Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 There are no elected government before 2006 coup. How did Khun T become PM twice? With the help from elite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is NOT the same thing as you stated. Neither is a voluntary choice to join a local force in order to avoid having to put one's name up for the draft. And neither, to get this back to what your apparent original point was, is an educational deferment the same thing as "avoiding the draft" If we were going to put it that way, then I guess we could say your son is also avoiding the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 I guess, what I am saying is that the next time you wish to make such statements that you actually make them factual, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 There are no elected government before 2006 coup. How did Khun T become PM twice? With the help from elite? No with vote buying, but you are changing the story, before the coup he was not elected, he was just sitting there, not even with legal tricks, just simply illegal. You focus more on rhetoric than on real facts, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumnien Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 (edited) Thaksin opened up Pandora's box and there is no crawling back into the shell in which the poor were completely disenfranchised in Thai society; this hardly makes Thaksin a saint, though he will always be viewed as one by many. This absolute love and devotion for Abhisit, PAD and the elite viral plague is a bit harder to understand. How one can justify everything they do is well beyond me. Why one, who is not one of them, would want to justify their behavior is even more baffling. Edited January 31, 2009 by jumnien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 There are no elected government before 2006 coup. How did Khun T become PM twice? With the help from elite? No with vote buying, but you are changing the story, before the coup he was not elected, he was just sitting there, not even with legal tricks, just simply illegal. You focus more on rhetoric than on real facts, right? lol .. like Thaksin and his cronies aren't 'elite' .. in fact Thaksin's family was elevated above the common people in 1911 I think ... and his cronies are some of the people with the most interesting histories in Thailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is NOT the same thing as you stated. Neither is a voluntary choice to join a local force in order to avoid having to put one's name up for the draft. And neither, to get this back to what your apparent original point was, is an educational deferment the same thing as "avoiding the draft" If we were going to put it that way, then I guess we could say your son is also avoiding the draft. SBK ... every Thai knows that you do not HAVE to be in the military if you are male. (But apparently everyone pretending to be Thai does not know this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Next step Abhisit government will borrow money to run Thailand as they don't know how to make money. This is the 2nd time. The 1st time, Khun T paid the loan. ... You can lie some people but you can't lie us. (edited for brevity) Koo, surely you must by now understand, Thaksin himself did not pay anything ? His first government completed repayment of the cheap IMF-loan, paying out of taxes or financing by issuing new long-term (possibly higher-interest) debt, which would still have to be repaid (with interest) at some time in the distant future. If you honestly believe that Thaksin himself paid the loan, or along with many poor Isaan people that all the village-grants came straight out of his own pocket, then you are simply mistaken or credulous. Governments do borrow money, especially in a recession, to boost public-spending & increase economic activity or to repay old-debts as they mature. This is normal public finance whether by Thaksin or the Democrats. It is not the government's role, to 'make money' for the country, in fact many wholly/partly government-owned businesses lose money, and always did. So Thaksin's questionable business-experience, making money from government-contracts or monopolies and tax-breaks, is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plus Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Thaksin opened up Pandora's box and there is no crawling back into the shell in which the poor were completely disenfranchised in Thai society... Thaksin didn't open anything and didn't empower anyone but himself. Just look at how red leaders treat their fellow activists - no room for dissenting opinion, don't like Jatuporn and Co, piss off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Thaksin opened up Pandora's box and there is no crawling back into the shell in which the poor were completely disenfranchised in Thai society... Thaksin didn't open anything and didn't empower anyone but himself. Just look at how red leaders treat their fellow activists - no room for dissenting opinion, don't like Jatuporn and Co, piss off. Shouldnt forget that Jatuporn and Nattawut would be nothing without Thaksin's largesse and without the sycophantic TV interview Jakrapob would still be under a rock. Nothing to do with democracy just insecure little boys with complexes who have shown they will do master's bidding in a desperate attempt to be loved. Veera is slightly different. He has history as some second string activist once charged with LM iirc. Although his position as a relative nonentity among activists was changed by the midas touch of dear leader's stang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is NOT the same thing as you stated. Neither is a voluntary choice to