Have Your Feelings Towards Thaksin Changed

[SpoliaOpima]

I can certainly tell you that they are not happy. its a complicated situation, and one that based on various theories and complexities, I would argue against blaming it on Thaksin. and to claim that it should be FULLY attributed to him says that you need to perhaps familiarise yourself with the various complexities of the problem a lot more?

Key word = sovereignty.

The Thaksin administration, after their prior mishandling of the situation in the South, had some forward thinking solutions to solve some of the problems, and took into account why there was so much dissatisfaction in the Southern Provinces.

Before there could be a decision to implement some of these changes they were rejected out of hand by Prem and the Privy Council.

In retrospect, Prem et al were 100% correct in their assessment of the situation in the south. We are now reaping the fruit of Thaksin's grievously miscalculated southern strategy, which dismantled the power balance initiated during the Prem era.

In fact Prem et al did nothing to prevent or 'reject' anything Thaksin did in the south. Please give an example of where they were rejected by the Privy Council, and by which mechanism they could enforce such a 'rejection.' If they could have done, it might have saved an estimated 3000 lives in those three provinces.

Edited May 9, 2009 by SpoliaOpima

[JimsKnight]

No change for me. Hated him before, hated him after. Guy's a selfish waste of space and rapidly becoming a joke.

Hey, I started hating him before it was fashionable to hate him.

I started hating him around 1996....how about you? Hated him even more when I worked for his government for 3 years.

As far as I'm concerned, hating Thaksin is just sooooo yesterday.

Disliked him a lot since 2001, then by 2003 with the anti-farang bs clamp-downs it was pretty much set in stone

[SpoliaOpima]

spolia

my question was, have you talked to people in those provinces and heard what they think?

Yes I have, in fact I would daresay I've talked to more people in those three provinces than you have.

another question is - do your amy general friends tell you how much the military/army budget was increasedunder claims its needed to tackle the unrest in the south?

or that those working in ISOC were requesting a budget increase for their salary , as in requesting a double claim to salary (and denied under Thaksin rule)

No, but it's a shame they didn't get the increase, though it would have meant nothing in the face of Thaksin's shift of control from a strong and relatively less corrupt army command to a weaker and relatively more corrupt police command

you dont think any of these things have any correlation as to why the army would want to claim that they were doing a great job but were blockaded by Thaksin to continue to do their work properly?

They're not saying they did a great job. Take a look at the stats for separatist violence and death in the south; they speak for themselves. I doubt you can find any reputable political analyst who wouldn't acknowledge how Thaksin's strategy kicked in a new cycle of violence after decades of relative peace. It's pretty much an accepted notion.

ohhh, I may not have the academic credentials to back my knowledge, but I can assure you...I do know my south thailand

I wont say for how long as I dont want to be alluding to my age

I've been to every district in all three concerned provinces and driven almost every road. Still have good friends in Yala and Pattani.

I don't know how much longevity really counts, but I've followed the situation in some detail since 1979, and had direct experience of the region dating back before that. I'm guessing I've probably been in Thailand more years than you have, but don't want to reveal my age either.

Edited May 9, 2009 by SpoliaOpima

[Oberkommando]

In retrospect, Prem et al were 100% correct in their assessment of the situation in the south. We are now reaping the fruit of Thaksin's grievously miscalculated southern strategy, which dismantled the power balance initiated during the Prem era.

In fact Prem et al did nothing to prevent or 'reject' anything Thaksin did in the south. Please give an example of where they were rejected by the Privy Council, and by which mechanism they could enforce such a 'rejection.' If they could have done, it might have saved an estimated 1200 lives in those three provinces.

There was a 'think-tank' put together by the Thaksin Government, headed by former PM Anand that made several suggestions such as making Yala an official language and bringing in certain elements of Islamic Law.

They were submitted to the Privy Council for perusal and rejected out of hand. Prem signalled to the government at the time the suggestions were simply unacceptable to Thailand's sovereignty. There was another one of Prem's famous ignorant quotes refering to the suggestions on reconcilliation, alas I am unable to find it on the internet.

I'm surprised you don't seem to be aware of this considering by your own admission you "spent about three decades writing and reporting on the situation in Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat."

[Ricardo]

Khun Prem hails from the South, Songkhla I believe, perhaps that means he knew more at first-hand about the local situation and politics, than the recently-installed PM from Chiang Mai ? I recall Thaksin's early claim that the muslim separatists were just crooks, rather than people with a possible political grievance, struck me at the time as being rather out-of-touch.

