Nickymaster

Mistakes were made by the military and by the government and by the generals, and those who suffered by those mistakes deserve both the truth and some sort of recompense for their suffering.

I don't think however there was ever intention to kill unnecessarily by authorities, and i find your choice of words murder spree, frankly disgusting (the sort of thing i would expect to be coming from the mouths of distinguished gentlemen like Jatuporn or Amsterdam). To speak so flippantly with zero thought for the soldiers who put their lives on the line, is something i find terribly sad.

Seems we are in equal disappointment with each other. Oh well...

If you find the the the gunning down of unarmed civilians a "mistake" rather than a crime, so be it.

If you describe the members of an unruly mob that collectively was responsible for so much destruction, violence, injury and death in the capital city in 2010, as unarmed civilians, or as innocent victims, so be it.

I believe all abuses on all sides be properly investigated and in the case of criminality adequately punished.You and the usual suspects apparently believe criminality on the part of generals and government should get a free pass.No wonder you get agitated when it becomes apparent the rest of the world thinks differently.

"No wonder you get agitated when it becomes apparent the rest of the world thinks differently."

Not really. Most of the world know the games people play with there own people (supporters).

The argument is weak to say the least, for example saying that more protesters than soldiers were killed, what does that prove?. Japan lost 1.8 or so million to the Allies 140.000, so that makes Japan the victim? No it just shows that they picked up a fight and got their arse handed back.

Most protesters died at or nearby the barricades, which of course would explain why most of the fatal injuries were to the head and torso (not to mention that injuries to the extremities are much less likely to cause death) They manned those barricades, created smokescreens which seems quite convenient for the MiB hit and run tactics. Let go a few rounds and or a grenade or two to the army lines and hightail somewhere else. They do that, the soldiers fire back and who gets it? the idiots at the barricade get it, that's who.

My argument was against those who suggest the red shirt protesters were escalating the conflict every day. I was suggesting that having had 5 security forces being killed on one day and then a further 6 in the month that followed is not reflective of the red shirts escalating their actions. In that same timescale when 50 plus protesters, cameramen, medics, bystanders were killed it appears to me that the army have upped the ante with no reasonable reason to do so.

As far as the head and torso shots being a result of hiding behind barricades it would seem the barricades were "not fit for purpose". I think it more highly likely that the troops ignored their officers and fired indiscriminately as has been suggested by a number of on the scene reporters. The use of snipers would obviously up this amount as well.

The argument still holds no water whatsoever, if there were not more soldiers dead was because they took no chances, no more walking up to the Red Shirts with shields and batons as on the 10th of April. But still there were deaths and grievous injuries at the hands of the "MiB" right up to the end of the "protest", by gunfire and grenades, they didn't stop trying, they just were less effective when the Army was prepared for their guerrilla tactics.

Lets take for example your comment

"The argument still holds no water whatsoever, if there were not more soldiers dead was because they took no chances, no more walking up to the Red Shirts with shields and batons as on the 10th of April."

First off you maintain incorrectly that soldiers walked up to the red shirts with shields and batons on the 10th April. Wrong, Some soldiers were armed with M16's and Tavors and were firing live ammunition at the red shirts.

Your next argument is the unarmed red shirts that were shot in the head or chest due to the fact that alleged armed elements of the Red Shirts would fight skirmish actions with the troops from behind the smoke of burning tyres and then slipping away letting the unarmed red shirts still at the barricades take the brunt of the return fire from the troops.

"Most protesters died at or nearby the barricades, which of course would explain why most of the fatal injuries were to the head and torso (not to mention that injuries to the extremities are much less likely to cause death) They manned those barricades, created smokescreens which seems quite convenient for the MiB hit and run tactics. Let go a few rounds and or a grenade or two to the army lines and hightail somewhere else. They do that, the soldiers fire back and who gets it? the idiots at the barricade get it, that's who."

