Police Charged Over Drug War

[rixalex]

And as i said, i neither justify nor condemn - it is not my position to do so.

One can't help wondering.... if you don't condemn innocent people being killed by the thousand, just exactly what is it you would condemn?

Tin of beans going up by a shilling perhaps?

[Journalist]

And as i said, i neither justify nor condemn - it is not my position to do so.

One can't help wondering.... if you don't condemn innocent people being killed by the thousand, just exactly what is it you would condemn?

Tin of beans going up by a shilling perhaps?

I do condemn the Police.

I condemn their requirement that bikini tops have been necessary at Nana Plaza for the last 6 years. It seems so harsh and unnecessary. It is an act of sheer futility and 'Big Brother' police state pointlessness.

[justanothercybertosser]

And as i said, i neither justify nor condemn - it is not my position to do so.

One can't help wondering.... if you don't condemn innocent people being killed by the thousand, just exactly what is it you would condemn?

Tin of beans going up by a shilling perhaps?

So, this thread is now supposed to be what i suspected - a self help group for farang emotionally affected by what they read in the papers about the drug war? Please no analyzes because it might disturb ongoing therapy?

Sorry, but please, if you want that, then announce it in the title of the thread, and i stay clear as i do not want to further damage the fragile emotional balance of the participants.

[justanothercybertosser]

Knowledge is worthless if you ignore it or fear it.

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

[sriracha john]

Just dont agree with extra-judicial killing myself whoever it is by. It is not a Thaksin thing although he bears (some) responsibility in this case.

If the police are involved and they carried out the extra-judicial stuff it gives a new spin on the claim it was drug dealers killing drug dealers .

That i am aware off, and it was acknowledged at the time: many of the killings were police officers in the trade cutting of their links to the trade. The real problem was, and is, that legally, there just is very little hope to go against those officers. What mattered then was that spread of drugs decreases, quickly and efficiently, no matter the collateral damage. And i want to point out - not just police was/is involved, military officers are as well. And politicians, etc...

Personally, i am disgusted by this logic. But i have to accept that there is logic behind it.

And yes, of course Thaksin bears responsibility. I do not exonerate him. I just refuse to follow this witch hunt, where the drug war is minimized to political agenda that has little to do with reality. And at the same time we are fed some rather outlandish pseudo solutions (such as incarcerate them dealers on some island) to obfuscate the inactivity of the present government towards the again rising drug infestation in the communities.

In your opinion, what then is an appropriate sentence for Thaksin's involvement in the Drug War and how does that compare to what you think is an appropriate sentence for others (and please specify who the others are?)?

Punishment for the actual trigger-pullers should be what?

Also for hammered:

Just how much is "some"?

And the police involvement in this has been talked about since marshbags original thread.

Although a great deal of this is just rehashing of that with the seemingly mandatory posts, from the same updated posters, lamenting their poor, drug-ridden Bangkok community environment that struggle to survive in. The drama was barely the first time around and now, with their updated ID's, it gets really old...

Translation for the uninitiated: Blame for this kind of poster is attributable only to the police and of course Thaksin himself.Any suggestion that the army, politicians and other elite figures had anything to do with or share any responsibility is "off message" regardless of the facts.If in danger of being defeated in the argument, start getting personal and belittling members background -as above.

No translation is necessary, especially if its going to be misleading and incorrect. Way back on Post #6, I stated my position which contradicts your message and makes your "translation" erroneous and false.

Additionally, it never hurts to be reminded, from time to time, who is who on these discussions and their backgrounds.

[sriracha john]

In your opinion, what then is an appropriate sentence for Thaksin's involvement in the Drug War and how does that compare to what you think is an appropriate sentence for others (and please specify who the others are?)?

Punishment for the actual trigger-pullers should be what?

Also for hammered:

Just how much is "some"?

And the police involvement in this has been talked about since marshbags original thread.

Although a great deal of this is just rehashing of that with the seemingly mandatory posts, from the same updated posters, lamenting their poor, drug-ridden Bangkok community environment that struggle to survive in. The drama was barely the first time around and now, with their updated ID's, it gets really old...

First learn to ask a question politely without the barely hidden impolite snide remarks, and an answer will be given, politely as well.

