Red-Shirt Movement 'At War With Military'

[ballpoint]

Let's not forget that the PTP could have called an election to validate their mandate during the civil unrest back in the latter months of 2008. Some would argue they should have done so when they had so obviously lost the support and control of the civil and military authorities. They chose not to do so, and now, like a football team with an injured player sitting on the field, but still pressing forward in attack, start squealing about injustice when the other team gets the ball and starts making its own attack. "Kick the ball out Mr Abhisit, give us a chance" goes the whine.

Edited January 27, 2010 by ballpoint

[Samuian]

I am guilty of this too, but we must not feed the reddened trolls here.

Nor should we feed the yellowed trolls, eh?

Yes that too,

though they tend to bite the hand that feeds them less frequently.

I have never seen a purple cow.

I hope I never see one.

But I'd rather see a purple cow,

than take the chance to be one.

Then make sure you never go to Switzerland, there they got 'em, saw it on an Milka Ad!

[jdinasia]

What I want to know is - from a purely selfish point of view - will Thailand be a safe place to live for foreigners over the next few weeks/months ? Is this all bark and no bite or....

I appreciate if you live here long term you are not going to want hear a "no"to that question - but I would appreciate an objective view as possible - I simply don't know enough about the situation to make an accurate assessment myself.

Safe? You mean from the threat of violence done against your person due to political unrest (and you don't happen to be in the middle of a rally for/against either side)?

Yes it is safe.

Safe? Meaning that you can ride a motorcycle drunk with no helmet? Refuse to pay a taxi fare? wander around Pattaya wearing 10baht of gold?

No it is not safe.

[jdinasia]

It's this sort of debasing of any argument with 'reddened trolls' and 'PR weenies' (whatever that is) which really shows your contempt for any other views but your own - those who may have some sympathy for the red cause are not stupid nor stooges but are entitled to debate - and what about you yellow fellows posting deliberate yellow banana skins all over the thread? there is a perfectly intelligent counter-argument to your unabashed, yellow supporting nonsense - the most important is let the people decide (which you are afraid of - of course). You do not exclusively hold the high ground nor do you speak with a consensus of the Thai people nor (lastly) do you have any moral or intellectual superiority - although you try to demonstrate that you do...

...naturally you will dismiss this as 'troll behaviour', 'stooge propaganda' or 'un-intelligent' - you being superior and all...

I think instead that it will be dismissed because you have admitted that the current government is in place legally and yet you keep crying for elections. The people elected the MP's who in turn elected the last 3 PM's .. you apparently had no issue with Samak and Somchai .. but do with the newest of the three COALITION governments.

My position is clear... I believe, that for the sake of peace in Thailand, that an election to 'show' the people that they do have a voice is the way forward - not because I want Thaksin back nor as an affront to Abhsit (who I have consistently said I quiet liked) but because many believe (me too, me too!) that although the government is technically ’legal’ it does not have widespread support – and if it does PROVE it. Let us not forget the government in Germany in 1940s was legal as is Mugabe's.

Again you are using IGNORANCE of democracy as an excuse to call for new elections. The support of the current government comes from the exact same place as the support of the last 2 coalition governments. You didn't call for them to step down (because they were pro Thaksin? or to give you the benefit of the doubt --- because your friends thought they were OK?)?

This government not only has the right to rule until the coalition folds or their term expires, they also have the moral obligation to do so.

Ok... but that's 'victors justice' not true justice - I would agree, if at all possible, that elections should be free and fair (obviously).

If I read that right CMF --- You would have elections even if they are not 'free and fair' and that you would have them even if the Democrats were terrorized and prevented from campaigning in some areas? If elections are NOT free and fair and if some parties are not allowed to campaign then they are not democratic elections. They are just your way of saying "my friends have the right to rule. Why you ask? Because they "Feel" that justice has not been served or because they don't understand that the current government is legally and morally in office".

Your comparisons to other countries in other times is not only faulty it is specious.

[ChiangMaiFun]

My position is clear... I believe, that for the sake of peace in Thailand, that an election to 'show' the people that they do have a voice is the way forward

It wouldn't be for the sake of peace, it would be for the sake of the red shirts.

