Abhisit Denies Thai Govt Plan To Stage Coup In Cambodia

[toptuan]

Any government set up by a coup in its own country wouldn't blink at doing the same in another country, if it served its own purpose.

1. The Thai military currently lacks the stomach for another coup in Thailand.

Famous last words...assumed at least 18 previous times in Thailand's modern history. OK, acknowledged you said "currently." I'd say that condition passes quickly in the broader view of history.

[bangon04]

Remarks concerning the monarchy of another country is considered defamation and is covered in the criminal code of Thailand. The remarks thus far seem to within the bounds of reason, since they do not attack the monarchy.

Please exercise care, however, in reference to the monarch.

It wpuld be very difficult to police the myriad of remarks concerning the British monarchy - one would need to ban the BBC output and the entire UK press product from entering Thailand, not to mention movies etc. Does anyone recall the wonderful scene in Naked Gun The smell of fear, when Drebbin is photographed between the legs of...... Such a policy strictly enforced could make full employment a realistic goal.

[h90]

No, I would not allow the remark to stand if it were in reference to another monarch.

How far reaching the Thai gov't might want to go with the law is something I don't know and don't really want to be a part of finding out. The primary reason for citing the law and watching references made about the Cambodian monarchy is because there is little reason to believe that there is an active role in the current political situation. If posters simply wish to make idle speculation with no basis, then the post has little value and I see no reason to let it remain.

The situation seems to be a political one and involves Hun Sen, Abhisit and the Thai government. I am not sure and haven't seen posts which reflect the role played by other Cambodian politicians, which would be of significant interest to the thread.

I can't see Thai law protecting foreign royals different than ordinary foreign people. Even Cambodian LM laws are much weaker than in Thailand. A forum is made to have place for speculations.

[geriatrickid]

Poor PM Abhisit. He doesn't need this. Everytime he tries to do something, someone on his team leaks something stupid. He spends more time dealing with collateral damage than anything else. I don't see Mr. Abhisit even contemplating such an act. He has his faults, but a war monger he is not.

This stuff just gets sillier and sillier.

[Publicus]

It's impossible to discuss realistically Thailand going to war against Cambodia (or anyone else) or organizing a coup in Cambodia (or in any other country). 

Such bogus talk is the work of Thaksin and Hun Sen.

Even the fruitcake Jatuporn hasn't become involved in this talk, preferring to work with Thaksin in talking the trash of some fantasy assassination plot and scheme.

Unfortunately, because the PM of Cambodia has chosen to stir the pot further, throwing in some wild talk of Thailand supposedly executing a coup in Cambodia, the PM of Thailand must respond - same as the MFA had to take legal action against Jatuporn because of his empty but loud assassination charges.

How in hel_l can any government govern with such nefarious people on the loose and continually scheming against it? How could a snap election be called or held in such an atmosphere and environment? Governing under present conditions and circumstances is an unusually difficult task, a snap election not feasible.

Jatuporn for PM?!? 

[Credo]

The crux of the problem is Abhisit's inability to actually govern. Leaders of most countries are hounded and pounded by their opposition. They pick themselves up and move on. Much of the time, they simply don't respond. Does Abhisit know what "No comment" means?

He needs to focus his attention on his government. He needs to plug the leaks and stop the knee-jerk reactions.

We are entering a new and different era of politics in Thailand. What is at stake is not just power, but a nation. The government needs to learn to keep it's cards close to its chest. It needs to start taking the high road. It needs to worry more about doing things and less about losing face.

[ballpoint]

The crux of the problem is Abhisit's inability to actually govern. Leaders of most countries are hounded and pounded by their opposition. They pick themselves up and move on. Much of the time, they simply don't respond. Does Abhisit know what "No comment" means?

He needs to focus his attention on his government. He needs to plug the leaks and stop the knee-jerk reactions.

We are entering a new and different era of politics in Thailand. What is at stake is not just power, but a nation. The government needs to learn to keep it's cards close to its chest. It needs to start taking the high road. It needs to worry more about doing things and less about losing face.

Bit simplistic isn't it?

Scenario One: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "No comment". - Watch the shares in armament factories go up.

Scenario Two: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "Of course not, we're not planning on sponsoring a coup in Cambodia." - More or less what he did do.

Scenario Three: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "What, that jumped up lying little tin (pol) pot dictator? Who'd believe a word he said?" - More or less what I'd say in his position.

Scenario Four: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "How dare you ask me a question, can't you see I'm holding the cross symbol up? Until you journalists start treating me nicely, and asking me questions I want to hear, I'm just going to ignore you." - More or less what Thaksin would say.

Scenario Five: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "When was the last time you had sex?" - More or less what the late Samak would say.

Scenario Six: "Mr Abhist, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true? Mr Abhist? Where did you go?" - More or less what Somchai would do.

And, the correct answer is?

Edited December 26, 2009 by ballpoint

[Credo]

Not too simplistic. His current remarks are helping the economy? I don't think so. So something like this:

"The policy of the Royal Thai Government is one of non-interference in the internal affairs of its neighbors."

[Insight]

The crux of the problem is Abhisit's inability to actually govern. Leaders of most countries are hounded and pounded by their opposition. They pick themselves up and move on. Much of the time, they simply don't respond. Does Abhisit know what "No comment" means?

He needs to focus his attention on his government. He needs to plug the leaks and stop the knee-jerk reactions.

We are entering a new and different era of politics in Thailand. What is at stake is not just power, but a nation. The government needs to learn to keep it's cards close to its chest. It needs to start taking the high road. It needs to worry more about doing things and less about losing face.

Bit simplistic isn't it?

Scenario One: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "No comment". - Watch the shares in armament factories go up.

Scenario Two: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "Of course not, we're not planning on sponsoring a coup in Cambodia." - More or less what he did do.