This though is no base for a civil and polite discussion.

My questions were rhetorical and not really expecting an "answer" because some of the posters who are posting from a position of being discredited and removed due to their past behavior are not genuinely interested in a discussion and haven't been since their earlier posts two years and longer ago.

[plachon]

It's unfortunate that in trying to show that Thaksin was not the head of the snake or the head snake (thankfully, not a snakehead as well), you come across as wanting to exonerate him from his share of responsibility, as Prime Minister of the time who ordered the War on Drugs and gave the clear green light to the Interior Ministry and cops use any means possible to rid Thailand of drugs. You seem to want to pass the buck to others, thereby lowering Thaksin's role in the EJK of some 2,700 + human beings.

However, as you are so keen on the socio-political and historical context which allowed Thaksin to order and execute (appropriate word) the War on Drugs, then I idly wonder, had Field Marshall Sarit been held responsible for his earlier popular War on Drugs which also allowed govt forces to murder people willy-nilly (perhaps the model for Thaksin's version?), tried, found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment or shot by firing squad (as was the mode in those days), whether Thaksin would have been so keen to order another round of drug bloodletting in 2003?

It seems to me, whichever way you want to cut it, not blaming and then trying Thaksin first and foremost for this crime against humanity, is to allow history to repeat itself again in the future, perhaps when Chalerm (or some other despot-in-waiting) gets his chance at PMship. This is irrespective of context, no matter how clever one thinks one is at "understanding" Byzantine or Macchiavellian politics.

What a selective view on history...

At least you acknowledge the role of precedents in the case of the drug war. But selectively chosing the assorted human rights violations without fully analyzing them in context of the at the time valid bureaucratic polity is intellectually not very honest.

We had after Thaksin a prime minister that has a proven history of human rights violations, and who also has announced a drug war. Why, do you think, nothing happened when Samak Sundaravej wanted to do his war against drugs? According to your theory, as holder of PM'ship he should have been able to kill lots of dealers. But he couldn't. He could not even get the army to follow his orders during the brief state of emergency he declared on Sept 2, 2008.

Is it maybe that Thaksin has been given a green light by sectors of society that can chose to follow, or not to follow orders of the PM? And if that is so, was Thaksin really the most powerful man in Thailand, as you imply here?

Your logic stinks, i am sorry to say, and the debate rapidly moves now into the territory of intellectual dishonesty and sophism.

Talking about selective views and intellectual honesty - I posed you a simple question, why didn't you try to answer it? Once again, would Thaksin have expedited his deadly War on Drugs, if he thought there was a historical precedent of a PM being held responsible for crimes against humanity through due legal process?

Nothing happened when Samak was in "power", because he was a lame duck, proxy PM of Thaksin, more interested in eating, cooking shows and complaining on TV than running the country. It was Chalerm anyway who wanted to kick off another round of the War on Drugs (under orders from Dear Leader no doubt, as a surefire way of propping up their fading popularity and putting fear into their political enemies). It was another big favour that PAD did Thailand - averting Chalerm and his goons going on another shooting spree after so-called "drugs dealers". They saved Thailand from a repeat of thousands of "doo yen" incidents by kicking out Samak and the insipid Somchai in smart order, and deserve credit for that alone.

[sriracha john]

Although a great deal of this is just rehashing of that with the seemingly mandatory posts, from the same updated posters, lamenting their poor, drug-ridden Bangkok community environment that struggle to survive in. The drama was barely the first time around and now, with their updated ID's, it gets really old...

Awesome !! So the same people you were disagreeing with 25,000 posts ago are still gainsaying you ! All that typing since 2004 and none of you agree on any commonality, nobody has been persuaded by anything.

Five years of life gone @ an average rate of 15 posts a day. Jeez !

Does that make one feel more or less steeled for posts 25001 to 49999? I think it would make me look for a new hobby, like golf or sailing!

Box on !

Actually, the fakeness and disingenuous nature of some of these "newer" members has only been a fairly recent development on the board.

Secondly, my intent has generally not been focused on persuading anyone of anything and is much more often related to informing people. To that end, I've not often shied away from discussing various aspects of life in Thailand, which oddly enough, is willingly discussed daily by still other posters that don't even live here. Now, to me, that aspect of members involvement has always been fascinating.

