How Many Years In Prison Does Thaksin Deserve?

[dumbnewbie]

I think foreigners have more reason to dislike Thaksin than the Thai people.

Why do you think this? (Not doubting you - I'm just asking).

[Moonrakers]

I think foreigners have more reason to dislike Thaksin than the Thai people.

Why do you think this? (Not doubting you - I'm just asking).

Because it's a convenient reason to deny the results of the poll?

[slimdog]

Help me understand why you guys hate Thaksin so much. I'm keeping an open mind, and will reserve my vote until I hear a lot more from both sides.

In many ways, the Thaksin issue is similar to your typical boy meets girls, boy loves girl, boy leaves girl story.

If you speak to the boy you will get one side of the story, he will firmly and passionately believe what he tells you is the truth.

Naturally, if you then speak to the girl in question, the story will be slightly or even totally different, although again she will firmly and passionately believe each and every part she has stated is fact.

It's not that either side is particularly stating untruths, just the two individuals have totally different perceptions of the same event.

Of course, when you meet the boy's best friend you will get a fresh perception, as you will from the girl's best friend.

Past lovers may give further insights.

Thailand's politics doesn't make the seeking of truth especially easy either, as the outsider eventually learns that the two are in fact not simply boy and girl, but brother and sister.

If you still don't understand or are like the majority of people, totally disgusted by the whole incestuous act, then welcome to the club.

Edited August 8, 2009 by slimdog

[dumbnewbie]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

I'd suspect that crimes against humanity hold quite lengthy jail terms. That's a charge unlikely to ever reach court though, unfortunately.

I assume you're referring to the extra-judicial killings of drug dealers. If he's guilty of this, why wouldn't that charge reach court?

Anyway, I don't know if drug dealers can be counted as 'humanity'. You do understand the nature of the drug business, right? These are highly addictive substances which utterly destroy people's lives (and seriously mess up the lives of their loved ones as well).

Now to the extent that some innocent people may have been gunned down, that would be a real crime against humanity. But even then, you have to consider how many lives were likely saved as a result. If anywhere near 3,000 drug dealers were put out of business, it's likely that a multiple of that number of young people never started using drugs during that window of vulnerability when they were susceptible to peer pressure to try them.

[Moonrakers]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

I'd suspect that crimes against humanity hold quite lengthy jail terms. That's a charge unlikely to ever reach court though, unfortunately.

I assume you're referring to the extra-judicial killings of drug dealers. If he's guilty of this, why wouldn't that charge reach court?

Anyway, I don't know if drug dealers can be counted as 'humanity'. You do understand the nature of the drug business, right? These are highly addictive substances which utterly destroy people's lives (and seriously mess up the lives of their loved ones as well).

Now to the extent that some innocent people may have been gunned down, that would be a real crime against humanity. But even then, you have to consider how many lives were likely saved as a result. If anywhere near 3,000 drug dealers were put out of business, it's likely that a multiple of that number of young people never started using drugs during that window of vulnerability when they were susceptible to peer pressure to try them.

Please don't tell me that you think it's OK because they where drug dealers.

What about a persons right to trial by jury. What about a persons right to be considered innocent until proven otherwise.

[Soutpeel]

OK, but the U.K. also didn't arrest him and hand him over to the Thai government either, right? On the other hand, if Zimbabwe's Mugabe (for example) were overthrown and fled to the U.K., we would expect a very different reaction from the British government. Of course, Mugabe would never flee to the U.K. in the first place, but Thaksin did.

Governments do change course according to evolving circumstances. For the time being the U.K. and U.S. appear to have withdrawn support for Thaksin, but that doesn't mean they weren't behind him in the first place, hoping he would affect some kind of permanent regime change in Thailand. And it doesn't mean they aren't just biding their time now, waiting for things to play out, while in the meantime pretending to abide by the current Thai government's wishes.

I don't know anything - I'm just asking questions, trying to learn something. But taking the media at face value is generally a pretty naive thing to do. "Conspiracies", as you call them, are going on all the time. That's why every government has multiple intelligence agencies, to both counter and perpetrate "conspiracies", both domestic and foreign.

My guess the British goverment didnt arrest him because the Thai goverment never asked them to...

Mugabe is a bad example, as there is no way he would ever flee to the UK, considering the history between the UK and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe...Libya would be more Mugabe's style....

The UK and US goverments generally support people because there is something in it for them, and not done out of the goodness of their hearts..Simple example....The US supported Sadam Hussien because he was fighting the Iranians, but fast forward, next thing they are invading them because of Oil.

Thailand per se doesnt have much to "offer" the US or UK, therefore why support Taksin, what was he offering for their support...absolutely nothing....hence dont believe Taksin was supported by either the US or UK at any stage...

