erobando

He cited recent battlefield successes by the Taliban, who he said are being aided with weapons from Iran

Lovely...

Now let's start a war with Iran.

Lovely...

Where did I say that? Iran is one of the biggest problems in the ME. Supplying weapons to all sorts of terrorist groups. Or perhaps you didn't know this???

If Iran is one of the "biggest problems" in the Middle East, then so is every other nation in the region.

Iran is engaged in a regional power struggle and acts like pretty much other nation has in the history of the world. They ally with groups that further their interests, in this case taking the "enemy of my enemy" approach. (In this case, the enemy is Daesh.)

Posters can make moralistic statements but Iran must co-exist with others in the region. If they think the Afghanistan government (who they generally support) will fail, it's better to have positive relations with other groups who they think will likely end up in complete (or a share of) power. They obviously think that Daesh is the bigger threat.

As far as supporting terrorists, Saudi Arabia and it's allies also support groups like Al Nusra.

Who Israel might support is questionable... but we do know that they conduct targeted assassinations and bomb sovereign nations however they see fit. From Iran's perspective, Israel is bully nation... the most powerful military in the region, equipped with WMD's and backed by the most powerful nation on earth.

And Iran's biggest "terrorist" project, Hezbollah, is a legal entity in its homeland which holds elected seats in Parliament. And when was the last time they were even accused of targeting civilians?

The Middle East now isn't much different the constant power struggles that existed in Western Europe until the end of WWII... this part of SE Asia was the same until the late 80's.

Maybe decades from now nations in the region will realize that cooperating economically is better than non-stop war.

The US engaging more with Iran is at least a start. Demonizing / blaming Iran as the primary cause of the Middle East's problems is not.

Dengue fever is prevalent in Thailand and more deadly. But same source so addressing them is the same.

The problem, as always, is 1) educating people how minimize vulnerability to mosquitoes; and 2) getting people to care enough to actually do #1.

^{We'd be fools to look for advice from some ignorant from ancient times like Eunoch Powell.}

^{The guy lived a century before the internet. Did he even know about soap?}

Marco Rubio (Republican):
Yet, Rubio has vehemently rejected Obama’s initiatives to engage with countries like China and Vietnam, as long they remain Communist one-party regimes.

LOL. Iis Rubio campaigning for President of the US or for the return of 1985?

Oh, wait, even Reagan engaged with the USSR and China.

And LOLouder at linking China and Vietnam together just because they are "Communist."

I don't know about the ad one way or the other... but I'm certain that Hillary's bowtie is really a camera.

If a single gateway is so essential for commerce, why don't they have them in the US, Europe or Japan?

Don't they do any commerce?

I think you don't understand Thainess.

Thailand is different than the places you list and the internet here is unique. A single gateway is better for Thailand, trust me.

By the way, I just recorded a song about unity and happiness. You should listen to it.

In the interview in Rolling Stone, Guzman defends his work at the head of the world's biggest drug trafficking organization, one blamed for thousands of killings. When asked if he is to blame for high addiction rates, he responds: "No, that is false, because the day I don't exist, it's not going to decrease in any way at all. Drug trafficking? That's false."

Pure BS. No drugs means no addiction, and no killings from the gangs that distribute this stuff. Great show out called Narcos. Interesting to see how they created this mess by importing cocaine into the US. It was an unknown before the early 80's.

Unknown before the early 80's? Cocaine was used in the US as far back as the 19th Century.

In any event, I think you're misunderstanding El Chapo's response. He's saying he doesn't feel responsible because, even if he's not involved in drug trafficking, someone else do it.

And isn't "Narco's" a TV drama? I don't suggest using fiction as a primary source to understand history.

Glorifying the Pahlavi Dynasty. That's some good work LOL...

But I do think it's worth remembering that Iran had a secular government in 1953.

North Korea is and has always been China's problem. If the situation really got out of hand, they would replace the regime... and North Korea knows this.

But now the status quo and, most importantly, stability in North Korea is fine for China. Anything that potentially destabilizes the North Korean regime would lead to too many headaches on the shared border.

Libya didn't need monetary aid under Gaddafi, either.

Good job, everyone! I guess this is what the neo-imperialists wanted.

It will be interesting to see what groups the Saudi-led group identifies as terrorists?

