority of people there were Thais - one would guess well intentioned and looking to help out their adversely affected countrymen - but the majority of the vendors didn't look very adversely affected (unlike the ones I saw at the temporary stalls at Siam Square on Friday). They certainly would have had a MAJOR boost from the numbers there today! But the Thais I saw there looking to be customers to the 'needy' vendors, mostly looked like not very well-off average urban Thai people themselves, so probably of the ones 'giving' their custom didn't have a lot to spare themselves.

- I came to the end of the soi I live on (piphat) - after being buffeted and bumped and having my feet trod on by the stupidly packed-in crowd for the 150m or so I'd walked from Soi Convent - to find the *whole* of the street was blocked off by a tent! Barely 60cm was left unblocked - between a building wall and a telephone pole - for a constant stream of people to *try* to squeeze through! To make it even more ridiculous, there wasn't even hardly anyone in/using the bloody tent!!!???

And, the crowning glory: - Before I'd got stuck in the 'lemming' pack, I'd stood in line to get a sausage/meat snack, the kind of sausage on a stick thing i'd normally expect to pay between 15-20 baht for. I'd heard a Thai guy in front of me being charged "samsip" baht, then (accepting, begrudgingly, but still accepting, the 'slight' hike up from the usual price) I asked for the same (pointing) and asked in gesture and mouthed English "how much?"; to which the vendor replied "sixty baht" in English, while holding up six fingers. Then she firmly repeated it again, "sixty baht!", while I'd kind of looked at her a bit confused... err!? My patience already thin, I replied "hoksip baht!? Mai samsip?" whereupon she giggled in that now increasingly annoying way and then started nodding agreement to the latter figure, avoiding my eyes, as she put the snack in a bag. I then raised just one finger at her and laughed back! "f*@k - off!"

I ask you!?

I check the mirror every day at least once, just in case I've somehow missed some kind of subtle mark or tattoo on my head that might read "stupid" or "mug"!

I know it's not everyone, it can't possibly be, i still have some threads of faith left... but I must confess, I become more and more jaded about the "pretence" I come across so increasingly and which I find so unpalatable here. I must also admit, I only have a couple of Thai friends as yet. But, the really sad thing is, I find myself questioning even their sincerity more and more as i wonder if they really just humour me most of the time - glad to have a few 'trophy' farang friends on their list. Though they speak excellent English (so the language barrier is negligible), they avoid or deflect any kind of contentious or awkward questions I ask of them.

Awfully cynical and bitter as all that sounds, i really hope to be proven wrong - significantly and soon! I'm not one that can accept artifice and duplicty too easily, and need some hardcore, laid-bare honesty and sincerity to offset it and temper my frustration... where do i find that in Bangkok then?

You have said this perfectly and brought about a MAJOR point and hitting many nails on the head.

And so true about the increasingly annoying Thai grin.

Well done for posting this. You have made the point perfectly.

You have my backing 100% in fact I want YOU as the next Thai Prime minister!

Not really. He's obviously unaware of the fact that haggling is a part of Thai culture, especially in marketplaces. If he doesn't understand how to haggle or deal with 'outrageous prices' then he has the freedom to shop somewhere else. Then again, flicking off a shopkeeper who's desperate to make back the money he's lost because of the redshirts doesn't earn him any merit points either. He's pretty much just a giant tool for doing so.

3BB Internet outages now in larger areas, parts of BKK and Pattaya reported

Yep, had 2 instances with all day outages but that was due to us changing our package and their server getting confused over the login name and such. Other than that it's been smooth sailing, although on some days I do get frequent disconnects. Sometimes up to 6 or 7 times a day. But the disconnects never last longer than a minute.

Sounds like Chantorn hopped aboard a rage train this morning. Sheesh.

"The Cabinet Tuesday resolved to extend curfew in Bangkok and 23 other provinces from Tuesday to Friday."

Now that curfew is from midnight to 4am, does this mean the curfew ends at 4am of 28th or 29th morning?

I'm confused here.

Thank you.

