General Anupong Rules Out Coup Next Year

[TAWP]

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

Quite, would someone remind General Anupong who pays his salary and who works for who, I think he seems to have forgotten.

If the US had had 18 military coups previously then their Generals might also have made such announcements.

Sometimes you really are comparing oranges and apples.

This is more in line with a presidents promise to reduce engagements overseas only to increase it with another 30 000 troops in time for Christmas...

[TheJoker12]

hub of coups.

[animatic]

Hub of Hyperbole!

[caf]

Actually the threat of a coup is from the Thaksin General's side

and not from the currently in power group of generals.

Anupong is basically saying :

'we know who they are and we are watching them closely."

I disagree that there is a Taksin general's side, so your quote from him is a non sequitur.

Yes, there are generals in his command that were in place when thaksin was pm but there is no "side".

[animatic]

Actually the threat of a coup is from the Thaksin General's side

and not from the currently in power group of generals.

Anupong is basically saying :

'we know who they are and we are watching them closely.'

I disagree that there is a Taksin general's side, so your quote from him is a non sequitur.

Yes, there are generals in his command that were in place when thaksin was pm but there is no "side".

What about that General brother in law warning of a coup in Sept?

What about Panlop? And the other Generals coming to PTP right now?

Even 'The Brain' from the black lagoon is a retired general on Thaksin's side.

Old generals still were leaders relatively recently over newer generals with commands now,

and still wield psychological power via respect and habit, and the ability to wave perks

and use their long standing connections to make deals.

A retired Thai General can be just as DANGEROUS AS ONE STILL ON THE JOB.

It was also not a direct quote of Anupongs words, but a read between the lines paraphrase,

which my set up made obvious... to most readers. Nor was I quoting Thaksin as your sentence seemed to imply.

Thaksin clearly has generals retired and active on his side,

and surely Anupong has spies in their ranks to keep a watchful eye on them.

If he didn't he wouldn't be worth his salt as a national commander of the military.

[Publicus]

I think few at this point would dispute that "the" military is in fact 350,000 or so soldiers, sailors, air personnel in uniform and under the flag but subdivided sociopolitically into competing camps.

One camp consists of traditional loyalists, another follows the money especially closely and other camps range from the indifferent to the weathermen who watch which way the wind blows.

While I agree the military is divided I would suggest that what actually drives the so called traditional loyalists is in fact the prospect of their snouts being dislodged from the money trough (or having to share it) with other questing snouts.

I think the same drive for self-advancement up the pecking order for the usual motive (inherent in any hierarchy) as well as for the prospect of a growing slice of the pie is common to all "camps" in the Thai military - the so-called traditional loyalists are certainly not immune to it. In common with various camps in most countries, some will have more right-wing/authoritarian leanings and some more liberal/democratic leanings. I'd like to see any evidence of "sociopolitical" orientation having any bearing on the degree to which any of the camps "follows the money" - thus far I've seen none. That said, according to research by Pasuk Phongphaichit and Sungsidh Piriyarangsan published in "Corruption & Democracy in Thailand" (1996), military governments here have been significantly more corrupt than civilian ones - though I stress it's a matter of degree.

Agreed as having been omitted the so called traditional loyalists are as much traditionally loyal to the snout in the trough system as to any other, that the two loyalties go hand in hand. And further agreed about totalitarian socialism/communism which I've very oddly also heard called totalitarian social democracy.

Red generals would have a sociopolitical "orientation" perhaps as much by default as by any active ideological system, as their man is the self proclaimed champion of the poor and is generally referenced by those domestic and abroad who are involved in political economy as a "populist," a commonly recognized and understood code word.

Red generals and their brethren command and general staff officers are fully aware that from the outset Mr. Thaksin moved dramatically to transform a core constituency central to the traditional institution of the country into his own loyal and much bestowed upon constituency. The rural agrarian poor, which for decades before Thaksin had known only special irrigation projects, innovative fresh water shrimp farming and one off model agricultural innovations suddenly received, inter alia, by virtue of the largess of Mr. Thaksin Bt 1million per village, which lit up the eyes of the poo yai and the eternally destitute peasant villagers alike. 

High ranking red commanders who see their version and take of the same largess may or may not be sociopolitically oriented ideologues, but as with the venerable institution's historical and moribund  base and core constituency come to life, the red brass of the military barely can control their snouts when the numbers become as astronomical as 76 bn. 

