4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

If they stop fighting for democracy once democracy doesn't get them the result they want, were they ever really fighting for democracy?

I am not claiming that they are perfect, but they are in no way comparable to the yellow shirts, the Juntas and their puppets (including. Abhisit at the time).

3 minutes ago, dukeandduke said:

It's a flaw in this so-called democratic system, IMO. I wanted the PM to come from the MFP, but they couldn't form a big-enough coalition. Until they strip un-elected senators of voting power, what are you gonna do? Next man (party) up. They need a government. 

Democracy is in no way on show here. It's the complete opposite. What is on show is a system put in place by a military junta to assure their power even after elections where the people voted them out.

Photos i took from last red, yellow shirt riots

6 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Democracy is in no way on show here. It's the complete opposite. What is on show is a system put in place by a military junta to assure their power even after elections where the people voted them out.

They didn't vote them out in this flawed system, unfortunately. They formed a plurality, not a majority.

17 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

They started the mayhem before the army arrived.

And the tomato police didn't do anything.

They were protesting to get elections. As far as I know the fire in the picture you posted was started after the killings.

16 minutes ago, candide said:

I am not claiming that they are perfect, but they are in no way comparable to the yellow shirts, the Juntas and their puppets (including. Abhisit at the time).

Ignorance is bliss, it seems. Were you in Bangkok in 2009 and 2010? Have you witnessed what really went on in the camps? Forgot about the red shirts killing soldiers near Khao San? Seh Daeng? 

 

And why, because that's the real question. Why were they mobilized by Thaksin? Do you understand what happened then? I doubt it.

6 minutes ago, candide said:

They were protesting to get elections. As far as I know the fire in the picture you posted was started after the killings.

They were protesting for Thaksin because he wanted "his" money back.

I was here at that time, and I will never forget when the red-shirts behaved like they own the city. 

Abhisit should have arrested them all right away. He waited too long. And the red-shirts got bolder and bolder. I am happy the army throw them out. The red-shirts could have left anytime. It was their problem if they wanted to die for their criminal hero. 

Sorry guys but I never understood the vitriol for Thaksin.

He's no worse than all the rest of them????

.

 

7 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

If they are really pro-democracy, they should now be campaigning for Pita to be PM.  The fact that they're happy with the result if it means Thaksin returns to Thailand suggests they favour one result over another, rather than what people actually democratically voted for.

 

Sadly, it isn't uncommon for people to claim they want a particularl progressive thing (democracy, human rights, etc.) but really they just want the result that they favour.

Addressing the last paragraph. I have and continue to wrestle with this. Yes, I feel I firmly support the idea of democracy. I want all citizens to have an equal vote. Then as an American, I am faced with an uneducated electorate ... not what the democratic ideal calls for ... an educated, engaged citizenry.

2 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

Addressing the last paragraph. I have and continue to wrestle with this. Yes, I feel I firmly support the idea of democracy. I want all citizens to have an equal vote. Then as an American, I am faced with an uneducated electorate ... not what the democratic ideal calls for ... an educated, engaged citizenry.

Are you suggesting an IQ test before being allowed to vote?

????

3 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Significant, as in more than Pheu Thai got!

But they will not e allowed to form a government as has been proven in the past few weeks.

 

If this is allowed for fester for another 10 months, it will give the current caretaker government another 10 months to reinforce their choice of senators and nobody will be able to stop them.

 

Additionally they can change the voting laws and prevent ANY other party from forming a government.

 

That a PTP led government could do the same is immaterial, and the MFP certainly wanted to change the rules.

 

IMHO there will be a large number of protests and perhaps another military coup, whether it is successful or not remains to be seen. I don't think it will be done by the current mob, as they are out of favour with the army.

 

Whether the person at the top will approve or intervene I truly have no idea.

3 hours ago, StayinThailand2much said:

I remember the picture of Thaksin in a photo-montage on a website (Mango Sauce), raising his arm on TV, with a bottle of Chang on top of it, and the text below reading: "Thaksin at a rally, reaching for a Beer Chang".

 ????

9 hours ago, webfact said:

Thaksin is considered an idol for the Red Shirts, who have fought tirelessly for democracy, enduring oppression under past regimes.

Is he trying to be a stand-up comedian? Because this joke is not funny at all...

1 hour ago, dukeandduke said:

They didn't vote them out in this flawed system, unfortunately. They formed a plurality, not a majority.

Sort of. MFP had to form a coalition to gain power. They did this. In any other 'democratic' counrty this would be accepted and the coalition would form a government. Thailand, however, it depends on 250 unelected senators put in place by a military junta to decide if they like you or not.

27 minutes ago, billd766 said:

IMHO there will be a large number of protests and perhaps another military coup, whether it is successful or not remains to be seen.