Scenario Three: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "What, that jumped up lying little tin (pol) pot dictator? Who'd believe a word he said?" - More or less what I'd say in his position.

Scenario Four: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "How dare you ask me a question, can't you see I'm holding the cross symbol up? Until you journalists start treating me nicely, and asking me questions I want to hear, I'm just going to ignore you." - More or less what Thaksin would say.

Scenario Five: "Mr Abhisit, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true?" "When was the last time you had sex?" - More or less what the late Samak would say.

Scenario Six: "Mr Abhist, are these accusations made by Hun Sen true? Mr Abhist? Where did you go?" - More or less what Somchai would do.

And, the correct answer is?

Bravo

[Publicus]

The crux of the problem is Abhisit's inability to actually govern. Leaders of most countries are hounded and pounded by their opposition. They pick themselves up and move on. Much of the time, they simply don't respond. Does Abhisit know what "No comment" means?

He needs to focus his attention on his government. He needs to plug the leaks and stop the knee-jerk reactions.

We are entering a new and different era of politics in Thailand. What is at stake is not just power, but a nation. The government needs to learn to keep it's cards close to its chest. It needs to start taking the high road. It needs to worry more about doing things and less about losing face.

The crux of the problem, as you put it, is that unlike Nixon in the US Thaksin will not go away. Nixon didn't have the loot Thaksin had on the line as Nixon purely was a constitution shredder but Thaksin, in additon to the loot, does have the face saving problem Nixon never had. Nixon knew his madness for power had to be abandoned, Thaksin only gets more insane about regaining power, position, status, prestige. 

You are correct however in stating we are entering a new era of politics and government in Thailand, the new era being a time in which there no longer is the unifying overarching moral authority that could bridge any divide, unite warring factions, expel rogue leaders and do it without being questioned or defied. Thaksin is not Thanom or a Thanon, nor is he a Phibun or any of the discredited tyrant losers who were deposed or in some instances banished, in other instances retired to a monastery.    

Thaksin is an entirely different beast who just won't quit and who remains both certain and determined to outlast the institution that banished him and to succeed it come hel_l or high water to the country.

[Scott]

Thanks Publicus, but I wasn't even thinking of Nixon--although he's probably as close as one would get. I don't in general think it's easy to compare more mature democracies with Thailand. You are perfectly correct that Thaksin is a force unto himself and no doubt a big part of the problem. But even without him, I think the country would have major problems.

Abhisit keeps playing into Thaksin's hand. He needs to start tackling a lot of the problems facing the country. Not an easy job, but it's the best option.

[animatic]

I have no idea who "Frank" is, so further references without a reasonable explanation will result in posts being deleted.

'Frank' is a reference between "Chairman Of The Board" Frank Sinatra and Shinawatra.

Apparently it was a moniker Thaksin enjoyed being associated with, and was used in

several local and international press reports, especially during the time of Manchester City ownership.

Thksin seemed to revel in the reference/comparison to Sinatra, and his cool and power in Vegas etc.

So just as his new passport for Takiee Shinegra is now valid for use,

'Frank' has been used many times on TVF and should continue to be usable,

as a legitimate alternate name for Thaksin.

[Oberkommando]

Poor PM Abhisit...

...He has his faults, but a war monger he is not.

The coup-makers that stand behind him are though.

[Scott]

Well, Thaksin might like being referred to as Frank, but a number of posters don't. So we won't. I don't follow football.

[animatic]

All militaries world wide create war games and scenario options to think about,

often no matter how far fetched, just so if the absurd DOES happen they aren't

caught flat footed.

And often those potential contingency plans get sent in a bridged versions to

governments and FP offices, as mental exercises so they can also THINK about options.

That these same potential scenarios are never ever likely to happen is besides the point.

Fore thought is better than hindsight. They only become and issue when leaked as if they are

actual plans for action, awaiting a go order, which is rarely even an option considered.

So this seems the only case at which Puea Thai could have these documents,

just hypothetical war game scenarios, now blown up into hysterical proportions

for political effect and nothing more.

I would not be at ALL surprised Cambodia doesn't have exactly the same docs on file,

and same for Myanmar and Laos. China must have 10s of thousands on file.

Tempest in a political teapot, calling the kettle black.

[animatic]

All militarys world wide create war games and scenario options to think about,

often no matter how far fetched, just so that if the absurd DOES happen they

aren't caught flat footed. At lkeasst someone thought about the possibility coherently.

And often those potential contingency plans get sent in a bridged versions to

governments and FP offices, as mental exercises so they can also THINK about options.

That these same potential scenarios are never ever likely to happen is besides the point.

Fore thought is better than hindsight. They only become and issue when leaked as if they are

actual plans for action, awaiting a go order, which is rarely even an option considered.

So this seems the only case at which Puea Thai could have these documents,

just hypothetical war game scenarios, now blown up into hysterical proportions

for political effect and nothing more.

I would not be at ALL surprised Cambodia doesn't have exactly the same docs on file,

and same for Myanmar and Laos. China must have 10s of thousands on file.

Tempest in a political teapot, calling the kettle black.

[ballpoint]

Not too simplistic. His current remarks are helping the economy? I don't think so. So something like this:

"The policy of the Royal Thai Government is one of non-interference in the internal affairs of its neighbors."

Well, why didn't you say that in your earlier post?

Leaders of most countries are hounded and pounded by their opposition. They pick themselves up and move on. Much of the time, they simply don't respond. Does Abhisit know what "No comment" means?

So, what is it to be? Don't respond? Say "no comment", or say "The policy of the Royal Thai Government...."? If you're now advocating the latter then I'd say that's the closest answer to what he actually did say. He did the right thing. Nothing more to see here, move on folks.