Thailand: Another Coup Would Be A Disaster

[geriatrickid]

The army admits that the soldiers fired after been shot at, I would do that also if I was in the firing line and my mates were shot. The reds will never admit something, they are a bunch of liars. Do not tell me that there were not armed men in black on the red side and in my opinion they fired and threw bombs also. That's what they promised to do anyhow.

If you did this in any western army and depending upon circumstances, the Russian and Chinese army, you would be arrested and sent for court martial. Weapons are not discharged randomly into crowds where there are non combatants. The target must be identified and only that target is to be taken out. Even in Israel, the IDF does not discharge live ammunition into crowds unless there is a clear target. In Afghanistan, neither the Canadian nor the British soldiers will fire into a hostile crowd despite taking fire. If the troops in Afghanistan can demonstrate discipline under far more difficult circumstances, then it is not unreasonable to expect similar conduct under far less difficult conditions as was the case in Bangkok.

Based upon the preliminary autopsy results that have been released, many of the UDD protestors that were killed or injured were shot in the back. This suggests to me that this wasn't a case of the units discharging weapons actually targeting identified hostile targets.

You are assuming that the protesters shot in the back were shot by the army and not agitators. This may or not be true. Either way there were plenty of shot soldiers. We had a saying in the army I was in - better court martialled than buried. If you feel brave enough to stand there with your dick in your hand while someone murders you, you have a mental problem.

And you're assuming that Thai conscripts are trained to western standards? And your assuming that Thailand is like Iraq. And your assuming that Russian and Chinese have a western style of democracy with of course a free press and independent police force to investigate and to report all the wrong doings of the government or protesters? I think you assume what ever you like as long as it fits in with your assumptions

We had a saying in the army I was in - better court martialled than buried. If you feel brave enough to stand there with your dick in your hand while someone murders you, you have a mental problem. Classic

A soldier that would discharge his weapon into a crowd without identifying a target is the one with a mental problem as you call it. An NCO that cannot control his unit is useless and must be removed. An officer that would order his troops to fire into unarmed civilians is guilty of a breach of the rules of engagement. Discipline must be maintained within the ranks. Without discipline there can be no clarity of thought and order collapses.

You are attempting to compare the unfortunate circumstances that can arise in a combat situation or when there are hostile forces engaging in an attack. Yes, there are often civilian casualties incurred and there are friendly fire incidents. However, in such incidents there is an evident imminent threat. Examples are a vehicle approaching that does not respond to warnings or unknown subjects demonstrating an evident threat. It the absence of such characteristics it is unacceptable to discharge weapons into a crowd of unarmed civilians.

The initial information released shows that the shootings were in some if not many, cases random. In other cases they were direct shots at close range. A proximity sufficient to allow an assessment of the threat. Let's review that information;

- Initially, the government denied the use of live ammunition. However, as the injuries were evidenced (bullet wounds to the head, back and genitalia),and third parties such as Reuters and the BBC described the weapons used and photographed bullet casings at the positions occupied by the army the government changed its statement.

- In a public statement , the army has stated that at a minimum the following was lost; 9X M16 rifles, 25 X Tavor rifles, 6 X anti-aircraft guns, 580 rubber bullets, 600 anti-aircraft shells and 8,182 M16 bullets. (Please tell me why anti aircraft weaponary was required. Due to the skyline, the threat of an air attack was unlikely.)

- There were 24 fatalities, of which 5 were army personnel. Several thousand protestors sustained injuries. Of these, in excess of 850 protestors were admitted to hospital. Today 217 are still in hospital with 14 in the ICU. Approx. 250 soldiers are reported to have sustained injuries. The military injuries are for the most part blunt force trauma and lacerations. (This is not meant to discount these injuries as many are grim and barbaric in nature.) The majority of civilian fatalities are due to head or back wounds. The government has not released the number of casualties that were shot in the back, but the the outstanding reports (they must be confirmed by autopsy) indicate that protestors were shot in the back as they fled.

