New Army chief’s pro-coup stance ahead of polls angers many

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Artisi said:

Besides cheap hospital visits, what else did Thaksin do for them that was beneficial for them long term ?

As for Taksin - he hasn't been around for a long long time. 

Roads and schools.  Polio was still killing people in north Thailand in the 1990's because travel was so difficult children weren't getting to clinics to be immunized.  That has changed.  Also, barely literate parents who never finished high school are seeing their children graduate from university now.

 

You are correct about Thaksin not being around for a long time, and the political incompetence of his sister was widely recognized.  Had elections been allowed in 2014 the parties affiliated with the Shinawatra's would have begun their slide into insignificance.  But the parties supported by the traditional elites would also have done poorly, which is why the elites opposed democracy.

[Baerboxer]

On 10/19/2018 at 3:58 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Many other politicians and political activists voiced similar opinions, and questioned whether the street rallies and clashes that led to the last coup had been spontaneous or engineered specifically to pave the way for a military takeover..." 

 

'Engineered specifically to pave the way for a military takeover'.

 

Suthep said as much in a political gaffe; a political gaffe being the rare occasion when a politician inadvertently tells the truth...

 

End of.

 

 

 

So all those red shirts bused in from the N/NE, paid for, given food, oh and had to hand over their ID cards, were a false flag operation? And when Nat and Jut, those red shirt leaders who were never elected such by somehow "appointed' call for a "beating the war drum rally" it was another cunning false flag?

 

Reality check - The Shins and their gang tried to mobilize but can't take the military on and win; they know this now. When in government they could make sure their supporters weren't arrested or prevented from attacking any critics. They could also openly say, dear old Chalerm did, that Shin supporters would be guaranteed protection whilst Yingluck advised those protesting against her to go home as their safety couldn't be guaranteed.

 

The only thing that stops the Shin gang imposing a dictatorship is the military/law/elite combo who want it for themselves.

 

 

[heybruce]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So all those red shirts bused in from the N/NE, paid for, given food, oh and had to hand over their ID cards, were a false flag operation? And when Nat and Jut, those red shirt leaders who were never elected such by somehow "appointed' call for a "beating the war drum rally" it was another cunning false flag?

 

Reality check - The Shins and their gang tried to mobilize but can't take the military on and win; they know this now. When in government they could make sure their supporters weren't arrested or prevented from attacking any critics. They could also openly say, dear old Chalerm did, that Shin supporters would be guaranteed protection whilst Yingluck advised those protesting against her to go home as their safety couldn't be guaranteed.

 

The only thing that stops the Shin gang imposing a dictatorship is the military/law/elite combo who want it for themselves.

 

 

You can argue endlessly about tactics.  Your arguments would carry more weight if you provided credible sources for your claims, and acknowledged that, before the coup, Nat and Jut had a right to free speech.

 

Your second paragraph has greater merit:  Organizers calling for elections can't defeat a military determined to stop elections. 

 

The "Shin gang" came to power by elections, and routinely called for new elections.  As flawed as its time in power was, it was better than military rule.

[Artisi]

37 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Roads and schools.  Polio was still killing people in north Thailand in the 1990's because travel was so difficult children weren't getting to clinics to be immunized.  That has changed.  Also, barely literate parents who never finished high school are seeing their children graduate from university now.

 

You are correct about Thaksin not being around for a long time, and the political incompetence of his sister was widely recognized.  Had elections been allowed in 2014 the parties affiliated with the Shinawatra's would have begun their slide into insignificance.  But the parties supported by the traditional elites would also have done poorly, which is why the elites opposed democracy.

That was Taksin not Thaksin who hadn't been around for a long while (early - mid 1700's).

Don't think you can lay claim to roads and schools and reduction of polio to Thaksin, it is all part of a countries development and affluence that was underway before the Shinawatra's push to increase their personnel wealth. 

[Baerboxer]

Just now, heybruce said:

You can argue endlessly about tactics.  Your arguments would carry more weight if you provided credible sources for your claims, and acknowledged that, before the coup, Nat and Jut had a right to free speech.

