Abhisit - A Prime Minister Tried By War

[jcbangkok]

Wasn't Clockwork Orange about a lunatic asylum? Perhaps you belong there.

You must have missed the point about Clockwork Orange. It was actually a satirical film about an imaginary dystopian future, one in which the more society tried to analyse and control itself, the more chaotic and morally bereft it became.

Really... where did you see that version.. I saw a crazed gang of droogs, with their Mad leader,Alex de Large, raping and robbing and killing... and driving a Lotus Europa... All to Beethoven...Did I miss something..? Oh, its also the nickname of the Glasgow Subway.. as any Droog Glasweigan will tell you..!

It isn't even worth mentioning the future part as it was a very near future and nothing really futuristic about it. The reason it was likely made in the very near future was simply to make it more credible in terms of the experiment to make the main character non-violent when he was in prison.

I am just flabbergasted now that he chose that screen name considering his lack of understanding of the movie.

Edited May 20, 2010 by jcbangkok

[ThailandTommy]

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is honest and good. He has tried to stop the highjacking of the nation with as little bloodshed as possible and yesterday was handled well. Now there is the problem of some very sore losers.

Many people have said that Thailand needs a great leader right now and Abhisit might very well be that man. The Abraham Lincoln of Thailand ? Maybe. Only time will tell.

Give me a pint of what your drinking!!!

[Ulysses G.]

Wasn't Clockwork Orange about a lunatic asylum? Perhaps you belong there.

You must have missed the point about Clockwork Orange. It was actually a satirical film about an imaginary dystopian future, one in which the more society tried to analyse and control itself, the more chaotic and morally bereft it became.

I'm pretty sure that he was just trying to imply that you must be crazy without coming right out and saying it.

[Ulysses G.]

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is honest and good. He has tried to stop the highjacking of the nation with as little bloodshed as possible and yesterday was handled well. Now there is the problem of some very sore losers.

Many people have said that Thailand needs a great leader right now and Abhisit might very well be that man. The Abraham Lincoln of Thailand ? Maybe. Only time will tell.

Give me a pint of what your drinking!!!

It won't cure your little problem.

[TITI1971]

I think comparing Abhisit to Lincoln is a bit of a stretch.

The article is classic Pravda propaganda, prepared by the party faithful.

What it doesn't mention is Thailand's fatal flaw - mob rule has replaced the electoral process, which people have completely lost faith in. Neither does the Pravda article mention that Abhisit's lot used this very same method of mob rule to pave the way for the parliamentary deal that got him into power in the first place. Thais support fair play, and while such a system of injustice and hypocrisy prevails there will never be peace. We might also bear in mind that Abhisit's pretext for snatching power was reconciliation, but all we have seen is more chaos. Far from being celebrated as the next Abe Lincoln, Abhisit is just as much focus of hatred as Thaksin is - both of them should withdraw from public life and give the country a chance to repair its broken democracy.

Restoring the public confidence in their right to elect their leaders is really what the Thai authorities should be concentrating on right now. Elections are pointless until the army and judiciary stop meddling with the result.

Your heros burned down the city yesterday - You must be so proud!

and the real other heroes ordered to shot on most unnarmed and pacifist peoples.... Catch the terrorist OK, kill them during a clash, almost OK but shot for free, bad, very bad... cleaning the area is right, but cleaning the area doesn't "clean" the real problem. Using guns is a lose lose solution, for both sides.

[whybother]

No matter what you think of Abhisit he will be ineffective now and has to step down. He has no other option.

If he proceeds with a potential massacre then he loses. His reputation as a leader as a competent leader is dead.

If he accepts third party intervention he loses again because he has shown he cannot control the problems within the country.

If he accepts the option of the dissolution of the government and have elections he loses again because he cannot win back his position.

If he stays in power Thailand will never come together again under his PM rule.

If he proceeds with what massacre?

He's already rejected third party intervention. He's already rejected dissolution.

Do you think the reds would accept anyone in power unless they're red?

Most of the by-elections since the last general election have gone against the reds. The reds are not winning any new friends with their efforts at the moment, and with their *less than majority* result in the last election, they are unlikely to get into power in the next election.

Abhisit lost friends by not acting quickly enough in bringing the protests under control. These people are not going to be voting red, so they will still be voting Democrat or someone who is going to go into coalition with the Democrats.

IMO, the reds will not win the next election, and they will continue their protests after that because they don't understand that in a democracy, the *majority* get to run the government.

If you are correct then why not have another election and shut the reds up? Abhisit can retain his position.

Once again, what massacre? It's standard for red propagandists to spout lies without any evidence or reason isn't it.

The reds need to learn to wait for elections every 4 years, when they're scheduled. Until then, they can campaign freely (unlike non-red parties in red areas).

[whybother]

The red party will win in a lot of the N/NE provinces, but that area is a minority of the whole of Thailand. I don't believe the red party will win in electorates outside of those provinces.

read it and weep.. I dont believe the red heartlands will shed a tear for burnt out shopping malls, if anything they will probably be even redder! (in my opinion)

The reds won the PR war. The yellows... ooo.. vely jai rai.. shoot lot of people.