In consideration of the above, I do not believe the imminent threat was present in most of the shootings. Your position holds that of the 800+ protestors that sustained weapon discharge injuries, that all were armed and on the attack. C'mon. You can't really believe that or did you just not bother with some critical thinking? If a civilian is running away, it is not acceptable to shoot the person in the back. if there were agitator snipers that were responsible for all of these injuries, it will be evidenced by the entry and exit wounds or at the very least some of the trace trajectory. What I have seen so far suggests that the majority of bullet wounds were sustained at ground level and at close range. As such the expression of holding one's dick is not applicable. The most likely explanation is that someone gave an order to shoot into the crowd.

I find it interesting that the word "assumption" is being used. Sorry, but the Thai troops implicated were well trained. These were not young conscripts, but long term personnel. The lead units have benefited from US, UK and Australian military exchanges. Do you actually think that the army deployed young conscripts? These were some of the best troops in the Bangkok area. Had anything less been used, there was a strong likelihood the troops would have joined with the protestors. Hence, it becomes more likely that someone gave a direct order to fire into the crowd.

If the situation had been similar to Iraq, I could definitely understand if there were significant casualties. The nature of Iraq and Afghanistan is that a surging crowd will most likely be violently hostile, armed and certainly more dangerous that what was seen in Bangkok. I have made no assumptions about Russian and Chinese democracy. it isn't even germane to this matter. However, even the Russians and Chinese troops do not fire randomly into hostile crowds.

My position remains that firing live ammunition into a cvilian population when there are no clear identified targets is wrong. Once the protests are over and the government changes, barring a coup d'etat there will be an inquiry and criminal charges will be brought. I note that the people so distressed by the accusations of extra judicial killings during the war on drugs have not said one word on this.

[way2muchcoffee]

A soldier that would discharge his weapon into a crowd without identifying a target is the one with a mental problem as you call it. An NCO that cannot control his unit is useless and must be removed. An officer that would order his troops to fire into unarmed civilians is guilty of a breach of the rules of engagement. Discipline must be maintained within the ranks. Without discipline there can be no clarity of thought and order collapses.

You are attempting to compare the unfortunate circumstances that can arise in a combat situation or when there are hostile forces engaging in an attack. Yes, there are often civilian casualties incurred and there are friendly fire incidents. However, in such incidents there is an evident imminent threat. Examples are a vehicle approaching that does not respond to warnings or unknown subjects demonstrating an evident threat. It the absence of such characteristics it is unacceptable to discharge weapons into a crowd of unarmed civilians.

The initial information released shows that the shootings were in some if not many, cases random. In other cases they were direct shots at close range. A proximity sufficient to allow an assessment of the threat. Let's review that information;

- Initially, the government denied the use of live ammunition. However, as the injuries were evidenced (bullet wounds to the head, back and genitalia),and third parties such as Reuters and the BBC described the weapons used and photographed bullet casings at the positions occupied by the army the government changed its statement.

- In a public statement , the army has stated that at a minimum the following was lost; 9X M16 rifles, 25 X Tavor rifles, 6 X anti-aircraft guns, 580 rubber bullets, 600 anti-aircraft shells and 8,182 M16 bullets. (Please tell me why anti aircraft weaponary was required. Due to the skyline, the threat of an air attack was unlikely.)

- There were 24 fatalities, of which 5 were army personnel. Several thousand protestors sustained injuries. Of these, in excess of 850 protestors were admitted to hospital. Today 217 are still in hospital with 14 in the ICU. Approx. 250 soldiers are reported to have sustained injuries. The military injuries are for the most part blunt force trauma and lacerations. (This is not meant to discount these injuries as many are grim and barbaric in nature.) The majority of civilian fatalities are due to head or back wounds. The government has not released the number of casualties that were shot in the back, but the the outstanding reports (they must be confirmed by autopsy) indicate that protestors were shot in the back as they fled.

In consideration of the above, I do not believe the imminent threat was present in most of the shootings. Your position holds that of the 800+ protestors that sustained weapon discharge injuries, that all were armed and on the attack. C'mon. You can't really believe that or did you just not bother with some critical thinking? If a civilian is running away, it is not acceptable to shoot the person in the back. if there were agitator snipers that were responsible for all of these injuries, it will be evidenced by the entry and exit wounds or at the very least some of the trace trajectory. What I have seen so far suggests that the majority of bullet wounds were sustained at ground level and at close range. As such the expression of holding one's dick is not applicable. The most likely explanation is that someone gave an order to shoot into the crowd.

