Return of ex-PM Thaksin may still leave Prayut with a test even if he loses this Sunday’s election

[OneMoreFarang]

21 minutes ago, MartinL said:

For most of his time in power, my wife has said she dislikes Prayuth and thinks he's a bad PM. I've never heard her say a good word about him.

 

This election, the local candidate for Prayuth's party is some sort of distant relation to her. He's asked my wife to vote for him. She says she will because she likes the candidate. But she still says she dislikes Prayuth.

 

I've tried to get her to see that voting for her relation will help Prayuth back into power with more of a government that she's disliked in the past. My words fall on stoney ground. She'll vote for him, she says.

 

After the election, should Prayuth become PM, I'm sure she'll once again say she dislikes him.

 

My head hurts ????.

The behavior of your wife is not unusual. Many people, including many people in western countries, behave like that.

It makes sense to locally vote for the best candidate who you trust (as much as possible) and who you think will help the locals. 

[OneMoreFarang]

5 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

And Prayut. Not a criminal?

The definition of a criminal is a person with a criminal conviction.

Thaksin was convicted several times.

Prayut was, as far as I know, never convicted. So by definition he is no criminal.

If Prayut will ever be convicted of a crime then he is a criminal.

It's not really that difficult. 

[Bangkok Barry]

11 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It's time that his supporters understand that a criminal is a criminal. Even if millions of people like him. He is a criminal and he avoided jail for many years. It's time that he goes to jail. If his supporters don't like it, then they should cry in their red villages.

That isn't the way it works. In Thailand, all they care about is that they elected him and the army staged a coup to remove him. And anyway, Thais openly endorse criminals if it suits them. Pattaya has an interesting history, which I would probably be unwise to go into here.

[terryofcrete]

47 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

That isn't the way it works. In Thailand, all they care about is that they elected him and the army staged a coup to remove him. And anyway, Thais openly endorse criminals if it suits them. Pattaya has an interesting history, which I would probably be unwise to go into here.

As is happening , or is likely to happen soon in the US... 

[crazykopite]

This weekends GE is going to be very interesting I would like to see a change in Government but that’s the decision of the Thai voters and not an outsider looking in ! Im expecting absolute turmoil in the next 5 days 

[generealty]

Thaksin (legally voted in PM) was addressing the United Nations in New York when the Army took over and a military funded Court set up to try him in his absence. Found guilty and sentenced. Internationally this is considered illegal. Whether you think he should serve time in prison or not. In my mind the Military Coup and trial in his absence is a far bigger crime. And so was the 2014 Coup and the installing of Police and Military top brass as Governors with voting power 'Prior' to the first election. These'Yes Governers' accounted for 30% of allocated voting. AND it still took nearly 5 months to announce the results. Sufficient time to doctor the results ?

[dinsdale]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

The definition of a criminal is a person with a criminal conviction.

Thaksin was convicted several times.

Prayut was, as far as I know, never convicted. So by definition he is no criminal.

If Prayut will ever be convicted of a crime then he is a criminal.

It's not really that difficult. 

So a person who commits murder but gets away it is not a criminal simply because they were not caught or convicted? Someone who commits burglary but is not caught is not a criminal? You're logic seems a bit flawed. Here's a bit of a different interpretation.

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/criminal_1#:~:text=criminal-,noun,person who commits a crime

criminal

 noun

a person who commits a crime

[paddypower]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Please remind us, what was the result of that audit of the Shinawatra family? 

The dog ate my homework. Plus: every Thai I know (and I know some really poor, disabled ones, out here in the country side) uses the 30 baht scheme. We have a saying back home, 'the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know - meaning what have the Coup makers done for this country.?

[NoshowJones]

6 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

He was convicted to jail, a couple of times. If he returns, he will be escorted to prison.

That's it.

Or should the PM think about every criminal who is arrested?

 

There is one criminal here in Thailand who has not been arrested yet, himself, and if he isn't in the not too distant future, there is something far far wrong, but wait, this is Thailand.

[Bday Prang]

5 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

Yet, the top dog probably doesn't see it that way. 

That's all that matters.

                    Exactly, It is somewhat naive to think that Prayut orchestrated a coup and installed himself in position completely off his own bat,  It was clearly deemed necessary at the time and sanctioned by a much higher authority.

