2 minutes ago, Nojohndoe said:

Yeah yeah . Salute your bogus flag of choice  if you feel obligated.

 

 

So, in your opinion, in what way would these submarines be tactically useful?

Gulf of Thailand is way too shallow for them to operate. No thermal layers to hide under and indeed from the air they can be physically seen.

And which enemy would they be protecting the country from?

3 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

So, in your opinion, in what way would these submarines be tactically useful?

Gulf of Thailand is way too shallow for them to operate. No thermal layers to hide under and indeed from the air they can be physically seen.

And which enemy would they be protecting the country from?

Don't expect an to answer that or any other serious question these guys never answer any questions, just create them.

11 hours ago, SeaMike01 said:

I've never really understood the goofballs who complain about Thailand buying tanks, submarines or helicopters. It's a sovereign nation and they can spend money on national defense as any other nation does.  Given the escalating tensions in the region, it makes sense to be reasonably well-armed, and good military equipment is not cheap. Booze-soaked geezers at the beach can laugh about "protect from who? LOL!", but the reality is that all regional powers have a military. For deterrence if nothing else.

Deterrence against who? Ze Germans? 

10 hours ago, MayBeNow said:

USA 71 submarines

UK 11 submarines

 

It seems many Western immigrants are really fired up about Thailand, with its long coastline, intending to buy 2 submarines. Did it ever dawn on you that its because the world is unsafe. Especially since Western countries care jackass about international law? Especially since 1989? Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen. The bullying of Cuba, Venezuela, Serbia, Russia, China, Iran to name just a few countries. The list is endless.

The above 2 countries, with a proven track record of centuries of imperialism, adventurism, mass murder and foreign occupation, posess overwhelming firepower (ok the UK is a small guy thinking its big, but still dangerous enough) firepower that they use to bully souvereign countries into submission. Thailand doesnt buy these 2 subs from China to protect itself from China...

You would have been better off making the point that Thailand wants to emulate the UK by having subs rather than the nonsense you posted, after all there's a reason the Thai military wear red jackets and bearskins on parade. 

 

They want to look like the best, but doesn't matter what hardwear they got or what uniforms they wear, they will always just be regarded as a joke. 

 

Chok dee. 

7 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

So, in your opinion, in what way would these submarines be tactically useful?

Gulf of Thailand is way too shallow for them to operate. No thermal layers to hide under and indeed from the air they can be physically seen.

And which enemy would they be protecting the country from?

Why does everyone harp on about the Gulf of Thailand?

Thailand has significant territorial rights and  economic resource rights in the Andaman Sea.

In the terms of  "enemy" does it have to always be an act of military aggression ? How many  countries confront flagrant encroachment by illegal fishing  fleets  already? Problematic is a surface vessel  can be spotted  approaching.  A submarine popping  up alongside  would be a better  option at least.

Don't blame the Thai Navy just like the government they are only doing what their master Pooh tells them too. 

Someone's making a nice little nest egg out of these wasteful purchases. 

I wonder how many vaccines the cost of 2 subs would buy?

People are starving, out of work, and household debts are spiralling out of control,, and these idiots want to buy  submarines,  words fail me.... Or is it something to do with the brown envelopes that come with these Subs... 

19 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Protect the country from who?

Themselves? 

 

6 hours ago, Nojohndoe said:

Why does everyone harp on about the Gulf of Thailand?

Thailand has significant territorial rights and  economic resource rights in the Andaman Sea.

In the terms of  "enemy" does it have to always be an act of military aggression ? How many  countries confront flagrant encroachment by illegal fishing  fleets  already? Problematic is a surface vessel  can be spotted  approaching.  A submarine popping  up alongside  would be a better  option at least.

Because the submarines base is at the very top of the Gulf of Thailand.

Well at least submarines, unlike many of the toys the military had to have, can't be used against its own people.

I laugh at all these military "experts" who apparently don't know what a "map" is and are under the impression that the Gulf of Thailand is the only "ocean" Thailand borders on.
(Hint - try looking at the West Coast of the country.)