I find it interesting that the word "assumption" is being used. Sorry, but the Thai troops implicated were well trained. These were not young conscripts, but long term personnel. The lead units have benefited from US, UK and Australian military exchanges. Do you actually think that the army deployed young conscripts? These were some of the best troops in the Bangkok area. Had anything less been used, there was a strong likelihood the troops would have joined with the protestors. Hence, it becomes more likely that someone gave a direct order to fire into the crowd.

If the situation had been similar to Iraq, I could definitely understand if there were significant casualties. The nature of Iraq and Afghanistan is that a surging crowd will most likely be violently hostile, armed and certainly more dangerous that what was seen in Bangkok. I have made no assumptions about Russian and Chinese democracy. it isn't even germane to this matter. However, even the Russians and Chinese troops do not fire randomly into hostile crowds.

My position remains that firing live ammunition into a cvilian population when there are no clear identified targets is wrong. Once the protests are over and the government changes, barring a coup d'etat there will be an inquiry and criminal charges will be brought. I note that the people so distressed by the accusations of extra judicial killings during the war on drugs have not said one word on this.

Your argument is invalid. Once the soldiers were fired upon with long-range sniper rifles, ak47s, and grenades, the level of engagement necessarily changed. They were being attacked with war weapons. They did not fire on 'unarmed' civilians. They fired on a heavily armed and deadly mob bent on their destruction. All of this took place under a state of emergency, so any protester on sight was in serious violation of the law. The protesters were given ample warning to disperse, but chose not to. Shortly before the crackdown, all of the tough young redshirt men at Ratchaprasong were moved over to the Phan Fah site specifically to fight the security forces.

Edited April 16, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[animatic]

Assuming that they randomly fired into a crowd

rather than specific targets leading the charge at them in a crowd is total conjecture.

We also know that commanders WERE being targeted,

so you argument about lose of control is rather muted...

And yes they were under attack and knew that war weapons were being used against them.

That changed the rules of engagement substantially.

Grenades launched from cover hitting your commander is not a time to question

the need to increased force durning rescue of wounded comrades.

[Jerrytheyoung]

Please Stop to argue to each other.

We are on the verge of the abyms....

Change your rhetoric try to find what is uniting instead of what divide.

Today, more stupid actions are on the way we are quite close from the critical point where we will enter insurrection and civil war will follow

[ovaltina]

I think its strange to see, after reading a lot of posts here, how so many people in here are bragging about how siviliced and mature the governements of the west are - and how wuickly they would have responded in these civilized countries. But from my viewpoint the only reason for that is that those socalled democratic and mature countries are really a mafia put in a nice woven system, and a population brainwashed to such and extent that they believe they are truly free. Any government that is not shaking in their pants from thinking what reactions they will get from their actions are truly the countries of which I would not like to live in. Like so many western countries, the government have nothing to fear, mostly because of their dosile and utterly brainwashed grass-root, but also because this brainwashed mob is helping them to keep up their game undefinently. If anyone gathers to form a coup they will quickly be labellled scary names as anarchists, communists, terrorists etc. So really, dear Thai-Visa readers, you are truly the hijacked people. You fail to see that this is a grass-root struggle, and that a government should be as loose as this. In my view all governemnts should respect their inhabitants and fear them and not have total monopoly of power agains the people. If its not even close to an even power-ratio between population and government, you would never have any real power against the so-called elected left/right-paradigm. This have shown itself to be a big hoax in most democracies, and its just laughable how people are believing that they have any real choise whatsoever when they are standing in the election booth.

I am proud to see people going to the streets and fighting and being so powerful that the government is going to last-resort practices trying to retain some resemblance of control. This is how a real democracy where set out to work, if you look at the original constitution of USA. It was clearly stated that the people should be allowed to own guns so that they in such times of hijacking or unconstitutional government take-overs should be willing to fight themselves back to the origianl law of the states - thus being free once again. With regards to USA, and all other western countries, we have long ago been hijacked by incrementalism and slowly lost all power from the people.

Go fight and reinstitute law and order to this country. You will learn from this process, and I hope this will show other people in the world that governments are really weak when it comes to a real grass-root rebellion.

