Thaksin Supporters

[Pakboong]

Really what bits were taken out of contex and twisted?

Despite his rhetorical commitment to humane responses to Thailand’s drug problem, Thaksin’s anti-drug campaign quickly evolved into a violent and murderous “war on drugs.” Beginning in February 2003, the Thaksin government instructed police and local officials that persons charged with drug offenses should be considered “security threats” and dealt with in a “ruthless” and “severe” manner. The result of the initial three-month phase of this campaign was some 2,275 extrajudicial killings

What about a few hundred thousand Iraqis? Or a couple of thousand Palestinian children? There are political decisions that cause death to innocents all over this world every day. Thaksin's leadership suffered some collateral damage as do all governments. You could compare numbers all day.

[rixalex]

Sorry I can not pass judgment like yourself without more information.

The man is on record at the time explaining all about it so just what exactly is it you contest? That it wasn't Thaksin's idea? That 2,500 people weren't shot without trial? What are you struggling to grasp here?

[Ulysses G.]

Yes, there were instances of human rights of abuse

Yeah 2600+ of them ...... and to make ANY excuse for extra-judicial murders certainly is quite telling.

There is no disagreement from me that any death of a non implicated party was a tragedy and wrong. Nor do I dismiss it. Unfortunately, waging a drug war is a messy business with significant collateral damage and the loss of life.

I would think that a day in court would be a bit mandatory particularly from someone that cares about democracy.

I wasn't in Thailand at the time so its hard for me to judge what was going on.

Were you here? if so what was the general impression you got from Thai people at the time, did they support it or were they against it?

What do the Thai people you know think about it?

I've never met a Thai who did not support Thaksin's Drug War, but that does not mean that I agree with it.

I grew up in the era when drug use was fashionable and I tend to think that it should be up to the individual what they do with their body.

On the other hand, I have seen how much they can hurt people and I understand first hand why some people are so much against them and I have to admit that with the cheap, powerful drugs available here, if drug use got out of control it could quickly ruin the whole country. When Thaksin declared war, Ya Ba (amphetamine) abuse was becoming rampant.

I agree that Thaksin intended to kill drug dealers, but I just don't believe that he intended police to handle things the way that they did and it did seem to work as drug use became much less prevalent for a while.

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

[mca]

I wasn't in Thailand at the time so its hard for me to judge what was going on.

Were you here? if so what was the general impression you got from Thai people at the time, did they support it or were they against it?

What do the Thai people you know think about it?

Over the years my personal experience is that quite a few Thais aren't particularly bothered about what happens to their fellow man (even their fellow countrymen). They don't seem that concerned even when it's the authorities murdering other Thais. It was quite sad (from my perspective natch) the level of apathy about Tak Bai after the incident. A lot I talked to didn't really give a shit. In fact it seems (in my extremely humble opinion) that mass abuses of Thai on Thai don't even register on the radar of most locals.

[rixalex]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point.

To say that the two and a half thousand odd people who were killed were innocent is neither an exaggeration or a lie. It's a FACT. Until you get a person in court and prove with evidence that they are who you say they are - that they have done what you say they have done - you can not conclude anything about them. Doing so goes against the very foundation of what most normal people consider to be free and fair justice.

[rixalex]

Were you here? if so what was the general impression you got from Thai people at the time, did they support it or were they against it?

What do the Thai people you know think about it?

I think most Thais supported it, although that probably had a lot to do with the way it was presented to them by Thaksin.

Sad truth is though that neither then, nor now, have Thais ever protested in outrage about this, as people surely would have done where most of us come from.

But what i'd like to know is what difference does all that make? Are we now saying that if a government commits genocide for example, and the people supported it, then the government is somehow exhonerated from any wrong-doing and no charges should be brought against those responsible? Or how about if the government decided to assassinate a convicted criminal who had fled from justice and the people backed the idea? Would that be ok? Would we simply say, "well if the people don't mind it, who cares if it's fair and just or not?"? I somehow don't think we would, do you?

[Ulysses G.]

It is not really up to us.

[rixalex]

It is not really up to us.