 

Your second paragraph has greater merit:  Organizers calling for elections can't defeat a military determined to stop elections. 

 

The "Shin gang" came to power by elections, and routinely called for new elections.  As flawed as its time in power was, it was better than military rule.

 

Everyone has their own opinion and can express them. I don't see your posts bursting with citations. If you want to check just look back through TVF. 

Nat and Jut's right to free speech should be the same as every ones. But they weren't elected to the red shirt leadership. Now perhaps you have an idea how and why they were appointed?

 

The Shin gang's footprint seems to be come to power by election as they haven't got the muscle to do otherwise, then ignore the law and do as you please whilst lining your own pockets as quickly as possible and dismantling checks and balances and trying to change the rules to suit themselves. Not unlike similar families to be found in Asia and South America. 

[Artisi]

47 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You can argue endlessly........

 

As flawed as its time in power was, it was better than military rule.

That is a very debatable point and rightly or wrongly, not everyone would agree.

 

[heybruce]

9 minutes ago, Artisi said:

That is a very debatable point and rightly or wrongly, not everyone would agree.

 

Agreed.  The rich and comparatively rich Bangkok middle class clearly prefer military rule, or anything but democracy.  The majority prefer otherwise.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

That was Taksin not Thaksin who hadn't been around for a long while (early - mid 1700's).

Don't think you can lay claim to roads and schools and reduction of polio to Thaksin, it is all part of a countries development and affluence that was underway before the Shinawatra's push to increase their personnel wealth. 

In 2000, the year Thaksin was elected, the north and northeast of Thailand were living in third world conditions, while Bangkok was building first world infrastructure and using all Thailand's infrastructure money in the process.  The boom that ended with the 1997 crash had only benefited Bangkok and a few select areas, it did not benefit the majority of Thais.  When I returned to Thailand in 2006, the year Thaksin was ousted in a coup, the north of Thailand had changed indescribably. 

 

Thaksin haters want to believe that is all coincidence.  Thai voters think otherwise.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Everyone has their own opinion and can express them. I don't see your posts bursting with citations. If you want to check just look back through TVF. 

Nat and Jut's right to free speech should be the same as every ones. But they weren't elected to the red shirt leadership. Now perhaps you have an idea how and why they were appointed?

 

The Shin gang's footprint seems to be come to power by election as they haven't got the muscle to do otherwise, then ignore the law and do as you please whilst lining your own pockets as quickly as possible and dismantling checks and balances and trying to change the rules to suit themselves. Not unlike similar families to be found in Asia and South America. 

What part of my post do you think needs a reference?  Do you dispute that Shinawatra parties call for elections and the military prevents elections?

 

You are one of many who insist that only perfect, corruption free democracy is worth defending; in other words you refuse to acknowledge the obvious, the real-world fact that democracy is always flawed, especially when new, and must evolve.  That attitude prevents democracy, which I suspect is the goal of many who are comfortable with military rule.

 

A flawed, corrupt democracy that holds elections and lets the voters eject the crooks is always better than corrupt military rule that crushes dissent with guns.

[Artisi]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

What part of my post do you think needs a reference?  Do you dispute that Shinawatra parties call for elections and the military prevents elections?

 

You are one of many who insist that only perfect, corruption free democracy is worth defending; in other words you refuse to acknowledge the obvious, the real-world fact that democracy is always flawed, especially when new, and must evolve.  That attitude prevents democracy, which I suspect is the goal of many who are comfortable with military rule.

 

A flawed, corrupt democracy that holds elections and lets the voters eject the crooks is always better than corrupt military rule that crushes dissent with guns.

free elections not financed by crooks who's only interested in their own personnel wealth is undoubtly better than a flawed and corrupt democracy or military rule, unfortunately not a likely scenario in Thailand looking into the near future. 

Of course is a flawed corrupt democracy (which isn't democracy any way) better or worse than a military junta - a very debatable point. 

 

[metisdead]

A troll post containing repeated troll comments that were repeated repeatedly to continue the troll post repeatedly has been removed as well as a reply. 

