Thailand's Oldest Party Announces New Policy Platform

[Plus]

Leaving Burma and Africa out of this, the general certainly has a point.

Many political pandits don't want banned TRT execs, and especially their supporters, to be completely excluded from political process. No one wants TRT voters being left without any political representation at all.

This is a valid argument - as a major political force, even if disgraced and outlawed, they still need a space to live and exist and hopefully do something useful for the society.

The general raises the same question with respect to the army - they are a major force, and they take great interest in what happens in the country, they are more than ready to act, yet they are the only group that is completely excluded from political life, on purpose. Even bureaucrats and judiciary have their place, but not the army.

At the same time everyone, and I really mean everyone - pro and anti, Thaksin and junta, has concerns about army continuing influence over the country's politics well after elections, behind closed doors, hidden from the view. We'll never be really sure that they returned to the barracks.

It would make more sense if the army had their designated area, defined powers and be open to public scrutiny.

I know that all they supposed to do is to follow civilian governments and defend the country if asked to, but this is denying the reality - the army is a major force, staffed with Thailand's best and brightest, and, for most part, really jobless.

The general didn't offer any practical solutions, maybe the army should set up its own political party, maybe they should have a quota of nominated senators - I don't know, but they shouldn't be completely shut out, it only invites troubles.

It shouldn't be anything major - the point is to reduce their relative power, not increase it, and I think doing it in a controlled environment is a better way to manage army's transition from the "ultimate power" to "defensive forces".

Naturally in the past couple of decades the military business career has lost some of its glamor as more money can be made legally than by smuggling Burmese or Cambodian logs or running karaoke bars and more power and influence can be obtained by running for Senate or Parlament, but we still have enough people there who don't really need to be in the army with their interests and abilities.

I would give this idea some more consideration, though realistically it has no chance in the present environment. At best Sonthi will run under some party banner, that's all.

[Siripon]

Od Dear!!!

Scrapping the barrel with bizaar excuses for the democrats non-participation

Where are those bank balances of those parties, whom you mentioned had no money to contest?

do you have their cash balance statements at hand to prove they had no money?

oh and i had no idea that the thai military who are major shareholders in 2 major tv companies, who staged the coup against taksin were OWNED by taksin, shouldnt you read up on all the major media companies in thailand and who are the major shareholders, a good place to start would be www.set.or.th, and those not listed you can search on their own websites.

shouldnt you do some sort of research before making false statements on the ownership of thai media companies

The Democrats non-participation was a disgrace to any democratic process

the last election was free for all concerned to contest, all politicians were freely allowed to canvass votes from voters, all parties were freelly allowed to present their policy platforms to voters to win over their support

unless you can prove that hundreds of mp's were banned from contesting the last election by the ruling party, or that all opposition parties funds were frozen by the ruling party, then the last election was fair and the democrats were not justified in non-participation

so back on topic

your point on the democrat party direct policies, do they have any?

and interesting comments today in the nation, if the article is true by the would be democratic party hopefull dear old gen. sonthi that "some political parties tried to suppress the millitary role, prompting the millitary vent out by staging coups" Nation newspaper 5 aug.

interesting thoughts on democracy by one democratic party hopefull!!!

Thaksin controlled the TV channels in that he had the political power to ban any programme that he didn't like- and he did.

Several moderators such as Dr Chermsak were banned from the airways. There was not one pundit critical of Thaksin allowed on state TV by 2003.

The airways were not free.

Didn't you see Thaksin holding up his 'negative' sign refusing to answer questions to journalists before cancelling his meet the press question time show.

Regarding expenses for political parties, if you know Thai politics you would know that political contributions flow from businesses that expect or hope that party to obtain power. Thaksin's massive majority in 2004 meant few businesses a year later saw any hope of The Democrats returning to power. In addition parties that favoured the Opposition could expect unexpected visits from tthe Inland Revenue, AMLO, etc.

You haven't answered my question about Thaksin's disgraceful decision to dissolve Parliament after just 14 months with a majority of 376 MPs to 124!

Edited August 5, 2007 by Siripon

[pete_r]

Leaving Burma and Africa out of this, the general certainly has a point.

The general raises the same question with respect to the army - they are a major force, and they take great interest in what happens in the country, they are more than ready to act, yet they are the only group that is completely excluded from political life, on purpose. Even bureaucrats and judiciary have their place, but not the army.