[rixalex]

Anyway, I don't know if drug dealers can be counted as 'humanity'.

How are you in a position to state who these thousands of people were, or what they did for a living? The whole point is that we, the public, don't know because there were no trials.

P.S. You need to try harder if you wish to feign neutrality.

Edited August 8, 2009 by rixalex

[dumbnewbie]

Please don't tell me that you think it's OK because they where drug dealers.

What about a persons right to trial by jury. What about a persons right to be considered innocent until proven otherwise.

I didn't say I approved. I'm just saying it's not a clear-cut case of 100% evil. If, for example, Thai police had gunned down even one person involved in "prostitution", I would have a huge problem with that, because that, to me, is a truly victimless crime.

Not so with drugs. Think of it this way: imagine your best friend, or sister, or daughter - a confused, somewhat rebellious teenager who just wants to fit in with a cool crowd - getting hooked on meth or some other serious drug. Since it's addictive, he/she cannot stop, until a few years later this person you loved is dead. Now how do you feel? Are you gonna feel bad if the police gun down a bunch of drug dealers? Probably not.

[monkfish]

I think foreigners have more reason to dislike Thaksin than the Thai people.

Why do you think this? (Not doubting you - I'm just asking).

Because it's a convenient reason to deny the results of the poll?

Nope the results are clear 40% 0 years 60% sentence

[Moonrakers]

Please don't tell me that you think it's OK because they where drug dealers.

What about a persons right to trial by jury. What about a persons right to be considered innocent until proven otherwise.

I didn't say I approved. I'm just saying it's not a clear-cut case of 100% evil. If, for example, Thai police had gunned down even one person involved in "prostitution", I would have a huge problem with that, because that, to me, is a truly victimless crime.

Not so with drugs. Think of it this way: imagine your best friend, or sister, or daughter - a confused, somewhat rebellious teenager who just wants to fit in with a cool crowd - getting hooked on meth or some other serious drug. Since it's addictive, he/she cannot stop, until a few years later this person you loved is dead. Now how do you feel? Are you gonna feel bad if the police gun down a bunch of drug dealers? Probably not.

Answer me this.

Who decided that those killed where guilty of dealing drugs?

[Geckos]

"LoL" Take one Drug Dealer out and thousands will not take up Drugs

That has to be one of the STUPIDEST things I've ever heard !!

Thats like saying take out one PIMP and a Thousand girls will not become a Prostitute !!

Listen for ever one Drug Dealer killed there's a Thousand waiting in line to TAKE HIS PLACE !!

The difference between DRUGS and PROSTITUTION and toxsin is you will never get rid of DRUGS OR PROSTITUTION but you will get rid of toxsin !!

Drug Dealers are just like toxsin !! Take him out and there's a Thousand Butt Heads like him that want to take his place to do as he did "PILAGE AND KILL" !!

[monkfish]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

I'd suspect that crimes against humanity hold quite lengthy jail terms. That's a charge unlikely to ever reach court though, unfortunately.

So far they have pinned everything possible on Thaksin, i mean no stone as been left unturned.

Why isn't this one in the list? surely it would be the easiest to prove?

[dumbnewbie]

The UK and US goverments generally support people because there is something in it for them, and not done out of the goodness of their hearts.

Correct.

Thailand per se doesnt have much to "offer" the US or UK, therefore why support Taksin, what was he offering for their support...absolutely nothing....hence dont believe Taksin was supported by either the US or UK at any stage...

Well, that's the question I'm asking. Maybe there was something. For example, if you think the West got involved in Iraq because of oil, you should find it easy to believe that it also gets involved in countries for another huge international business - drugs. Thailand has something to do with the opium trade - besides Afghanistan, the "Golden Triangle" area on the Thai border of Laos and Burma is the major center of this trade. You may have heard of the Opium wars between Britain and China in the mid 1800's. What were they about? Well, the British government was selling opium (from India at that time) all over China against the wishes of the Chinese government, and in the process sucking a huge amount of wealth out of China while at the same time addicting a large percentage of the population and thus weakening the country. When the Chinese government tried to stop this trade, the British sent in the troops to crush the Chinese forces.

Well, this kind of thing is still going on. It never ended. Cocaine from Colombia and other Andean countries, Opium, hashish, heroin, etc. from the Golden Triangle and Afghanistan...

I'm just saying there is all kinds of stuff happening behind the scenes, with HUGE money involved, which the popular media rarely touch on.