[Oberkommando]

Khun Prem hails from the South, Songkhla I believe, perhaps that means he knew more at first-hand about the local situation and politics, than the recently-installed PM from Chiang Mai ? I recall Thaksin's early claim that the muslim separatists were just crooks, rather than people with a possible political grievance, struck me at the time as being rather out-of-touch.

I doubt he knew more than the National Reconciliation Commission report, especially when it was heralded by local leaders in the Southern Provinces.

It was headed by Anand also BTW, not Thaksin.

I found Prem's quote in reference to one of the NRC's findings, he said, "We cannot accept that [proposal] as we are Thai. The country is Thai and the language is Thai... We have to be proud to be Thai and have the Thai language as the sole national language".

[Oberkommando]

Of course the theory that the Army is in a better position that the Police to control the South has been proven to be nonsense after the Junta claims in 2006 they would solve the problems.

Violence escalated under the Junta's Hearts and Minds campaign, 30% more violence post-coup in the South.

[khunjamespittman]

If you want an opinion then just ask for it. Don't berate a person for giving their opinion. If you don't want their opinion don't aske for it.

khunjames ...

I just did ask it!

Again, you didn't respond directly. I simply asked WHY the recent actions of Thaksin made you much more positive which you didn't state at first, and then didn't state again when directly asked (as that is the topic of this thread, the change in attitudes after Songkran). I know it can be frustrating to be "read" but if you write, expect to be read. If you don't want to respond to a direct question directly on topic to the thread, may I humbly suggest not posting at all rather than trying to do a boomerang?

You are quite obstinant aren't you. You failed to comprehend the gist of my post. It was to point out that you weren't really asking for opinions. You were trying to defend your beliefs. the one positive thing out of this whole mess is that maybe, just maybe someone with some economic and financial knowledge still has a chance to revive the economy of Thailand even after the fierce onslaught of attacks by the like of you.

If you really wanted to know people's opinions then you would not be compelled to critize them for their opinions. You should at least have the honesty to admit that you don't care what other peoples' opinions are. You are just looking for a forum to repeat your opinions over and over and over again. IMHO a very juvenile approach worthy of a grammar school student.

[SpoliaOpima]

In retrospect, Prem et al were 100% correct in their assessment of the situation in the south. We are now reaping the fruit of Thaksin's grievously miscalculated southern strategy, which dismantled the power balance initiated during the Prem era.

In fact Prem et al did nothing to prevent or 'reject' anything Thaksin did in the south. Please give an example of where they were rejected by the Privy Council, and by which mechanism they could enforce such a 'rejection.' If they could have done, it might have saved an estimated 1200 lives in those three provinces.

There was a 'think-tank' put together by the Thaksin Government, headed by former PM Anand that made several suggestions such as making Yala an official language and bringing in certain elements of Islamic Law.

They were submitted to the Privy Council for perusal and rejected out of hand. Prem signalled to the government at the time the suggestions were simply unacceptable to Thailand's sovereignty. There was another one of Prem's famous ignorant quotes refering to the suggestions on reconcilliation, alas I am unable to find it on the internet.

I'm surprised you don't seem to be aware of this considering by your own admission you "spent about three decades writing and reporting on the situation in Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat."

I do remember the proposals but don't remember the privy council 'rejecting' them. By what mechanism were the privy council able to reject the idea? Do you have a reference?

I don't believe those proposals would have made any difference, personally. I think the change most called for is local election of provincial governors throughout Thailand.

[SpoliaOpima]

Of course the theory that the Army is in a better position that the Police to control the South has been proven to be nonsense after the Junta claims in 2006 they would solve the problems.

Violence escalated under the Junta's Hearts and Minds campaign, 30% more violence post-coup in the South.

Not at all. Pandora's box will be hard to close. As I said, the most optimistic reports say it will take another 20 years to undo what the Thaksin regime has wrought in the deep south.

Khun Prem hails from the South, Songkhla I believe, perhaps that means he knew more at first-hand about the local situation and politics, than the recently-installed PM from Chiang Mai ? I recall Thaksin's early claim that the muslim separatists were just crooks, rather than people with a possible political grievance, struck me at the time as being rather out-of-touch.