[...]

the army is a major force, staffed with Thailand's best and brightest, and, for most part, really jobless.

If the general really is one of Thailand's "best and brightest", he should learn to communicate his point better. I mean, emulate Burma among all countries... What next, North Korea???

[Plus]

Yes, but people like Sonthi are not so bad, he should try himself in politics where he can't rely on guns. That would teach the army a lesson.

Even Gen Saprang would be better off in politics or at least in the public eye, not hidden away in state enterprise boardrooms. He certainly has an agenda, let people know about it.

As long as the army has ambitions that are political in nature, they should be given a legitimate political outlet to apply themselves. At the moment whatever they do, they do illegally. What's the benefit in that?

[hammered]

Great

so you guys have the proof to justify the democrats non-participation lol

where are the links?

do you have those cash statements to say they had no money?

do you have those secret documents to say that the thai millitary are not major shareholders in 2 tv companies but secretly a cover for mr t?

do you have those records to say that all opposition mps were banned from canvassing votes?

funny, i was expecting a more substantial arguement from you guys to justify their non-participation, not the pathetic excuses you have used, not to mention the other excuse of labelling thailand with the likes of the war conflicts in palestine, iraq.

As I said before on this case I have laid out an accepted framework for deciding whther an election boycott was justified or not. That is broken democracy and unfair system. I am not saying the boycott was justiifed or not. Now it would seem that people either agree with the generally accepted criteria or not. If they dont then fine everyone is entitled to an opinion even if intellectually it holds no water. Or people agree with the criteria and present arguements one way or the other. To dte I have only seen person even try to justify their opinion on this thread and that was Siriporn. I would be only to happy to see a counter arguement as I find politcal rhetoric and stating of opinions as though they are true facts something that is not worth considering. On the issue of the boycot I personally can see differnet opinions and it genuinely interests me to hear more rational arguement on this as I am not totally convinced one way or the other. I would appreciate it if you would indulge us by presenting the arguement for why the electoral boycott by a number of parties was not justified as the Thai democratic system under Thaksin was neither broken nor unfair as I am sure you accept the academic criteria.

[Plus]

To quickly recap:

Immediately after the House dissolution boycott didn't feature in Democrat's discussions at all, only a few days later, after consulting with other opposition parties, laywers, and people on the streets (represented by PAD), they have decided to put up a united front to TRT and boycott the elections. Chuan Leekpai initially opposed this decision, but eventually he gave in, too.

Their main argument was that snap election call was irresponsible and against the spirit of the democarcy as there was no constitutional crisis of any kind and the government was as stable as ever. Thaksin simply used a loophole that allowed him to legally disslove the House at a whim. There was no justifications in holding new elections,

The only reasons for House Dissolution were personal matters of Thaksin that should have been dealth through apporpirate channels, not elections.

Thaksin's plan was simple - he wanted to use elections to escape answering questions that would have disqualified him from running in the first place.

PAD and opposition parties argued that elections can not replace courts and checks and balances mechanisms and that participating in Thaksin's plan meant whitewashing his numerous wrongdoings and thus undermining the democracy, not strenghtening it.

Basically they refused to play a corrupt and tainted game because it goes against the game's principles and sets a bad precedent.

Not very different from reasoning behind boycotts in Zimbabwe, though circumstances are very different.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Plus

[hammered]

To quickly recap:

Immediately after the House dissolution boycott didn't feature in Democrat's discussions at all, only a few days later, after consulting with other opposition parties, laywers, and people on the streets (represented by PAD), they have decided to put up a united front to TRT and boycott the elections. Chuan Leekpai initially opposed this decision, but eventually he gave in, too.

Their main argument was that snap election call was irresponsible and against the spirit of the democarcy as there was no constitutional crisis of any kind and the government was as stable as ever. Thaksin simply used a loophole that allowed him to legally disslove the House at a whim. There was no justifications in holding new elections,

The only reasons for House Dissolution were personal matters of Thaksin that should have been dealth through apporpirate channels, not elections.

Thaksin's plan was simple - he wanted to use elections to escape answering questions that would have disqualified him from running in the first place.