Indeed, it has been hobby, albeit one that is becoming less interesting as the genuineness of posters is increasingly being called into question to the point of nearing the point of exasperation.

Historically, many a popular Usenet group experienced the same phenomenon and their appeal has dropped off the map.

[plachon]

Although a great deal of this is just rehashing of that with the seemingly mandatory posts, from the same updated posters, lamenting their poor, drug-ridden Bangkok community environment that struggle to survive in. The drama was barely the first time around and now, with their updated ID's, it gets really old...

Awesome !! So the same people you were disagreeing with 25,000 posts ago are still gainsaying you ! All that typing since 2004 and none of you agree on any commonality, nobody has been persuaded by anything.

Five years of life gone @ an average rate of 15 posts a day. Jeez !

Does that make one feel more or less steeled for posts 25001 to 49999? I think it would make me look for a new hobby, like golf or sailing!

Box on !

Actually, the fakeness and disingenuous nature of some of these "newer" members has only been a fairly recent development on the board.

Secondly, my intent has generally not been focused on persuading anyone of anything and is much more often related to informing people. To that end, I've not often shied away from discussing various aspects of life in Thailand, which oddly enough, is willingly discussed daily by still other posters that don't even live here. Now, to me, that aspect of members involvement has always been fascinating.

Indeed, it has been hobby, albeit one that is becoming less interesting as the genuineness of posters is increasingly being called into question to the point of nearing the point of exasperation.

Historically, many a popular Usenet group experienced the same phenomenon and their appeal has dropped off the map.

Don't let your valuable contributions to this board SRJ, be sabotaged by a few nay-sayers, contrarians and fake journalists.

As you know, there are countless more people here who do value the effort you put in to keep people informed of events in Thailand and hope you continue to keep up the good work for many years to come, even when it does seem a thankless task,

You're the Lopburi of the news board and get my vote of thanks for pursuing your hobby so tirelessly!

[justanothercybertosser]

Talking about selective views and intellectual honesty - I posed you a simple question, why didn't you try to answer it? Once again, would Thaksin have expedited his deadly War on Drugs, if he thought there was a historical precedent of a PM being held responsible for crimes against humanity through due legal process?

Nothing happened when Samak was in "power", because he was a lame duck, proxy PM of Thaksin, more interested in eating, cooking shows and complaining on TV than running the country. It was Chalerm anyway who wanted to kick off another round of the War on Drugs (under orders from Dear Leader no doubt, as a surefire way of propping up their fading popularity and putting fear into their political enemies). It was another big favour that PAD did Thailand - averting Chalerm and his goons going on another shooting spree after so-called "drugs dealers". They saved Thailand from a repeat of thousands of "doo yen" incidents by kicking out Samak and the insipid Somchai in smart order, and deserve credit for that alone.

That was a question. Ups, i thought you spoke to yourself there. My apologies.

To answer that question.These are those 'what if' scenarios which are rather moot to discuss because we are then moving in fantasy land. If any of the previous human rights violations committed by the Thai state would have been properly investigated and the guilty parties punished regardless of status, Thailand might be a more developed nation than it is now.

But that did not happen. And also this drug war of the discussion will not be investigated. All your rants here are nothing but rants. The by you supported coup installed government has already made it very sure that there will not be any investigations beyond a few lower and mid-ranked officers of not much importance. May i remind you - the result of their investigation committee was that Thaksin cannot be linked to the killings. The house of cards might collapse if one digs too deep.

And a few days ago, the great justice system of Thailand has also exonerated the security officials involved in the Tak Bai incident of all wrong doing as well. Drone on about Thaksin, if it makes you feel better, but the evidence is one my side of the argument.

[Mario2008]

Let's stay on the topic shall we? Enough about fan clubs.

Several off topic post have been deleted already.

[Lite Beer]

Posts containing Royal references have been edited or deleted.

[hammered]

Just dont agree with extra-judicial killing myself whoever it is by. It is not a Thaksin thing although he bears (some) responsibility in this case.

If the police are involved and they carried out the extra-judicial stuff it gives a new spin on the claim it was drug dealers killing drug dealers .

