Thailand Condemns Cambodia (Video)

 

 

28 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Cambodia does seem to lack the weaponry to win this conflict, so why was it started?  I think China is behind it:

 

- China eggs on it's puppet Cambodia to start/retaliate in a conflict

- China already controls Laos and Cambodia and parts of Myanmar

- China threatens Thailand and the 'West' gets seriously worried!

- China and the West agree to let China take over Taiwan if it stops the Thai-Cambodia conflict by giving Hun Sen a slap!

 

Far-fetched? China plays the very long game and will use whatever means necessary to reach its goals. 

 

Lol. 

 

This started because Hun Sen outwitted the dim Thai PM Paetongtarn and exposed the Shin family duplicity for all to see.

 

This has caused a political crisis in Thailand which they are desperately trying to deflect with yet another Border conflict around the Khmer temple of Preah Vihear. 

 

It's a tried and tested method from the nationalist Thai playbook and one that has been done many times before. 

 

Remember that the Future Forward party and real change is always the bigger danger. 

anyone here read about Khmer history, it really is brutal and compares to other atrocities that man is shamefully guilty and capable of, wonder why the population is so low ....... I know why

3 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

This started because Hun Sen outwitted the dim Thai PM Paetongtarn and exposed the Shin family duplicity for all to see.

 

This has caused a political crisis in Thailand which they are desperately trying to deflect with yet another Border conflict around the Khmer temple of Preah Vihear. 

 

You forget that the phone call happened after the border conflict already was ongoing

10 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

These are facts. You might not like them but don't shoot the messenger. 

 

No, these are a one-sided selective collection of facts which omit some rather pertinent and important facts, namely:

 

1)  The 1907 French map was supposed to be based on the watershed line between Thailand and Cambodia. That was in the 1904 Franco-Siamese boundary treaty. That was the agreement between France and Thailand.

 

2) The French blatantly disregarded this agreement, and instead did NOT follow the watershed line, and instead awarded themselves the historic temple and surrounding land, even though it is clearly on the Thai side of the watershed line.

 

3) It is possible, indeed likely, that this was not at all an error by the French. The French had long been a pioneer in South East Asian studies, and no doubt realised the historic importance of the temple. The purposeful award of the temple to the French side, was probably an attempt to deceive the Thais and gain territory for the French.

 

4) An impartial judge on the ICJ recognised all the above and clearly stated that the land and temple should have been awarded to Thailand.

 

5)  The 2013 ICJ ruling does not affect the north of the temple lands, adjacent to the temple, which has always and continues to be recognised as Thai. Indeed the judgement also said the road to the Temple should be controlled by Thailand.

2 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

 

You forget that the phone call happened after the border conflict already was ongoing

 

Thai soldiers started the whole thing back in February by preventing Cambodian tourists singing their national anthem at Prasat Ta Moan Thom.

 

The Thais have had their pants pulled down here and have resorted to military force. 

 

Cambodia immediately went to seek international arbitration throughout this dispute but Thailand refuses. Ask yourself why that is? 

9 hours ago, RAZZELL said:

 

I said this two days ago.

 

Got a few thumbs down! 555

Ha! So did I!

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

No, these are a one-sided selective collection of facts which omit some rather pertinent and important facts, namely:

 

1)  The 1907 French map was supposed to be based on the watershed line between Thailand and Cambodia. That was in the 1904 Franco-Siamese boundary treaty. That was the agreement between France and Thailand.

 

2) The French blatantly disregarded this agreement, and instead did NOT follow the watershed line, and instead awarded themselves the historic temple and surrounding land, even though it is clearly on the Thai side of the watershed line.

 

3) It is possible, indeed likely, that this was not at all an error by the French. The French had long been a pioneer in South East Asian studies, and no doubt realised the historic importance of the temple. The purposeful award of the temple to the French side, was probably an attempt to deceive the Thais and gain territory for the French.

 

4) An impartial judge on the ICJ recognised all the above and clearly stated that the land and temple should have been awarded to Thailand.

 

5)  The 2013 ICJ ruling does not affect the north of the temple lands, adjacent to the temple, which has always and continues to be recognised as Thai. Indeed the judgement also said the road to the Temple should be controlled by Thailand.

 

You are attempting to muddy the discussion with historical revisionism. 

 

The facts are exactly as I posted them. The timeline I posted is EXACTLY what has happened.

12 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

This has caused a political crisis in Thailand which they are desperately trying to deflect with yet another Border conflict around the Khmer temple of Preah Vihear. 

 

 

Nonsense, it is the Cambodians who want to force the issue and settle it once and for all. Because they fear that Thailand will again and again raise territorial claims on lands the Cambodians consider is theirs by right. Cambodia is wedged between Vietnam and Thailand, and they know the Thais are stronger militarily. That is why they want to settle the territorial dispute and are provoking the issue, so it gets settled now. They don't want a protracted series of claims by Thailand flaring up.