Hi Jay,

They increased the curfew by 4 days, so including today that would mean that the curfew would end at 4:00AM Saturday, the 29th of May. On the other hand, they might still extend it further.

I don't think this verdict is going to change much for him.

Oh yes it does.

Campaigning for someone convicted of corruption is one thing.

Also supporting the same person on terrorist charges will give even the forum Thaksin red apologists a few difficulties.

What about extradition treaties? He might seek asylum based on that Thailand carries out the death penalty. Guess we'll wait and see.

I don't think this verdict is going to change much for him.

Nice to know this woman is happy that poor people in Bangkok (many of whom actually come from the same kind of background as her) have lost their jobs thanks to all the burning she is happy about. Seems nobody is picking up on all the poor that are suffering because of the red arson and violence. There is a big irony in that albeit a sad one. Bnagkok is not full; of only rich people and it is the poor who are suffering most from the attacks through lost work.

I am sorry to say I agree with the woman from Chiang Mai, the Abhisit government is not legitimate, it rorted the normal electoral process.

It is also cynical, shameless and unprincipled. I believe Abhisit's objective is simply to hold on to power and he doesn't much mind at what cost.

You are not sorry at all.

The one who doesn't care at what cost is Thaksin.

The woman participated in an attack on Bangkok people.

The one who will suffer is her child.

Truth. Her actions are completely irresponsible and detestable. Her children should always take precedence over her political inclinations.

She just sounds bitter. So what does she want? Communism? Money? Once she's rich does she fall into the category of people she hates? She blames her own incompetence and stupidity on people who had nothing to do with it. She can swim in her pool of schadenfreude all she wants, for all I care. An attitude like hers in no way helps this country move forward. In fact, it's probably the most counterproductive way to think.

Articles like this are written by those who don't really understand the basics of good journalism. A lot of Thais live in a fantasy world where what you see on television represents an absolute truth. All CNN, BBC and other news organisations did is report from the ground and present both sides of the argument. Because this balanced approach conflicts with simplistic absolute truth of good guys vs terrorists presented by the Thai media, a lot of Thais believe "The Truth" can be found on their little Thai television programmes and "Lies" is found on the "foreigner television".

How contradictory. BBC and CNN did nothing of the sort. In fact, their entire coverage of the events in Bangkok were exclusively presented in a good guys (poor, unarmed freedom fighting farmers) vs. bad guys (corrupt, abusive, human rights violating, malicious and murdering everyone in sight military). It is pretty clear that you are fond of this biased view as well. BBC was more one sided than the N. Korean Dear Leader channel and couldn't have been further from the truth that was happening around us.

They seem to have shockingly dropped this story off the map once:

1. They set the city on fire, endangering the lives of thousands of people who live here, completely ignoring the heroic effort of the fire brigade and medics working through the night to prevent a completely horrific disaster from spreading.

2. Numerous footage of red shirts with weapons of war firing into crowds and military surfaced.

3. A plethora of IED's, grenades, guns and ammunition were found hidden around the site.

4. Red shirt leaders were charged with terrorism.

5. Car bombs, stolen ID's and credit cards were discovered around the protest site.

I could go on, but the OP's article is spot on. I knew that BBC specifically pandered to bleeding heart liberals but I never would have thought that they would go this far. I can say with complete confidence that they are no where near a legitimate source of information.

Never read about stolen ID's and credit cards were discovered around the protest site...source please!

1,000 of ID Card in sewage lines. FOUND

You're right, I apologize. The correct term should be 'allegedly confiscated'. My point stands.

Articles like this are written by those who don't really understand the basics of good journalism. A lot of Thais live in a fantasy world where what you see on television represents an absolute truth. All CNN, BBC and other news organisations did is report from the ground and present both sides of the argument. Because this balanced approach conflicts with simplistic absolute truth of good guys vs terrorists presented by the Thai media, a lot of Thais believe "The Truth" can be found on their little Thai television programmes and "Lies" is found on the "foreigner television".