join a local force in order to avoid having to put one's name up for the draft. And neither, to get this back to what your apparent original point was, is an educational deferment the same thing as "avoiding the draft" If we were going to put it that way, then I guess we could say your son is also avoiding the draft. All I know in our case is that my son registered to be in some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Governments do borrow money, especially in a recession, to boost public-spending & increase economic activity or to repay old-debts as they mature. But this government is not usual. They gang up with the PAD nuts to destroy tourism and export business by protesting in the airports. Do they think the recession is not serious enough to kill Thailand so they make it come faster? They plan to spend money to build up confidence in tourists and investors after they directly damaged Thailand. It just doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacknDanny Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Did they lie that Abhisit did not join the Army? No, but it has no merit on anything whatsoever. What is next, female MPs have to be virgins to be considered clean? Did they lie that Abhisit climbed to the PM chair with the help from PAD+military+Privy Council+elites+judiciray+politicians+middle classes? Yes, as what happened was due process. You might not like it since you hate democracy, but that is life. Did they lie that Abhisit did not win a general election like what Khun T and Khun Samak did? Yes, as Samak didn't win any election anymore than Abhisit did. If you don't know how your electoral process works, should you really be trying to be involved in debating it? Did they lie that Kasit was a terrorist in PAD protest /.../ Yes, as no-one has been convicted or tried on terrorism charges. Did they lie that in the Party in the South after Abhisit became PM, PAD said "Without PAD, Abhisit can't become a PM even in his next life in the afternoon"? Yes, since PAD isn't a single organism IT cannot have said anything. Members in the organisation could however try to up-play their importance and beat their own chest to make themselves appear important. Doesn't men it is true however. Did they lie that Abhisit must appoint PAD to key positions because he can't break the promise? Probably lied, and of course no evidence is presented. It's just talk. Did they lie that Dems Party people donated bags containing rotten fish cans, 4 kg instead of 5kg rice bags with mods (insects eating rice) inside, expired medicine, rotten nam prik phao (Thai chili paste), thin blankets not to keep them warm but to be used as mosquito nets? Poor those people in those areas. They put back the opened fish cans and sent to government. Probably lied, as what would be the purpose of donating bad items on purpose? Spite? Just don't accept it and you are at the same position as before you where sent the items... Looking forward to a reply to each rebuttal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacknDanny Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is correct, and EVERY Thai person who I know, is aware of the above. I can only assume that Koo Is knowingly trying to deliberately mislead people to try and make her point valid. Wake up and smell the coffee Koo. TV members are not as naive as you think they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 (edited) My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is correct, and EVERY Thai person who I know, is aware of the above. I can only assume that Koo Is knowingly trying to deliberately mislead people to try and make her point valid. Wake up and smell the coffee Koo. TV members are not as naive as you think they are. The other possible answer is that some people on here are not who/what they claim they are. I would like to HEAR (edit sp) more of this story though! Edited January 31, 2009 by jdinasia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacknDanny Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Governments do borrow money, especially in a recession, to boost public-spending & increase economic activity or to repay old-debts as they mature. But this government is not usual. They gang up with the PAD nuts to destroy tourism and export business by protesting in the airports. Do they think the recession is not serious enough to kill Thailand so they make it come faster? They plan to spend money to build up confidence in tourists and investors after they directly damaged Thailand. It just doesn't make sense. Whatever the Govt does, you will never be happy. At first, when I initially started reading your posts a few months ago, I kind of felt sorry for you, thinking you were slightly misguided and naive. Now I just think you are having a giraffe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Abhisit did not join the Army as required by Thai law. The details said by Jatupon of Truth Today is that Abhisit did not register with military so he did not have the Certificate Number 43. After becoming PM and people questioned him, he showed his old photo (very handsome) wearing military uniform when he taught in Military Institute for about a month. The issue is, in order to apply for this teaching job, he had to have the #43 for a complete application. He of course did not have. He then managed to have a fake #43. The person who issued this fake certificate was fired for this reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koo82 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Did they lie that Abhisit did not join the Army? No, but it has no merit on anything whatsoever. What is next, female MPs have to be virgins to be considered clean? Did they lie that Abhisit