In 2002, Shinawatra stated, "There's no separatism, no ideological terrorists, just common bandits." By 2004 he had reversed his position, and has come to regard the insurgency as the local front in the global War on Terrorism. Martial law was instituted in Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat in January 2004.^[14]

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Thailand_insurgency

Edited May 9, 2009 by SpoliaOpima

[Oberkommando]

I do remember the proposals but don't remember the privy council 'rejecting' them. By what mechanism were the privy council able to reject the idea? Do you have a reference?

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/25/hea...es_30007268.php

That's a clear rejection, as Prem's quote I posted earlier indicated.

Thaksin was removed in the 2006 coup a couple of months later, having vowed to implement the NRC's findings.

Not at all. Pandora's box will be hard to close. As I said, the most optimistic reports say it will take another 20 years to undo what the Thaksin regime has wrought in the deep south.

It will if the military continues with its tactics of oppression, intimidation and violence.

Thaksin failed, but he was in the process of attempting to rectify that failure when he was ousted. Given that the NRC's findings are directly in contention with the beliefs of the Privy Council and the Nationalistic ideals of the Thai Military, I doubt we'll see any of those recommendations implemented in the near future.

Shame, as many of the suggestions could have gone some way to healing the deep divisions.

[MiG16]

perhaps to clarify/ add a little to ober's comment about privy council rejecting the recommendations

the privy council is ofcourse not in a position to accept or reject those recommendations, as it was submitted to the government for consideration.

however, Gen. Prem did make those comments with regard to autonomous reign recommendation that was forwarded as one of recommendation to consider. other considerations included: using malay/yawi as the second official language in addition to thai. and I believe Gen Prem publicly voiced his oppposition to this recommendation.

opalia - I cant and wont debate whos been here longer, but all I can say is thailand is all I know

[Arkady]

Met him in 1990 at Shin Corp and thought he was quite humble and impressive. He did a good job of explaining why GSM was going to be big in Thailand and had an impressive vision of mobile telephony, although it was obvous at the time that he was very dependent on his ability to bribe the right people. He managed the business well and was careful to avoid too much cheap dollar debt, while the banks were chucking the stuff at Thai businesses and most hoovered it up greedily. Hence his businesses survived the 1997 crisis much better than most. OK that's the end of the positive impressions.

The Thaksin who entered politics in the mid 90s seemed a different persona to Thaksin the businessman: a liar, a cheat, a meglomanic, a murderer - basically a brutal conman on a massive scale. I started to dislike him from the moment he appeared in politics in Chamlong's Palang Dharma Party. He made a fool of himself as Deputy PM in charge of traffic by making extravagant claims that he would solve the Bangkok traffic problem within 6 months. But he didn't care. He had established himself as an old style politician who would just tell bare faced lies all the time and assume people would not dare challenge him. The Constitutional Court case over his asset concealment was not a surprise in that he had shamefully tried to conceal his assets or that with quite a few nudges the court would acquit through some tortuous judicial gymnastics. Many puuyai failed for some reason to see through him and thought he would good for the country. In a sense he has been good for the country because he was woken up the rural people to their ability to participate in politics, even though he abused their mandate to behave as a political monster, indulging in corruption and brutalilty on a grand scale. Politics will never be the same again in Thailand but Thaksin, after giving the people some kind of a voice, didn't provide them with sustainable solutions or honest MPs who cared about anything other than enriching themselves at the expense of the rural poor. That will be left to future generations to sort out, as the rural folk were only a means to an end for Thaksin, not an end in themselves, and he, himself, would clearly be appalled at the logical result of their political awakening which should eventually mean better educated voters who will reject corrupt politicians and demand better opportunities and better a return on their labour at the expense of capitalists like Thaksin and his cronies.

In conclusion I don't think any the worse of Thaksin for leading the assaults on Pattaya and Bangkok because it would not be possible to think much worse of him than before. His behaviour was in line with expectations. He jumped on the bandwaggon and hoped to create maximum chaos to provoke a massacre of red shirts by the army which would lead to some kind of scenario whereby he could return and recover his money and power. In his TV interviews he was visibly shaken by the fact that there had been no slaughter and kept repeating that there were truckloads of dead bodies in the vain hope it would somehow come true. By pre-arrangement his representatives also delivered a petition to the King to stop the violence by the military, which must have caused some bafflement in the Palace, since it was clear by that time that the only deaths were two men murdered by Thaksin's red shirts for daring to defend their working class neighbourhood and get rid of the red shirts' large gas tanker bomb. Some knowledgable Thais say that Thaksin, who is known to be tight fisted with his own money, failed in his power grab over Songkran because he under budgeted the expenses for his power grab and would have got far more red shirts to Bangkok, if he had coughed up what his lieutenants had requested. It is funny that this personality defect is what got him thrown out of office in the first place. If he had made a voluntary donation to the nation of a reasonable percentage of his profits on the Shin Corp sale, he would probably still be office today and would have been able to recoup the "tax" several times over from corruption. Som nam naa!