How contradictory. BBC and CNN did nothing of the sort. In fact, their entire coverage of the events in Bangkok were exclusively presented in a good guys (poor, unarmed freedom fighting farmers) vs. bad guys (corrupt, abusive, human rights violating, malicious and murdering everyone in sight military). It is pretty clear that you are fond of this biased view as well. BBC was more one sided than the N. Korean Dear Leader channel and couldn't have been further from the truth that was happening around us.

They seem to have shockingly dropped this story off the map once:

1. They set the city on fire, endangering the lives of thousands of people who live here, completely ignoring the heroic effort of the fire brigade and medics working through the night to prevent a completely horrific disaster from spreading.

2. Numerous footage of red shirts with weapons of war firing into crowds and military surfaced.

3. A plethora of IED's, grenades, guns and ammunition were found hidden around the site.

4. Red shirt leaders were charged with terrorism.

5. Car bombs, stolen ID's and credit cards were discovered around the protest site.

I could go on, but the OP's article is spot on. I knew that BBC specifically pandered to bleeding heart liberals but I never would have thought that they would go this far. I can say with complete confidence that they are no where near a legitimate source of information.

You think that just because the government announces something or decides on a course of action that we should all just think it's great, shut our mouths and go along with it?

No offense TB2, but unless you have citizenship here, then yes. You have no legal influence on how this country is run as a foreigner. No voting, no running, no voice. If you are truly so unhappy with how things are maybe moving to a country that more closely fits your moral and legal outlook would be best, or your home country where you have the ability to influence these things.

As foreigners here we have the responsibility to obey the laws of the country no matter who is in charge or what those laws are.

Lets wait to see how many interrogations lead to subsequent arrests, perhaps the militant wing is already back in Cambodia, where Thai people go to hide.

The Black clad shooters are from Cambodia , there is now evidence to be released this week on who and why they were contracted for the job, The pay check Master Thaksin made his $$ deposit some months before this in the case he needed them to cross over into Thailand if he lost his money in the court ruling , Since 911 the world has a special practice of wire tap /cell phone word searching for key words, Thaksin made this list some 3 months ago and all of his evidence now will list him as the money leader behind the terrorism attacks now in Thailand .

he likes to say he has no connection but his mighty dollars linked the WAY

Could you a link a source to this information? First time I've heard this and I'd be interested to read more about it.

I've seen this too, it's been all over Thai broadcast news. Mercenaries from Burma and Cambodia, the money trail, etc.

Yes but all the evidence so far has been individual eyewitnesses and rumors. That does not hold enough credibility for me. A real investigation, report or some evidence would give this rumor some legitimacy. I'm not saying that it's improbable, just that I can't believe everything negative being said about the UDD.

Lets wait to see how many interrogations lead to subsequent arrests, perhaps the militant wing is already back in Cambodia, where Thai people go to hide.

The Black clad shooters are from Cambodia , there is now evidence to be released this week on who and why they were contracted for the job, The pay check Master Thaksin made his $$$$$$ deposit some months before this in the case he needed them to cross over into Thailand if he lost his money in the court ruling , Since 911 the world has a special practice of wire tap /cell phone word searching for key words, Thaksin made this list some 3 months ago and all of his evidence now will list him as the money leader behind the terrorism attacks now in Thailand .

he likes to say he has no connection but his mighty dollars linked the WAY

Could you a link a source to this information? First time I've heard this and I'd be interested to read more about it.

deleted

Anyone who thinks the protesters were unarmed can easily test their conspiracy theory - go down to Rama IV and ask some of the residents if they were unarmed.

@Deeral: Allow me to propose a definition of 'terrorist' for you to ponder: Anyone who launches grenades, shoots at the residents and burns down the buildings in our neighbourhood is a terrorist. We couldn't give a rats arse about their political views.

Honestly there are some boneheads around here.