The only question at this point is which camp gets their cut of the loot. I should think that of Bt 76bn there should be enuff to go around for everyone. 

Edited December 28, 2009 by Publicus

[webfact]

UPDATE

Army determined to prevent bloodshed and a coup

By Avudh Panananda

The Nation

Published on December 29, 2009

As the political turbulence bubbles with the red shirts' threat to oust the government, Army chief General Anupong Paochinda has stepped in to pour cold water on the rival camps.

While Anupong's remarks appeared to be the usual pledge not to stage a coup, he did make a significant point by saying "I am confident there will be no coup because I will not allow the situation to reach that point [to warrant military intervention]".

Thailand has experienced a number of military interventions. Before each coup in the past, top military leaders would echo one another vowing not to grab power. Then soldiers would march out of their barracks to take over the seat of government.

Unlike past commanders, Anupong has reinforced his no-coup mantra with a firm commitment to deny himself a pretext to seize power.

When General Sonthi Boonyaratglin was the dark horse who became Army chief in 2005, he was a low-key soldier harbouring no political ambitions. But the fractious politics between then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his yellow-shirt opponents swept him into the centre of the power struggle.

The 2006 coup took place before a backdrop of unprecedented turmoil. Sonthi might have had good reason to clean the political slate in order to bring about a fresh start.

But mistakes were made, often despite the best of intentions. The power seizure did not end animosity but may have deepened it. Key players opted to settle old scores rather than overcome the polarisation.

The yellow shirts continue to crusade against what they see as the evils of Thaksin. The former PM has insisted, in turn, on flaunting his popularity even though his leadership brought about social divisions of a kind unseen in Thai history.

Thaksin's army of red shirts have fought with no holds barred to pave the way for him to come back.

As rival camps gear up for a showdown next year, the military has become a wild card which could either be a stabilising force - or a weight to tip the political equation.

Anupong has made it clear he sees his job as a stabiliser. He will neither tolerate politically-motivated violence nor let the situation deteriorate into bloodshed in the streets.

Reading his message between the lines, the military will likely apply pre-emptive pressure, in whatever form it takes to do the job short of power seizure, to prevent a repeat of the 2006 coup.

Anupong's message is particularly noteworthy when coupled with the New Year remarks by chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulanonda.

Prem reminded the top brass they are duty-bound to ensure His Majesty's happiness. The King said in his birthday speech that his happiness hinges on the prosperity, security and normalcy in the country.

In light of the polarisation, normalcy is the operative word in the royal speech. Prem and Anupong envision the military role as a key to rein in political animosity.

How the military leaders will go about their job remains a matter for speculation. In the 1980s, the military once successfully played a stabilising role to steer the country out of half-baked democracy.

In light of the military determination to safeguard normalcy, Thaksin and allies such as Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, Panlop Pinmanee, Weng Tojirakarn and Khattiya Sawasdipol, ought to rethink their strategy to grab power by mobilising the red shirts to drive out the government.

The message is loud and clear - fight within the political system. Thaksin, the red shirts, the yellow shirts and parties concerned should have realised by now that almost five years of political conflict have got us nowhere.

-- The Nation 2009/12/29

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[miguel3x]

Actually the threat of a coup is from the Thaksin General's side

and not from the currently in power group of generals.

Anupong is basically saying :

'we know who they are and we are watching them closely."

I disagree that there is a Taksin general's side, so your quote from him is a non sequitur.

Yes, there are generals in his command that were in place when thaksin was pm but there is no "side".

Rogue generals on Thaksin's payroll cry for final showdown

A new battle line has been drawn, with the sound of war drums beating, and the red shirts dancing around the bonfire. Their spirits are high, hoping that the showdown this time will be final and victorious. It does not matter to them whether there will be bloodshed or if the nation faces ruin.

The red-shirt battle cry this time came from a rogue junior Army general, and a number of retired military officers on the payroll of fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra. They don't mind being branded traitors. The tidy sum from the man in exile is considered worthwhile.

The other day, the rogue soldier, commonly known as "Seh Daeng" warned that the battle this time will be open, with advance warning when shots will be fired upon the enemy, or whoever dares to move against the joint push for power at the command of Thaksin.

"Seh Daeng", Major General Khattiya Sawasdiphol, is a self-styled warrior, seeking the full blaze of publicity. He commands a group of militia being given political indoctrination as well as basic arms training.