Same applies to events happening all over the world. Doesn't mean that having an opinion on such matters is forbidden or that it is worthless though.

[Gary A]

It is a strange thing that only the politically oriented farangs and the Thai elite Thaksin haters have a problem with the "drug war". The vast majority of Thais have no problem with how it was handled. Murders? No doubt there were some, but the Thais think that where there is smoke, there is fire.

[Moonrakers]

Really what bits were taken out of contex and twisted?

Despite his rhetorical commitment to humane responses to Thailand's drug problem, Thaksin's anti-drug campaign quickly evolved into a violent and murderous "war on drugs." Beginning in February 2003, the Thaksin government instructed police and local officials that persons charged with drug offenses should be considered "security threats" and dealt with in a "ruthless" and "severe" manner. The result of the initial three-month phase of this campaign was some 2,275 extrajudicial killings

What about a few hundred thousand Iraqis? Or a couple of thousand Palestinian children? There are political decisions that cause death to innocents all over this world every day. Thaksin's leadership suffered some collateral damage as do all governments. You could compare numbers all day.

That's another subject entirely. This thread is about Thaksin.

[Moonrakers]

It is a strange thing that only the politically oriented farangs and the Thai elite Thaksin haters have a problem with the "drug war". The vast majority of Thais have no problem with how it was handled. Murders? No doubt there were some, but the Thais think that where there is smoke, there is fire.

Are you trying to suggest that what he did was OK?

[jdinasia]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

I am sure that with just a TINY bit of research you will find various reports NOT made by Thai Visa members detailing the executions of innocents during the drug war.

I also suggest that how you phrase a question in Thailand is far more likely to get you the answer that you WANT to hear.

"Do you blame Thaksin for the deaths of the drug dealers that the police were trying to capture?"

That will get one response ...

"Do you think people should get a fair trial and not be executed by the police on the mere suspicion of being somehow connected with drugs?"

That will get a different response.

"Thaksin promoted the war on drugs and innocent people that had no connection with the drug trade were murdered by the police death squads. Do you think Thaksin should answer for those deaths?"

Will get yet a third response....

If you know NOBODY that is/was opposed to the war on drugs and the extra-judicial killings then I submit that they were feeling your bias and answering the way they thought you wanted them to.

If you make excuses for those extra-judicial killings and ever discuss democracy as if the concept of democracy matters to you, then you really need to start thinking about the base rights of a citizen in a democracy.

(I do agree that most people here just gave it no thought at all .... which is still mind boggling to me!)

[Pakboong]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

I am sure that with just a TINY bit of research you will find various reports NOT made by Thai Visa members detailing the executions of innocents during the drug war.

I also suggest that how you phrase a question in Thailand is far more likely to get you the answer that you WANT to hear.

"Do you blame Thaksin for the deaths of the drug dealers that the police were trying to capture?"

That will get one response ...

"Do you think people should get a fair trial and not be executed by the police on the mere suspicion of being somehow connected with drugs?"

That will get a different response.

"Thaksin promoted the war on drugs and innocent people that had no connection with the drug trade were murdered by the police death squads. Do you think Thaksin should answer for those deaths?"

Will get yet a third response....

If you know NOBODY that is/was opposed to the war on drugs and the extra-judicial killings then I submit that they were feeling your bias and answering the way they thought you wanted them to.

If you make excuses for those extra-judicial killings and ever discuss democracy as if the concept of democracy matters to you, then you really need to start thinking about the base rights of a citizen in a democracy.

(I do agree that most people here just gave it no thought at all .... which is still mind boggling to me!)

Human rights violations by politicians are subject to international law.

[H2oDunc]

I do not think a farang will ever really understand Thai politics.

I disagree. A large proportion of the regular contributers to the political threads of this forum (and i include reds, yellows, pinks and blues), in my opinion have not only a better understanding, but also (and importantly) a greater interest in Thai politics than a lot (not all) of Thais i meet on a daily basis, many of whom really find nothing more boring than a discussion like this one.

By the way, what nationality are you Dunc? I assume you are not a foreigner (farang as you call it), because if you were, why were you bothering to post your opinion of something you yourself tell us you have no understanding of?