 

The border conflict now is the result of both countries, not just Thailand, massing troops in the area, and this caused instability as even innocent patrols could be a cause of mishaps. The killing of the Cambodian soldier was mostly likely accidental. Both sides massed their troops on that border.

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

Nonsense, it is the Cambodians who want to force the issue and settle it once and for all. Because they fear that Thailand will again and again raise territorial claims on lands the Cambodians consider is theirs by right. Cambodia is wedged between Vietnam and Thailand, and they know the Thais are stronger militarily. That is why they want to settle the territorial dispute and are provoking the issue, so it gets settled now. They don't want a protracted series of claims by Thailand flaring up.

 

The border conflict now is the result of both countries, not just Thailand, massing troops in the area, and this caused instability as even innocent patrols could be a cause of mishaps. The killing of the Cambodian soldier was mostly likely accidental. Both sides massed their troops on that border.

 

 

Chatgpt disagrees.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Hunz Kittisak said:

Makes my blood boil to see Cambodian side targeting civilians.

 

Is there a volunteer militia force? Where do I sign up? 

 

Also makes my blood boil to see aggressive Siamese military targeting civilians!

 

(see my post with picture above)

14 hours ago, ronnie50 said:

I'm 90% sure of that too. This was pre-planned, a manufactured crisis to enable an eventual coup. The demand by the People's Party (formerly Move Forward) to disolve parliament and call an election is, in my view, the only way to head off the ultra-conservatives' plan for a coup and more right-wing dictatorship in Thailand. But there are rumblings that Thaksin may be trying to do yet another deal with the conservatives to avoid an election (which PT Party would clearly lose, but so would the conservatives).

 

Someone gets it. 

8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

The killing of the Cambodian soldier was mostly likely accidental.

I doubt that (well not necessarily killing him, but they shot at him on purpose - and you don't do that without someone much higher up telling you and other comdrades that you can shoot to kill in a situation like that).

 

More recently, though, this declaration of martial law "by the Thai military" in border areas is worth looking at. Not a surprise of course, but isn't it the pervue of Thailand's civilian government to make such a declaration, not the subordinate military commanders? Yes, I know, Thanksin has been yapping away on social media that the Army can call all the shots going forwward - but he's not 'officially' in charge - no one elected him. So has the government - not Thaksin - given the authority to the military to make all such declarations as it sees fit? And when was that government directive announced exactly? 

4 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

I doubt that (well not necessarily killing him, but they shot at him on purpose - and you don't do that without someone much higher up telling you and other comdrades that you can shoot to kill in a situation like that).

 

More recently, though, this declaration of martial law "by the Thai military" in border areas is worth looking at. Not a surprise of course, but isn't it the pervue of Thailand's civilian government to make such a declaration, not the subordinate military commanders? Yes, I know, Thanksin has been yapping away on social media that the Army can call all the shots going forwward - but he's not 'officially' in charge - no one elected him. So has the government - not Thaksin - given the authority to the military to make all such declarations as it sees fit? And when was that government directive announced exactly? 

 

Indeed.

 

Unfortunately we are getting a lot of dislikes for stating these things as people cannot separate their emotions from the facts.

If Prayuth Chan-ocha had still been in charge none if this would have happened, 

12 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

 

Indeed.

 

Unfortunately we are getting a lot of dislikes for stating these things as people cannot separate their emotions from the facts.

I know. Despite the board, in general, being very US-centric and right wing, no one counters with facts, just thumbs down. It's like they'd love a coup. But back in the days of Thaivisa, it was even worse.

 

I'd love to say that Trump could stop all of this in less than a day, but he won't because we all know it is Biden's fault.

 

Take a screenshot this will only fly for five minutes.

A conspiracy troll post removed.

 

@Mises this is the news section where you need to back up claims with credible links, not just your own conspiracy theories.

1 hour ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

 

Thai soldiers started the whole thing back in February by preventing Cambodian tourists singing their national anthem at Prasat Ta Moan Thom.

 

The Thais have had their pants pulled down here and have resorted to military force. 

 

Cambodia immediately went to seek international arbitration throughout this dispute but Thailand refuses. Ask yourself why that is? 

 

It's always the case that the weaker party seeks international arbitration at the  UN, ICJ and so on, while the stronger party wants a simple bi-lateral solution. Hardly surprising, the same as in any other conflict.

 

However, there was already a bilateral border commission set up by Thailand and Cambodia to resolve the issue. Why did Cambodia refuse to use it, ask yourself why that is?

 

Because Cambodia wants to settle this issue in its favour for good, they do not want a series of flare ups of Thai claims on the disputed border lands to happen, again and again. Cambodia knows it's in a tenous position because it is wedged between Vietnam and Thailand and both are stronger than Cambodia.

 

This is why Cambodia has been stirring up nationalist sentiment in relation to the temple lands, why do you think they're sending people to sing all these patriotic songs? Obviously that's a provocation for the Thai forces there.