He brands his warriors as "Ronin", the legendary leaderless samurai warriors of ancient times, and also soldiers of King Taksin the Great, who fought to free Thailand from Burmese occupation before the Chakri Dynasty. Some of the rogue general's fighters are mere thugs with no honour and or valour. It is sheer brute force inspired by cowardice.

The warning, of course, should cause considerable unease among those who know about Seh Daeng's notoriety. His claim to fame was an ability to predict when grenades would be launched at the rallies of the People's Alliance for Democracy. He denied with a deadpan face, of course, that he had any part in the action. There was no proof, due to lukewarm investigations by law enforcement officers.

When should the mayhem and bloodletting take place? There are variations in terms of timing for the strike. Seh Daeng said it should be sometime after Valentine's Day, as instructed by Thaksin. Another ageing general said April would be judgement day, and that would be the time for Thaksin's return to triumph.

The red shirts are not quite sure. The leaders are obviously not happy that their thunder has been stolen by soldiers. That means the credit sought will be shared together with the prize for victory. The red-shirt leaders are known for their heavy campaign expenses sought from Thaksin, and they have pocketed huge chunks much, to the chagrin of other group leaders.

One of them said the showdown day had not yet been decided. It must be decided by the red shirts at a meeting. Sounding arrogant, he uttered that Thaksin was just a red-shirt member and must heed the joint decision. Such insolence could be dealt with when all political scores are settled.

What is the government doing to prevent possible chaos? Nothing yet. Army chief, General Anupong Phaochinda, reckons there will not be any trouble, and no bloodshed. At the same time, he also assured the public through a radio interview that there would not be a coup either.

Nobody is quite sure what basis the general - who is due to retire at the end of September, 2010 - used to predict what is to come, especially when the public has seen all along that nothing much has been done to subdue Seh Daeng.

No preventative measures have been meted out yet. Prime Minister Abhisit still takes things lightly, as if he bases his hopes on the readiness of the military; and he has yet to complete the appointment of a new police chief.

Everything is hanging in the balance. The red shirts and Thaksin might overestimate their potential and ability to mobilise enough support to hold massive rallies at various locations to force out the government. There is a slim chance of success as long as there is no widespread violence, and the military refuses to take action to quell the uprising.

At least, there will be some time yet - until mid-February - if the words of Thaksin and his thugs are to be believed. But this must terrify many people, especially business people, who have been disheartened by the red shirts' unending hate campaigns.

This time around, Abhisit's political future will be put on the line. If he survives with some bruises, it should be the end of Thaksin's attempt to return to power. From now on, Abhisit must prove that he is worthy enough to lead the country against the spectre of Thaksin's political cronies ousted by court decisions.

If he can prove a higher degree of leadership and take full charge, he will not fight the battle alone - failing which, he will be another part of Thailand's tragic history.

The Nation

Published on December 29, 2009

[jayboy]

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

Quite, would someone remind General Anupong who pays his salary and who works for who, I think he seems to have forgotten.

If the US had had 18 military coups previously then their Generals might also have made such announcements.

Sometimes you really are comparing oranges and apples.

This is more in line with a presidents promise to reduce engagements overseas only to increase it with another 30 000 troops in time for Christmas...

Of course Thailand and the US have different backgrounds but toptuan's point is valid nonetheless.Just because it doesn't cause particular surprise Anupong's comment is a disgrace and in an ideal world he would perhaps not be sacked but sharply reprimanded.

[TAWP]

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

Quite, would someone remind General Anupong who pays his salary and who works for who, I think he seems to have forgotten.

If the US had had 18 military coups previously then their Generals might also have made such announcements.

Sometimes you really are comparing oranges and apples.

This is more in line with a presidents promise to reduce engagements overseas only to increase it with another 30 000 troops in time for Christmas...

Of course Thailand and the US have different backgrounds but toptuan's point is valid nonetheless.Just because it doesn't cause particular surprise Anupong's comment is a disgrace and in an ideal world he would perhaps not be sacked but sharply reprimanded.

...and what would happen to the generals calling for a coup?

[h90]

Why would they stage a coup when they are in almost absolute control?

the Thaksin sponsored one are the one who want to do the next coup.

Sie Daeng, Panlop and several others.

But new is that there is an official schedule for coups in Thailand.

[animatic]

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

Of course Thailand and the US have different backgrounds but toptuan's point is valid nonetheless.Just because it doesn't cause particular surprise Anupong's comment is a disgrace and in an ideal world he would perhaps not be sacked but sharply reprimanded.

...and what would happen to the generals calling for a coup?