What or who says I cannot have an opinion on a subject that I know very little about ? YOU

I know absolutely NOTHING about football but can still have an opinion or is that not allowed in your world ? ? As far as I was aware he was the prime minister of the country or they would not have had to have a coup ? Lots of people LIKE him. Some people hate him. When he is convicted in a court of law then things will change slightly till then it will rumble on and on and farangs like me will still be posting and having a opinion on it That is if its OK with you ?

Edited February 14, 2010 by H2oDunc

[jdinasia]

Duncan ---- I know that some little things may have escaped you ... but Thaksin HAS been convicted in a court of law --- and is currently on the run.

You diminish the people that hate him .. (LOTS like him .. some hate him). In truth LOTS like him and LOTS hate him and MOST just want this crap to end!

He wasn't the "elected" PM at the time of the coup unlike your previous claims ... he was an on again off again caretaker PM. Thailand had not had an elected government since Thaksin dissolved parliament to try and cover his butt on the Temasek scandal and the disbanding of TRT. There could be no elected government until another election was held .. so we are dealing with months and months with no effective elected government.

But remember --- he HAS been convicted in a court of law. He cannot be tried on other cases until he returns to Thailand to hear the charges against him in person. He won't return because he will immediately be jailed for 2 years due to his conviction. He waived his right to appeal that conviction by running.

[Ulysses G.]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

I am sure that with just a TINY bit of research you will find various reports NOT made by Thai Visa members

So you agree that many posters that are posting about Thaksin are full of s___?

[rixalex]

What or who says I cannot have an opinion on a subject that I know very little about ? YOU

No not me. Common sense perhaps?

If someone professes to know little on a certain suject, wouldn't it be wise to get better informed before taking a standpoint and trying to argue it?

When he is convicted in a court of law then things will change slightly till then it will rumble on and on and farangs like me will still be posting and having a opinion on it That is if its OK with you ?

When he is convicted?!

When you said you knew little, i thought perhaps you were being modest.

[tooninthai]

Strange how talk of Thaksin can be the root of so much heated discussion. A bit like in the UK, you love the Tories or Labour and can rarely agree who does a better job.. That is fine for the British. We have - as do many of you - the right to vote in an election and if the majority of people are dissatisfied you / we can elect a new government.

Thankfully, Aussies, Americans, Canadians or others cannot vote for a UK government and vice-versa. It is up to us to vote how we feel for our own countries.

Why not the same for Thai people? I still believe many Thai want Thaksin back, for better or worse. They should be allowed to vote on that

To some of us, Thaksin is a bad man. To others he is a good man. Yet it is not up to us to decide.

If we look back on our own histories we have had good and bad leaders, kings, Queens and Presidents. Some have won back power because the people wanted them back. If we or our ancestors made mistakes in that department then that was our fault. But we did it democratically.

I think the people should be allowed to decide, especially as here in Thailand all the parties buy their votes either in small, local elections or national elections. Those who do not have the financial backing will never get enough votes in a lot of cases, but the people should be allowed to decide on Thaksin after hearing he arguments from all relevant sides in Thailand and, that does not include us 'Farang'. And that may not be a bad thing as we have made enough cock ups in our own countries, but the Thai people never interfered with our elections.

Have an election and let the majority decide Thaksin's future.

[rixalex]

Thankfully, Aussies, Americans, Canadians or others cannot vote for a UK government and vice-versa.

What about if they have been living, working and raising a family in the UK for the last ten, twenty, thirty years?

Have an election and let the majority decide Thaksin's future.

Elections will come when the ruling party sets a date. No reason for them to set it at someone else's request.

As far as Thaksin's future is concerned, people charged with crimes don't as far as i'm aware have the option of using a general election as a way of determining innocence or guilt.

[tooninthai]

Thankfully, Aussies, Americans, Canadians or others cannot vote for a UK government and vice-versa.

What about if they have been living, working and raising a family in the UK for the last ten, twenty, thirty years?

But, then they would be British citizens to be able to vote. So a bit out of context

Have an election and let the majority decide Thaksin's future.