[alstaxi]

No change, a slime ball then a slime ball now.

[Arkady]

I do remember the proposals but don't remember the privy council 'rejecting' them. By what mechanism were the privy council able to reject the idea? Do you have a reference?

I don't believe those proposals would have made any difference, personally. I think the change most called for is local election of provincial governors throughout Thailand.

I don't thnk there was any mechanism for the privy council to reject the recommendations of Anand Panyarachun's National Reconciliation Committee on the South. Off the top of my head I think that Prem responded in his private capacity that the proposal to make Malay a second official language in the South was unacceptable because it impinged on Thailand's national sovereignty. That seems as sensible as suggesting that making Welsh an official language in Wales would cause Westminster to lose to control of Wales. Whereas mother tongue Welsh speakers are now in the minority in Wales, in the deep South mother tongue Malay speakers represent over 100% of the population. (It seems insulting to adopt the Thai convention of referring to the language as Yawi which is in fact not a language or dialect but a writing system).

Although Prem is responsible for his comments, diverting the blame for Thaksin's failure to even consider any reforms in the South on to Prem, the Privy Council or the now fashionable term of amartiyathipotai is clearly disingenuous. Thaksin not only rejected the recommendations of the Anand committee but he also rejected some very similar recommendations from Chaturon who was a minister in the Thaksin government. If Thaksin had really wanted to initiate reform in the South, he would have: 1) found a way to do it, in spite of opposition by conservative figures to certain aspects of reform; 2) not deliberately escalated the violence in the first place.

I agree that local election of provincial governors would have been a significant change (in the South and the rest of Thailand) but Thaksin was too busy centralizing power to consider anything of that nature. Combined with that the proposed reforms could have been very significant. A related part of the proposals was that more local officials should be from the South, particularly police and military commanders. Ironically even though Prem opposed parts of the proposals, his own solutions as PM were partly along these lines. He implemented the Southern border command (I forget the precise name) that gave the military the upper hand over police in security matters. Prem, himself, is a Southerner and this policy involved selecting commanders suitable for long service in the South. Even, if they were not from the South, over many years service in the South they built up a great deal of knowledge, contacts and trust with local people which made it easier for them to keep things under control. On the minus side Southern command controlled a lot of illegal activities, including the massive oil smuggling, and squeezed the police out. That is what was behind Thaksin's move to dissolve the Southern command structure and put the police in charge of security, which meant a rotation of senior police commanders in South on short tours of duty and under pressure to get quick results.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Arkady

[ThNiner]

He is not afraid of scrutiny.

Quote of the day.

[rixalex]

If he had made a voluntary donation to the nation of a reasonable percentage of his profits on the Shin Corp sale, he would probably still be office today and would have been able to recoup the "tax" several times over from corruption. Som nam naa!

Excellent post Arkady.

And the last bit is so very true. In fact there have been numerous occasions when Thaksin has failed to make obvious decisions which would have easily kept him in power for a very very long time. He's either a lot less intelligent than some give him credit, or he's incredibly obstinate to the point of cutting off his nose to spite his face - perhaps it's a mixture of the two?

[SpoliaOpima]

perhaps to clarify/ add a little to ober's comment about privy council rejecting the recommendations

the privy council is ofcourse not in a position to accept or reject those recommendations, as it was submitted to the government for consideration.

however, Gen. Prem did make those comments with regard to autonomous reign recommendation that was forwarded as one of recommendation to consider. other considerations included: using malay/yawi as the second official language in addition to thai. and I believe Gen Prem publicly voiced his oppposition to this recommendation.

