Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, blaze master said:

Says the guy instrumental in the last coup. 

Can a leopard change its spots? 

Of course he is correct, but could you really trust his comment? 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
3 hours ago, JoePai said:

He reassured that today's military "can think for themselves"    🤣🤣🤣

Isn't parliament supposed to control and think for the army,

  • Like 1
Posted
6 hours ago, webfact said:

He reassured that today's military "can think for themselves",

 

....and therein lies the problem......the thinking should be done for them by democratically elected servants of the public.

  • Agree 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
6 hours ago, webfact said:

highlighting that the real issues lie within politics, not the state's condition. People, he noted, are suffering due to political turmoil.

 

People are suffering and dying due to people like him, he is one of the worst.

Posted
6 hours ago, blaze master said:

Says the guy instrumental in the last coup. 

 

....and one of the guys who profited most from the last coup. 

Posted
4 hours ago, JoePai said:

He reassured that today's military "can think for themselves"    🤣🤣🤣

And the Thaksins are on his watch list.

Posted
Quote

He reassured that today's military "can think for themselves"

This is an interesting comment as it could mean multiple things depending on what you infer from it.

It could mean:

1) That the government isn't in control of them

2) That the military brass can freely think (not dogmatically or in a conditioned way)

3) There are no rules for them, just whatever they "think" is okay

4) That somehow the military has changed and previously they were unable to do so

 

Could probably come upo with some more if I gve it some thought, but that's enough to hightlight the ambiguity of such a statement (but then again, even as a statement, it gives pause for thought as to whether it's a fact or an opinion).

Posted
11 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

This is an interesting comment as it could mean multiple things depending on what you infer from it.

It could mean:

1) That the government isn't in control of them

2) That the military brass can freely think (not dogmatically or in a conditioned way)

3) There are no rules for them, just whatever they "think" is okay

4) That somehow the military has changed and previously they were unable to do so

 

Could probably come upo with some more if I gve it some thought, but that's enough to hightlight the ambiguity of such a statement (but then again, even as a statement, it gives pause for thought as to whether it's a fact or an opinion).

 

What they should do is arrest Prayut and Prawit for treason, then try and hang them on the National TV. Thus sending a message to the military, "you're not allowed to think for yourself".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Topics

  • Popular Contributors

  • Latest posts...

    1. 1

      Current UK banking arrangements for British in Thailand

    2. 0

      Protesters Rally at Victory Monument Calling for PM’s Resignation

    3. 95

      German breakfast

    4. 66

      Trump Wins on Injunctions

    5. 60

      Many Americans are witnessing immigration arrests for the first time and reacting

  • Popular in The Pub

×
×
  • Create New...