That i am aware off, and it was acknowledged at the time: many of the killings were police officers in the trade cutting of their links to the trade. The real problem was, and is, that legally, there just is very little hope to go against those officers. What mattered then was that spread of drugs decreases, quickly and efficiently, no matter the collateral damage. And i want to point out - not just police was/is involved, military officers are as well. And politicians, etc...

Personally, i am disgusted by this logic. But i have to accept that there is logic behind it.

And yes, of course Thaksin bears responsibility. I do not exonerate him. I just refuse to follow this witch hunt, where the drug war is minimized to political agenda that has little to do with reality. And at the same time we are fed some rather outlandish pseudo solutions (such as incarcerate them dealers on some island) to obfuscate the inactivity of the present government towards the again rising drug infestation in the communities.

In your opinion, what then is an appropriate sentence for Thaksin's involvement in the Drug War and how does that compare to what you think is an appropriate sentence for others (and please specify who the others are?)?

Punishment for the actual trigger-pullers should be what?

Also for hammered:

Just how much is "some"?

And the police involvement in this has been talked about since marshbags original thread.

Although a great deal of this is just rehashing of that with the seemingly mandatory posts, from the same updated posters, lamenting their poor, drug-ridden Bangkok community environment that struggle to survive in. The drama was barely the first time around and now, with their updated ID's, it gets really old...

As PM and head of government that instituted and carried out the policy then Thaksin does bear ultimate responsibility for the policy. This precedent has been set ,amy times at international level in countries with even more complicated socio-politcal contextxs than Thailand. The idea of he who legally instituted the policy is responsible is a norm. That is not to say that Thaksin will ever be tried. Others in other places got away with ushc things completely or for a very long time.

Having said that Thaksin did not draw up death lists or pull the trigger. Those who carried out those actions also bear a level of responsibility. Then there are those who turned a blind eye when tasked with investigating. Then there are other politicians who voted for the policy in cabinet etc. Then we get into the area of moral responsibility for all of those who happily turned their backs and said or did nothing or supported the scheme or were apologists for it. Ultimately all society bears some responsibility when things like this occur. However, there are international examples of who ends up bearing responsibility and it is really only from these that we can we draw parallels if looking for answers as there is no history of responsibility for these kind of actions in Thailand itself. that must change at some time. Sadly it is likely it wont be now. Thaksin like Samak, Sarit, Suchinda etc will still be held up as great people, and in that there is something very worrying for a society imho. Having read the debate going on I think there are actually (art least) two different things being discussed. There is: Thaksin and his responsibility for the drug war, and a discussion on the powers behind the scenes that empower or decline an event. I think it perfectly possible to say Thaksin had (some) responsibility for the drug war and this should be investigated (I am not saying will but talking on a hypothetical level) and at the same time recognizing that there are parallel power structures in Thailand that affect politcal action. Having said that many democracies have powerful and influential people/organizations that impact on much.

Thank you for the tip off on Marshbags information.

[sriracha john]

And thank you for your reply. It pretty much reflects my own opinion regarding culpability.

[plachon]

Talking about selective views and intellectual honesty - I posed you a simple question, why didn't you try to answer it? Once again, would Thaksin have expedited his deadly War on Drugs, if he thought there was a historical precedent of a PM being held responsible for crimes against humanity through due legal process?

Nothing happened when Samak was in "power", because he was a lame duck, proxy PM of Thaksin, more interested in eating, cooking shows and complaining on TV than running the country. It was Chalerm anyway who wanted to kick off another round of the War on Drugs (under orders from Dear Leader no doubt, as a surefire way of propping up their fading popularity and putting fear into their political enemies). It was another big favour that PAD did Thailand - averting Chalerm and his goons going on another shooting spree after so-called "drugs dealers". They saved Thailand from a repeat of thousands of "doo yen" incidents by kicking out Samak and the insipid Somchai in smart order, and deserve credit for that alone.

That was a question. Ups, i thought you spoke to yourself there. My apologies.

To answer that question.These are those 'what if' scenarios which are rather moot to discuss because we are then moving in fantasy land. If any of the previous human rights violations committed by the Thai state would have been properly investigated and the guilty parties punished regardless of status, Thailand might be a more developed nation than it is now.