The country is peaceful now, granted not without a degree of division and friction, but what guarantees are there that after an election there would be any change in that? I don't think there would. Indeed, if a Thaksin friendly government were formed, as you believe, i think if anything the division and friction that exists now would be amplified ten-fold.

Red shirts need to accept that complaining about the political process that allowed Abhisit to come to power would only have had credibility had they been similarly vocal about the way Samak and Somchai came to power. They weren't. The political process was fine for them until the opposition got in power. Now it's all wrong. Funny that...

'The country is peaceful now' long may it continue... but I fear it will not...

So in fact what you are saying is not so much that there should be elections for the sake of peace, but there should be elections because of the threat of violence from certain minority quarters. Great reasoning to call an election i must say.

And what happens, if as you predict, the reds win an election when it is called and whitewash Thaksin of all criminal charges? Do you not think the yellows might also threaten violence? What would we do then? By your logic, we would call another election. Where would it end?

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

[way2muchcoffee]

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

Actually nearly every anti-Thaksin poster here has repeatedly condemned the PAD takeover of the airport. Funny that you don't remember the many times this has been stated.

Edited January 27, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[ChiangMaiFun]

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

Actually nearly every anti-Thaksin poster here has repeatedly condemned the PAD takeover of the airport. Funny that you don't remember the many times this has been stated.

Repeatedly? not on this thread they haven't - you can't have it both ways - if it's wrong it's wrong for both sides - and stop saying 'Thaksin' many Thais I know who want an election are not Thaksin supporters

[way2muchcoffee]

Repeatedly? not on this thread they haven't - you can't have it both ways - if it's wrong it's wrong for both sides - and stop saying 'Thaksin' many Thais I know who want an election are not Thaksin supporters

You might have to read the many threads to catch it, but I assure you I have. I have yet to see any regular poster in the News Clippings section offer any support for the airport takeover. I totally agree, you can't have it both ways. It was wrong for the PAD to commit violence in the pursuit of their agenda. It is wrong for the UDD, DAAD, RCM51, etc to commit violence in the pursuit of their agenda.

I have no doubt that you know people who want elections that are not Thaksin supporters. Just as there are many people who do not think elections are appropriate at this time who are not PAD supporters.

It would good if you would please explain how fair elections could be held right now. Please also comment on the fact that one of the major parties is not allowed to campaign in large swaths of the country. Do you believe that if they are prevented from doing so by a very loud and sometimes violent minority group then the election can in any way be fair?

Edited January 27, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[ChiangMaiFun]

Repeatedly? not on this thread they haven't - you can't have it both ways - if it's wrong it's wrong for both sides - and stop saying 'Thaksin' many Thais I know who want an election are not Thaksin supporters

You might have to read the many threads to catch it, but I assure you I have. I have yet to see any regular poster in the News Clippings section offer any support for the airport takeover. I totally agree, you can't have it both ways. It was wrong for the PAD to commit violence in the pursuit of their agenda. It is wrong for the UDD, DAAD, RCM51, etc to commit violence in the pursuit of their agenda.

I have no doubt that you know people who want elections that are not Thaksin supporters. Just as there are many people who do not think elections are appropriate at this time who are not PAD supporters.

It would good if you would please explain how fair elections could be held right now. Please also comment on the fact that one of the major parties is not allowed to campaign in large swaths of the country. They are prevented from doing so by a very loud and sometimes violent minority group.

fair enough... I am against all forms of violence and so you will have no recourse to rebuke me about that particualr stance - no matter if they are red, yellow, blue or purple!

I am, in principal, stating that the only way for lasting peace is for a fair and equitable election - how we do it? now there's the rub!

[way2muchcoffee]

I am, in principal, stating that the only way for lasting peace is for a fair and equitable election - how we do it? now there's the rub!

So maybe we're not too far off in our beliefs then. No violence. Free and fair elections. Good Governance. We may disagree in the methods and timing to accomplish this but the goals are the same.

[ChiangMaiFun]

I am, in principal, stating that the only way for lasting peace is for a fair and equitable election - how we do it? now there's the rub!