Well all I can say about that theory is that at best it's fanciful when compared to the footage available of the shooting incidents (for example the one accompanying the Nick Nostitz on the spot report mentioned earlier in the thread)

I cannot see any evidence of the Red Shirt supporters continually upping the ante argument that is being used to justify the use of snipers and seemingly coincidentally large rise in protesters shot and killed. Is there some kind of trade off that goes on in peoples minds: that they threw two grenades so we kill 10 protesters - Is that how you view this as an escalation of "violence" by the red shirts?

Meanwhile back on planet earth:

1) the firing of an M79 into the 11th Infantry Regiment on January 28, 2010;

2) the firing of grenades during the incidents at Kok Wua intersection on April 10, 2010, which caused 5 deaths of soldiers (including that of Col Romklao);

3) the firing into the oil depot at Prathum Thani on April 21, 2010;

4) the firing of an M79 into the BTS station at Sala-Daeng on April 22, 2010, which caused 2 deaths and 78 injuries;

5) the firing of 3 RPGs into Dusit-Thani Hotel on May 17, 2010

6) the firing attack into the police flat at Lumpini Police Station on May 19, 2010, causing deaths and injuries of police officers and their families;

7) the firing of an M16 on police officers and soldiers in front of the Krung Thai Bank, Sala-Daeng Branch, on May 7, 2010, which caused 1 death and 2 injuries of policemen;

8) the firing into the UCL building on May 14, 2010, causing 1 deaths and 4 injuries of police officers.

Lets take for example your comment

"The argument still holds no water whatsoever, if there were not more soldiers dead was because they took no chances, no more walking up to the Red Shirts with shields and batons as on the 10th of April."

First off you maintain incorrectly that soldiers walked up to the red shirts with shields and batons on the 10th April. Wrong, Some soldiers were armed with M16's and Tavors and were firing live ammunition at the red shirts.

Your next argument is the unarmed red shirts that were shot in the head or chest due to the fact that alleged armed elements of the Red Shirts would fight skirmish actions with the troops from behind the smoke of burning tyres and then slipping away letting the unarmed red shirts still at the barricades take the brunt of the return fire from the troops.

"Most protesters died at or nearby the barricades, which of course would explain why most of the fatal injuries were to the head and torso (not to mention that injuries to the extremities are much less likely to cause death) They manned those barricades, created smokescreens which seems quite convenient for the MiB hit and run tactics. Let go a few rounds and or a grenade or two to the army lines and hightail somewhere else. They do that, the soldiers fire back and who gets it? the idiots at the barricade get it, that's who."

Well all I can say about that theory is that at best it's fanciful when compared to the footage available of the shooting incidents (for example the one accompanying the Nick Nostitz on the spot report mentioned earlier in the thread)

I cannot see any evidence of the Red Shirt supporters continually upping the ante argument that is being used to justify the use of snipers and seemingly coincidentally large rise in protesters shot and killed. Is there some kind of trade off that goes on in peoples minds: that they threw two grenades so we kill 10 protesters - Is that how you view this as an escalation of "violence" by the red shirts?

You do understand that people within the Red Shirt protest was firing guns and grenades at security forces and other targets throughout the protest, up and until the final crack down, don't you?

You don't need to escalate things any more than gunfire and explosives to get an armed reaction from security agencies.

I'm frankly perplexed at this line of argumentation.

I'd probably agree with you if those additional 50 odd civilians were throwing grenades and firing at soldiers. I happen to believe that wasn't the case. I also happen to believe this will be borne out by the inquest results as and when they are published.

Most were probably not "armed" with fire guns and grenades, still most died at the barricades. Take a look at this video:

Now put yourself on the side of the soldiers on the other end of the road.

First two clips, you see through the smoke of burning tires a metal tube projecting from the barricade and taking aim at your position, do you wait until they fire to decide whether it is a an M79 or just a firework to lay down suppressive fire or not? Remember, your life and the lives of those around you may depend on that decision.

Go to around 0:25, Red Shirts set off fireworks and a particularly stupid Red Shirt pops up and pretends to fire a gun, you on the other side, you have either already been attacked with guns or know someone who has, do you fire back?

Now, one small thought experiment, suppose you are in the vicinity of a recent shooting, let's say a crazy guy opens fire during a police parade injuring and killing a few officers; police scramble and start looking for the shooter. Now you, standing in a shadowy place pull out a toy gun and pretend to fire to one of the officers, what would you expect to happen next?