climbed to the PM chair with the help from PAD+military+Privy Council+elites+judiciray+politicians+middle classes? Yes, as what happened was due process. You might not like it since you hate democracy, but that is life. Did they lie that Abhisit did not win a general election like what Khun T and Khun Samak did? Yes, as Samak didn't win any election anymore than Abhisit did. If you don't know how your electoral process works, should you really be trying to be involved in debating it? Did they lie that Kasit was a terrorist in PAD protest /.../ Yes, as no-one has been convicted or tried on terrorism charges. Did they lie that in the Party in the South after Abhisit became PM, PAD said "Without PAD, Abhisit can't become a PM even in his next life in the afternoon"? Yes, since PAD isn't a single organism IT cannot have said anything. Members in the organisation could however try to up-play their importance and beat their own chest to make themselves appear important. Doesn't men it is true however. Did they lie that Abhisit must appoint PAD to key positions because he can't break the promise? Probably lied, and of course no evidence is presented. It's just talk. Did they lie that Dems Party people donated bags containing rotten fish cans, 4 kg instead of 5kg rice bags with mods (insects eating rice) inside, expired medicine, rotten nam prik phao (Thai chili paste), thin blankets not to keep them warm but to be used as mosquito nets? Poor those people in those areas. They put back the opened fish cans and sent to government. Probably lied, as what would be the purpose of donating bad items on purpose? Spite? Just don't accept it and you are at the same position as before you where sent the items... Looking forward to a reply to each rebuttal. Replied "Today, 2009-01-31 11:09:03" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is NOT the same thing as you stated. Neither is a voluntary choice to join a local force in order to avoid having to put one's name up for the draft. And neither, to get this back to what your apparent original point was, is an educational deferment the same thing as "avoiding the draft" If we were going to put it that way, then I guess we could say your son is also avoiding the draft. All I know in our case is that my son registered to be in some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. If this is all you know then please don't make statements such as this: Thai law forces every boy at 18 must join the Army or join some sort of local forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacknDanny Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My question is are you sure that Thai law requires that every male over the age of 18 join the military or some local force? Do you have any facts to back this up? My son is joining some sort of local forces so he does not need to be a military man. Again, you are not answering my question. Not every Thai male is drafted by the military. I know many, in fact, who have not been drafted. But, they must all put their names up for it. This is correct, and EVERY Thai person who I know, is aware of the above. I can only assume that Koo Is knowingly trying to deliberately mislead people to try and make her point valid. Wake up and smell the coffee Koo. TV members are not as naive as you think they are. The other possible answer is that some people on here are not who/what they claim they are. I would like to HEAR (edit sp) more of this story though! The facts are that every Thai male 21+ has to report for draft. If they volunteer, they serve, I think, around 1 yr. If they are drafted, they have to serve a minimum of 2yrs. One of the ways of drafting is to pick balls out of a bag. It is FALSE that every Thai male has to enlist. Koo, you are welcome to put me right here, but I think we both know that I am correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Abhisit did not join the Army as required by Thai law. The details said by Jatupon of Truth Today is that Abhisit did not register with military so he did not have the Certificate Number 43.After becoming PM and people questioned him, he showed his old photo (very handsome) wearing military uniform when he taught in Military Institute for about a month. The issue is, in order to apply for this teaching job, he had to have the #43 for a complete application. He of course did not have. He then managed to have a fake #43. The person who issued this fake certificate was fired for this reason. You dont your cause any good by just repeating propoganda from a propoganda station. Would you believe evrything that was said on ASTV? If the answer is no then realise that nobody excepting the red shirts themselves are going to believe what you post from what is the equivalent of the red shirts version of ASTV. By the way as you are so concerned about people doing military service, how do you feel about the documented and known to be factual desertion of Chalerm's son when he was a serving officer? Surely as there is more evidence of this and it is irrefutable and not just rumour, this case should be of concern to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Nevermind all this talk of military service, i'm still reeling from the news that there's a Koo82 junior somewhere out there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Abhisit did not join the Army as required by Thai law. The details said by Jatupon of Truth Today is that Abhisit did not register with military so he did not have the Certificate Number 43.After becoming PM and people questioned him, he showed his old photo (very handsome) wearing military uniform when he taught in Military Institute for about a month. The issue is, in order to apply for this teaching