Yes. I've been following Thai politics since about the first time I travelled to Thailand. I've walked among the Red Shirts and Yellow Shirts, and saw the chaos at the time. Out of interest, I just read up on Thai politics in the 1990s... Guess what, it was quite similar to the 2000s and early 2010s! History really seems to repeat itself in Thailand over and over again, every 10 to 15 years or so. And as long as there is only a tiny upper class, and 90%+ of indebted 'have-nots', I doubt it will change. - Would anything have changed under a Move Forward led government? Guess we'll never know.

9 hours ago, paddypower said:

PT is so power hungry that they will cosy up to any other snakes

Well said.

 

Imagine I was encouraging my wife to vote for them.

 

She voted for Move Forward incidentally.

 

The thought of Anutin being PM is awful.  Polls always had him at 3% or lower approval rating.

 

How he managed 71 MP's buggers belief.  70 actually as one of the MP's also had shares in Itv. 

1 hour ago, SoilSpoil said:

Ignorance is bliss, it seems. Were you in Bangkok in 2009 and 2010? Have you witnessed what really went on in the camps? Forgot about the red shirts killing soldiers near Khao San? Seh Daeng? 

 

And why, because that's the real question. Why were they mobilized by Thaksin? Do you understand what happened then? I doubt it.

They were protesting to get elections. Of course, the army went against them for this reason. Unlike when the yellow shirts (or equivalent: PDRC) protest in order to oust an elected government or to block elections. In this latter case the army does nothing or even helps the protesters.

 

The difference between Abhisit and Yingluck is eloquent! . Both had their legitimacy strongly contested. Yingluck quickly dissolved the parliament in order to let the people make a decision about it via elections. Abhisit sent the troops!

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

They were protesting for Thaksin because he wanted "his" money back.

I was here at that time, and I will never forget when the red-shirts behaved like they own the city. 

Abhisit should have arrested them all right away. He waited too long. And the red-shirts got bolder and bolder. I am happy the army throw them out. The red-shirts could have left anytime. It was their problem if they wanted to die for their criminal hero. 

Abhisit should have done the same as Yingluck: dissolve the parliament and quickly organise elections. That's how democratic governments do.

 

However, as he was a puppet, he had to wait for the nomination of Prayut as army chief before organising new elections.

9 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

No, no, no, they want democracy!    That is what they have "fought tirelessly" for... ????

The red shirts did fight and did die back in 2010 lest we forget 

8 hours ago, StayinThailand2much said:

My prediction is that he will either spend only a short time in jail, or, possibly, none at all. 

He shouldn’t even spent a minute in jail as we all know it was all politically engineered 

5 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Maybe he can explain his unusual wealth when he returns

He’s #13 on the Forbes list 

it’s well know how he Legally made all of his money. 
how about the generals explaining their source of wealth 

2 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Are you suggesting an IQ test before being allowed to vote?

????

There in lies 'the rub". Smacks of earlier USA "literacy tests" purposely designed to restrict voting of blacks after a time of, by law, forbidding blacks to be taught how to read or write. Now? Allowing that an uneducated citizenry should direct the election of representatives, and their influencing the electorate through paid lobbied "propaganda" on how they should vote. I am thinking, this society is sadly doomed to failure. The ideal of the critical need for a basic minimum public provided education is essential but that education must be effectual. Again, sadly, far too many of my fellow citizens are woefully lacking in knowledge or critical thinking skills

23 minutes ago, Hunz Kittisak said:

He’s #13 on the Forbes list 

it’s well know how he Legally made all of his money. 
how about the generals explaining their source of wealth 

If it's well known list it

29 minutes ago, Hunz Kittisak said:

The red shirts did fight and did die back in 2010 lest we forget 

But were they fighting for democracy or just for Thaksin?

And yet.....most still aren't comprehending who's pulling the strings during this latest boondoggle. 

Easily distracted and even less knowledgeable. 

9 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

If it's well known list it

Look on WiKi/Google or ask any Thai older than 40!

You are being either obtuse or just argumentative!

2 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Are you suggesting an IQ test before being allowed to vote?

????

Most of the generals would fail unless the question were on history and military coups.

21 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

If it's well known list it

It is known how the Eastern Tigers made money. That was long time ago, at the time of the Red Khmers.....

 

For more recent information, all the cases involving the military have been buried. It could also be mentioned that Thailand is at the bottom range for transparency of procurement in rankings.

1 hour ago, candide said:

They were protesting to get elections. Of course, the army went against them for this reason. Unlike when the yellow shirts (or equivalent: PDRC) protest in order to oust an elected government or to block elections. In this latter case the army does nothing or even helps the protesters.

 

The difference between Abhisit and Yingluck is eloquent! . Both had their legitimacy strongly contested. Yingluck quickly dissolved the parliament in order to let the people make a decision about it via elections. Abhisit sent the troops!

They protested to get elections? The top red shirt leaders refused Abhisits election promise and  roadmap during a live tv broadcast after receiving text messages from their boss.  The red shirts were used by the Shinawatra dynasty to get the confiscated Temasak money back. Stick to the facts please.

They're going to be disappointed.