Elections will come when the ruling party sets a date. No reason for them to set it at someone else's request.

As far as Thaksin's future is concerned, people charged with crimes don't as far as i'm aware have the option of using a general election as a way of determining innocence or guilt.

I was talking theoretically regarding Thaksin and all the 'hoo-haa' surrounding him in this forum. But never mind

Though, in the future, things can change.

[Ricardo]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

I am sure that with just a TINY bit of research you will find various reports NOT made by Thai Visa members

So you agree that many posters that are posting about Thaksin are full of s___?

I'm sure the fanatical pro-Thaksin ones are all totally fact-driven and un-biased, does that answer your question UG ?

Edited February 14, 2010 by Ricardo

[Ulysses G.]

I haven't seen any "fanatically pro-Thaksin" posters at all on here at all - just a few who think that he is not the bogeyman and pretty much like all the other Thai politicians before him. Actually, I think that you just proved my point.

[jdinasia]

As far as innocents being killed, I have seen many times how posters on Thai Visa exaggerate and just plain lie to make a point. I take anything I read here with a BIG grain of salt.

I am sure that with just a TINY bit of research you will find various reports NOT made by Thai Visa members

So you agree that many posters that are posting about Thaksin are full of s___?

Oh .... most definitely! The list stars .... UG ..... then ..... well there's UG .... (if I made a real list I'd get in trouble

[jdinasia]

I haven't seen any "fanatically pro-Thaksin" posters at all on here at all - just a few who think that he is not the bogeyman and pretty much like all the other Thai politicians before him. Actually, I think that you just proved my point.

Nah .. we get them .. then they say something like "Thaksin never returned after the coup ...." get caught out and quit posting. or "When he gets convicted in a court..." The largest group these days are the ones that say "I am not for Thaksin..." and agree that the Dems are in power legally .... and then call for an election AND the return of Thaksin.

[Ulysses G.]

You mean that they are "fanatically pro-Thaksin", but they pretend that they aren't on an anonomous internet forum. I get you.

[jdinasia]

You mean that they are "fanatically pro-Thaksin", but they pretend that they aren't on an anonomous internet forum. I get you.

Yeppers ... remember there were quite a few that were openly pro-Thaksin and they just kept getting banned over and over (not because of their beliefs but because of their tactics). Eventually even they have learned and now do the denial thing while still giving the same base-line message.

Then there are the "one-liners" ... one quick line of something that sounds bright but contains no facts

[geriatrickid]

Gosh JD, I haven't been banned or suspended yet, I'm trying though Perhaps if I make naughty suggestions as to the use of a papaya in bed....

Please do not confuse those of us with a strong dislike of army and other entrenched interest group's interference in the civil affairs of Thailand with being "pro-Thaksin". Had Mr. Thaksin cut certain people in for a bigger share of the pie I have no doubt the army and its cronies would not have seized the civil apparatus. No one claims Mr. Thaksin was a saint.

Unfortunately, 20-20 hindsight is easier than having to deal with a situation as it unfolds. You keep going back to the loss of life during the "drug war". Well then, why do you have such a hard time in accepting reality. This wasn't a struggle with the good guys and the bad guys easily identifiable. The drug war took place because for all intents and purposes there was an insurrection underway. The reach of the cartels was all encompassing. Honest police officials and members of the judiciary were being intimidated and killed off. I put it to you that a great many of the mysterious deaths were carried out by the drug cartels corrupt police officers or by people posing as the police. The same scenario has occurred in Peru, Bolivia and Columbia. Why should Thailand have been any different? In Iraq, terrorists often dress up as police officers before they enter a secured compound and blow themselves up. The end result is that people are wary of the police and blame the police for the events.

The extra judiciary killings as you term them (I call them criminal murders and sabotage) would never have taken place had the army and other entrenched powers assisted the government at the time. You have ignored the fact that the drugs were flowing across the Burmese border. How pray tell did that happen? Wasn't the army that responsible for the border?I put it to you that the army could have slowed the drug trade had it made the effort. It was in the interest of the cartels and their business allies that the war on drugs fail and become mired in scandal and that was precisely what it did with the leaks, the lack of co-operation and the murders. If you want to play the blame game, then please go the full distance and wag your finger at the assorted army generals that I believe were implicated in this. Better yet, why not have a full public inquiry into the matter.