PAD and opposition parties argued that elections can not replace courts and checks and balances mechanisms and that participating in Thaksin's plan meant whitewashing his numerous wrongdoings and thus undermining the democracy, not strenghtening it.

Basically they refused to play a corrupt and tainted game because it goes against the game's principles and sets a bad precedent.

Not very different from reasoning behind boycotts in Zimbabwe, though circumstances are very different.

Thanks for that. Still no counter arguement.

[Hampstead]

This thread is turning into a comedy act

Realting thailand's politics with Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe OMG

To think we had another poster relating Thailand to Iraq, Palestine and serbia

along with the classic Gen. Sonthi and his thoughts on thailand should aspire to Burma

oh and the classic line Taksin controlled the whole media, well well, did anyone ask what the thai millitary are doing owning 2 tv companies!!!

oh and how about the lovely corruption of 4 Billion Baht in Ukranian Tanks, cannot wait for the thai millitary to have some hilarious excuse, maybe this is inline with classic standup comedian who thinks Gen Sonthi was right for thailand to aspire to burma, well heres your proof, they certainly aspiring to burmas corruptive purchases of arms

keep me smiling guys with your attempts to be unable to critizise the military or the democrats

OH AND BACK TO THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD

DO ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY CLUE TO THE DEMOCRATS PARTY POLICY PLATFORMS?

[hammered]

This thread is turning into a comedy act

Realting thailand's politics with Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe OMG

To think we had another poster relating Thailand to Iraq, Palestine and serbia

along with the classic Gen. Sonthi and his thoughts on thailand should aspire to Burma

oh and the classic line Taksin controlled the whole media, well well, did anyone ask what the thai millitary are doing owning 2 tv companies!!!

oh and how about the lovely corruption of 4 Billion Baht in Ukranian Tanks, cannot wait for the thai millitary to have some hilarious excuse, maybe this is inline with classic standup comedian who thinks Gen Sonthi was right for thailand to aspire to burma, well heres your proof, they certainly aspiring to burmas corruptive purchases of arms

keep me smiling guys with your attempts to be unable to critizise the military or the democrats

OH AND BACK TO THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD

DO ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY CLUE TO THE DEMOCRATS PARTY POLICY PLATFORMS?

Why not make the arguement of why the opposition parties were wrong to boycott the April 2 election because Thailands democracy was both fair and functional instead of providing just pure propoganda and rhetoric and attacking fellow posters who do try to present an arguement?

It would be easy to approach the Democrat party if you genuinely want to know of their polices by the way, so that you can make an informed decision on how you cast your vote in the upcoming election. I assume you are a Thai person as you seem for more personally and emotionally tied into the personal politics and rhetoric than any foreigner would be.

Peace.

[sriracha john]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

[hammered]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

That is true, but with elections only a few months away maybe the military should wait for an elected government to put this through. It may then be less politically questionable.

[womble]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

Is it me or does that sound really expensive?

[hammered]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

Is it me or does that sound really expensive?

The average unit cost of a Bradley is over 3 million, so the deal here sounds reasonable as long as the equipment is functional and reasonably modern. I didnt see what vehicle they were actually buying, and this will obviously affect an judgement on final value for money.

[A_Traveller]

I'm assuming they are buying a BTR series {4 probably} based on the Soviet BTR 80, which would make financial sense given the numbers published.

However, I do hope they are not buying the DOZOR-8, that would be a bad move IMHO.

For those who are interested Kharkiv Morozov

Regards

[Plus]

along with the classic Gen. Sonthi and his thoughts on thailand should aspire to Burma

I admit I missed those. Could you refresh my memory, please.

oh and the classic line Taksin controlled the whole media, well well, did anyone ask what the thai millitary are doing owning 2 tv companies!!!

Up until the coup the army appeared to be on Thaksin's side. Even while the coup was in progress Thaksin called on Ruengroj Mahasaranont, the Supreme Commander at the time, to fire Sonthi, thinking that he was on his side.

Army run channels didn't show any signs of breaking rank with Thaksin's regime up until the very last minute.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Plus

[Gnarpjohan]

"The constitution should involve the military in order to prevent any more intervention," said General Pasit Sonthikhan.

