Thaksin Snubs Possibility Of Pheu Thai-Palang Pracharath Alliance

[OneMoreFarang]

21 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Everyone must play the cards they are dealt, not the cards they wish they were dealt.

As far as I know Thai people can enter Thai politics, establish political parties, get votes, etc.

But I understand it must be frustrating for honest people to do that if they know that the typical Thai voter will vote again for the same clan they always voted for. TiT

[heybruce]

25 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Did you read my post? Did you understand it?

PT is controlled by Thaksin. Thaksin is a wanted criminal and he is not in Thailand. His involvement in Thai politics is illegal.

And if he does more of the same and if his daughter becomes PM and follows the orders or her father then nobody should be surprised if history repeats itself.

Thaksin could still be PM and loved by almost everybody if he wouldn't have been so greedy. 

Are you blind to the meaning of my post?  As I've explained before, an elected corrupt leader is better than an unelected coup leader. 

[OneMoreFarang]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Are you blind to the meaning of my post?  As I've explained before, an elected corrupt leader is better than an unelected coup leader. 

Good that you "explained" that before. That is your personal opinion. Not more, not less. The last two coups wouldn't have happened if Thaksin would have worked for Thais and Thailand and not mostly for himself. But I guess for you that is ok, because the masses voted for him, and they are stupid enough to vote for him again. 

[heybruce]

35 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Good that you "explained" that before. That is your personal opinion. Not more, not less. The last two coups wouldn't have happened if Thaksin would have worked for Thais and Thailand and not mostly for himself. But I guess for you that is ok, because the masses voted for him, and they are stupid enough to vote for him again. 

The last two coups would not have happened if the Thai military had not chosen to overturn democracy. 

 

Democracy, for all its failings, has accountability.  Leaders can be changed peacefully when the majority wants change.  Coups happen when a minority wants to maintain undeserved privilege.  Change comes at gunpoint.

[OneMoreFarang]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

Change comes at gunpoint.

With no shots fired and lots of happy people.

 

[heybruce]

17 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

As far as I know Thai people can enter Thai politics, establish political parties, get votes, etc.

But I understand it must be frustrating for honest people to do that if they know that the typical Thai voter will vote again for the same clan they always voted for. TiT

Right.  They can do all that and if the ones that get elected upset the elites they get deposed in a coup.

 

Why are you so upset about the corruption of elected officials and show no concern for the corruption of those who seize power in a coup?

[heybruce]

12 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

With no shots fired and lots of happy people.

 

Do you think those coups would have succeeded if the military hadn't had guns and a history of turning them on civilians?  Do you think the elite who were thrilled about the toppling of democratic government represent the majority?

[OneMoreFarang]

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Do you think those coups would have succeeded if the military hadn't had guns and a history of turning them on civilians?  Do you think the elite who were thrilled about the toppling of democratic government represent the majority?

I don't care. The criminal Thaksin and his little criminal sister were removed by the military. The courts didn't dare to prosecute and convict them at that time so someone else had to do it. Good job. Thanks. 

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I don't care. The criminal Thaksin and his little criminal sister were removed by the military. The courts didn't dare to prosecute and convict them at that time so someone else had to do it. Good job. Thanks. 

Yes, you've made it very clear that you don't care when a corrupt military topples an elected government. 

[OneMoreFarang]

4 hours ago, heybruce said:

Yes, you've made it very clear that you don't care when a corrupt military topples an elected government. 

That is your limited understanding of what I wrote. You could read it again and think again. But I don't have much hope that that will happen. 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

That is your limited understanding of what I wrote. You could read it again and think again. But I don't have much hope that that will happen. 

You want a more nuanced understanding?  OK, you clearly think having an unelected corrupt military leader who can't be removed is better than having a corrupt elected leader who can be removed in the next election.

[Jackbenimble]

On 3/28/2023 at 5:30 AM, 2baht said:

If "Tony" ever comes to power again, with the relaxed cannabis laws, he could have a field day, he could wipe out millions this time!

why would he do that?

[OneMoreFarang]

26 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You want a more nuanced understanding?  OK, you clearly think having an unelected corrupt military leader who can't be removed is better than having a corrupt elected leader who can be removed in the next election.

I think that it was good that Thaksin was removed, and it was good that Yingluck was removed. They should have been removed with prosecuting them for their crimes while they were in office. But as we know that didn't happen.

Obviously not every unelected military leader is better than any elected leader. But some unelected military leaders are better than some elected leaders - at least IHMO. 

[heybruce]

25 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I think that it was good that Thaksin was removed, and it was good that Yingluck was removed. They should have been removed with prosecuting them for their crimes while they were in office. But as we know that didn't happen.

Obviously not every unelected military leader is better than any elected leader. But some unelected military leaders are better than some elected leaders - at least IHMO. 

I like the way you qualified your post--IHMO, In Humble My Opinion. 

 

You greatly humbled your opinion by overlooking the most obvious flaw:  There is no peaceful way to remove military leaders who don't want to go.  The peaceful change in leadership is the greatest strength of democracy, but your hatred of all things Shinawatra blinds you to that.

[2baht]

2 hours ago, Jackbenimble said:

why would he do that?

Why were there 2500 +- extrajudicial killings in his war on drugs when he was in power before???2005/2006

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

I like the way you qualified your post--IHMO, In Humble My Opinion. 

 

You greatly humbled your opinion by overlooking the most obvious flaw:  There is no peaceful way to remove military leaders who don't want to go.  The peaceful change in leadership is the greatest strength of democracy, but your hatred of all things Shinawatra blinds you to that.