These idiots decided to play war with armed soldiers, they bear responsibility for their actions.

These idiots were sadly brainwashed by their leaders into starting a war with the army.

If they could have gotten their hands on bazooka they would have used it too.

He avoided questions about the funds used for this trip but admitted that it was a mistake and he would make sure it is not repeated.

An honest mistake

Those PT crooks have come to a stage where they will just say:

"Next week I am going to steal 7 million from the tax-payers which I am going to use for a holiday for me and my friends. It will be a honest mistake and won’t happen again".

well obviously not because that's exactly what you're doing in that reply.

you asked me what i'd do and i told you, i asked you so why won't you answer me?

You guys are the ones that are saying that they should have done something different.

We know what you would NOT do. But you haven't answered the question of what you WOULD do?

Red glasses people have been asked to answer that question a hundred times.

“I’d not say if the TRC’s report is acceptable or not. I’m willing to do anything that is acceptable by all parties for the country’s peace and happiness. The best way is to let the committee work on it first,” she said. (MCOT online news)"

Good to see that the beloved PM has an opinion and is taking a stand...

"The premier said further discussion on the report is needed, so the government has assigned a committee to study the document for further action."

And that is committee nr: uuuhhh 187 or so

I wonder how many innocent civilians would have been hurt or killed had the granade attack on Sala Deng BTS station had actually hit a train?

BANGKOK, 5 May 2010 (NNT) M79 grenade attacks at Sala Daeng Intersection on 22 April 2010 have been proven to be shot from Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, according to the Central Institute of Forensic Science Director, Khunying MD Pornthip Rojanasunan.

The director stated that M79 grenades against protestors of the Alliance of Patriots that day could have been launched from either the seventh or the eighth floor of King Bhumibol Building in Chulalongkorn Hospital based on traces and damages found at the scene.

Ahh, Chula hospital, where they refuse to treat reds and allow army snipers access to their upper floors & then pull a (very successful to the gullible) publicity stunt of evacuating patients, putting their own patients at risk. Oh & let's not forget their most famous associate Dr. Dr. Tul Sithisomwong (old DNA Tul as I like to call him)

What a s..t load of speculation.

The Reds themselves have already confirmed that there were no soldiers there. Only a lot of very scared patients.

Or do you question the red's "own investigation"?

http://www.guardian....invade-hospital

Hahaha. Why not.. It almost worked for the reds.

They waited 6 weeks to clean up the red mess, should have done it after 6 days.

a related story?

http://www.thaivisa....ental-patients/

I wonder how many innocent civilians would have been hurt or killed had the granade attack on Sala Deng BTS station had actually hit a train?

the firing of an M79 into the BTS station at Sala-Daeng on April 22, 2010, caused 2 deaths and 78 injuries

At the very least, the 'trigger happy brigade' will know that the eyes of the world are watching and that there is a possibility that they may be called to account. "Pulling their heads in" would be carte blanche for the ones who consider themselves excused any moral or legal obligations. Probably not a clever idea.

Sure. That explains following comments from the Reds.

http://www.thaivisa....ailands-report/

So I am up here in floody Sukhothai. The water went away 2 days ago and now it has returned and looking like more days of reading thaivisa threads. This one has had me fixed for 5 days and I have enjoyed reading it all.

Originally I was thinking of the N then I seen the F and now I have been to my friends house and had a little look at the Versys, I'm stuck as what to choose?

I originally wanted finance with about 50% down but now I could be swayed to get a 2nd hand one and pay cash. Only problem is I don't see many in the classifieds or on any of the other websites.

Decisions Decisions......

Any knowledge of bikes for sale or any other pearls of wisdom will be greatly received.

Take care and stay safe out there

jambco984

There are loads of Er6N/F and versys for sale at this website. You need a Thai person to help you out.

http://www.er6thailand.com/board/index.php?board=4.0

scroll down and you will find many pages of ads

You only have to look at that woman's face to know the kind of kwais you're dealing with ......