Sure, some of the red shirts were armed, but it was not an armed movement. The majority of the people there did NOT have weapons of war. However, seeing as how the government and the army spokespeople are now dictating the news (and presenting evidence after they deem areas 'safe' and let journalists in), I'm sure we can all rest assured that they are using only the truth to legitimize their own deadly use of force. The Thaivisa children know that authority figures, especially in SE Asia MUST be believed, because to do otherwise is to risk deportation or worse.

Where do you people come from that believe the likes of the government and the military? Do you hold the same esteem for these institutions back home? Even the red apologists here don't defend Thaksin as an honest source of information. You can hate the reds all you want... that's a matter of opinion, but to believe all that the establishment has to say is irresponsible and foolish. Support the government if you wish, but accept statements from the army as gospel? Shame on you!

Having an armed wing willing to kill innocent bystanders, medics, policemen, soldiers and journalists legitimizes the use of force. I am not sure why you don't agree with this. Do you live in Bangkok and in any of the danger zones? I could see how your perspective could be radically different if you didn't hear the sound of gunfire and grenade explosion for a month straight. The UDD at this point is no different to Hezbollah. The difference being that they pander to western liberalism instead of directly attacking it in ideology. If it were not for the military my apartment building could have been torched, I could have been randomly targeted with a grenade, I could have been robbed by red checkpoints, I could have been impaled on a bamboo spear by a crazed redshirt guard, the list goes on. In my eyes, they protected me from aggressors who were intent on killing, destroying and stealing.

You can't just look at the armed wing of the movement and dismiss it as 'fake' red shirts. I would never associate myself with a movement that carries out attacks of terrorism against innocent targets, no matter how much I agree with the ideology. It makes you a supporter of that violence.

Please!! Hezbollah??? Hezbollah launches rockets INTENTIONALLY against civilians. They use suicide bombers against school buses of children. That comparison is offensive.

And launching M79 grenades at innocent civilians is ok? Setting fire to dozens of locations in a densely populated city is harmless? If it wasn't for the heroic rescue teams in this city hundreds of people would have perished in the Channel 3 building. It has become quite apparent that you support the death of innocents for your ideology to prevail. I think we're done.

Anyone who thinks the protesters were unarmed can easily test their conspiracy theory - go down to Rama IV and ask some of the residents if they were unarmed.

@Deeral: Allow me to propose a definition of 'terrorist' for you to ponder: Anyone who launches grenades, shoots at the residents and burns down the buildings in our neighbourhood is a terrorist. We couldn't give a rats arse about their political views.

Honestly there are some boneheads around here.

Sure, some of the red shirts were armed, but it was not an armed movement. The majority of the people there did NOT have weapons of war. However, seeing as how the government and the army spokespeople are now dictating the news (and presenting evidence after they deem areas 'safe' and let journalists in), I'm sure we can all rest assured that they are using only the truth to legitimize their own deadly use of force. The Thaivisa children know that authority figures, especially in SE Asia MUST be believed, because to do otherwise is to risk deportation or worse.

Where do you people come from that believe the likes of the government and the military? Do you hold the same esteem for these institutions back home? Even the red apologists here don't defend Thaksin as an honest source of information. You can hate the reds all you want... that's a matter of opinion, but to believe all that the establishment has to say is irresponsible and foolish. Support the government if you wish, but accept statements from the army as gospel? Shame on you!

Having an armed wing willing to kill innocent bystanders, medics, policemen, soldiers and journalists legitimizes the use of force. I am not sure why you don't agree with this. Do you live in Bangkok and in any of the danger zones? I could see how your perspective could be radically different if you didn't hear the sound of gunfire and grenade explosion for a month straight. The UDD at this point is no different to Hezbollah. The difference being that they pander to western liberalism instead of directly attacking it in ideology. If it were not for the military my apartment building could have been torched, I could have been randomly targeted with a grenade, I could have been robbed by red checkpoints, I could have been impaled on a bamboo spear by a crazed redshirt guard, the list goes on. In my eyes, they protected me from aggressors who were intent on killing, destroying and stealing.