But that did not happen. And also this drug war of the discussion will not be investigated. All your rants here are nothing but rants. The by you supported coup installed government has already made it very sure that there will not be any investigations beyond a few lower and mid-ranked officers of not much importance. May i remind you - the result of their investigation committee was that Thaksin cannot be linked to the killings. The house of cards might collapse if one digs too deep.

And a few days ago, the great justice system of Thailand has also exonerated the security officials involved in the Tak Bai incident of all wrong doing as well. Drone on about Thaksin, if it makes you feel better, but the evidence is one my side of the argument.

No, it was simply a hypothetical question. Quite normal in political discussions the world over. Not a rant. In fact, I have to say that in my opinion you come across as a ranter far more than most on this board 'tosser. But rather than rant against the injustices in the system (as you claim you are amoral), you prefer to rant against those on TV who point them out or point a finger at the head of the snake. Fine, if that's what floats your boat.

But, I have to say that with Thaksin, for the first time in Thai history perhaps there is a chance that a former PM could be tried and convicted for abuse of power whilst PM. (In fact, he already has and found guilt of corruption). And once that taboo has been broken ( a major step forward imo), it does raise the faint possiblity that families of his victims, with the help of human rights and justice groups, could one day prosecute Thaksin for his role in the War on Drugs, as the person who ordered it in the first place and the one who declared it a "total success".

We can but live in hope.

Edited June 1, 2009 by plachon

[hammered]

Talking about selective views and intellectual honesty - I posed you a simple question, why didn't you try to answer it? Once again, would Thaksin have expedited his deadly War on Drugs, if he thought there was a historical precedent of a PM being held responsible for crimes against humanity through due legal process?

Nothing happened when Samak was in "power", because he was a lame duck, proxy PM of Thaksin, more interested in eating, cooking shows and complaining on TV than running the country. It was Chalerm anyway who wanted to kick off another round of the War on Drugs (under orders from Dear Leader no doubt, as a surefire way of propping up their fading popularity and putting fear into their political enemies). It was another big favour that PAD did Thailand - averting Chalerm and his goons going on another shooting spree after so-called "drugs dealers". They saved Thailand from a repeat of thousands of "doo yen" incidents by kicking out Samak and the insipid Somchai in smart order, and deserve credit for that alone.

That was a question. Ups, i thought you spoke to yourself there. My apologies.

To answer that question.These are those 'what if' scenarios which are rather moot to discuss because we are then moving in fantasy land. If any of the previous human rights violations committed by the Thai state would have been properly investigated and the guilty parties punished regardless of status, Thailand might be a more developed nation than it is now.

But that did not happen. And also this drug war of the discussion will not be investigated. All your rants here are nothing but rants. The by you supported coup installed government has already made it very sure that there will not be any investigations beyond a few lower and mid-ranked officers of not much importance. May i remind you - the result of their investigation committee was that Thaksin cannot be linked to the killings. The house of cards might collapse if one digs too deep.

And a few days ago, the great justice system of Thailand has also exonerated the security officials involved in the Tak Bai incident of all wrong doing as well. Drone on about Thaksin, if it makes you feel better, but the evidence is one my side of the argument.

No, it was simply a hypothetical question. Quite normal in political discussions the world over. Not a rant. In fact, I have to say that in my opinion you come across as a ranter far more than most on this board 'tosser. But rather than rant against the injustices in the system (as you claim you are amoral), you prefer to rant against those on TV who point them out or point a finger at the head of the snake. Fine, if that's what floats your boat.

But, I have to say that with Thaksin, for the first time in Thai history perhaps there is a chance that a former PM could be tried and convicted for abuse of power whilst PM. (In fact, he already has and found guilt of corruption). And once that taboo has been broken ( a major step forward imo), it does raise the faint possiblity that families of his victims, with the help of human rights and justice groups, could one day prosecute Thaksin for his role in the War on Drugs, as the person who ordered it in the first place and the one who declared it a "total success".

We can but live in hope.

I tend to think this wont happen. However, it was once thought that Pinochet was immune from prosecution and finally only his death kept him from it. So......

[plachon]

Talking about selective views and intellectual honesty - I posed you a simple question, why didn't you try to answer it? Once again, would Thaksin have expedited his deadly War on Drugs, if he thought there was a historical precedent of a PM being held responsible for crimes against humanity through due legal process?