[Artisi]

33 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Agreed.  The rich and comparatively rich Bangkok middle class clearly prefer military rule, or anything but democracy.  The majority prefer otherwise.

Seems, based on prior so called elections, a vast number of the majority prefer who ever arranges the best transport to the polling point and who pays the most, not withstanding the pressure from the village head etc. on who you are expected to vote for. 

 

[Eric Loh]

32 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Seems, based on prior so called elections, a vast number of the majority prefer who ever arranges the best transport to the polling point and who pays the most, not withstanding the pressure from the village head etc. on who you are expected to vote for. 

 

Ah, the formula for winning an election finally revealed by our sharp eye resident poster. No need for coups. Just deep pockets of the elites and trucks from the military. Brilliant.

[heybruce]

59 minutes ago, Artisi said:

free elections not financed by crooks who's only interested in their own personnel wealth is undoubtly better than a flawed and corrupt democracy or military rule, unfortunately not a likely scenario in Thailand looking into the near future. 

Of course is a flawed corrupt democracy (which isn't democracy any way) better or worse than a military junta - a very debatable point. 

 

 

47 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Seems, based on prior so called elections, a vast number of the majority prefer who ever arranges the best transport to the polling point and who pays the most, not withstanding the pressure from the village head etc. on who you are expected to vote for. 

 

Once again: "But, but, but....vote buying!"

 

No evidence needed, just keep telling yourself it happened and you can believe it's true.  Once you've convinced yourself it's true, it's easy to ignore the fact that Yingluck won an internationally monitored election and the results declared legitimate by ANFREL, while the junta obstructed international monitoring of their sham referendum on the new constitution.

[chainarong]

Prayut is the latest Coup leader to realize after the wedding festivities the marriage starts to break down, nothing has been achieved except more of the same retoric as previously , the true test lies with the appointment of 250 Senators elected by their peers, whether the people can stomach this deliberate finger job to the people, remains to be seen.

[Artisi]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

 

Once again: "But, but, but....vote buying!"

 

No evidence needed, just keep telling yourself it happened and you can believe it's true.  Once you've convinced yourself it's true, it's easy to ignore the fact that Yingluck won an internationally monitored election and the results declared legitimate by ANFREL, while the junta obstructed international monitoring of their sham referendum on the new constitution.

No no no vote buying, just ask Bruce or Eric they are the eyes and the ears of the red fella's and can tell you categorically that no red votes were ever bought.

But at the end of it all, it makes bugger all difference as it is ongoing scourge of Thai politics, previously and into the future. 

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, Artisi said:

No no no vote buying, just ask Bruce or Eric they are the eyes and the ears of the red fella's and can tell you categorically that no red votes were ever bought.

But at the end of it all, it makes bugger all difference as it is ongoing scourge of Thai politics, previously and into the future. 

Your claims would have greater credibility (meaning a little more than zero credibility) if you could give any credible evidence of vote buying on a scale to sway an election, and if your claim did not fly in the face of ANFREL's observations. 

 

So far all I've heard are second and third hand stories about somebody's wife's cousin saw something in some village somewhere that looked like an attempt to buy votes.  I'll go with the ANFREL observations instead.  Of course you have clearly convinced yourself vote buying is real, even though you can't give any evidence to support your belief.

[marqus12]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

No no no vote buying, just ask Bruce or Eric they are the eyes and the ears of the red fella's and can tell you categorically that no red votes were ever bought.

But at the end of it all, it makes bugger all difference as it is ongoing scourge of Thai politics, previously and into the future. 

it does not really matter because politicians always buy votes in one way or another

Edited October 20, 2018 by marqus12

[zzaa09]

19 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Your claims would have greater credibility (meaning a little more than zero credibility) if you could give any credible evidence of vote buying on a scale to sway an election, and if your claim did not fly in the face of ANFREL's observations. 

 

So far all I've heard are second and third hand stories about somebody's wife's cousin saw something in some village somewhere that looked like an attempt to buy votes.  I'll go with the ANFREL observations instead.  Of course you have clearly convinced yourself vote buying is real, even though you can't give any evidence to support your belief.