                   People seem to have forgotten exactly how close to civil war the country was at the time. From what I saw,  Prayut performed a a vital function at the time, as well as anybody could have been expected to. Although I tend to think that he has now ( indeed long since) outstayed his welcome

                  Taksin is a very divisive figure and that he is heralded as some sort of hero and champion of the impoverished is firstly astonishing and secondly a prime example of the benefits of keeping a large section of the population pretty much uneducated.

                    It was clearly necessary that he and his clan were removed from Thai politics and it is clearly necessary that he should not be allowed to return under any circumstances

                    Anybody expecting him to face any serious jail time is nothing short of delusional

[Bday Prang]

3 minutes ago, NoshowJones said:

There is one criminal here in Thailand who has not been arrested yet, himself, and if he isn't in the not too distant future, there is something far far wrong, but wait, this is Thailand.

well don't keep us in suspense, at least give us a clue

[NoshowJones]

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

well don't keep us in suspense, at least give us a clue

The guy who said there won't be a coup nine years ago.

[OneMoreFarang]

28 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

So a person who commits murder but gets away it is not a criminal simply because they were not caught or convicted? Someone who commits burglary but is not caught is not a criminal? You're logic seems a bit flawed. Here's a bit of a different interpretation.

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/criminal_1#:~:text=criminal-,noun,person who commits a crime

criminal

 noun

a person who commits a crime

Ok, do you know anybody who you know committed a crime but who was not (yet) convicted. Please report to the police and let us know what happens. 

[OneMoreFarang]

20 minutes ago, paddypower said:

The dog ate my homework. Plus: every Thai I know (and I know some really poor, disabled ones, out here in the country side) uses the 30 baht scheme. We have a saying back home, 'the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know - meaning what have the Coup makers done for this country.?

For how much longer should the 30-baht health care be a reason to vote for Thaksin or one of his cronies? 

[h90]

6 hours ago, Mad mick said:

As far as l'm concerned all Millatary Coup d'etat leadership  should be at front of the cuew & imprisoned for life well before Thaksin or his sister The real criminals are in power taken by force , Millatary should be completely removed from any elected Government,  As from removal of word Coup d'etat being removed by military request is nonsense They are criminals & against freedom or so called Democracy, Real criminals are Millatary Jaunta Top Brass & cronies 

The constitution says different....and the General was elected...even got the most votes in the last election.
While a coup is not nice, Thailand was on the bring of a civil war and the government in power was a caretaker parliament that expired already (I hope I don't mix the last 2 coups).
I rather have a coup of someone who returns to democracy than a full civil war. There was already talks about some provinces splitting away. Democracy is not the most important thing. Life is because if you are dead nothing matters.

[candide]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

The definition of a criminal is a person with a criminal conviction.

Thaksin was convicted several times.

Prayut was, as far as I know, never convicted. So by definition he is no criminal.

If Prayut will ever be convicted of a crime then he is a criminal.

It's not really that difficult. 

Only when the justice system is unbiased and laws are fair, which is not the case in Thailand.

Following your logic, Stalin, Mao or Kim should not be considered as criminals.

[scorecard]

6 hours ago, BestB said:

There is of course another possibility that a deal was reached with him getting pardoned after serving 6 months or so

If so, who agreed the deal?

[dinsdale]

13 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Ok, do you know anybody who you know committed a crime but who was not (yet) convicted. Please report to the police and let us know what happens. 

Me. HaHaHaHa. Don't think I will go to the police though.

Edited May 13, 2023 by dinsdale

[OneMoreFarang]

8 minutes ago, scorecard said:

If so, who agreed the deal?

And why?

[candide]

20 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

People seem to have forgotten exactly how close to civil war the country was at the time. From what I saw,  Prayut performed a a vital function at the time, as well as anybody could have been expected to. Although I tend to think that he has now ( indeed long since) outstayed his welcome

This is the Junta's propaganda and It's not true.

At the time of the coup, Suthep's mob were getting thin and he was not a threat any more. Elections were planned for July.