So maybe we're not too far off in our beliefs then. No violence. Free and fair elections. Good Governance. We may disagree in the methods and timing to accomplish this but the goals are the same.

Yes... any reasonable person would hold this view - and I have not veered from it once... so we should concentrate on the things which unite us not divide us

[animatic]

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

Actually nearly every anti-Thaksin poster here has repeatedly condemned the PAD takeover of the airport. Funny that you don't remember the many times this has been stated.

Repeatedly? not on this thread they haven't - you can't have it both ways - if it's wrong it's wrong for both sides - and stop saying 'Thaksin' many Thais I know who want an election are not Thaksin supporters

Your a relative newbie, it was repeatedly stated here, so often that

it is old hat, and just a rethrashing of the obvious for many of us at this point.

And the violence involved was rather limited more a large sit in with security pushed to paranoia,

vs the Red shirt attacks on their dissenting voices, which were blatant and intentional.

Of course now we will hear more on that all again, and again.

And over and over and over again.

The main point of the airport take over was because they were being hand grenaded at night

from stealth in their encampment, and quite logically this made them angrey and they upped the anti.

They pushed it too far, BUT I have always felt they WERE pushed into that decisions by clandestined red forces.

I have always seen the airport as a reqaction to red provocations, and intolerable increase of

violence towards PAD protestors, not a planned action to disable the government.

If the night attacks hadn't happened PAD would have stayed in GH.

But that is all clearer in hindsight, not at that time. I partly blame a red miscalculation of tactics.

I am sure several here don't, and that's their lack of insight IMO.

Edited January 27, 2010 by animatic

[ChiangMaiFun]

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

Actually nearly every anti-Thaksin poster here has repeatedly condemned the PAD takeover of the airport. Funny that you don't remember the many times this has been stated.

Repeatedly? not on this thread they haven't - you can't have it both ways - if it's wrong it's wrong for both sides - and stop saying 'Thaksin' many Thais I know who want an election are not Thaksin supporters

Your a relative newbie, it was repeatedly stated here, so often that

it is old hat, and just a rethrashing of the obvious for many of us at this point.

And the violence involved was rather limited more a large sit in with security pushed to paranoia,

vs the Red shirt attacks on their dissenting voices, which were blatant and intentional.

Of course now we will hear more on that all again, and again.

And over and over and over again.

Sit in? if it's by yellows - and it would be 'outrageous thuggery' if by reds... that's the point - your seeing through 'yellow rose tinted goggles' it's BAD by any side - say it - don't dress up one as a friendly little sit-in - it was outrageous and undemocratic - say so!

[rixalex]

'The country is peaceful now' long may it continue... but I fear it will not...

So in fact what you are saying is not so much that there should be elections for the sake of peace, but there should be elections because of the threat of violence from certain minority quarters. Great reasoning to call an election i must say.

And what happens, if as you predict, the reds win an election when it is called and whitewash Thaksin of all criminal charges? Do you not think the yellows might also threaten violence? What would we do then? By your logic, we would call another election. Where would it end?

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

It's impossible to have any sort of a logical debate with you because you continually change tacts and go off at a tangent, presumably when you are at a loss to answer.

The point i was making was about elections for the sake of avoiding violence. It had nothing to do with whether you are anti-violence or not.

(As it happens i was against the airport take over and have gone on record as saying exactly that on this forum, on threads that pertained to that subject. You should do a search for those threads and find people who supported it to aim your criticism at them. Stop throwing these accusations about willy-nilly to whomever disagrees with you)

Back on topic and returning to the point i made and you avoided, do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right way to go? Where would it end?

You say the reds "feel" cheated and therefore they have a right to demand an election - you even join them in that call - well don't you think that if the reds got back in power (as you believe they will) and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s, a certain yellow group would then feel like they have been cheated - would you then join them in demanding a fresh election?

[ChiangMaiFun]

'The country is peaceful now' long may it continue... but I fear it will not...

So in fact what you are saying is not so much that there should be elections for the sake of peace, but there should be elections because of the threat of violence from certain minority quarters. Great reasoning to call an election i must say.