A related side note - 

Ever notice the most intense and obsessed posters, regarding Thai politics/society, are those who don't live here [for any length of time] or have any little/distant association with the culture.

 

This odd wannabe trait is most profound among Thai-themed "expat" forums. 

Some find it disturbing, others amused.

[Eric Loh]

58 minutes ago, Artisi said:

No no no vote buying, just ask Bruce or Eric they are the eyes and the ears of the red fella's and can tell you categorically that no red votes were ever bought.

But at the end of it all, it makes bugger all difference as it is ongoing scourge of Thai politics, previously and into the future. 

I think you completely miss the big picture or perhaps you just being obstinate. Paying for favour is a old feudal/people relationship in Thailand. It is not only done only during election but also in business. It takes much more to influence an election. This quote from an ordinary folk in Issan best explain. “ "Every party hands out money. People take money from everyone, but who they vote for is up to them."

[Artisi]

36 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

I think you completely miss the big picture or perhaps you just being obstinate. Paying for favour is a old feudal/people relationship in Thailand. It is not only done only during election but also in business. It takes much more to influence an election. This quote from an ordinary folk in Issan best explain. “ "Every party hands out money. People take money from everyone, but who they vote for is up to them."

Not according to Bruce, no vote buying ever. 

[jimmynewbie]

17 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Not according to Bruce, no vote buying ever. 

yellows buy votes too! they even pay more

The scums were even asking farangs for money to go cause havoc in bkk when they closed airports, i told my very hi so landlord exactly what i thought of it and gave him nothing.

He then came back moaning no farang, no customers in his hotels, som nam na

 

 

[jayboy]

No no no vote buying, just ask Bruce or Eric they are the eyes and the ears of the red fella's and can tell you categorically that no red votes were ever bought.
But at the end of it all, it makes bugger all difference as it is ongoing scourge of Thai politics, previously and into the future. 

If you believe vote buying is the ongoing scourge of Thai politics, you simply have not been paying attention.This has not been a significant factor for several decades.

All studies have confirmed this and politicians in all sides understand this.It is actually almost impossible to “fix” an election in Thailand these days.

But the myth continues- and not only among the pub talk farang types.The silly old Sino Thai matrons in my muubaan all come out with this discredited rubbish.

If you want to talk about vote buying I suggest you focus on the urban middle class who have long benefited from the grotesque skewing of resources in one of the most unequal societies in the world.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[anon537687643]

The real control lies with those who use excuses to remove Governments and prevent anything resembling a “free and fair election “ Guess who has the power to do that ?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[zzaa09]

53 minutes ago, markaoffy said:

The real control lies with those who use excuses to remove Governments and prevent anything resembling a “free and fair election “ Guess who has the power to do that ?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

????

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, markaoffy said:

The real control lies with those who use excuses to remove Governments and prevent anything resembling a “free and fair election “ Guess who has the power to do that ?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Enigmatic like the phantom of the old or new opera. 

[zzaa09]

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

Enigmatic like the phantom of the old or new opera. 

Part and parcel of the historic theatre.

[chama]

On 10/18/2018 at 6:49 PM, zzaa09 said:

Should be expecting a coup or counter coup regardless of the election outcome.

 

The traditional circles are looking to change players, but not the theatre.

 

Same as it ever was.

My turn at the trough, Big P had his already. Its a right of passage for top Generals!

[heybruce]

On 10/20/2018 at 7:46 AM, Artisi said:

Not according to Bruce, no vote buying ever. 

Are you making stuff up, or are you easily confused?  I said there is no evidence of vote buying.  If there were vote buying on a scale to affect the outcome of a national election there would be ample evidence.

[GinBoy2]

On the vote buying thing, I'll just tell you my wife's experience, for whatever it's worth.

Last time she accepted the money from 4 of them when they offered, then still voted how she wanted.

I suspect that's typical.

Her take was that if they're that stupid I'll take all their money.

Wise woman my wife