Nothing happened when Samak was in "power", because he was a lame duck, proxy PM of Thaksin, more interested in eating, cooking shows and complaining on TV than running the country. It was Chalerm anyway who wanted to kick off another round of the War on Drugs (under orders from Dear Leader no doubt, as a surefire way of propping up their fading popularity and putting fear into their political enemies). It was another big favour that PAD did Thailand - averting Chalerm and his goons going on another shooting spree after so-called "drugs dealers". They saved Thailand from a repeat of thousands of "doo yen" incidents by kicking out Samak and the insipid Somchai in smart order, and deserve credit for that alone.

That was a question. Ups, i thought you spoke to yourself there. My apologies.

To answer that question.These are those 'what if' scenarios which are rather moot to discuss because we are then moving in fantasy land. If any of the previous human rights violations committed by the Thai state would have been properly investigated and the guilty parties punished regardless of status, Thailand might be a more developed nation than it is now.

But that did not happen. And also this drug war of the discussion will not be investigated. All your rants here are nothing but rants. The by you supported coup installed government has already made it very sure that there will not be any investigations beyond a few lower and mid-ranked officers of not much importance. May i remind you - the result of their investigation committee was that Thaksin cannot be linked to the killings. The house of cards might collapse if one digs too deep.

And a few days ago, the great justice system of Thailand has also exonerated the security officials involved in the Tak Bai incident of all wrong doing as well. Drone on about Thaksin, if it makes you feel better, but the evidence is one my side of the argument.

No, it was simply a hypothetical question. Quite normal in political discussions the world over. Not a rant. In fact, I have to say that in my opinion you come across as a ranter far more than most on this board 'tosser. But rather than rant against the injustices in the system (as you claim you are amoral), you prefer to rant against those on TV who point them out or point a finger at the head of the snake. Fine, if that's what floats your boat.

But, I have to say that with Thaksin, for the first time in Thai history perhaps there is a chance that a former PM could be tried and convicted for abuse of power whilst PM. (In fact, he already has and found guilt of corruption). And once that taboo has been broken ( a major step forward imo), it does raise the faint possiblity that families of his victims, with the help of human rights and justice groups, could one day prosecute Thaksin for his role in the War on Drugs, as the person who ordered it in the first place and the one who declared it a "total success".

We can but live in hope.

I tend to think this wont happen. However, it was once thought that Pinochet was immune from prosecution and finally only his death kept him from it. So......

Yes, lots of interesting hyopthetical questions too around how much different or similar the Thai situation is/was from some of the EJK sprees in Latin America, thinking particularly about Chile, Argentina, El Salvador and Nicaragua.

With the power of the internet and global communications, how long will it be before victim support groups in Chile and Thailand (for example) exchange experiences about possible ways to bring the perpetrators to justice? Been quite a few prosecutions in Chile, beyond Pinochet, I believe.

[hammered]

I still think it highly unlikely Thaksin will be prosecuted for the drug war.

[wackysleet]

Personally I cannot see how Thaksin could have instigated this policy without a substantial backing from M.Ps of all parties and if this is the case then every person that voted for it is culpable from the lowest ranked bib and the lowest ranked squaddie and including all the behind the scene untouchables, Thaksin may have been the instigator but there were plenty of willing cohorts.

Those of you that think Thaksin will be prosecuted, I simply say " get real " you think that he will come back here when he did a runner over a mere two year sentence, certain people do not want him back at any cost as it may well put their own exalted positions in society in jeopardy.

Did it not appear strange to people that Thaksin whilst going to the States prior to the coup that he had in fact chartered several planes to transfer belongings etc abroad, is it not feasible that he was told about the proposed coup.

What we will end up with of course is a few minor persons being used as cannon fodder to placate the general public.

[DaleBlue]

The drug thing. Because it is a failure, Thaksin have to take the blame.

On the other hand, if it is a success, who do you think will take the credit?

I am sure not Thaksin, but another person.

[Plus]

On the other hand, if it is a success, who do you think will take the credit?

I am sure not Thaksin, but another person.

What are you talking about?

He was already given the whole credit for eradicating drugs.