Exactly.

All Anupong said, is that

he is looking to prevent the opposition from even starting off a coup attempt.

Not in any way does this say he is holding back a coup from his side,

which seems to be the implication by some here.

[caf]

Actually the threat of a coup is from the Thaksin General's side

and not from the currently in power group of generals.

Anupong is basically saying :

'we know who they are and we are watching them closely.'

I disagree that there is a Taksin general's side, so your quote from him is a non sequitur.

Yes, there are generals in his command that were in place when thaksin was pm but there is no "side".

What about that General brother in law warning of a coup in Sept?

What about Panlop? And the other Generals coming to PTP right now?

Even 'The Brain' from the black lagoon is a retired general on Thaksin's side.

Old generals still were leaders relatively recently over newer generals with commands now,

and still wield psychological power via respect and habit, and the ability to wave perks

and use their long standing connections to make deals.

A retired Thai General can be just as DANGEROUS AS ONE STILL ON THE JOB.

It was also not a direct quote of Anupongs words, but a read between the lines paraphrase,

which my set up made obvious... to most readers. Nor was I quoting Thaksin as your sentence seemed to imply.

Thaksin clearly has generals retired and active on his side,

and surely Anupong has spies in their ranks to keep a watchful eye on them.

If he didn't he wouldn't be worth his salt as a national commander of the military.

Only my own view.

("him" did not refer to Thaksin. I should have been clearer)

[jayboy]

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

Of course Thailand and the US have different backgrounds but toptuan's point is valid nonetheless.Just because it doesn't cause particular surprise Anupong's comment is a disgrace and in an ideal world he would perhaps not be sacked but sharply reprimanded.

...and what would happen to the generals calling for a coup?

Exactly.

All Anupong said, is that

he is looking to prevent the opposition from even starting off a coup attempt.

Not in any way does this say he is holding back a coup from his side,

which seems to be the implication by some here.

The Nation reports contradicts you.Whether however he undertakes not to launch a coup or prevent someone else doing so it is really inappropriate for him to comment.Some of these generals should learn to keep their mouths shut.

[TAWP]

...and what would happen to the generals calling for a coup?

Exactly.

All Anupong said, is that

he is looking to prevent the opposition from even starting off a coup attempt.

Not in any way does this say he is holding back a coup from his side,

which seems to be the implication by some here.

The Nation reports contradicts you.Whether however he undertakes not to launch a coup or prevent someone else doing so it is really inappropriate for him to comment.Some of these generals should learn to keep their mouths shut.

Thaksins 'family-blood in general shape' called for a coup.

So I ask again, what should happen to Generals that call for a coup?

[jayboy]

...and what would happen to the generals calling for a coup?

Exactly.

All Anupong said, is that

he is looking to prevent the opposition from even starting off a coup attempt.

Not in any way does this say he is holding back a coup from his side,

which seems to be the implication by some here.

The Nation reports contradicts you.Whether however he undertakes not to launch a coup or prevent someone else doing so it is really inappropriate for him to comment.Some of these generals should learn to keep their mouths shut.

Thaksins 'family-blood in general shape' called for a coup.

So I ask again, what should happen to Generals that call for a coup?

They should be ignored, told to shut the hel_l up and concentrate on their main line of business, i.e making money off the backs of the Thai people

[TAWP]

So I ask again, what should happen to Generals that call for a coup?

They should be ignored, told to shut the hel_l up and concentrate on their main line of business, i.e making money off the backs of the Thai people

So if a general says there wont be a coup, they should be fired...but if a general calls out for a coup, they should merely be ignored and told to shut up?

Some priorities you have here...

[jayboy]

So I ask again, what should happen to Generals that call for a coup?

They should be ignored, told to shut the hel_l up and concentrate on their main line of business, i.e making money off the backs of the Thai people

So if a general says there wont be a coup, they should be fired...but if a general calls out for a coup, they should merely be ignored and told to shut up?

Some priorities you have here...

In both instances they should be ignored (and privately told by the civil authorities to pipe down.)

[TAWP]

So if a general says there wont be a coup, they should be fired...but if a general calls out for a coup, they should merely be ignored and told to shut up?

In both instances they should be ignored (and privately told by the civil authorities to pipe down.)

Alright, let's see if toptuan agrees. His previous post.

Could you imagine the Army Chief of Staff in the USA calmly announcing this for the new year? He'd be sacked before the New Year arrived! Such is the power and influence of this country's military. Rather arrogant and brazen.