And what happens, if as you predict, the reds win an election when it is called and whitewash Thaksin of all criminal charges? Do you not think the yellows might also threaten violence? What would we do then? By your logic, we would call another election. Where would it end?

I am anti-violence by any side - but the yellows set the trend for disturbance with the airport take-over which smashed the Thai tourist economy to shreds - funny how you avoid all mention of this and comment too... funny that

It's impossible to have any sort of a logical debate with you because you continually change tacts and go off at a tangent, presumably when you are at a loss to answer.

The point i was making was about elections for the sake of avoiding violence. It had nothing to do with whether you are anti-violence or not.

(As it happens i was against the airport take over and have gone on record as saying exactly that on this forum, on threads that pertained to that subject. You should do a search for those threads and find people who supported it to aim your criticism at them. Stop throwing these accusations about willy-nilly to whomever disagrees with you)

Back on topic and returning to the point i made and you avoided, do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right way to go? Where would it end?

You say the reds "feel" cheated and therefore they have a right to demand an election - you even join them in that call - well don't you think that if the reds got back in power (as you believe they will) and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s, a certain yellow group would then feel like they have been cheated - would you then join them in demanding a fresh election?

There you go again... 'and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s' - stop linking calls for an election to this issue - I'm illogical and you are logical?

hmmm pot and kettle springs to mind!

[sbk]

We are not discussing the airport takeover, so suggest you drop that particular line of thought cheers. Please re-read the OP if you are unaware as to the original contents of this story.

[ChiangMaiFun]

We are not discussing the airport takeover, so suggest you drop that particular line of thought cheers. Please re-read the OP if you are unaware as to the original contents of this story.

nor are we discussing Thaksin nor alot of the others things mentioned cheers

[way2muchcoffee]

There you go again... 'and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s' - stop linking calls for an election to this issue - I'm illogical and you are logical?

hmmm pot and kettle springs to mind!

But the problem CMF is that calls for an election at this time have a fair chance of leading to a PPP government, though that is far from a certainty. And if PPP is elected, then fine, that's okay.

But what's not ok is the near certainty that the PPP would immediately revert back to the 1997 constitution, reinstate all banned politicians, whitewash Thaksin's crimes, and if possible, elect him PM.

It is therefore impossible to separate the call for immediate elections from the Thaksin situation.

[animatic]

I was and am still against the airport take over,

but that doesn't mean I don't understand WHY they did it.

[sbk]

We are not discussing the airport takeover, so suggest you drop that particular line of thought cheers. Please re-read the OP if you are unaware as to the original contents of this story.

nor are we discussing Thaksin nor alot of the others things mentioned cheers

Would you like me to make a list, or is a simple reminder to stay within rough guidelines without resorting to flaming, nastiness, childish insults, or the rest of it required here? I can certainly be much more formal about it if that is your preference.

[ChiangMaiFun]

There you go again... 'and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s' - stop linking calls for an election to this issue - I'm illogical and you are logical?

hmmm pot and kettle springs to mind!

But the problem CMF is that calls for an election at this time have a fair chance of leading to a PPP government, though that is far from a certainty. And if PPP is elected, then fine, that's okay.

But what's not ok is the near certainty that the PPP would immediately revert back to the 1997 constitution, reinstate all banned politicians, whitewash Thaksin's crimes, and if possible, elect him PM.

It is therefore impossible to separate the call for immediate elections from the Thaksin situation.

I hope that would not happen of course... but that problem with 'democracy' is that sometimes you don't get what you want - I just don't see another way... hope I'm wrong - truly

[ChiangMaiFun]

I was and am still against the airport take over,

but that doesn't mean I don't understand WHY they did it.

I am against violence and the angry reaction against the present government but I understand WHY too

[SpoliaOpima]

My position is clear... I believe, that for the sake of peace in Thailand, that an election to 'show' the people that they do have a voice is the way forward - not because I want Thaksin back nor as an affront to Abhsit (who I have consistently said I quiet liked) but because many believe (me too, me too!) that although the government is technically ’legal’ it does not have widespread support – and if it does PROVE it. Let us not forget the government in Germany in 1940s was legal as is Mugabe's.