And after that people wonder why TV is considered by a large section of Thai expats as "low class"

And what's wrong with being from a lower class. That's a fundamental part of being a red shirt - the poor downtrodden underclasses. You're not getting all elitist on us are you?

Lo class in my vocabulary has nothing to do with your education, fortune or family origin.

It's an attitude, like hitting someone on the ground, insulting a woman, making fun or taking advantage of someone with disability ... that's lo class !

...supporting corrupt criminals...

IT'S PATHETIC!!

I have figured that the reds are ALL of the same mentality and it is exactly the same as the red apologists on TV. No matter what is staring you in the face they just want the 'truth' to only resemble their version, nothing else, there is no reasoning, no logic, ....just the party line. Communism at its best..way to go.

Perhaps they remember Phan Fah

One incident you highlight before

"On 10 April, troops unsuccessfully cracked down at Phan Fah, resulting in 24 deaths, including one Japanese journalist and five soldiers, and more than 800 injuries. The Thai media called the crackdown "Cruel April" (Source WiKi)

April 10, the day 5 soldiers were killed.

The main problem of the democrats is that Abhisit is not a leader, just the pretty face on the election poster and, for the people behind the scene, the fall guy if (actually when) everything goes wrong. Abhisit is not the sharpest pencil in the box but he should have understood that before accepting the job of "leader" of the democrats and PM.

The main problem of the PTP is that Yingluck is not a leader, just the pretty face on the election poster and, for the people behind the scene, the fall gal if (actually when) everything goes wrong. Yingluck is not the sharpest pencil in the box but she should have understood that before accepting the job of "leader" of the PTP and PM.

See what i did there?

It is absolutely staggering that someone who openly supports the current set up, could preach about the woes of a pretty face puppet PM with no brains. Can someone really be that blind to their own contradictiousness?

For the sake of the argument, lets say that if I support Yingluck and the PT party, I know that they will have the support of K. Thaksin and his team who are amongst the most brilliant minds of the the Thai politic scene. You may like them or not but you can't objectively contest that they are brilliant.

On the other side, first Abhisit leadership is heavily contested within his own party but the worst is they don't have anybody else. The real power belongs to a gerontocracy totally out of touch with the reality of our time. The magnificent 7 a recent editorial was hoping will solve all our problems. The "dream team" to who the power was handled after the coup and it was a total disaster. The real problem for the democrats is that behind the pretty face there is nobody you can trust to run the country.

"For the sake of the argument, lets say that if I support Yingluck and the PT party, I know that they will have the support of K. Thaksin and his team who are amongst the most brilliant minds of the the Thai politic scene. You may like them or not but you can't objectively contest that they are brilliant."

Where have you been lately? That fairy tale has ended a long time ago.

Robert Amsterdam claims to be a human rights lawyer but his view on human rights is very different from the view of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay.

These people are dangerous and won't bow down, won't reconcile unless it benefits them and are doing nothing less than a modern witch hunt. The motive for this is pretty clear to me and this whole charade won't rest till the man behind the curtain gets a red carpet comeback, his money back and takes revenge as interest.

Won't happen.

Says the lady who never gives any answers to anybody.

At least the police did not open fire on the civilians.

Correct. It was the red shirts opening fire on the police and army:

-the firing of an M79 into the 11th Infantry Regiment on January 28, 2010;

-the firing of grenades during the incidents at Kok Wua intersection on April 10, 2010, which caused 5 deaths of soldiers (including that of Col Romklao);

-the firing into the oil depot at Prathum Thani on April 21, 2010;

-the firing of an M79 into the BTS station at Sala-Daeng on April 22, 2010, which caused 2 deaths and 78 injuries;

- the firing of an M16 on police officers and soldiers in front of the Krung Thai Bank, Sala-Daeng Branch, on May 7, 2010, which caused 1 death and 2 injuries of policemen;

- the firing into the UCL building on May 14, 2010, causing 1 deaths and 4 injuries of police officers (see Thairath).