job, he had to have the #43 for a complete application. He of course did not have. He then managed to have a fake #43. The person who issued this fake certificate was fired for this reason. You dont your cause any good by just repeating propoganda from a propoganda station. Would you believe evrything that was said on ASTV? If the answer is no then realise that nobody excepting the red shirts themselves are going to believe what you post from what is the equivalent of the red shirts version of ASTV. By the way as you are so concerned about people doing military service, how do you feel about the documented and known to be factual desertion of Chalerm's son when he was a serving officer? Surely as there is more evidence of this and it is irrefutable and not just rumour, this case should be of concern to you. hmmmm Koo is spreading MORE lies after being warned by SBK? Abhisit did not join the Army as required by Thai law. Maybe we will hear more about this law that does not exist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 ^ It doesn't AFAIK. There was a guy in our office who had to go on leave for 2 months while he was handpicked to be drafted in the army, but this certainly doesn't apply to everybody. What's the turnout looking like so far Koo? 50? 60? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmsally Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 You are exempted from the possibility of military draft if you finish the "Lor Dor" course (Army Cadets). I believe you can also apply for exemption in such professions as medicine (ie. there is exemption for trainee doctors in some cases). Otherwise you turn up and take the red or the black ball or whatever on conscription day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Governments do borrow money, especially in a recession, to boost public-spending & increase economic activity or to repay old-debts as they mature. But this government is not usual. They gang up with the PAD nuts to destroy tourism and export business by protesting in the airports. Do they think the recession is not serious enough to kill Thailand so they make it come faster? They plan to spend money to build up confidence in tourists and investors after they directly damaged Thailand. It just doesn't make sense. I was one week on holidays and everything was almost full. The only damage I see it because of the 15 day visa from neighbor countries. At the 1997 crisis was Thaksin in the government and not the democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 You are exempted from the possibility of military draft if you finish the "Lor Dor" course (Army Cadets). I believe you can also apply for exemption in such professions as medicine (ie. there is exemption for trainee doctors in some cases).Otherwise you turn up and take the red or the black ball or whatever on conscription day. You left out: or you pay a certain amount or there is no need for a lottery as volunteers cover the needed intake for a year. Why though is nobody upset about the proven case of Chalerm's son deserting while a serving officer? A rumour about Abhisit denied by the military excites the excitable and yet they miss a slam dunk desertion case. Wouldnt be because Chalerm is leader of the red side in parliament would it? The usual hypocricy? Personally I couldnt care about Chalerm's son being a deserter even if the evidence is obvious. There are more important things. And the claim against Abhisit is not even approaching the level of seriousness or proof that the Chalerm son case does. It is a grasping at straws attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Abhisit did not join the Army as required by Thai law. The details said by Jatupon of Truth Today is that Abhisit did not register with military so he did not have the Certificate Number 43.After becoming PM and people questioned him, he showed his old photo (very handsome) wearing military uniform when he taught in Military Institute for about a month. The issue is, in order to apply for this teaching job, he had to have the #43 for a complete application. He of course did not have. He then managed to have a fake #43. The person who issued this fake certificate was fired for this reason. I didn't know that any one who can read and write believes Truth Today. Liar program on such low level that every idiot can figure out that it is paid Thaksin propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Thai law forces every boy at 18 must join the Army or join some sort of local forces. No, it does not. It's not part of the reality I live in [incl. reading over CVs of applicants to positions in the company and noticing the status of every applicant]. Why did you say I hate democracy? What democracy was that that politicians were instructed to meet military people and later on they switched their voices to Dems? I say you hate it since you cannot stand the game rules around it. As you again prove. You claim it's alright when PPP convince parties to abandon their pledge to NOT support PPP from the election campaign, but it is not alright when they are convinced to not support them anymore - which was in line with their election campaign. Isn't it a little one-eyed? Who is allowed to form coalitions? Is a government not basing on people majority voice called democracy? Since PPP wasn't a majority after the election, what are you trying to say? Is anti 1 man 1 vote rule called democracy? Even their name is misleading. It should have been "People against Democracy". Don't confuse the Democrats with the PAD. Democrats are not proponents of shifted vote-weights. Don't muddle the waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.png.76be522b3b43e7458166b9dac9e422ed.png)
Recommended Posts