Arkady has responded eloquently on this topic

opalia - I cant and wont debate whos been here longer, but all I can say is thailand is all I know

It's a reasonable assumption that a person born and raised in Thailand will know more about Thai politics or about how southern Thais feel than a foreign resident does. On the other hand there are a number of foreigners around who have spent most of their lives in Thailand and whose careers and/or personal interests have led them deeper into the political culture here than the majority of Thais have ventured (whether intentionally or not).

The assumption I made, recognising a youthful exuberance in your writing style, was that you were born well after I first arrived in Thailand. I could be wrong But I doubt that Thailand is all you know, since you read and write English at near-native level. I would guess you have lived abroad for a number of years

[geeky]

sure, Thaksin has been steering recent events, but the root of the problem is that the rural population is sick and tired of being suppressed by the current government and especially the army

for the last 5-10 years, the floods in Isan has become a huge problem, these floods are caused mainly by the illegal wood cutting of the army, that's why the rural population is behind Thaksin; they are losing their incomes due to the corrupt army ... that's why they're willing to go for the kill; if they don't they will drown!

in other words; no my feelings towards Thaksin didn't change, mainly because he's not the bigger ossue here; the army is the real problem

Thailand is getting ready for their own French revolution; good for them!

Edited May 10, 2009 by geeky

[SpoliaOpima]

A related part of the proposals was that more local officials should be from the South, particularly police and military commanders. Ironically even though Prem opposed parts of the proposals, his own solutions as PM were partly along these lines. He implemented the Southern border command (I forget the precise name) that gave the military the upper hand over police in security matters. Prem, himself, is a Southerner and this policy involved selecting commanders suitable for long service in the South. Even, if they were not from the South, over many years service in the South they built up a great deal of knowledge, contacts and trust with local people which made it easier for them to keep things under control. On the minus side Southern command controlled a lot of illegal activities, including the massive oil smuggling, and squeezed the police out. That is what was behind Thaksin's move to dissolve the Southern command structure and put the police in charge of security, which meant a rotation of senior police commanders in South on short tours of duty and under pressure to get quick results.

Southern Security Command (SOSC), led by a career military man from Krabi who had been trained in counter-insurgency strategy in the USA. Higher up, the 4th Army (southern regional branch of the army) had also been headed by southern Thais from early 80s onwards. The army's strategy in those days was to use politics rather than arms to deal with the insurgency. After the SOSC was dismantled it was replaced by the Southern Police Operation Centre, based in Yala, under the direct command of Police Lt-Gen Wongkot Maneerin, also commander of the Central Investigation Bureau. Wongot was a classmate of Thaksin's -- both Police Academy class 26 grads.

It was around that time that Thaksin issued his comments about the insurgency being just bandits, implying it was a simple law enforcement problem. But the opening of the police centre was widely reported as a sign of a power struggle between the police and the army, and may have created yet another motive for the 2006 coup.

[SpoliaOpima]

Violence escalated under the Junta's Hearts and Minds campaign, 30% more violence post-coup in the South.

The number of insurgent attacks in Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and the four affected districts of Songkhla (Jana, Thepa, Saba Yoi, Na Thaw) increased from 50 in 2001 to 2,173 by 2005.

That's a 4,300% increase during the Thaksin regime.

Source: http://www.navy.mi.th/ians/acd/ACADEMY/dat...rn_thailand.pdf

[Cynical]

There is a general consensus in the media that Thaksin has been weakened by his big revolutionary gambles in Pattaya (which he saw as a great victory) and the subsequent fiasco of Black Songkran in Bangkok.

Is this true for you, or not?

In my case my previous feeling was that the reds were more dangerous and violent than the yellows. However, my feelings deeply hardened after these recent events, so I voted I am much more negative on him now.

I used to love the guy and would often argue with anyone who put him down. As another poster said, he's the best thing to happen in Thai politics for over twenty years. I can attest to that having been here that long. However, the last straw was when he said 'This is not for me. It's for democracy in Thailand'.

He's much more aggressive than before and will hurt anyone or anything to get what he wants.....no thanks!

Edited May 10, 2009 by Cynical

[Dap]

I started hating him around 1996

Yes, I have also been watching him a long time. I felt he was a major creep even in the early days. I smelled a wannabe dictator.

Anybody remember when his original platform was to clean up the Bangkok traffic snarls?