-the firing of an RPG into Dusit-Thani Hotel on May 17, 2010

-the firing attack into the police flat at Lumpini Police Station on May 19, 2010, causing deaths and injuries of police officers and their families;

And your proof of the redshirts being responsible is what?

Says the guy who likes geriatrickid's comment.

Recent events indicate that the momentum for serious inquiries, proper scrutiny of actions / decisions and perhaps indictments and court cases is building.

Perhaps some Dems and Generals might be getting a bit nervous.

Haven't you read the news lately?

The only nervous people I have seen (after the report came out) are Thida, Chalerm and some other reds.

"Pillay called for the Thai government to preserve evidence and information gathered by the commission for the prosecution of the perpetrators.

"

The men in black appeared to be intially involved to 'protect' the protestors, there is photographic evidence of such activity by unarmed 'men in black'

I guess they were also there as a deterent to the RTA turning up and dispersing the peaceful protest camp. It would appear that the RTA and Abhisit were not deterred and turned up surrouding the camp......thus escalating the violence

It seems to me that you are the first person to point out the most likely role of the now infamous MiB which would have been to protect the protesters.

I watched a program on TV the other night from the series 'Through the Wormhole' with Morgan Freeman, they were trying to find evidence of parallel Universes, well I think we have it, I must pop him an email.

Militia are not needed to guard peaceful protestors. An 'encampment' that is built in the middle of a bustling city where roads are sealed off with walls of tyres primed with incendiaries, and barricades of sharpened bamboo sticks/wood/tyres etc etc, where people moving through that part of the city on their day to day business are stopped and searched at unauthorized checkpoints by militia who are armed to intimidate, on stage speeches lasting 20 hours a day where those who attend are told to kill soldiers and burn the city to the ground, where blood is taken from children below the age of consent for a sick demonstration at the family house of the PM etc etc etc. Where the sick and elderly infirm were forced to evacuate their beds when the peaceful protestors invaded a hospital, and all this before a soldier went anywhere near them. If all that is peaceful in your parallel universe then cool, but please stay there and don't bring your mindless codswollop to this real world where the definition of peaceful is a little less 'colourful'.

GJ - I'll be happy to stay in my universe and I hope that people who think they can unleash the army on their own people will stay out of it.

What should the army have done? The terrorizing of downtown Bangkok and the killing of 20 officials is not enough. They should have waited until it was 30 or 40? Not even talking about invading a hospital and all that kind of stuff.

So what should the army have done? (Remember an election within 6 months was promised)

unfortunately it it just a dogma-driven oversimplification of a conflict and has little to do with the reality of the situation in 2010.

Read the account of May 15th from NN and read the part about the army firing without any pauses at a group of protesters behind tires armed with a slingshot, or how they were shooting at him as he ran for cover, then the part as he heard the boots meeting flesh when the solders were beating the unarmed protesters in the gas station, or the fear he had that the solders would just open fire over the wall in to the garden where they were hiding or or or...

I don't care if the protesters are red, yellow or green shirts, no government should do these things to their own citizens. I understand the conditions which led to these events pretty well, but that doesn't mean I think it was in any way justified.

No it is not a tennis match - what a callous way to dismiss the people killed and injured by the army. But if you somehow think that a ratio of around 8-1 of fatalities indicates that the poor army was being terrorized by protesters, then you should ... well nevermind - whatever.

8-1? You mean 7-2.

70 protestors and 20 officials. The first 10 people killed were officials.

An incredible ratio. Unheard of in any modern democracy.

does it matter? does it make a difference to you if it is 7-2 or 8-1? Would 8-1 have been over the line? 7.5-1?

Thailand is not only a modern democracy, but a young one. And protests are what happens when a democratically elected government is stolen from the people by the old-power elite. The typical response of the old-powered elite is to suppress any and all opposition. This is what happened in 2010. Protests and suppression of those protests. It was dam.n ugly.

I was appalled by the violence on both sides, and particularly by that of the government. I wasn't surprised, but I was appalled.

As for you and me, I don't think that we have the least bit of common ground which is generally needed for a discussion. Same for KireB.

"Thailand is not only a modern democracy, but a young one".

So why do you support corruption?