PM Prayut: Roadmap doesn’t prolong NCPO’s power

[webfact]

PM: Roadmap doesn’t prolong NCPO’s power

 

 

BANKGOK, 25th September 2017 (NNT) – The prime minister of Thailand has reiterated that the country’s reform roadmap doesn’t prolong military control at the expense of political parties. 

Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha has given an assurance that the current administration and the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) have no interest in perpetuating military rule in Thai politics, nor does the 3-phase roadmap allow the military to cling to power for years to come. 

He said the government is trying to build trust with the international community through partnerships and diplomatic ties, while calling on the general public to help foster unity and reconciliation in the country as well as ensure a peaceful atmosphere, during the period leading up to the next general election. 

Thailand is awaiting 10 organic laws to be promulgated after which the exact date of the general election can be determined. At this preliminary stage, the election is expected to take place late next year.

 

-- nnt 2017-09-25

[Samui Bodoh]

Rarely have I seen so much nonsense in such a short article.

 

"We are great people who really don't want to stay in power forever, but we have to for the country."

 

In three years, you haven't done much. Time to go.

[inThailand]

roadmap doesn’t prolong military control at the expense of political parties. 

 

Should it read? Road map doesn't prevent military control...
 

[Cadbury]

I can only guess the so called "road map"  Prayut is talking about is a 20 year road map to fit in with all those fanciful airy-fairy 20 year plans he is creating. 

Or is he suggesting his 20 year plans are being put in place for a democratically elected government to administer while he just fades away into obscurity? I find such a premise difficult to believe coming from a man who has such a overblown opinion of himself.

[steven100]

3 minutes ago, Cadbury said:

I can only guess the so called "road map"  Prayut is talking about is a 20 year road map to fit in with all those fanciful airy-fairy 20 year plans he is creating. 

Or is he suggesting his 20 year plans are being put in place for a democratically elected government to administer while he just fades away into obscurity? I find such a premise difficult to believe coming from a man who has such a overblown opinion of himself.

Lets hope they are in control for 20 years.  Many projects have been pushed forward because of Khun Prayuth ....

but i guess you will never be happy in Thailand.

[steven100]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Rarely have I seen so much nonsense in such a short article.

 

"We are great people who really don't want to stay in power forever, but we have to for the country."

 

In three years, you haven't done much. Time to go.

Rubbish,  many projects have been fast tracked and pushed forward since Khun Prayuth Chan O Cha came to power. Tell me one thing that Yingluck succeeded in ... ?   excluding the rice scam ...

[Cadbury]

Just now, steven100 said:

Lets hope they are in control for 20 years.  Many projects have been pushed forward because of Khun Prayuth ....

but i guess you will never be happy in Thailand.

Nice to see you again Steven. I knew that one would flush you out. I love it here in Thailand, if only for the pleasure of winding you up!

 

[colinneil]

13 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Lets hope they are in control for 20 years.  Many projects have been pushed forward because of Khun Prayuth ....

but i guess you will never be happy in Thailand.

how is life in la-la land?

I am sure that is where you live, next door to your idol.

[steven100]

I prefer the Junta in control rather than the previous protests, road blocks, and general disorder ....

Weird how some farang prefer the old way.

[kaorop]

4 minutes ago, steven100 said:

I prefer the Junta in control rather than the previous protests, road blocks, and general disorder ....

Weird how some farang prefer the old way.

You'd support a military take over in your own country?

and give up your right to vote, hold protests, speak out against wrongs etc etc etc.

 

Weird how some farangs have such obvious hypocrisy.

 

 

[colinneil]

3 minutes ago, kaorop said:

You'd support a military take over in your own country?

and give up your right to vote, hold protests, speak out against wrongs etc etc etc.

 

Weird how some farangs have such obvious hypocrisy.

 

 

Very well said mate, if there was a military coup in his own country, he would probably be the first to moan.

[PatOngo]

49 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Lets hope they are in control for 20 years.  Many projects have been pushed forward because of Khun Prayuth ....

but i guess you will never be happy in Thailand.

 

How can you not love Thailand when cigarettes are only 125Thb per packet!

[steven100]

16 minutes ago, kaorop said:

You'd support a military take over in your own country?

and give up your right to vote, hold protests, speak out against wrongs etc etc etc.

 

Weird how some farangs have such obvious hypocrisy.

 

 

I support peace and stability.  I don't support an anarchy, mayhem & disorder.

If it means a stable government as it is now then yes, i'm all for it.

Democracy is only a bullshit word, it doesn't work in Thailand which has been shown time & time again in the past. Democracy is not something that is cast in stone and has to happen, it may work for the corrupt politicians in Australia or elsewhere but it won't work here. And many of you know that .... but you just don't want to admit to it ...