Pasit said Burma and countries in Africa set legislative quotas for soldiers, and Thailand should emulate these nations by setting aside seats in the House and the Senate for commanding officers.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/08/05...es_30043760.php

is this part of the new face of the democratic party policy platforms?

For Thailand to Emulte the military dictatorship of "BURMA" the same burma which has one of the worst records of democracy developments for its people and some of the highest records of human rights violations and genocide on the planet!!!

Anyone who still believes that the coup was about restoring democracy? Now the generals even clearly state that they want the military to control politics in the same way as in "Burma and countries in Africa". Some progress. Leave them to their game and see this country sink

Even stranger, cheered on by a small group of farang ThaiVisa-posters.

[Plus]

I posted a couple of long messages on this subject. Have you seen them?

In short it's better if they participate in politics openly and under clear rules than try to use their influence behind the scenes.

As long as military remains powerful and has interests beyond their simple role, it should be included just like any other group.

A bit like legalising prostitution to keep it in check.

[Gnarpjohan]

I posted a couple of long messages on this subject. Have you seen them?

Yes, and I know you are no fan of democracy. I disagree 100%.

[Plus]

Well, generals want to participate in politics but feel prohibited from doing so. Where is democracy in that?

New Constitution acknowledges three power poles - bureacracy, politicians, and judiciary. Military is ingored.

Where is democracy in that, too?

That is sligtly tongue in cheek comment, but artificially keeping the army out of politics is denying reality.

[sriracha john]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.[/b]

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

That is true, but with elections only a few months away maybe the military should wait for an elected government to put this through. It may then be less politically questionable.

Perhaps, but with fatalities coming on a daily basis, it's difficult to ask the potential widows to wait and postpone such a much-needed addition. The AFP also reports this procurement item has been in the works since 2001 with constant delays... resulting, in some measure, to any number of additional deaths of soldiers who are travelling unprotected in unarmoured vehicles.

Edited August 7, 2007 by sriracha john

[Gnarpjohan]

Well, generals want to participate in politics but feel prohibited from doing so. Where is democracy in that?

The military folks can vote for the politicians of their liking, just like anybody else. Nobody is prohibiting them from participating in politics, why don't they form an "army party" if they really have the support of their people?

Now the army is arranging for a permanent presence in power even though nobody has voted for them, that is undemocratic. The new constitution also includes a put option on the power of elected leaders - they can be thrown out of office at will - that is undemocratic.

The army is keeping itself in politics, artificially, since they are equipped with the most efficient guns.

[Hampstead]

Yes, but people like Sonthi are not so bad, he should try himself in politics where he can't rely on guns. That would teach the army a lesson.

Even Gen Saprang would be better off in politics or at least in the public eye, not hidden away in state enterprise boardrooms. He certainly has an agenda, let people know about it.

As long as the army has ambitions that are political in nature, they should be given a legitimate political outlet to apply themselves. At the moment whatever they do, they do illegally. What's the benefit in that?

Good OLde Gen. Saprang the bernard manning of the east

wow the same gen. who asks tot for a nice voluntary contribution of 400 MILLION BAHT, AN exec resigns over this, and guess what the exec says yes they wanted tot to volunteer the money to the army for equipment but the equipment they wanted to purchase only costs 30 MILLION BAHT

UM A NICE 370 MILLION BAHT SCAM UNCOVERED NEWS STORY WHICH HAS SINCE DISSAPERED FROM OUR LOVELY NEWS HACKS PAPERS

and now we have the purchase of armour vehicles, um so the army will say it costs 4 BILLION BAHT , but how much will the sellers over in UKRAINE receive?

SO THE NEWS HACKS CAN SMELL A SCAM BY THE ARMY, i wonder which generals will pocket the change in their good olde offshore bank tax free accounts.

UM SO its not ok for TRT to be corrupt BUT the army can be corrupt all they want, is that what you guys applauding the millitary are saying?

the same army who install a PM who was actively, personnely and physically involved in the student massacre!!!!

WOW this thread is in need of a standing ovation for its comedic quality by those applauding the millitary and its little side sister the democrat party

WELL DONE GUYS FOR THE LAUGHTER

I MUST SALUTE YOU GUYS ALSO FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF PARTY POLICY PLATFORMS OF THE DEMOCRATS

Edited August 7, 2007 by Hampstead

[Hampstead]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.[/b]

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

That is true, but with elections only a few months away maybe the military should wait for an elected government to put this through. It may then be less politically questionable.