My guess the criteria will be:

1) Is the group fighting against Iran? If yes, then this is not a terrorist organization.

2) Is the group allied with Iran? If yes, then this is a terrorist organization.

Avoid contact with the infected? wear mask?

What the heck? Dengue fever isn't transmissible person to person, only by mosquito bites.

Source: https://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/denguefever/understanding/Pages/Transmission.aspx

He might as well have tried to know a little bit what he's talking about.

What a disgrace...

While washing hands and wearing masks won't prevent Dengue fever, it would still be useful in the long run since it will cut down on spread of the Alzheimer's, the AIDS and most types of the Cancer.

While soccer fans are in no way representative of society as a whole.

Unfortunately, I believe the disrespect for the slain Paris infidels is representative of Muslim communities in general...there is no outrage at Muslim people destroying the ME...they are either unconcerned, afraid, or proud of their brother's accomplishments.

The Muslim community has not risen up against IS in a meaningful way...their lack of speaking out against IS atrocities...speaks volumes...

This instance is pretty clearly right-wing / Turkish ultra-nationalist sentiment, not speicifically Islamist and more influenced by their conflict with the Kurds (also majority Sunnis).

Of course, the result of this nationalism helps Daesh because the Turkish government is primarily focused on reducing Kurdish power (who are fighting Daesh).

As far as no outrage by Muslims on the violence in the Middle East... I'm not even sure what this means or what you think some people should be doing and who you think should be doing it.

The violence in the Middle East involves various groups fighting with several layers of proxy wars by regional and international powers... literally dozens of groups / nations acting on what they perceive as self-interests.

I hope that world leaders are reading this forum because, if so, then the problems of the Middle East will be solved within months.

Bring in the French Foreign Legion and grant Saudi males free-of-charge prostitutes paid for by the UN.

And why are the Kurds wasting their time fighting Daesh? They should be protesting instead!

Daesh has done some dramatic things recently but they're losing territory despite none of of the regional powers paying them that much attention.

Why aren't the regional powers paying much attention to them? Because Daesh is lower on their agendas / list of perceived threats than each other. Can Daesh take territory from Turkey or Saudi Arabia? Of course not. They're annoying to them but Turkey is more concerned about the Kurds (and also Iran) and Saudi Arabia is more concerned about it's proxy wars with Iran.

And Iran (which is fighting Daesh more in Iraq than Syria) is more concerned maintaining it's influence against the Saudi alligned nations.

What's wrong with some of you people?

Pershmerga-Yazidi forces with Western air backup conduct a successful operation, yet people still complain that they aren't doing enough?

Why don't these people defend themselves?!? It's pretty clear that's what the Kurds and Yazidis are doing. These aren't official nation-states so it's not realistic to expect them to have their own air force.

In fact, the Kurds have been defending themselves for decades against multiple nation-states and Islamist groups... yet "courageous" people sitting behind a computer complain that they aren't doing enough. Good job!

This is a pretty good idea. As if the British Council is doing the intensive 6 week training course I'd imagine that it'll be CELTA or similar that the Thai teachers are going through. Not only will it improve their English significantly, but it'll teach them how to teach more effectively.

As it's meant to be for the best English teachers at each school it'll likely be heads of department, or teachers who have the full support of the head of dept, and so they'll have the authority/status required to teach the other teachers.

"Slashing" the number of foreign teachers wouldn't be a good move at this stage, but long term that's where Thailand needs to head to. Also they didn't say if by foreign they meant NESs or non-NESs. As they need better Thai teachers, they can't rely on every school having foreign teachers, there simply aren't enough to go around, and so it just increases the inequality between the rich & poor schools.

My personal view is, and has been for a long time, that Thailand needs to spend money on teaching the teachers if they want to be successful. Foreign NES teachers are more expensive and often only stay teaching in Thailand for a few years. Comparatively Thai teachers start on less than half of the salary most foreigners are paid & can increase their ability over a career of 30-40 years, rather than just 1-5.

The current problem is though, that they start at such a low level that even after 30 years they're usually not as effective at teaching as a NES is after 3 years experience. Which is why the teachers need to have their level increased, courses like this one will help, but it's only (hopefully) the first step, the next step being reassigning foreign teachers from high schools to universities where they can teach the teachers. Thailand needs to look forward to the next generation, as it's already too late for this generation.