Maybe the heartlands won't, but the heartlands are not a majority of Thailand, so it's the other areas that the reds need to worry about.

As it was, they didn't get a majority in the last election, and in by-elections since then they have lost more ground.

I don't believe the reds won the PR war. While the protests were peaceful it was going OK for them, but, particularly after April 10 and the men in black and especially after they rejected Abhisit's offer of elections, they have made it worse for them. The looting and burning has completely wrecked any gains that they may have made earlier.

I don't believe the reds will win the election in December 2011. It will be a Democrat coalition government again.

[lilkitty]

I think comparing Abhisit to Lincoln is a bit of a stretch.

A big stretch, I'd say. May as well compare Einstein to Doraemon.

[Grey11]

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is honest and good. He has tried to stop the highjacking of the nation with as little bloodshed as possible and yesterday was handled well. Now there is the problem of some very sore losers.

Many people have said that Thailand needs a great leader right now and Abhisit might very well be that man. The Abraham Lincoln of Thailand ? Maybe. Only time will tell.

I think the author give Lincoln more credit than he deserves. When you have the enemy outnumbered by the tens of thousands and have nearly all manufacturing in your area, it doesn't take a brilliant man to defeat a badly outnumbered enemy. Still, it took four years and then 13 years of bitter Reconstruction to whip the Southerners into line. But, Lincoln was a much more compassionate man than those in his Cabinet who took over power upon his assassination. Lincoln probably would not have set out to punish the Southern States nearly as severly as did those who took his place that hated the Southerners and all they stood for with a passion. They did not believe in bringing the nation together. They believed in revenge. Therefore, 13 years of terrible suffering known as Reconstruction was the fate of the Southerners - particularly those who fought for the Confederate States of America in the war. The first step was the Bank of the U.S. to raise taxes on Southern land so high that the Southerners (who were totally broke at the end of the war) could not afford to pay taxes. Thus they lost their land to Carpetbaggers (Yankees who came South with money in bags made of carpet & bought the land for pennies on the dollar), not more than two ex-Southern soldiers were allowed to speak together in a group without arrest, Southern officers lost their right to vote and most C.S.A. veterans were not allowed to run for office - state or federal, and Pres. Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee were stripped of their citizenship as "traitors." Now I realise that many in the northern U.S. consider all C.S.A. generals & other officers to be "traitors" and would rather they have been executed, which was a battle fought amongst those who ruled after Lincoln died. Seward, even had Robert E. Lee's signed letter pledging his allegiance to the U.S. after Reconstruction giving him back his citizenship hidden. Lee died a non-citizen of the U.S. In the early 1970s the letter Lee signed was found among the belongings of one of Seward's relatives and in 1974 U.S. Pres. Gerald Ford (from Michigan) posthumously, gave Robert E. Lee his citzenship back. I think Lincoln was a good man and did what he had to do. I think the same about PM Abhisit. Although I do think PM Abhisit is, all in all, a kinder and more intelligent man than was Abraham Lincoln.

[MB1]

Wasn't Clockwork Orange about a lunatic asylum? Perhaps you belong there.

You must have missed the point about Clockwork Orange. It was actually a satirical film about an imaginary dystopian future, one in which the more society tried to analyse and control itself, the more chaotic and morally bereft it became.

I'm pretty sure that he was just trying to imply that you must be crazy without coming right out and saying it.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of crazies are making their new homes on Thai Visa until evicted from under their bridges by the Mods, but after reading many of the political threads over the last couple of months (Trying to keep out of them and refrain from posting) during the troubles in Thailand it seems IMO that most of the crazy ones are red supporters with a one sided view or just trolls, with the execption of a few who have the ability to see both sides and have the intelligence and etiquette to debate in an unbiased way.

The one sided biased ones IMO need to engage brain before typing finger and unless they do are not really worth replying to, though I must confess that I think Vikings head is full of broken biscuits and he or she reallly needs to give it a good shake.

I've even noticed on some threads that some Farang people who sympathised with the reds have now turned against the Reds after the last couple of days events, I have a feeling that some Thais have changed their minds also after seeing what the so called peaceful protests have done to their country.

In view of whats happened over the last couple of months IMO Mr Abhisit has done what he see best for the country and gave the reds chance after chance to peacefully disperse and go home, but certain hardcore elements IMO never had any intention of protesting peacefully or had any intention of ending the protests peacfully but had the sole intention of trying to bring down the Government and cause chaos.

I hope that the ones who have orchestrated the events that have unfolded have their day in court and pay dearly for their crimes against their own people and country.

I also hope that if it's proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Thaksin bankrolled the recent protests that he faces the courts and is sentenced appropriately, IMO for treason and terrorism.

Thailand at this moment in time needs strong leadership to keep the country as stable as possible and IMO Abhisit has been strong and I can't see who would be able to fill his boots at this time of crisis.