I experienced years of Shinawatra trouble in Thailand. I had enough of it, and I would be delighted if they would all rot in the desert and nobody would ever mention them again.

 

But obviously Thai people can vote for whoever they want. They just shouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself.

 

[zzaa09]

On 3/27/2023 at 3:45 PM, RichardColeman said:

I am pretty much in the camp of thinking these people will agree to anything to stay at the pig trough if they can

Sure. That's what they do. 

Survival. 

 

It's not as if either one is diametrically opposed to each another. 

They're more apart of the club than not. 

 

Has little or nothing to do with service to the people or benefiting the commons. 

[heybruce]

38 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I experienced years of Shinawatra trouble in Thailand. I had enough of it, and I would be delighted if they would all rot in the desert and nobody would ever mention them again.

 

But obviously Thai people can vote for whoever they want. They just shouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself.

 

Right.  You don't care if Thailand is denied democracy and if corrupt military rule holds the country back, so long as they keep those pesky democracy advocates off the streets.

 

I like the Thai people and think they deserve better.  You obviously have a different opinion.

[OneMoreFarang]

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

democracy advocates

like the red-shirts? 555

 

 

 

[zzaa09]

35 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I experienced years of Shinawatra trouble in Thailand. I had enough of it, and I would be delighted if they would all rot in the desert and nobody would ever mention them again.

 

But obviously Thai people can vote for whoever they want. They just shouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself.

 

As long as any continuous references to anything Shinawatra that makes for good and dazzling copy, it'll always be news worthy.......in a gossipy kinda manner. Also difficult to move on when the old boy controls a very influential segment of Thai "alternative/underground" news and information sources that seemingly spins out the expected. 

 

Could be worse. Could be an abiding mainstream news corps that is solely owned and operated by military and traditional elite circles. 

 

Nonetheless, all will come full circle in it's own time. 

It's best to be highly suspicious of the systems than to be angst and despising groups or individuals that commonly come from the same class and club. 

 

The hope that attaching oneself to real political/social opposition always appears to be waning - yet, is out there and remains strong.......just not allowed to participate in the games. Club rules and all that.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

like the red-shirts? 555

 

 

 

Apparently you can only reply to two out of context words in my post, and even then your reply is weak.

 

Yes, the Red Shirts were democracy advocates.  They began when democracy was denied to Thailand.  They never would have existed if election results had been respected.

[OneMoreFarang]

20 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Yes, the Red Shirts were democracy advocates.  They began when democracy was denied to Thailand.  They never would have existed if election results had been respected.

You're almost funny - almost. 

[zzaa09]

On 3/28/2023 at 10:54 PM, OneMoreFarang said:

As far as I know Thai people can enter Thai politics, establish political parties, get votes, etc.

 

Sounds true with the usual romantic visions......but it's not the way it is.

Simple observations will suggest that a Thai political free-for-all isn't allowed to exist. 

It's incredibly restricted, as any and every sort of legitimate opposition will be dismissed [in one manner or another] by the firm hand of the ruling class. 

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

You're almost funny - almost. 

"The Red Shirts (Thai: เสื้อแดง, romanized: Suea Daeng) are a political movement in Thailand, formed following the 2006 coup d'état which deposed then-Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shirts_(Thailand)

 

No coup, no redshirts. 

 

The redshirts are both a symptom and an attempt at a cure for the disease of military coups and undemocratic rule.  You prefer the disease.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

The redshirts are both a symptom and an attempt at a cure for the disease of military coups and undemocratic rule.  You prefer the disease.

I liked central Bangkok more before the red-shirts burned it down. They should be all in jail. 

[zzaa09]

12 hours ago, heybruce said:

Apparently you can only reply to two out of context words in my post, and even then your reply is weak.

 

Yes, the Red Shirts were democracy advocates.  They began when democracy was denied to Thailand.  They never would have existed if election results had been respected.

Oh dear.

You might want to brush up on your contemporary history.....and understand who was and who wasn't.

[heybruce]

57 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I liked central Bangkok more before the red-shirts burned it down. They should be all in jail. 

Noted.  You have no use for democracy and like life better under military rule.

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Oh dear.

You might want to brush up on your contemporary history.....and understand who was and who wasn't.

I lived through the last two coups, martial law, curfew, soldiers on the streets and a military roadblock close to where I lived.  What part of contemporary history am I missing?

[Jackbenimble]

21 hours ago, 2baht said:

Why were there 2500 +- extrajudicial killings in his war on drugs when he was in power before???2005/2006

do you seriously think Thailand pre 2005 is the same place then as it is in 2023?  His war on drugs was a good thing as the country at the time had been run by mafia stooges. He took the mafia out of the equation. Say what you want about it now, almost 20 years on, but it was effective and it was necessary. He wrestled power back from them and restored it to Government. Maybe this was before your time?

[2baht]

1 hour ago, Jackbenimble said:

do you seriously think Thailand pre 2005 is the same place then as it is in 2023?  His war on drugs was a good thing as the country at the time had been run by mafia stooges. He took the mafia out of the equation. Say what you want about it now, almost 20 years on, but it was effective and it was necessary. He wrestled power back from them and restored it to Government. Maybe this was before your time?

Well within my time, Jack, are women and children, collateral damage, mafia stooges? Is the drug problem any better now than it was 20 years ago or is it worse??? Is it not still run by mafia stooges? As far as wrestling back and restoring power, where does the power lie now? Tell me Thailand is better now, Jack!