It's when it's time to pass the blame that he is not around.

>>>

I don't know who came up with the idea of death squads, I belive it wasn't Thaksin himself, but without his accepting the idea and building the whole war strategy around it, nothing would have happened.

It would be nice to bring those shady military types into the light, but who's going to judge them? Surely not politicians who gave the ordres, and not the "people" who cheered on, ether.

No one has enough "baramee".

Thaksin won't be prosecuted for the same reason.

[Old Man River]

Personally I cannot see how Thaksin could have instigated this policy without a substantial backing from M.Ps of all parties ...

I know as a fact this wasn't the case. It didn't matter since at that time the TRT had complete control of the country and Thaksin had complete control of the TRT. No support from any other institution was needed, other than to stay out of his way.

[wackysleet]

Personally I cannot see how Thaksin could have instigated this policy without a substantial backing from M.Ps of all parties ...

I know as a fact this wasn't the case. It didn't matter since at that time the TRT had complete control of the country and Thaksin had complete control of the TRT. No support from any other institution was needed, other than to stay out of his way.

I won't argue with your statement as you said you know for a fact that only the TRT voted for it, perhaps you were in the house at the vote, but your statement flies in the face of other statements I've read on numerous other posts, so no other MPs other than TRT voted the motion through, so what does that make the other MPs who didn't have the balls to vote against it but just kept their heads down.

[Old Man River]

Personally I cannot see how Thaksin could have instigated this policy without a substantial backing from M.Ps of all parties ...

I know as a fact this wasn't the case. It didn't matter since at that time the TRT had complete control of the country and Thaksin had complete control of the TRT. No support from any other institution was needed, other than to stay out of his way.

I won't argue with your statement as you said you know for a fact that only the TRT voted for it, perhaps you were in the house at the vote, but your statement flies in the face of other statements I've read on numerous other posts, so no other MPs other than TRT voted the motion through, so what does that make the other MPs who didn't have the balls to vote against it but just kept their heads down.

Vote for the motion? What are you talking about? Do you really think this was put up to a vote in parliament?

[wackysleet]

I won't argue with your statement as you said you know for a fact that only the TRT voted for it, perhaps you were in the house at the vote, but your statement flies in the face of other statements I've read on numerous other posts, so no other MPs other than TRT voted the motion through, so what does that make the other MPs who didn't have the balls to vote against it but just kept their heads down.

Vote for the motion? What are you talking about? Do you really think this was put up to a vote in parliament?

Of course it was not an open vote in parliament but don't think for one minute this action was not agreed on by a majority of MPs behind closed doors because everyone knew what the policy was, official or unofficial, and Thaksin didn't go around pulling the trigger, or do you know otherwise?.

[Journalist]

As PM and head of government that instituted and carried out the policy then Thaksin does bear ultimate responsibility for the policy. This precedent has been set ,amy times at international level in countries with even more complicated socio-politcal contextxs than Thailand. The idea of he who legally instituted the policy is responsible is a norm. That is not to say that Thaksin will ever be tried. Others in other places got away with ushc things completely or for a very long time.

Having said that Thaksin did not draw up death lists or pull the trigger. Those who carried out those actions also bear a level of responsibility. Then there are those who turned a blind eye when tasked with investigating. Then there are other politicians who voted for the policy in cabinet etc. Then we get into the area of moral responsibility for all of those who happily turned their backs and said or did nothing or supported the scheme or were apologists for it. Ultimately all society bears some responsibility when things like this occur. However, there are international examples of who ends up bearing responsibility and it is really only from these that we can we draw parallels if looking for answers as there is no history of responsibility for these kind of actions in Thailand itself. that must change at some time. Sadly it is likely it wont be now. Thaksin like Samak, Sarit, Suchinda etc will still be held up as great people, and in that there is something very worrying for a society imho. Having read the debate going on I think there are actually (art least) two different things being discussed. There is: Thaksin and his responsibility for the drug war, and a discussion on the powers behind the scenes that empower or decline an event. I think it perfectly possible to say Thaksin had (some) responsibility for the drug war and this should be investigated (I am not saying will but talking on a hypothetical level) and at the same time recognizing that there are parallel power structures in Thailand that affect politcal action. Having said that many democracies have powerful and influential people/organizations that impact on much.