Hard to know where to begin. You write like a 15-year-old who thinks violent revolution is the same as MTV rock videos and its all cool & stuff, power to the people.

Firstly, you sit in Norway & encourage armed uprising on the streets of a faraway nation. That is deplorable. It is the kind of Armchair-General, you sit there sipping brandy 5000 miles from any kind of danger, while encouraging others to spill their blood and the blood of innocent bystanders, in a distant land.

Second. You go on about how the West is brainwashed. I disagree. The West has accepted the inevitable, which is something called Market Forces. The West is run by capitalism, which is the inevitable system of commerce. Commerce is something that the Westerners LIKE. It is not brainwashing, it is just something they want. The Asia Pac nations want this too, incase you missed this fact.

The West is run by Corporate Power. It is no more or less mafia than anything else on Earth, from rural tribes with head-man and his tough guy bodyguards, on up. In caveman times there was some guy in the cave owning all the bits of flint. The difference with Corporate Control, is that it is inevitable. Because people want those corporate products. It has nothing to do with brainwashing.It is 'things that people want'. Full stop.

Obama/ Brown etc., are not allowed to do anything without the permission of Corporations. They are pretty or at least presentable / fairly credible figureheads on the bow of a corporate mega-ship.

Thailand also has corporate interests, they are growing , the same way they are growing in every nation on Earth. Abhisit understands this. He is a boardroom boy at heart. He understands that whatever he does, the boss is always the Corporations. He understands that his job is to balance the people & the Corporations as best he can.

People serve the corporations, on the factory floor and the field. The corporations serve the people, in delivering the goods they need.

Third. You sit there in Norway, safe & sound, pontificating & advocating the unnecessary bloodshed of innocent,young & quite frankly impressionable Thais. The computer you are using is manufactured by the Corporations which are the heart and soul of the 'evil brainwashed westerner'. Do you think that your computer in Norway, or your internet connection, your mobile phone or your car or anything, were manufactured in some rice paddy in NE Thailand?

Social change is not achieved in the streets, and it is not achieved by bloodshed. It is achieved in boardrooms and polling booths. It takes decades of gradual social change, not a few weeks of rage and stupidity in some roads.

Even your Viking ancestors had more sense than you. They were traders. They only resorted to violence in self defense, and raided towns only to recover stolen goods. They concentrated on trade ; capitalism. The violence was defensive. You can read about it in books,if you like.

You are a hypocrite, to use corporate technology media and to use it to call for the downfall of corporate 'brainwashed' capitalism from the West. Just like those black-clad anarchists at 'stop capitalism' demos, with their Nokias.

You are heartless & sociologically illiterate, to suggest that a violent armed coup, will bring better life standards to anybody in Thailand. It will bring injury and death.It has already cost the economy hugely, from small-business,hoteliers, etcetc. In a trickle-down economy, the losses to poor people when the economy takes a hit, are huge. The poor people are losing money, because they are damaging their own economy. Abhisit had already laid out long-term plans for redistribution and infrastructure in the North, as well as helping the urban poor. These plans are financially undermined when the economy suffers.

As we have seen, it is not Thaksin or his generals, or long-distance Keyboard-Warriors like yourself, who are injured or killed , it is Thais; dead soldiers and dead farmers, from the same poor backgrounds. The corporate powers will always be in charge. Only the figurehead changes. And not for the better.

The photo of an unhappy Thai child you have selected for avatar is appropriate, it is the face of Thailand's slowly recovering economy and tentative steps to democracy & profitable stable business enterprise, being publically derailed by a gang of anarchist thugs.

To adress your point ; they are anarchists. They have no agenda .Their demand for more money to the rural poor is a demand for changes that Abhisit has already been introducing in his short term in power, changes that by necessity take years & decades to implement & flourish.

They march with banners saying 'we want peace', in a land where the government have not been violent to them at all until this armed uprising. They march with banners saying 'we want democracy' in a land with votes & a leader who even offers them early elections in 9months time as a concilliatory gesture. Fact is, they don't have agenda, or demands. They want to burn stuff & re-instate a billionaire underworld godfather just because he promised them all free TV's.

Edited April 16, 2010 by ovaltina

[Jingthing]

Please Stop to argue to each other.

We are on the verge of the abyms....