 

[darksidedog]

Given the intelligence and maturity levels of Thai politicians and the voters too, we can expect the losing side to throw their toys out of the pram, if and when elections ever happen and the same cycle, resulting in another coup happen all over again.

[yellowboat]

1 hour ago, steven100 said:

Rubbish,  many projects have been fast tracked and pushed forward since Khun Prayuth Chan O Cha came to power. Tell me one thing that Yingluck succeeded in ... ?   excluding the rice scam ...

She got elected and she would have done so again.   Autocracies are by nature more efficient as they answer to no one, but they serve their own interest.  Elected officials need to use finesse, debate and make compromises to stay in office.   That sort of higher level governance is part of Thailand's past and not its future.  Its profoundly sad.  Some may have a problem with living in Thailand, but you hate Thais.  You seem likable, but you really do appear to hate your fellow Thai. 

Edited September 25, 2017 by yellowboat

[harada]

I was under the impression that the latest constitution ensures that the military will be pulling the strings no matter who wins the election.

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, steven100 said:

I support peace and stability.  I don't support an anarchy, mayhem & disorder.

If it means a stable government as it is now then yes, i'm all for it.

Democracy is only a bullshit word, it doesn't work in Thailand which has been shown time & time again in the past. Democracy is not something that is cast in stone and has to happen, it may work for the corrupt politicians in Australia or elsewhere but it won't work here. And many of you know that .... but you just don't want to admit to it ...

 

i believe you are entirely correct: do a search on 'democracy third world countries' and the concise summaries there fit current day thailand as to why thailand has not evolved sufficiently to support democracy as understood by the rest of the world;

as to the current group, i just wish they were better at governing; sure, they can fast track projects yet large societal issues here have not been effectively addressed ( the old tired list;corruption,education...)

[newcomer71]

2 hours ago, steven100 said:

Lets hope they are in control for 20 years.  Many projects have been pushed forward because of Khun Prayuth ....

but i guess you will never be happy in Thailand.

Really? Could you name some? What has been done in 3 years?

[colinneil]

20 minutes ago, newcomer71 said:

Really? Could you name some? What has been done in 3 years?

You ask what has been done in 3 years, errr give me a while i am trying to think of something.

Ohh got it, the PM HAS STOPPED CORRUPTION.

[Thailand]

1 hour ago, harada said:

I was under the impression that the latest constitution ensures that the military will be pulling the strings no matter who wins the election.

That's how I understand it. Myanmar of 40 years ago.

[Get Real]

3 hours ago, colinneil said:

Very well said mate, if there was a military coup in his own country, he would probably be the first to moan.

Oki doki! I can relate to that a military regime is not what is best in all aspects, and would off course not like it to be like that in my own country. Maybe I really don´t give a damn about it, due to that I will never move back. Yeah, it´s Sweden i am talking about. The sinking ship you know.

Back to topic! Due to the situation in Thailand, I must agree with some people that says that the military in power at the moment has been good. That´s just because people in general do not understand the true meaning of democracy in this country. Here they understand exactly what they want to do at the moment, and everybody around has to accept that. Due to the circumstances, Thailand is today unable to solve thier problem on their own. It does not matter if the military tries to do it, or if it would be an elected government. The military try to force people into doing things, without any explainations why they should do it. An elected government ain´t gonna have time to do anything before they are taken down by protesters and a new violent mass of people destroying the cities and the country.

[Happyman58]

The cycle in Thailand will never stop. If they elect a government and the army dont like them out they go.

 

Was having a chuckle to myself  and thinking When Prayut goes to America and Trump asks him these questions

 

Did you win the last election by a landslide?

 

When are you having your next elections?

 

How do you select your candidates to run in your country?

 

How many opposition parties you think will run against you?

 

Just wonder how he will answer them

 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, steven100 said:

I support peace and stability.  I don't support an anarchy, mayhem & disorder.

If it means a stable government as it is now then yes, i'm all for it.

Democracy is only a bullshit word, it doesn't work in Thailand which has been shown time & time again in the past. Democracy is not something that is cast in stone and has to happen, it may work for the corrupt politicians in Australia or elsewhere but it won't work here. And many of you know that .... but you just don't want to admit to it ...

 

If peace and stability are the most important qualities of government for you, you would love North Korea.

 

Democracy hasn't worked in Thailand because a self-serving elite, backed by the self-serving generals, won't let it work.  It's been 85 years since Thailand became a "constitutional democracy" and only one Prime Minister has been allowed to finish a term in elected office.  You can't say democracy doesn't work in Thailand until democracy is given a chance to work in Thailand.