And the democrats have stated that they are fully willing to call elections as soon as there is the ability to campaign freely in all areas without threat of violence, and there are no terrorist/revolutionary actions on the part of the opposition. So the onus is really on the PPP to reign in their supporters and to drop the divisive criminal Thaksin from their platform. But they have shown little interest in either, and in fact seem to be going in the opposite direction.

Why should there be premature elections when they can neither be free nor fair?

It makes no sense.

The point is that you are quoting the yellows as if they are 'clean and pure' but what about the airport take-over? you fail to be even-handed - if they condemned that as equally as they condemn red agitation then i could see your point.

He wasn't quoting the yellows.

[animatic]

Spoilia, don't disrupt a good one sided rant with logic!

Edited January 27, 2010 by animatic

[way2muchcoffee]

I hope that would not happen of course... but that problem with 'democracy' is that sometimes you don't get what you want - I just don't see another way... hope I'm wrong - truly

But that is precisely where and how democracy would fail. The mechanics in a democracy are simply to have a populous that is educated, informed, and participates in free and fair elections. But democracy is much more than simple elections.

Democracy requires a separation of powers into Judicial, Legislative, and Executive branches. It is critical that this separation is clear and firm, otherwise a functioning democracy is not possible. Unfortunately the Thaksin-led TRT government systematically dismantled the separation of powers. Any return of Thaksin would guarantee the same. Moreover, in the simple act of un-banning politicians and whitewashing their crimes the Judicial branch would be destroyed and rendered meaningless and useless.

Edited January 27, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[SpoliaOpima]

Yes and CMF thinks the Democrats and the PAD are the same. Guess he missed it when the PAD formed their own political party, and missed the FCCT panel long before that point where spokespersons for the Democrats, the PAD and the TRT argued with each other.

[animatic]

Ah, lack of balanced nutrients, that explains it!

[rixalex]

It's impossible to have any sort of a logical debate with you because you continually change tacts and go off at a tangent, presumably when you are at a loss to answer.

The point i was making was about elections for the sake of avoiding violence. It had nothing to do with whether you are anti-violence or not.

(As it happens i was against the airport take over and have gone on record as saying exactly that on this forum, on threads that pertained to that subject. You should do a search for those threads and find people who supported it to aim your criticism at them. Stop throwing these accusations about willy-nilly to whomever disagrees with you)

Back on topic and returning to the point i made and you avoided, do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right way to go? Where would it end?

You say the reds "feel" cheated and therefore they have a right to demand an election - you even join them in that call - well don't you think that if the reds got back in power (as you believe they will) and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s, a certain yellow group would then feel like they have been cheated - would you then join them in demanding a fresh election?

There you go again... 'and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s' - stop linking calls for an election to this issue - I'm illogical and you are logical?

hmmm pot and kettle springs to mind!

There you go again... completely ignoring the points i put to you.

To repeat for the third time of asking: do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right solution?

If yes, would you not be concerned about the precedent it would set?

[mca]

I really can't see a stable future at all at the moment for Thailand when all sides seem to think that if their team doesn't win an election it's their right to cause as much shit as possible to oust whoever is in power with the army sitting there as the "protectors of the realm" or whatever ready to fire up the engines if someone so much as sneezes wrong.

Honestly folks. How can it possibly end?

Dem win = Red shirts going buck wild

Red shirts win = Accusations of vote buying and the PAD dusting off their clackers.

Nobody will ever concede defeat. It's frigging awful.

[animatic]

I was about to post the SAME exact part of his ignored question.

Back on topic and returning to the point i made and you avoided,

do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right way to go?

Where would it end?

Without using the H word, we can talk about Neville Chamberlain and his appeasement.

The violence only got worse. It was called WWII.

If ANY side can intimidate the other via enough violence into changing the political landscape,

this just encourages the opposition to see THIS as a viable way to get what they want.

Hence the Reds just announcing an airport protest, but all and sundry shooting the idea down quick fast.

A line MUST be drawn in the sand and sooner than later, none of this; 'they did it so we can too' logic,

can be allowed to hold the day, because it will never end.