Yeah, to the NES point... I don't know the percentage of native English speakers among foreign English teachers at Thai public schools, but I do know that in recent years Thailand actively recruited teachers from the Philippines. So this could be a change from that that direction rather than basic anti-foreigner policy.

Every cloud has a silver lining, at least ISIL is now doing the right thing by taking the fight to the Hezbollah

home.... a befitting situation where one group of terrorist kills the other group of terrorists, good for the meddle

east, good for the world....

All "terrorists" are not the same.

Except Hezbollah is a lot different than Deash... Hezbollah works within the Lebonese political system, with elected members of Parliament and coordinates activities with the Lebanese military. When was the last time they targeted civilians? Maybe 2012 in Bulguaria?

ISIL fights everyone non-stop executes civilians by the scores.

Yep. Burn the lot down. Myanmar style Buddhism. Didn't do any society any good though. Fighting hatred with hatred never ever results in anything positive.

Ok, that's fine, but how come throughout the entire world muslims can spout hatred to all non-Muslims, but Buddhists, Jews, Christians can't say a damn word without being called racist???

Look at this photo, can you see anything, anything at all, wrong in the pictures?

They are threatening a 9/11 on British people, and the police are not doing a damn thing about it. Now, just imagine EDL people standing there with placards saying, "KILL ALL MUSLIMS"?

Why can they spout hatred to us, but nothing gets done about it...?

Hmm, those photos don't look like Thailand to me. So I don't see what they have to do with this "monk" or the insurgency in the South.

If anyone (Muslim, Buddhist or otherwise) proposes acts of violence then something will be done about it by the current regime. In fact, it's the opposite... Anyone who lives in Thailiand knows that "something" will be done if one publicly does or proposes any kind of action against the status quo.

The monk had proposed buring down mosques starting in the North and moving southward. That's more than noni-PC, it's stupid. There is a Muslim minority in Thailand, but they all aren't Malay-Patani and not all people of Malay-Patani descent are involved in the conflict. Why would the BRN or any other groups involved in the conflict care if a Mosque is burned down in Chiang Mai or Bangkok?

Maybe the monk lumps all Muslims together regardless of who or where they are... although he's more likely doing this for personal political gain. In any event, I hope the guy can find his time machine so he can return to when that world view belongs.

Oh, and as far the Myanmar approach that the monk is proposing... anyone who thinks the primarly or only conflict within that country is Buddhists vs. Muslims should look into the situation a little more.

The most publicized conflct is between the Muslim Rohingya and Buddhist Rakhine,.. Do the (Buddhist) Rakhine look upon the (Buddhist) Burmese as allies? No, they view the Burmese as opprossors, and for good reason.

Sweet! If the Myanmar government does something, it must be a good idea and should be emulated!

"Single Gateway" sounds to menacing.

"One Nation One Gateway" sounds much better.

On a somewhat related topic, I've just noticed today that vimeo is now blocked. I think that's a recent develeopment.

The most tragic thing about this tragedy is that the biggest victims aren't the victims themselves but instead the same scapegoats that are parroted out every time this happens... the media, guns, Obama, Muslims, the shooter, etc.

I suppose it's also possible to argue that the the victims are also victims as well.

Actually it does matter what Thaksin's motives were & still are - power & enrichment. Thais have been politicised for decades and have voted in decent numbers in elections. The only difference since 2001 is that that politicisation is for or against Thaksin. And if you include vote buying, intimidation (red shirt villages for example), and brainwashing (2010 for example) it's not a very thoughtful politicisation.

The so-called elites. These are everywhere, within PTP & without, in Bangkok and locally throughout Thailand. Some are called influential people. I don't deny that there are those outside the scope of this debate. Pity though that some seem to view only one elite which tends to be used as a big stick to boost weak arguments.

In summary, no, Thaksin has not been any sort of catalyst for real change within Thailand. In truth he is a barrier to opening up the country politically & will continue to be so while he continues to interfere in its affairs.