Perhaps, but with fatalities coming on a daily basis, it's difficult to ask the potential widows to wait and postpone such a much-needed addition. The AFP also reports this procurement item has been in the works since 2001 with constant delays... resulting, in some measure, to any number of additional deaths of soldiers who are travelling unprotected in unarmoured vehicles.

Thats great S john

if you care so much about the thai army, why dont you pop down to soi aree and post a few charity cheques to some of these generals, be carefull when walking into their driveways, you'll have to side step the brand new lamborghine's, bmw's and mercedes's, sitting outside the art deco 30 million baht house's, but that shouldnt matter for you, right, because you are a believer of no corruption in the ranks of the 2-300 army generals in thailand.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Hampstead

[hammered]

Yes, but people like Sonthi are not so bad, he should try himself in politics where he can't rely on guns. That would teach the army a lesson.

Even Gen Saprang would be better off in politics or at least in the public eye, not hidden away in state enterprise boardrooms. He certainly has an agenda, let people know about it.

As long as the army has ambitions that are political in nature, they should be given a legitimate political outlet to apply themselves. At the moment whatever they do, they do illegally. What's the benefit in that?

Good OLde Gen. Saprang the bernard manning of the east

wow the same gen. who asks tot for a nice voluntary contribution of 400 MILLION BAHT, AN exec resigns over this, and guess what the exec says yes they wanted tot to volunteer the money to the army for equipment but the equipment they wanted to purchase only costs 30 MILLION BAHT

UM A NICE 370 MILLION BAHT SCAM UNCOVERED NEWS STORY WHICH HAS SINCE DISSAPERED FROM OUR LOVELY NEWS HACKS PAPERS

and now we have the purchase of armour vehicles, um so the army will say it costs 4 BILLION BAHT , but how much will the sellers over in UKRAINE receive?

SO THE NEWS HACKS CAN SMELL A SCAM BY THE ARMY, i wonder which generals will pocket the change in their good olde offshore bank tax free accounts.

UM SO its not ok for TRT to be corrupt BUT the army can be corrupt all they want, is that what you guys applauding the millitary are saying?

the same army who install a PM who was actively, personnely and physically involved in the student massacre!!!!

WOW this thread is in need of a standing ovation for its comedic quality by those applauding the millitary and its little side sister the democrat party

WELL DONE GUYS FOR THE LAUGHTER

I MUST SALUTE YOU GUYS ALSO FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF PARTY POLICY PLATFORMS OF THE DEMOCRATS

Take a look at Thai history to see the relationship between the dems and the army.

[Siripon]

Yes, but people like Sonthi are not so bad, he should try himself in politics where he can't rely on guns. That would teach the army a lesson.

Even Gen Saprang would be better off in politics or at least in the public eye, not hidden away in state enterprise boardrooms. He certainly has an agenda, let people know about it.

As long as the army has ambitions that are political in nature, they should be given a legitimate political outlet to apply themselves. At the moment whatever they do, they do illegally. What's the benefit in that?

Good OLde Gen. Saprang the bernard manning of the east

wow the same gen. who asks tot for a nice voluntary contribution of 400 MILLION BAHT, AN exec resigns over this, and guess what the exec says yes they wanted tot to volunteer the money to the army for equipment but the equipment they wanted to purchase only costs 30 MILLION BAHT

UM A NICE 370 MILLION BAHT SCAM UNCOVERED NEWS STORY WHICH HAS SINCE DISSAPERED FROM OUR LOVELY NEWS HACKS PAPERS

and now we have the purchase of armour vehicles, um so the army will say it costs 4 BILLION BAHT , but how much will the sellers over in UKRAINE receive?

SO THE NEWS HACKS CAN SMELL A SCAM BY THE ARMY, i wonder which generals will pocket the change in their good olde offshore bank tax free accounts.

UM SO its not ok for TRT to be corrupt BUT the army can be corrupt all they want, is that what you guys applauding the millitary are saying?

the same army who install a PM who was actively, personnely and physically involved in the student massacre!!!!