[Jingthing]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

My main reason was his leadership of Black Songkran. As long as he is alive, he is a threat to lead another violent revolutionary attempt. I think it would be a disaster for Thailand for him to succeed. So the reason: to make sure that he REALLY quits politics. With a normal person, I think a deal and a promise to go retire in quiet would be acceptable. However, he is clearly a gigantic ego and POWER MAD. He has crossed a line that you can NEVER cross back or take back. How anyone can seriously trust or believe this man about anything, even his supporters, is truly amazing.

Edited August 8, 2009 by Jingthing

[dumbnewbie]

Anyway, I don't know if drug dealers can be counted as 'humanity'.

How are you in a position to state who these thousands of people were, or what they did for a living? The whole point is that we, the public, don't know because there were no trials.

P.S. You need to try harder if you wish to feign neutrality.

Just because I'm not outraged over drug dealers getting killed doesn't mean I support Thaksin. First off, I'm not Thai, and second, I don't even live in Thailand. I've been to the country and had a good time there and have a high regard for Thai people and culture in general, so I'd like whatever is best for Thailand as a whole. But I'm in no position to know what or who that is. I am interested in learning more, so I'm asking questions, that's all.

For the record, I'm opposed to killing anyone. But at the same time, I consider drug dealers to be murderers.

And again I ask, if Thaksin gave the orders for thousands of people to be gunned down in the streets without any assurance of their identities or guilt, why haven't his opponents brought the evidence to court? How do we know that this isn't just a wild accusation made up by his opponents?

[Moonrakers]

dumbnewbie, I do believe that you have completely missed the point.

[Moonrakers]

Anyway, I don't know if drug dealers can be counted as 'humanity'.

How are you in a position to state who these thousands of people were, or what they did for a living? The whole point is that we, the public, don't know because there were no trials.

P.S. You need to try harder if you wish to feign neutrality.

And again I ask, if Thaksin gave the orders for thousands of people to be gunned down in the streets without any assurance of their identities or guilt, why haven't his opponents brought the evidence to court? How do we know that this isn't just a wild accusation made up by his opponents?

You can't be serious.

[dumbnewbie]

"LoL" Take one Drug Dealer out and thousands will not take up Drugs

That has to be one of the STUPIDEST things I've ever heard !!

Yeah, that's pretty stupid alright, but it's not what I said. Here's what I said: "If anywhere near 3,000 drug dealers were put out of business, it's likely that a multiple of that number of young people never started using drugs during that window of vulnerability when they were susceptible to peer pressure to try them."

I'll stand by that.

[Jingthing]

How do we know that this isn't just a wild accusation made up by his opponents?

Verified by objective international organizations. Just google, its your friend. Really why comment when you are so uninformed?

[Moonrakers]

"LoL" Take one Drug Dealer out and thousands will not take up Drugs

That has to be one of the STUPIDEST things I've ever heard !!

Yeah, that's pretty stupid alright, but it's not what I said. Here's what I said: "If anywhere near 3,000 drug dealers were put out of business, it's likely that a multiple of that number of young people never started using drugs during that window of vulnerability when they were susceptible to peer pressure to try them."

I'll stand by that.

It doesn't work like that.

[dumbnewbie]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

My main reason was his leadership of Black Songkran. As long as he is alive, he is a threat to lead another violent revolutionary attempt. I think it would be a disaster for Thailand for him to succeed. So the reason: to make sure that he REALLY quits politics. With a normal person, I think a deal and a promise to go retire in quiet would be acceptable. However, he is clearly a gigantic ego and POWER MAD. He has crossed a line that you can NEVER cross back or take back. How anyone can seriously trust or believe this man about anything, even his supporters, is truly amazing.

Are you against all violent revolutionary attempts in all countries on principle, or only in Thailand (or only by Thaksin)? I'm asking because I bet you can think of some violent revolutions that you'd support. If so, what's your specific objection to this one?

Anyway, wasn't Thaksin elected, and then overthrown in a coup? In which case, so-called violent revolution would be an attempt to undo an illegal coup, no?

As for "giant ego" and "power mad", well.... that's pretty much par for the course in politics the world over, isn't it? Am I missing something here?

[Moonrakers]

Am I missing something here?

The point?

[Soutpeel]

Thanks for the history lesson..

Oil is the "opium" of the 21st century, do you really think the US/UK is involved in Afghanistan because of Opium..??...They are involved because of the strategic location, for running pipelines...do you think its coincidence that current president of Afghanistan, put in the position by the US, is an Ex- Unocal executive ??

Anyway we digress, and lets get back on topic...

Lets go with your theroy that Toxic is/was supported by the UK/US, what would be on offer ?:

1. Oil & Gas....Naah...mininal, not enough to interest the likes of the US/UK

2. Strategic location...Maybe...but already in place courtsey of the Vietnam war, US has use of airbases, ports, ie Cobra Gold, every year..