Change your rhetoric try to find what is uniting instead of what divide.

Today, more stupid actions are on the way we are quite close from the critical point where we will enter insurrection and civil war will follow

Reality check. What foreigners say here isn't going to change anything about what is going to happen in/to Thailand. We may be a lot of things, but we aren't responsible for the insanity of the current crisis in Thailand. Most of us would like to see peace talks. The reds have said no numerous times. What happens next? Maybe some people behind the curtain know, and maybe they don't ...

[Old Man River]

Please Stop to argue to each other.

We are on the verge of the abyms....

Change your rhetoric try to find what is uniting instead of what divide.

Today, more stupid actions are on the way we are quite close from the critical point where we will enter insurrection and civil war will follow

Reality check. What foreigners say here isn't going to change anything about what is going to happen in/to Thailand. We may be a lot of things, but we aren't responsible for the insanity of the current crisis in Thailand. Most of us would like to see peace talks. The reds have said no numerous times. What happens next? Maybe some people behind the curtain know, and maybe they don't ...

The Phue Thai Party will hold a press conference in English tomorrow morning at 10:30 AM at their HQ.

[geriatrickid]

Is the killing of young Thai soldiers, from the same poor villages as these civilians, OK? Surely all killing is wrong.

Surely, when you *don't* march on the capital armed with melee weapons & firearms, you greatly reduce, if not eradicate altogether, the risk of said civilians & soldiers being injured.

By inference, when you *do* get tooled-up with a vast array of sharp & exploding items, & march upon the capital with your leaders shouting 'we shall burn Bangkok' (quote), you are actually raising the risk of civilians, passers by and indeed soldiers, being injured or killed. Perhaps, the best course of action is not to pick up those weapons and go marching off to confrontations in the first place?

The soldiers are not from the same villages. They were drawn from the central and southern elite units. No conscripts from the North were deployed to the front lines. This by no means serves as a justification for killing anyone but you need to look at who the commanders were and from where they were drawn. The village folks that you refer to are the ones sent south to Pattani etc.

And now for something completely different. Has anyone noticed that the Navy and Airforce leadership has been very very quiet? Not a word. If you were in these branches and saw your share of the budget shrinking while the land forces saw theirs increase would you be in a good mood? IMO The much maligned navy has some of the most professional members of the officer corps. These are the officers that have spent more time with other nations and IMO they are more enlightened. Keep an eye on the navy and airforce brass. If they do not join a coup, this will speak volumes about the internal disagreements. I admit to being biased because I personally have a great deal of respect for this branch that has had to do so much with so little. Under appreciated and neglected with a large contribution to the national environment and health programs.

[Mario2008]

1 post and 2 replies to it deleted for comparing people who support government action with a mob of Eichman brothers.

[selftaopath]

As far as this whole disturbance has been allowed to progress, I am quite afraid that NONE of the potential outcomes are very encouraging.

Thailand can never be accused of being a "mature" society.

Neither do the masses appreciate "rule of law".

It is not part of their culture.

I have observed many Thai parents/grandparents do not teach the idea of NO to children. Do schools teach the message of NO i.e. pass failing students regardless they are not qualified to progress? Does Thai culture understand NO?

[way2muchcoffee]

As far as this whole disturbance has been allowed to progress, I am quite afraid that NONE of the potential outcomes are very encouraging.

Thailand can never be accused of being a "mature" society.

Neither do the masses appreciate "rule of law".

It is not part of their culture.

I have observed many Thai parents/grandparents do not teach the idea of NO to children. Do schools teach the message of NO i.e. pass failing students regardless they are not qualified to progress? Does Thai culture understand NO?

Not exactly. They do seem to understand 'not yes' though.

Edited April 17, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Johpa]

Nothing is going to change the cycles of repeated military coups until the lese majeste laws are removed from the books.

[anotherpeter]

Nothing is going to change the cycles of repeated military coups until the lese majeste laws are removed from the books.

Even the person that they apply to says that they shouldn't be there.

[yoshiwara]

Nothing is going to change the cycles of repeated military coups until the lese majeste laws are removed from the books.

Well we know where that is coming from.

Thaksin's not so secret agenda.

Maybe he is Napoleon when he dreams.

And you are Josephine.