While submarines are a "luxury" item that Thailand probably can't really afford at this time, there is more to consider than just "protecting the beaches of Pattaya". 
The Straits of Malacca are strategically important to a lot of countries as well and while not in Thai territory, they no doubt have defense agreements with other nations and could be called upon to help with things like interdiction and/or blockading of ports and passages. 
(Another hint - it's not a good idea to wait until someone attacks you before you decide that you need protection. That kind of thinking didn't work out so well for most of Europe in the late 1930s.)

However, with all the financial pressure on the gov't due to the covid crisis (and the loss of a significant part of their GDP due to the ban on tourists), one wonders how they could afford such luxury items.

I have no doubt that China is making them an "offer they can't afford to refuse" as a way of getting the country even further indebted to them. It's a scheme China has been employing quite effectively in other countries (like Cambodia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Djibouti to name a few). 
Thailand is strategically important to China and they'd love to replace the US as Thailand's "best friend and defender", just like they are doing in Cambodia right now. 
It seems they already have their puppet gov't installed and have been pushing a number of large budget projects (from high speed rail lines linking China and Thailand to condo projects in Jomtien).
This is how they exert their influence. 
They sell you their equipment at cut rate prices. They build expensive "infrastructure" projects (like dams, rail lines, power generating facilities) with generous "terms". They offer low interest "loans" to help with budget issues.
Pretty soon, they have enough influence to start ordering the host country to do whatever China wants and that country has little choice but to obey. 

For example. The Americans built new "Command and Control" buildings in a Cambodian naval port (Ream) just a few years ago. 2012 actually. They were the "Tactical Headquarters of the National Committee for Maritime Security".
The Chinese recently signed a new ("secret") deal with Cambodia to lease (some/most/all - it's a secret) of that base. Then suddenly the Cambodians decided to destroy those new C&C buildings the Americans built. (Apparently the Chinese didn't want them there. Maybe worried the Americans had the buildings bugged and could spy on them.)

Around the same time, China "gifted" Cambodia with over 300 military trucks (that were apparently

never ordered by the Cambodian military). Cambodia's PM announced that he was "donating" the trucks to the police and army (as though he'd bought them out of his own pocket).

Thaksin was pretty cozy with the Chinese while he was in power. (One wonders how his net worth went from 15 billion to 76 billion after just 5 years in office.)

The current gov't is also pretty cozy with them. They are the ones pushing for the masses of Chinese tourists. You know, the "clean Chinese" that some people (like former general Anutin) prefer over "dirty farang" tourists.

The sub deal could be tabled and then later on quietly crossed off the budget but if it goes through it will speak volumes about who this gov't really answers to.

 

Some troll posts and the replies have been removed.

 

Removed a post (and responses) that claimed others were paid to post. If you have any actual evidence please forward it to support. If it's just a lame debating tactic, further references like that may find you without posting rights. 

A waste of money.

I think they might have been better spending that money towards building the Thai version of the Panama Canal across the Isthmus of Kra. Think of the shipping fees they could earn.

10 hours ago, Nojohndoe said:

Why does everyone harp on about the Gulf of Thailand?

Thailand has significant territorial rights and  economic resource rights in the Andaman Sea.

In the terms of  "enemy" does it have to always be an act of military aggression ? How many  countries confront flagrant encroachment by illegal fishing  fleets  already? Problematic is a surface vessel  can be spotted  approaching.  A submarine popping  up alongside  would be a better  option at least.

You dont use submarines to counter illegal fishing. Have you ever read any of the reports of subs getting caught in nets? It usually ends badly for the fishing vessel.

Ergo submarines keep well clear of fishing vessels.

On 7/18/2021 at 9:00 AM, mrmicbkktxl said:

Even prayuth can't be that stupid to buy submarines now

I wouldn't put money on it, he is a megalomaniac.

On 7/18/2021 at 7:52 AM, Jonathan Fairfield said:

The Navy has officially submitted a proposal this week to the parliamentary budget committee considering the fiscal budgets for the 2022 year,

It will (excuse the pun) sail through, got to keep their mates at the trough.

what a sensible way for the government to spend money instead on vaccines' !!! maybe  will  be used to search for the covid 19 in the sea  !!!