You clearly belong to the simple minded school that believes Thailand's current problems can broadly be explained by the activities of one "bad man".This is quite a common perception especially among the Sino Thai urban middle class, not on the whole a group given to serious reflection.It is not however a view that can be sustained by anyone with a knowledge or understanding of Thai culture and history.The old elites themselves understand much better what is involved but to date they have failed, mainly because of dismal leadership, to pursue any sense of enlightened self interest which would give them a long term opportunity to preserve their wealth and influence.

I am not going to spend time refuting your comments since they contain, surprisingly in such a short post, many of the the lazy and intellectually bankrupt assumptions that have been demolished many times on this forum over the years.Suffice it to say your views on corruption and vote buying are not connected to reality.

The position, fort hose who are not blinded by ignorance and prejudice, is well summarised by Patrick Jory of the University of Queensland.

"The essence of the political conflict remains unchanged since it began in late 2005, when a

movement backed by Thailand’s conservative elite ousted the elected government of the

popular Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Today, a power bloc — consisting of the military, the

bureaucracy, and Sino–Thai banking and industry continues its struggle to preserve its political supremacy. This power

bloc is threatened by the politicisation of Thailand’s rural and urban working classes — whose

political potential Thaksin was the first to recognise and exploit.

The power bloc wages this struggle in ideological terms in the name of ‘reform’. But what is

endlessly debated in the pro-establishment media and by conservative intellectuals as a moral

issue — how to solve the problem of corrupt politicians, vote-buying, ignorant voters — is in reality

a political issue: how to accommodate the entry of millions of Thai citizens into Thailand’s

political process. The draft constitution’s oft-stated desire to rid Thai politics [3] of the former is

really an attempt to block the latter."

The slightly strange aspect is that these views are not considered the slightest bit controversial outside Thailand on all shades of political thought.One could expect the left wing/liberal side to come up with these conclusions but I have seen very similar sentiments expressed by the late Lee Kwan Yew.

..but of course only Thais (and reactionary "expats") can understand Thailand.

I think that view is not controversal in developed countries in the West because they aren't familiar with how things run in most developing countries, whether "democratic" or not. Politics is about people instead of policy and political parties are just groups of people who band together for when they think it benefits their goals of acheiving power. Plus, throw in the the military and police (really, factions within each) that act as political actors and the nuances of politics in developing countries makes little sense to them. Or, more likely, people reporting or giving opinions on politics here (politicians, academics, reports) understand the complexities but tend to phrase it in terms of an ideoligical struggle when it servers their own self-interests.

Thai politics -- at least among the Thai political parties -- in the dozen plus years have been pro-Thaksin and anti-Thaksin... but the fight isn't elites versus non-elites. It's those that support a old elite structure versus an newer elite structure based around Thaksin. The coups had nothing to do with idological policy. The coups occured to ensure that certain factions in the military retained power. They didn't care about "populist policy" one way or another but they cared a lot about attempts to restructure the military that would give Thaksin's allies more power and themselves less.

The voting hasn't been rural poor versus Bangkok elite. It has been geographical. Thaksin's party will keep on winning elections because his geographical support base (North and Northeast) is more populous than the also rural South. TRK/PPP/PTP fares better in Central Thailand, including Bangkok, than in the South. And In Bangkok, you'll do a lot better guessing how someone will vote based upon the geography of their family roots than their socio-economic class.

The problem with Thai electoral politics is that the priimary focus is on whether or not Thaksin (and other banned officials) can return to politics. Things like the health care scheme and accessibiliy to loans did make a difference to poorer people. But those things happened during the TRK's first term well over a decade ago.

The current military junta's interests are more complicated. Yes, they are anti-Thaksin. But many of their actions are also related to internal power/political struggles with other factions within the military.

That's interesting because I don't think most Americans really understand the concept of coups.

I think many of the people who said yes are thinking more revolutions of the people rising up vs. a typical military government coup.

Personally I am sympathetic to that idea ... that the people rising up should always be an option if government becomes too oppressive.

No, the question was pretty clear that it was about the military.

"9. Is there any situation in which you could imagine yourself supporting the U.S. military taking over the powers of federal government?"

This was one among a series questions about attitudes towards the miliatary, police and politicians the one about the coup.

But this wasn't a random poll, either. It was an online poll in which respondents are self-selected.

This info is only new to us and we're only aware of it because of someone read a communique from June.

Hopefully, since then, some people (e.g., business leaders with good relations with the current government) were able to convince the junta that this is not a good idea.