You can't just look at the armed wing of the movement and dismiss it as 'fake' red shirts. I would never associate myself with a movement that carries out attacks of terrorism against innocent targets, no matter how much I agree with the ideology. It makes you a supporter of that violence.

m-16 war weapon m79 war weapon ak47 war weapon, is there any footage of protesters men in black etc with these weapons ? yes quite a few.

Yes of course, but that's not the point. The question you are trying very hard not to understand is that, according to the government, the reds had car bombs but they did not use them. Why? According to the government, the reds had stocks of high explosive, but they didn't use them. Why? According to the government the reds had M60 machine guns (vastly more powerful than M16 or AK 47) but didn't use them. Why?

I thought they only found the M60 bullets.

You are, naturally, assuming that the red shirts only targeted soldiers and not innocent bystanders, medics and reporters, right?

Wrong. I am saying that if the reds had used the "war weapons" the government claims they had then a lot more soldiers and a lot more civilians would be dead. Perhaps you have never seen what an M60 can do.

This is also only assuming that they would have been firing indiscriminately and as much as possible. They used the same strategy the military did. Restrained and carefully chosen targets. Naturally, for the sake of PR, they had to wait until the cameras were not looking or at least until they thought they weren't. Being gung ho with heavy weaponry would have quickly revealed to the tuned in world that they were just an armed and crazy militia. April 10th is probably the biggest testament to that. No one even knew where the attacks on the military came from, not even the majority of the red shirts there. Completely planned and hidden, the targets picked out and assassinated. Gruesome stuff.

That's my take on it.

If the army could have moved in regardless of consequences, it would have been 1 -2 troops injured, protesters either dead or nearly so. In the 5 days cleanup of Rachaprasong 'only' 54 dead. Again a real crachdown would have fill mass-graves.

The fact that we lots of wounded troops and a few dead just symbolizes the restraint with which the army moved in.

<deleted>? only 54 dead and only hundreds injured, must have been are real clean cleanup and not a massacre - what a logic.

What next? A nomination for the Nobel peace prize?

So what do you think would have been the best course of action?

Sorry to interrupt, dttk0009, but it was a response on my reply (thanks for support anyway)

I didn't say 'clean' cleanup, only one full of restrain. If the army eally had have a free hand, we could have had 1000s dead or seriously wounded. Now 54 dead, 1800 wounded, but only 200 or so left in hospital. Whether you want to believe reports on armed resistance or not, torched buildings are in sight, many videos are available. If I had been a young trooper going in any who starts to provoke me, start throwing rocks, molotov cocktails, fires M79's, I would shoot! I maybe wrong, luckily those troopers has higher boiling points than I have.

Indeed, the question was actually aimed at mazeltov, but it's always interesting to hear different opinions. If you look at the soldiers, especially the ones present on April 10th, many of them were barely out of high school and conscripted. I could never imagine what that must feel like, still a teenager, to be targeted by those attacks. I'm sure it's absolutely possible that mistakes were made, errors of judgment, but when you see the evidence we have of that evening, the response was completely restrained. The mob was aggressive and the 'black shirts' were well hidden, picked their positions and targets and carried out their attack. Every single video of that night you see the military simply retreating and returning fire. The word returning is very important. Just my interpretation of that evening. I don't think they could have done much else.

Still interested in mazeltov's opinion.

After 10th of April, are you really surprised that there have been almost no army casualties?

If the reds really did have, car bombs, C4 high explosives, M60 machine guns, as the government claims, then yes it is surprising.

You are, naturally, assuming that the red shirts only targeted soldiers and not innocent bystanders, medics and reporters, right?

If the army could have moved in regardless of consequences, it would have been 1 -2 troops injured, protesters either dead or nearly so. In the 5 days cleanup of Rachaprasong 'only' 54 dead. Again a real crachdown would have fill mass-graves.

The fact that we lots of wounded troops and a few dead just symbolizes the restraint with which the army moved in.

<deleted>? only 54 dead and only hundreds injured, must have been are real clean cleanup and not a massacre - what a logic.

What next? A nomination for the Nobel peace prize?

So what do you think would have been the best course of action?