[Publicus]

So I ask again, what should happen to Generals that call for a coup?

They should be ignored, told to shut the hel_l up and concentrate on their main line of business, i.e making money off the backs of the Thai people

So if a general says there wont be a coup, they should be fired...but if a general calls out for a coup, they should merely be ignored and told to shut up?

Some priorities you have here...

In both instances they should be ignored (and privately told by the civil authorities to pipe down.)

Freedom of speech does not include a general advocating a coup d'etat publicly or privately. 

To allow it is to eviscerate the rule of law and to guarantee instability, not to mention accept that the military can menace the society at will/whim. The society that allows such outlaw speech invites the action and its own retardation, if not its own destruction.

This is not a point of debate nor is it negotiable. 

[caf]

I am having problems replying to parts of Publicus' post so, as he has criticised me on the public forum for quoting a whole nest of quotes ( which I seem able to do); I will respond by a new post.

There are no "red" generals as referred several times in the post. Anupong has a team of generals that work under his command. From my knowledge of him anyway.

As Webstat has in my view correctly stated:

Quote

"Anupong's message is particularly noteworthy when coupled with the New Year remarks by chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulanonda.

Prem reminded the top brass they are duty-bound to ensure His Majesty's happiness. The King said in his birthday speech that his happiness hinges on the prosperity, security and normalcy in the country.

In light of the polarisation, normalcy is the operative word in the royal speech. Prem and Anupong envision the military role as a key to rein in political animosity."

Unquote

[animatic]

They should be ignored, told to shut the hel_l up and concentrate on their main line of business, i.e making money off the backs of the Thai people

So if a general says there wont be a coup, they should be fired...but if a general calls out for a coup, they should merely be ignored and told to shut up?

Some priorities you have here...

In both instances they should be ignored (and privately told by the civil authorities to pipe down.)

Freedom of speech does not include a general advocating a coup d'etat publicly or privately.

To allow it is to eviscerate the rule of law and to guarantee instability, not to mention accept that the military can menace the society at will/whim. The society that allows such outlaw speech invites the action and its own retardation, if not its own destruction.

This is not a point of debate nor is it negotiable.

In most countries even retired Generals lose pension and are prosecuted for implying a coup should happen.

It's called fomenting insurrection and is considered MORE severe in a retired general than a plain civilian.

I re-read the Nation report,

and no where is there an implied threat of Anupong holding back

a current army leadership coup 'or else' civilian rule is over-ruled.

He clearly says he is watching to prevent a coup from happening, and that subtext is clearly aimed,

in the best Thai fashion, at Pro Thaksin generals and their linked subordinates in and out of service at present.

It's a shot across the bows to not start something. And in no way implies a threat towards civilian rule or society.

Sure there are no overt Red Generals...just the ones that flock to Red Rallies

and ally with Thaksin and PTP, and say they will all get together and bring down the government...

But they aren't red, oh no, that's ONLY the street wing of Thaksins forces. Yeah, righty O!

Edited December 30, 2009 by animatic

[baht&sold]

There are no "red" generals

Legions of old soldiers o' fortune have 'opportunistically' signed on to Mr Thaksin's Puea Thai Party.

Here's just one:

"Puea Thai General to lead red-shirt rally"

http://www.bahtsold.com/news?id=2206

That would be General Panlop of Mr Thaksin's proxy-Party Puea Thai, who will *lead* the reds in an *all-out* rally next month.

Several other Puea Thai MP's are also red-leaders.

This is all to take place before mid-Feb-

(conveniently just before the verdict is read on Mr Thaksin's frozen 76 billion;)

[rainman]

Obviously there will be no coup next year, as there won't be any elections. There will be a coup again as soon as there's an election and the Democrats lose. If the Democrats win, there won't be any coup either. It's called democracy, Thai style.

[Publicus]

I am having problems replying to parts of Publicus' post so, as he has criticised me on the public forum for quoting a whole nest of quotes ( which I seem able to do); I will respond by a new post.

There are no "red" generals as referred several times in the post. Anupong has a team of generals that work under his command. From my knowledge of him anyway.

As Webstat has in my view correctly stated:

Quote

"Anupong's message is particularly noteworthy when coupled with the New Year remarks by chief royal adviser General Prem Tinsulanonda.

Prem reminded the top brass they are duty-bound to ensure His Majesty's happiness. The King said in his birthday speech that his happiness hinges on the prosperity, security and normalcy in the country.