[MiG16]

The assumption I made, recognising a youthful exuberance in your writing style, was that you were born well after I first arrived in Thailand. I could be wrong

hahaha

Im not about to divulge my age, but have to say I like you already. and for the above Im willing to let you get away with whatever else

men with sweet words can always get away with things cant they

ps. and before anyone tries to accuse me of nepotism, Im saying i will let him get away with disagreeing with my thoughts about some matter. not saying he will get special treatment from the mods. gee you have to be so neutral and politically correct as mod doesnt one

by the way, my comments on this thread have totally been as a member, not a MOD.

all these disclaimers mygosh. i sound so politically correct

[MiG16]

The number of insurgent attacks in Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and the four affected districts of Songkhla (Jana, Thepa, Saba Yoi, Na Thaw) increased from 50 in 2001 to 2,173 by 2005.

That's a 4,300% increase during the Thaksin regime.

Source: http://www.navy.mi.th/ians/acd/ACADEMY/dat...rn_thailand.pdf

spolia

things turned for the worse after the raid at the army camp in early 2004. you speak of capability.

how does an army claim to be capable of resolving any issue, or offering security to the public when it cant even protect its own compound?

call me naive, but isnt it the case that one can assume in most countries a military compound would be one of the most secure and highly guarded of all places in the country?

with your background, Im sure you must have heard the story behind that?

and in my limited mind, bizarre as it may sound, there is some logic to it. not something I like discussing on a public forum though...

[Cayenne]

I started hating him around 1996

Yes, I have also been watching him a long time. I felt he was a major creep even in the early days. I smelled a wannabe dictator.

Anybody remember when his original platform was to clean up the Bangkok traffic snarls?

Yeah, I remember that quite well...that was the first of many BS that we have had to hear from him

[Milo]

No change for me. Hated him before, hated him after. Guy's a selfish waste of space and rapidly becoming a joke.

Agreed

[flying]

I started hating him around 1996

Yes, I have also been watching him a long time. I felt he was a major creep even in the early days. I smelled a wannabe dictator.

Anybody remember when his original platform was to clean up the Bangkok traffic snarls?

Yeah, I remember that quite well...that was the first of many BS that we have had to hear from him

With all due respect isn't this what they call a Politician? Anywhere in the world?

Don't all politicians make outlandish promises? That they never fulfill...Because it is logically impossible & because it *buys* votes.

Look at our most recent elected President in the US

Look at any politician it is common knowledge if their lips are moving their lying.

If you like politics or sausage do not watch either being made

Edited May 10, 2009 by flying

[wasaskater]

Thaksin was a politician and a businessman...I have met him briefly on a couple of times...and he was pleasant and helpful on those occasions. I believe there would be no red party if Thaksin did not exist...I also believe that the red party is not any worse than the yellow. I do not agree with the way each one went about it....and most of all not the blue. If you do not like Thaskin because of the way he made his money...then you shouldn't like any politican in the Thai government...and I have met quite a few of them. Money/power may not have been their only goal...but favors for family and friends were the norm...including but not limited to school scholarships...citzenship...visas...all expense vacations. For those of you who have to do visa runs all the time...tell me how it is fair for them to be born and raised overseas, and get citizenship because one of their parents is Thai...oh, and their parents were born overseas and got their citzenship because they were Thai. For those who are trying to get a visa for your Thai girlfriend/wife...how is it fair that these Government officials can leave at anytime? So do I dislike Thaksin for what he has done...no...if anything I wish I could have been strong enough to do the same...when I was threatened with harm. Sorry for all the typos.

[Jingthing]

No change for me. Hated him before, hated him after. Guy's a selfish waste of space and rapidly becoming a joke.

Agreed

I don't begrudge him at all his little slice of paradise in sunny Nicaragua! Out of sight, out of his mind. Live and let live! Daniel Ortega and Thaksin deserve each other, a marriage made in heaven.

Its interesting to see the poll here widening in the negatives for Mr.T: total now 58 percent negative reaction to the Songkran failed violent revolution and 14 percent reacting positively. Smashing. I understand the negatives but would love to hear more rationale for the positives. I can only conclude you think the ends justified the means, but in this case both the ends and the means were dismal. It failed. So what's to like? Do tell. Actually, I suspect people didn't vote honestly, and that Tacky lovers voted positive even though his recent desperate fiasco didn't make them like him better, how could it really? Or maybe I am wrong and you really think he is Thailand's Nelson Mandella (didn't the "great" man himself describe himself that way?).

Edited May 10, 2009 by Jingthing