[heybruce]

54 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Oki doki! I can relate to that a military regime is not what is best in all aspects, and would off course not like it to be like that in my own country. Maybe I really don´t give a damn about it, due to that I will never move back. Yeah, it´s Sweden i am talking about. The sinking ship you know.

Back to topic! Due to the situation in Thailand, I must agree with some people that says that the military in power at the moment has been good. That´s just because people in general do not understand the true meaning of democracy in this country. Here they understand exactly what they want to do at the moment, and everybody around has to accept that. Due to the circumstances, Thailand is today unable to solve thier problem on their own. It does not matter if the military tries to do it, or if it would be an elected government. The military try to force people into doing things, without any explainations why they should do it. An elected government ain´t gonna have time to do anything before they are taken down by protesters and a new violent mass of people destroying the cities and the country.

" That´s just because people in general do not understand the true meaning of democracy in this country. Here they understand exactly what they want to do at the moment, and everybody around has to accept that."

 

Can you name a democracy where that is not true for much of the voting population?  Can you name a country in which democracy was given one election cycle or less and matured to perfection in that time?  That the democracy doesn't begin in a mature and flawless form is the main complaint that supporters of military rule give for opposing democracy in Thailand.

 

What makes military rule better than democracy?  In spite of censorship and eliminating free speech and protest, it is obvious to anyone with eyes that military rule has never improved things in Thailand for the majority, only for the minority.

[Happyman58]

2 hours ago, harada said:

I was under the impression that the latest constitution ensures that the military will be pulling the strings no matter who wins the election.

The only Road Map he is interested in is the one they gave the driver to help Yingluck escape 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, YetAnother said:

i believe you are entirely correct: do a search on 'democracy third world countries' and the concise summaries there fit current day thailand as to why thailand has not evolved sufficiently to support democracy as understood by the rest of the world;

as to the current group, i just wish they were better at governing; sure, they can fast track projects yet large societal issues here have not been effectively addressed ( the old tired list;corruption,education...)

Why don't you provide these concise summaries? 

 

Thailand is at the same or higher level of development as many South and Central American and east Asian countries were at when they decided they'd had enough of military rule and opted for democracy.  The biggest difference is that these other countries managed to keep the military largely out of politics.  That is what Thailand needs to try the same.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, harada said:

I was under the impression that the latest constitution ensures that the military will be pulling the strings no matter who wins the election.

 

4 minutes ago, Happyman58 said:

The only Road Map he is interested in is the one they gave the driver to help Yingluck escape 

I have my doubts about that.  Prayut objecting to Yingluck leaving the country reminds me of the scene in the movie Casablanca when the casino is closed:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME 

[Get Real]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

" That´s just because people in general do not understand the true meaning of democracy in this country. Here they understand exactly what they want to do at the moment, and everybody around has to accept that."

 

Can you name a democracy where that is not true for much of the voting population?  Can you name a country in which democracy was given one election cycle or less and matured to perfection in that time?  That the democracy doesn't begin in a mature and flawless form is the main complaint that supporters of military rule give for opposing democracy in Thailand.

 

What makes military rule better than democracy?  In spite of censorship and eliminating free speech and protest, it is obvious to anyone with eyes that military rule has never improved things in Thailand for the majority, only for the minority.

Ok, dude! That was appearently to complicated for you. I give you the easy version. What do you want? Choose your poison!

1. Continued mayhem, burning and killing in the streets.
2. Military regime that prevents the above.

I did never say that a military regime is nessecary in most countries with failing democracy! I just stated that in Thailand in particular, it was nessecary due to that people have no boundraries in this country.

Maybe get what I meant now? If not, just don´t bother.

[kaorop]

6 hours ago, steven100 said:

I support peace and stability.  I don't support an anarchy, mayhem & disorder.

If it means a stable government as it is now then yes, i'm all for it.

Democracy is only a bullshit word, it doesn't work in Thailand which has been shown time & time again in the past. Democracy is not something that is cast in stone and has to happen, it may work for the corrupt politicians in Australia or elsewhere but it won't work here. And many of you know that .... but you just don't want to admit to it ...

 

no you dont you support suppression of people rights at the end of a gun, just because you see it a stability doesnt make it true

 

no its not, to you maybe, but plenty of thais think otherwise and want those rights back

 

project to much?

 

you would support a military take over in your own country if it suited your selfish needs, you just dont want to admit it.

 

but i am wasting my time, you see it with your blinkered perspective no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary

 

 

Edited September 25, 2017 by kaorop

[Reigntax]

8 hours ago, inThailand said:

roadmap doesn’t prolong military control at the expense of political parties. 

 

Should it read? Road map doesn't prevent military control...
 

 

Or roadmap doesnt exist and therefore we can say it does or doesnt include whatever we make up or deny.