In light of the polarisation, normalcy is the operative word in the royal speech. Prem and Anupong envision the military role as a key to rein in political animosity."

Unquote

????????????

Also when did I criticize you "for quoting a whole nest of quotes"? No such thing. Never happened. What are you on about?

[LaoPo]

Obviously there will be no coup next year, as there won't be any elections.

It would be risky to put your hand in the fire with a quote like this Rainman although you're probably correct.

The problem for the present Government is that it's a Coalition Government, a weak coalition as the Democrats Party's leader Mr Abhisit is allowed to rule with the support of former political allies of Thaksin's party.

And, we all know how the wind will blow if it comes to keeping or losing power.

After all, the whole political discussions here on TV are meaningless since the real power play is done behind the velvet curtains of the Military- and Thai Elite and it will be their decision who's allowed to sit on the pluche...or not.

If a democratic process by means of elections (if the present coalition would fall over whatever reason) would bring a party and/or leader who's not favored by those parties, above, there WILL be another coup in 2010, whether we like it or not.

LaoPo

[animatic]

It doesn't seem likely Newin would find welcoming arms from Thaksin if Thaksin's minions managed a re-coup of power.

So I can not see that the current coalition is so much in disarray in this possible eventuality.

The only side that could want a coup is Thaksins. Newin benefits more from elections minus Thaksin,

and with Dems than anything resembling a Thaksin lead government.

So Suthep can expect cooperation if push comes to shove vs Thaksin's probable attempts at treasonous action.

[LaoPo]

The only side that could want a coup is Thaksins.

Incorrect.

You don't want to bet too much money on that....you might loose.

There are more possible causes for a coup if the coalition falls to pieces and I painted the scenario above.

Too many democracy examples of failing coalitions. They happen all the time and Thailand would be no exception to the rule, not even being a democracy.

The only difference between Thailand and real democracies are the Generals.

LaoPo

[Publicus]

Ahhh, welcome 2010 and the latest and current tack, which is to flail in yet another approach to returning Thaksin, this time by claiming in virtually every post by the usual suspects (and some newer ones) that Thailand is not a democracy whether in fact or in spirit. This is the TVF 2010 baby wrapped in a blanket hanging from the bill of the proverbial stork........a red stork and a red blanket with Thaksin's smiling square emblazoned on it.

Thailand is not a democracy..........Thailand is not a democracy.........Thailand is not a democracy. The new mantra of the usual suspects as the country moves into another perilous new year which brings us the drumbeat of impending red action to topple the government, the only question being when - should it be this month or the next? Should it be on Valentine's Day or should the physical assault against the government be done sooner? 

After all, if Thailand is not a democracy then it could be seen as the moral right, duty, responsibility, obligation, and the like, of some moral and upright citizens to destroy the present undemocratic coalition government which supposedly was organized by undemocratic means, even antidemocratic means. Would by any chance those moral and upright citizens who would destroy this undemocratic, antidemocratic government be draped in red?

The mantra that Thailand is not a democracy is another beat added to the already beating drums as their pounding continues to become louder and ever closer.

Yes, it can be argued Thailand is a banana republic but no, it cannot be argued Thailand is not a democracy. There is no legitimate argument that Thailand is not a democracy. There is only the drumbeat that the government shall be destroyed come hel_l or high water to the country. Destroyed of course by the 'true' democrats.      

[LaoPo]

Yes, it can be argued Thailand is a banana republic but no, it cannot be argued Thailand is not a democracy. There is no legitimate argument that Thailand is not a democracy. There is only the drumbeat that the government shall be destroyed come hel_l or high water to the country. Destroyed of course by the 'true' democrats.      

I leave your well hidden flames, pinches if you will, aside. Try to comment at the content, not the messenger.

"There is no legitimate argument that Thailand is not a democracy"

Really ?

Maybe you should read my messages a little better since I was replying to Animatic's response that the only side, wanting a coup was "Thaksins" (his words).

I responded that there are more possible causes/scenario's (if the coalition would fall for any given reason).

And as long there's always a military threat that Thailand could face a coup at any given time, Thailand can't be considered to be a democracy.

I know there are many variants for Democracies but the military threat is always there in Thailand and as long it's there it's not a proper democracy but at best a flawed democracy*.

dated from 2007 and Thailand being on place 54: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Since Thailand dropped on the list of Press Freedom place 54 has, at best, not improved, or would you say it has?

LaoPo