I'm good to go with this account of it.

[justanothercybertosser]

No, it was simply a hypothetical question. Quite normal in political discussions the world over. Not a rant. In fact, I have to say that in my opinion you come across as a ranter far more than most on this board 'tosser. But rather than rant against the injustices in the system (as you claim you are amoral), you prefer to rant against those on TV who point them out or point a finger at the head of the snake. Fine, if that's what floats your boat.

But, I have to say that with Thaksin, for the first time in Thai history perhaps there is a chance that a former PM could be tried and convicted for abuse of power whilst PM. (In fact, he already has and found guilt of corruption). And once that taboo has been broken ( a major step forward imo), it does raise the faint possiblity that families of his victims, with the help of human rights and justice groups, could one day prosecute Thaksin for his role in the War on Drugs, as the person who ordered it in the first place and the one who declared it a "total success".

We can but live in hope.

Dream on.

Thaksin is not going to be prosecuted for reasons you are apparently not willing or able to understand. As long as you believe that Thaksin is "as the person who ordered it in the first place" you do not understand how such far reaching policies are decided upon by the Thai state. There are precedents, such as the events of 1976, and the aftermath. Learn about them, and draw parralells.

I never claimed that i am "amoral", i just don't carry morals as a coat hiding utter ignorance.

[Old Man River]

Of course it was not an open vote in parliament but don't think for one minute this action was not agreed on by a majority of MPs behind closed doors because everyone knew what the policy was, official or unofficial, and Thaksin didn't go around pulling the trigger, or do you know otherwise?.

You are missing my point and no need to get angry about it.

The war on drugs initially had a great deal of support. It was supposed to be a war on the criminal element and there are few that would have a problem with this unless they were part of the drug trade themselves. However, it ended up to be something completely different and on this, the main opposition party did not support (and I do know this as a fact, but I fully understand if you wish to disagree). At that time, there wasn't anything the opposition or anybody else could do about it.

[animatic]

As PM and head of government that instituted and carried out the policy then Thaksin does bear ultimate responsibility for the policy. This precedent has been set ,amy times at international level in countries with even more complicated socio-politcal contextxs than Thailand. The idea of he who legally instituted the policy is responsible is a norm. That is not to say that Thaksin will ever be tried. Others in other places got away with ushc things completely or for a very long time.

Having said that Thaksin did not draw up death lists or pull the trigger. Those who carried out those actions also bear a level of responsibility. Then there are those who turned a blind eye when tasked with investigating. Then there are other politicians who voted for the policy in cabinet etc. Then we get into the area of moral responsibility for all of those who happily turned their backs and said or did nothing or supported the scheme or were apologists for it. Ultimately all society bears some responsibility when things like this occur. However, there are international examples of who ends up bearing responsibility and it is really only from these that we can we draw parallels if looking for answers as there is no history of responsibility for these kind of actions in Thailand itself. that must change at some time. Sadly it is likely it wont be now. Thaksin like Samak, Sarit, Suchinda etc will still be held up as great people, and in that there is something very worrying for a society imho. Having read the debate going on I think there are actually (art least) two different things being discussed. There is: Thaksin and his responsibility for the drug war, and a discussion on the powers behind the scenes that empower or decline an event. I think it perfectly possible to say Thaksin had (some) responsibility for the drug war and this should be investigated (I am not saying will but talking on a hypothetical level) and at the same time recognizing that there are parallel power structures in Thailand that affect politcal action. Having said that many democracies have powerful and influential people/organizations that impact on much.

I'm good to go with this account of it.

Ditto.

Noting that the "Area of Moral Responsability"

is quite likely somewhere other than LOS.

[Plus]

Of course it was not an open vote in parliament but don't think for one minute this action was not agreed on by a majority of MPs behind closed doors

4 suspects shot dead on day 1 of drug war

.....

Opposition Leader and Democrat Party leader Chuan Leekpai warned yesterday that the government should not violate basic human rights in its war against illegal drugs.

Chuan said the government had indicated several times that officers battling traffickers would "shoot to kill".

This would tarnish Thailand's image in regard to human rights and the international community might boycott Thai products to protest against human-rights violations, he said.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/read.php?newsid=74589