WOW this thread is in need of a standing ovation for its comedic quality by those applauding the millitary and its little side sister the democrat party

WELL DONE GUYS FOR THE LAUGHTER

I MUST SALUTE YOU GUYS ALSO FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF PARTY POLICY PLATFORMS OF THE DEMOCRATS

Please give details regarding your statement that the PM ' was actively,personnely(sic),and physically involved in the student massacre.'

[sriracha john]

133 million dollars for 96 armoured personnel carriers (NOT tanks) is a reasonable cost in the realm of military expeditures.[/b]

Particularly in light of their usage:

For security forces operating in its insurgency-hit southern provinces, officials said Monday.

The army plans to purchase the armoured personnel carriers to improve the safety of its forces in the Muslim-majority provinces along the Malaysian border, a spokeswoman said.

Separatist insurgents in the region have battled the government for more than three years, with militants regularly detonating roadside bombs near passing military convoys.

- AFP

That is true, but with elections only a few months away maybe the military should wait for an elected government to put this through. It may then be less politically questionable.

Perhaps, but with fatalities coming on a daily basis, it's difficult to ask the potential widows to wait and postpone such a much-needed addition. The AFP also reports this procurement item has been in the works since 2001 with constant delays... resulting, in some measure, to any number of additional deaths of soldiers who are travelling unprotected in unarmoured vehicles.

Thats great S john

if you care so much about the thai army, why dont you pop down to soi aree and post a few charity cheques to some of these generals, be carefull when walking into their driveways, you'll have to side step the brand new lamborghine's, bmw's and mercedes's, sitting outside the art deco 30 million baht house's, but that shouldnt matter for you, right, because you are a believer of no corruption in the ranks of the 2-300 army generals in thailand.

Got anything more than a forged photo (ala PM's supposed luxury mansion in the national forest that turned out to be just pure perjury) of these specific things of which you speak?

Also, do you have anything to quote that any one, anywhere at any time in any forum in thaivisa has said there is no corruption in the Army?

[rychrde]

The stench the army is generating makes a lorry load of durian smell like roses.

Why didn't they just allocate some military seats in the senate, and added some for religious leaders too?

Maybe such positions would be too far to steal from. The House of Lords in UK has always had seats especially for bishops, but don't think they ever had any especially for the military although many historically have been military men, fewer now.

The privy council is also a place from which they can hide-and-steal.

rych

[Plus]

The army is keeping itself in politics, artificially, since they are equipped with the most efficient guns.

Like I said - give them a space and maybe they won't need to remind us about the guns.

As an occupation, military is still probably the largest contributor to country's leadership, they are everywhere - politics, bureaucracy, everywhere. Yet they are all forced to retire first. Legally the army has no say in country's governance, they have to act through proxies.

Setup like this is open to abuse, it naturally produces lots of undesirable side effects, like coups.

It's not very wise to simply copy paste Western restrictions on the army's role, the reality will always find its way pass this paper regulations.

I still can't think of a better comparison that prostitution in Thailand - they can't come to grips with the reality of it and waste their time on projecting a clean virgin image instead.

[pete_r]

The army has no role to play in politics in a democratic country. It hasn't in Europe, nor in Japan, nor in Australia. That's the kind of countries Thailand should try to emulate, instead of Burma or "some African countries".

If the generals want to do politics, they shouldn't be generals and they shouldn't be in the army. They should be civilian politicians.

Granting the army a constitutional role in politics will only reinforce the unhealthy link between army and politics in Thailand.

Edited August 8, 2007 by pete_r

[Plus]

Not reinforce, recognise and manage.

Thailand is a not a democratic country like Europe or Australia. It could be like Japan, if Americans come, occuppy it, and write consitution for Thailand themselves, and then keep military bases to keep it in check.

The fact that both military and police play a big underhand role in Thai politics is a fact. If it appears to be a problem, what are you going to do about it? My proposal is to give them a clear defined and transparent outlet. In real life they will continue to work behind the curtains no matter if Thailand calls herself a democratic country or not.

Check the latest bribery scandal, TRT court case. Junta investigates a retired coloned who was in the same class at Thammasat Law school as the judge.

They are just everywhere.

Rychrde proposal actually makes sense - give them some senate seats, they won't be involved in day to day governance and counterweight the runaway politicians, the role they want themselves and the role the public is ready to accept.

There are reserved seats for other occupations already, with professional criteria and a selection process.