Ask yourself why there has been no public inquiry. After all, Mr. Thaksin could be blamed for the deaths very easily just as you are doing. Do you think it is possible that such an inquiry might reveal some disturbing relationships and that the military command along with some members of the elite would be most uncomfortable? Corruption makes for some strange bedfellows and the people implicated and alleged to have profited either directly or indirectly is alleged to read like a who's who listing of the elite.

[waza]

Gosh JD, I haven't been banned or suspended yet, I'm trying though Perhaps if I make naughty suggestions as to the use of a papaya in bed....

Please do not confuse those of us with a strong dislike of army and other entrenched interest group's interference in the civil affairs of Thailand with being "pro-Thaksin". Had Mr. Thaksin cut certain people in for a bigger share of the pie I have no doubt the army and its cronies would not have seized the civil apparatus. No one claims Mr. Thaksin was a saint.

Unfortunately, 20-20 hindsight is easier than having to deal with a situation as it unfolds. You keep going back to the loss of life during the "drug war". Well then, why do you have such a hard time in accepting reality. This wasn't a struggle with the good guys and the bad guys easily identifiable. The drug war took place because for all intents and purposes there was an insurrection underway. The reach of the cartels was all encompassing. Honest police officials and members of the judiciary were being intimidated and killed off. I put it to you that a great many of the mysterious deaths were carried out by the drug cartels corrupt police officers or by people posing as the police. The same scenario has occurred in Peru, Bolivia and Columbia. Why should Thailand have been any different? In Iraq, terrorists often dress up as police officers before they enter a secured compound and blow themselves up. The end result is that people are wary of the police and blame the police for the events.

The extra judiciary killings as you term them (I call them criminal murders and sabotage) would never have taken place had the army and other entrenched powers assisted the government at the time. You have ignored the fact that the drugs were flowing across the Burmese border. How pray tell did that happen? Wasn't the army that responsible for the border?I put it to you that the army could have slowed the drug trade had it made the effort. It was in the interest of the cartels and their business allies that the war on drugs fail and become mired in scandal and that was precisely what it did with the leaks, the lack of co-operation and the murders. If you want to play the blame game, then please go the full distance and wag your finger at the assorted army generals that I believe were implicated in this. Better yet, why not have a full public inquiry into the matter.

Ask yourself why there has been no public inquiry. After all, Mr. Thaksin could be blamed for the deaths very easily just as you are doing. Do you think it is possible that such an inquiry might reveal some disturbing relationships and that the military command along with some members of the elite would be most uncomfortable? Corruption makes for some strange bedfellows and the people implicated and alleged to have profited either directly or indirectly is alleged to read like a who's who listing of the elite.

You forget, Jan 24, 2008 The military-appointed government, under Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont, was praised for promising a proper investigation into the 2003 anti-narcotics crackdown in which over 2,500 people were killed. Thaksin could be tried for war crimes, since the ousted premier and senior government officials had approved a policy that gave the police a ‘’license to kill’’ in going after suspected drug dealers.

Yet any hope of bringing those responsible for excesses in the anti-drug campaign were dashed by a statement made by Surayud, days before handing over power to a new government elected in the late December polls. The independent panel appointed by the post-coup administration to inquire into the killings has unearthed little evidence to punish the perpetrators

‘’Due to lack of evidence, as many witnesses have refused to come forward to provide vital information to the investigators, this panel couldn’t hold anyone responsible,’’ Surayud was quoted

[Ulysses G.]

Then there are the "one-liners" ... one quick line of something that sounds bright but contains no facts

Sometimes "bright sounding" one liners contain more truth than page after page after page of so-called "facts".

[Ulysses G.]

You forget, Jan 24, 2008 The military-appointed government, under Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont, was praised for promising a proper investigation into the 2003 anti-narcotics crackdown in which over 2,500 people were killed.

Cases in point; are you referring to the illegal government that was put in power by the same people who staged the illegal military coup against the legal government?