3. Minerals/resources...naah

Again, would state my question, if the US/UK supported Toxic, what is in it for the US/UK ??

Edited August 8, 2009 by Soutpeel

[dumbnewbie]

How do we know that this isn't just a wild accusation made up by his opponents?

Verified by objective international organizations. Just google, its your friend. Really why comment when you are so uninformed?

OK, but then why not bring charges in a court of law? I mean if it's so cut and dried, it should be a piece of cake to convict him and then get him extradited to Thailand, right? I'm just asking. Isn't this a sensible question?

[Moonrakers]

How do we know that this isn't just a wild accusation made up by his opponents?

Verified by objective international organizations. Just google, its your friend. Really why comment when you are so uninformed?

OK, but then why not bring charges in a court of law? I mean if it's so cut and dried, it should be a piece of cake to convict him and then get him extradited to Thailand, right? I'm just asking. Isn't this a sensible question?

I wonder the same thing myself before. Although I'd suspect that it is a can of worms that a lot of people would not want opened. No doubt Thaksin was not the only one involved.

[dumbnewbie]

Am I missing something here?

The point?

What is the point? Maybe you could spell it out for me, since after all, I'm just a dumb newbie?

[Moonrakers]

Am I missing something here?

The point?

What is the point? Maybe you could spell it out for me, since after all, I'm just a dumb newbie?

The point is that he broke the law.

It doesn't matter who did what and why, Thaksin broke the law and should be punished accordingly.

[monkfish]

To those voting Life Sentence or Multiple Life Sentence, how do you justify your verdict?

My main reason was his leadership of Black Songkran. As long as he is alive, he is a threat to lead another violent revolutionary attempt. I think it would be a disaster for Thailand for him to succeed. So the reason: to make sure that he REALLY quits politics. With a normal person, I think a deal and a promise to go retire in quiet would be acceptable. However, he is clearly a gigantic ego and POWER MAD. He has crossed a line that you can NEVER cross back or take back. How anyone can seriously trust or believe this man about anything, even his supporters, is truly amazing.

Do you not think the government was partly to blame for the violence by using Armed Forces against its own people?

I think if this were to happen in the US or UK street rioting would also occur? and a lot worse!

[dumbnewbie]

Thanks for the history lesson..

Oil is the "opium" of the 21st century, do you really think the US/UK is involved in Afghanistan because of Opium..??...They are involved because of the strategic location, for running pipelines...do you think its coincidence that current president of Afghanistan, put in the position by the US, is an Ex- Unocal executive ??

Anyway we digress, and lets get back on topic...

Lets go with your theroy that Toxic is/was supported by the UK/US, what would be on offer ?:

1. Oil & Gas....Naah...mininal, not enough to interest the likes of the US/UK

2. Strategic location...Maybe...but already in place courtsey of the Vietnam war, US has use of airbases, ports, ie Cobra Gold, every year..

3. Minerals/resources...naah

Again, would state my question, if the US/UK supported Toxic, what is in it for the US/UK ??

I don't know - I'm just asking. Maybe something to do with the drug trade? Since we know Thailand sits astride one of the centers of the worldwide opium trade and also that Thaksin supposedly gunned down 3,000 drug dealers.... I don't know... maybe he was taking out one drug distribution organization in favor of another one run by the CIA or MI6 or whoever?

Come to think of it, maybe that's why this 'crime' hasn't been brought to trial - because the governments involved don't want such facts coming to light?

I realize I'm probably not going to get any answers here. I'm just really curious why so many of you feel so strongly about Thaksin when you're not Thai and probably feel no difference no matter what politician is in power.

[dumbnewbie]

Am I missing something here?

The point?

What is the point? Maybe you could spell it out for me, since after all, I'm just a dumb newbie?

The point is that he broke the law.

It doesn't matter who did what and why, Thaksin broke the law and should be punished accordingly.

EVERYBODY breaks the law. Not just every politician, but EVERYBODY. The law is so complex, we cannot help breaking some law or other without even meaning to. If the government doesn't like you, they can start digging into your life (especially your finances, taxes, personal relationships, sexual relations, communications, etc.) and find something to nail you on. If you're part of the government, then you have other factions in government always trying to nail you for something. There's generally a balance of power so that most of the time nobody is busted for anything. But if someone comes along and tries to upset that balance, that's the guy who gets nailed, if he isn't clever enough to cover all his bases. It doesn't mean that this guy was the biggest bastard. It could be that he simply wasn't clever enough or connected enough to get away with whatever he supposedly did.