That's the reason for the orchestrated coup: the mob coup failed, the judicial coup failed as it had not been able to oust the whole caretaker government, and people had again the opportunity to elect their government. The only remaining way to prevent people from choosing their government was a military coup.

[candide]

20 minutes ago, h90 said:

The constitution says different....and the General was elected...even got the most votes in the last election.
While a coup is not nice, Thailand was on the bring of a civil war and the government in power was a caretaker parliament that expired already (I hope I don't mix the last 2 coups).
I rather have a coup of someone who returns to democracy than a full civil war. There was already talks about some provinces splitting away. Democracy is not the most important thing. Life is because if you are dead nothing matters.

You missed an important point. The political faction which made a military coup, was the same faction which created unrest. 

The same faction which also prevented a peaceful and democratic solution by blocking elections organised under the caretaker government, in accordance with the constitution.

[Bday Prang]

22 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Me. HaHaHaHa. Don't think I will go to the police though.

is there anybody walking the earth who is not an unconvicted criminal    I know I certainly am 

[Bday Prang]

1 minute ago, candide said:

You missed an important point. The political faction which made a military coup, was the same faction which created unrest. 

The same faction which also prevented a peaceful and democratic solution by blocking elections organised under the caretaker government, in accordance with the constitution.

There would never have been a peaceful democratic solution, The coup was sanctioned from the very top table

[dinsdale]

29 minutes ago, h90 said:

The constitution says different....and the General was elected...even got the most votes in the last election.
While a coup is not nice, Thailand was on the bring of a civil war and the government in power was a caretaker parliament that expired already (I hope I don't mix the last 2 coups).
I rather have a coup of someone who returns to democracy than a full civil war. There was already talks about some provinces splitting away. Democracy is not the most important thing. Life is because if you are dead nothing matters.

It was the army dropping ping pong balls around BKK. The army stirred up problems. Who were the black shirts? Prayut did not get the popular vote. He got more seats because of his 250 appointed army mates in the senate and coalition with minor parties.

[paddypower]

32 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

For how much longer should the 30-baht health care be a reason to vote for Thaksin or one of his cronies? 

I'll give you an uptick on the question, although it is a bit disengenuous.  You've raised a good point -  the OP is about him returning or not, Its not about him getting elected. If he were stupid enough to return (and he's not stupid) a coalition govt would never let it be. The numbers say that PT cannot get a clear majority, so, hopefully, they'll have to link up with Pita. my mantra for this week is ABP (anyone but Prayut). ????

 

[Bday Prang]

18 minutes ago, candide said:

This is the Junta's propaganda and It's not true.

At the time of the coup, Suthep's mob were getting thin and he was not a threat any more. Elections were planned for July.

That's the reason for the orchestrated coup: the mob coup failed, the judicial coup failed as it had not been able to oust the whole caretaker government, and people had again the opportunity to elect their government. The only remaining way to prevent people from choosing their government was a military coup.

I thought there was some sort of rule on this forum about only quoting part of other peoples posts when it might detract from what they were trying to say

[dinsdale]

7 minutes ago, paddypower said:

I'll give you an uptick on the question, although it is a bit disengenuous.  You've raised a good point -  the OP is about him returning or not, Its not about him getting elected. If he were stupid enough to return (and he's not stupid) a coalition govt would never let it be. The numbers say that PT cannot get a clear majority, so, hopefully, they'll have to link up with Pita. my mantra for this week is ABP (anyone but Prayut). ????

 

May form a minority govt with the 250 senate lackeys and some minor parties but get put down by a vote of no confidence in the House. . Then it will be back to the polls.

[paddypower]

Just now, dinsdale said:

May form a minority govt with the 250 senate lackeys and some minor parties but get put down by a vote of no confidence in the House. . Then it will be back to the polls.

rinse, repeat, rinse repeat. 

[candide]

23 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

I thought there was some sort of rule on this forum about only quoting part of other peoples posts when it might detract from what they were trying to say

I was not altering the meaning of your post, just responding to one of your claims. Did I misunderstand it?

 

If you want, I can do it again with your whole post quoted.

Edited May 13, 2023 by candide

[dinsdale]

1 minute ago, paddypower said:

rinse, repeat, rinse repeat. 

Prayut is history. He either leaves peacefully or the people will get rid of him.