 

Both parties massed troops in that area. Both parties tried  to take actions which provoked the other, it was only a  question of time before it flared up.

 

Thailand is resorting to military force as it knows its military is stronger, and it is a means to move border markers and gain de facto control of some of the disputed area.

 

Cambodia was foolish to try and force the issue.

 

And btw, it's hardly surprising Thailand refuses to acknowledge ICJ jurisdiction, after international powers like France cheated Thailand, and the ICJ in the 60s falsely awarded the temple to Cambodia, a decision even some judges on the ICJ case at the tiime found repugnant.

 

 

1 hour ago, ronnie50 said:

I doubt that (well not necessarily killing him, but they shot at him on purpose - and you don't do that without someone much higher up telling you and other comdrades that you can shoot to kill in a situation like that).

 

It's inconceivable that the Thais would shoot a Cambodian soldier on purpose as they know, given the tensions in the area, that would result in a major incident and potentially war.

 

Clearly what happened was that both sides massed troops in the area, something that was started by Cambodia. Given the amassing of troops by both sides even routine patrols could lead to misinterpretations and incidents.

 

Cambodia had been sending people there to sing patriotic songs and provoke the military. It looks like it was all started by Cambodia and provoked by Cambodia, but of course you can't know for sure, as neither has given credible accounts of what happened exactly. 

So Cambodia has called for an immediate ceasefire and it was all quiet this morning in Prasat near Surin where I live . However that did not last long as the shelling has started again at mid-day .

5 minutes ago, superal said:

So Cambodia has called for an immediate ceasefire and it was all quiet this morning in Prasat near Surin where I live . However that did not last long as the shelling has started again at mid-day .

 

Time to send the F16's back in again, this time multiple runs, does Thailand have napalm?

2 minutes ago, lordgrinz said:

 

Time to send the F16's back in again, this time multiple runs, does Thailand have napalm?

Just heard them go over my place  to Cambodia

4 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

 

Except the Preah Vihear temple was occupied by Thai forces which kicked this whole thing off. 

 

The ICJ has now ruled twice that the temple belongs to Cambodia and is on the Cambodian side of the border. 

 

Just because the road is on the Thai side means nothing, but try explaining this to a Thai.

 

The temple is Khmer (built before Siam or Thailand even existed during the Khmer Empire).

If you have been to  Preah Vihear It is on top of the plateau escarpment  and the Thai border runs along that escarpment   for hundreds of kilometres    so the Temple is definitely in Thai territory  ,,, Yes it was built by Kyhmer empire hundreds of years ago  but so were temples  deep inside Thailand  .

Governments and power bases use wars to bolster their sagging public opinion ratings.

The issues here go back as far as the 19th century, and of course there are colonial powers that started it – so much for "Thailand has never been colonised" – they're still fighting over it now.

20 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

Not as good as as the RAF. Beat that https://www.aircrew-saltire.org/lib135.html

The RAF is woke now, Poofery doesn't win wars.

12 hours ago, ThreeCardMonte said:

You think Mexico is safe?  LMAO

No not with Trump sending all the criminals back.

Been told that 100+ Cambodian troops killed by one F16 hit

5 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Timeline:

 

A 1907 French map placed Preah Vihear within Cambodian territory.

 

In 1959, Cambodia brought the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

 

 

The written agreement says the watershed is the border. The Thais first disputed this some time in the 1920s/1930s. The problem is the map is wrong. 

 

6 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Timeline:

 

A 1907 French map placed Preah Vihear within Cambodian territory.

 

In 1959, Cambodia brought the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

 

In 1962, the ICJ ruled that:

1. The temple is in Cambodian territory.

2. Thailand must withdraw any forces and return any items taken from the site.

 

In 2008, Cambodia succeeded in getting Preah Vihear listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

 

Cambodia asked the ICJ to clarify the 1962 judgment due to Thai opposition.

 

In 2013, the ICJ ruled that:

1. Cambodia has sovereignty over the whole promontory where the temple sits.

2. Thailand must withdraw military personnel from the area.

Your timeline has a glaring omission - the 1904 treaty. This is obviously highly relevant since it was a major item that was considered during the ICJ deliberations.

 

Here's what the ICJ ruling says about the 1904 treaty's provisions as regards the location of the border.

 

Quote

The application of the Treaty of 13 February 1904 was, in particular, involved. That Treaty established the general character of the frontier the exact boundary of which was to be delimited by a Franco-Siamese Mixed Commission

 

In the eastern sector of the Dangrek range, in which Preah Vihear was situated, the frontier was to follow the watershed line.

 

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php

 

So even the ICJ stated that the border should have followed the watershed line - which would put Preah Vihear in Thai territory.

 

So it seems a little strange to me, that having said that, they still went ahead and decided in the end that the temple belongs to Cambodia.