[Grey11]

The difference is, that Lincoln doesn’t have several paragraphs on his wiki page concerning corruption and scandals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhisit_Vejjajiva

The victors write the history books. Lincoln was in office during a war and Presidents are judged much more softly during war. All of the quotes by Lincoln in which he doesn't oppose slavery and even suggested maybe the Blacks could be sent back to Africa during debates have been left out of the history books. Lincoln even told those states that were contemplating withdrawing from the U.S.A. to form their own country (which they did using the original U.S. Constitution with a capital, C.S.A. Reps. & Senators, governors in individual states, etc.) that he would allow each slave to count as 1/3 of a vote but not a full vote. But, he would not lift the heavy taxes on produce grown in the southern states particularly when they tried to sell to England, France and other countries. But, I do not wish to cause further controversy or take this any further. Fact is when a President is assassinated, as Kennedy was, many of their failures and evil deeds are forgiven and forgotten. Not of their own choosing of course, but they become matryrs. Wikipedia, like all U.S. history has been molded to fit the times and to be forgiving.

[thaimite]

There's not many men in this world who I have the up most respect for or would feel humbled in their presence, Abhisit is most definitely a man who I truly respect.

He has proven without reasonable doubt he is what this country needs, maybe not in the eyes of some folk but for the country as a whole Thailand needs Abhisit.

I bow before your sir, how you have handled the situation over the past few weeks is truly remarkable and commendable given the circumstances.

Well said.

Normally I have little or no respect for any politician of any party (britain and US included) but I think Abhisit has done the best possible job in what was always a no-win situation. the number of deaths although very sad is remarkably low compared to what it could have been, and the vandalism of a few thugs who decided to act like spoilt children when things did not go their way was always on the cards, and in such circumstances all anybody can do is react as fast as possible to the events as they happen

[expat8]

No matter what you think of Abhisit he will be ineffective now and has to step down. He has no other option.

If he proceeds with a potential massacre then he loses. His reputation as a leader as a competent leader is dead.

If he accepts third party intervention he loses again because he has shown he cannot control the problems within the country.

If he accepts the option of the dissolution of the government and have elections he loses again because he cannot win back his position.

If he stays in power Thailand will never come together again under his PM rule.

If he proceeds with what massacre?

He's already rejected third party intervention. He's already rejected dissolution.

Do you think the reds would accept anyone in power unless they're red?

Most of the by-elections since the last general election have gone against the reds. The reds are not winning any new friends with their efforts at the moment, and with their *less than majority* result in the last election, they are unlikely to get into power in the next election.

Abhisit lost friends by not acting quickly enough in bringing the protests under control. These people are not going to be voting red, so they will still be voting Democrat or someone who is going to go into coalition with the Democrats.

IMO, the reds will not win the next election, and they will continue their protests after that because they don't understand that in a democracy, the *majority* get to run the government.

If you are correct then why not have another election and shut the reds up? Abhisit can retain his position.

Once again, what massacre? It's standard for red propagandists to spout lies without any evidence or reason isn't it.

The reds need to learn to wait for elections every 4 years, when they're scheduled. Until then, they can campaign freely (unlike non-red parties in red areas).

Are you having a problem with a direct question. You are diverting. Abhisit did not wait for 4 years. A military coup did just fine.

Believe it or not I am not a red supporter but the ludicrous spewing is difficult to take. A reality check would do you good.

[lilkitty]

Are you having a problem with a direct question. You are diverting. Abhisit did not wait for 4 years. A military coup did just fine.

Believe it or not I am not a red supporter but the ludicrous spewing is difficult to take. A reality check would do you good.

You have a very good point. Neither did Abhisit wait for 4 years, after he lost the previous election to Samak.

[expat8]

Wasn't Clockwork Orange about a lunatic asylum? Perhaps you belong there.

You must have missed the point about Clockwork Orange. It was actually a satirical film about an imaginary dystopian future, one in which the more society tried to analyse and control itself, the more chaotic and morally bereft it became.

I'm pretty sure that he was just trying to imply that you must be crazy without coming right out and saying it.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of crazies are making their new homes on Thai Visa until evicted from under their bridges by the Mods, but after reading many of the political threads over the last couple of months (Trying to keep out of them and refrain from posting) during the troubles in Thailand it seems IMO that most of the crazy ones are red supporters with a one sided view or just trolls, with the execption of a few who have the ability to see both sides and have the intelligence and etiquette to debate in an unbiased way.

The one sided biased ones IMO need to engage brain before typing finger and unless they do are not really worth replying to, though I must confess that I think Vikings head is full of broken biscuits and he or she reallly needs to give it a good shake.

I've even noticed on some threads that some Farang people who sympathised with the reds have now turned against the Reds after the last couple of days events, I have a feeling that some Thais have changed their minds also after seeing what the so called peaceful protests have done to their country.

In view of whats happened over the last couple of months IMO Mr Abhisit has done what he see best for the country and gave the reds chance after chance to peacefully disperse and go home, but certain hardcore elements IMO never had any intention of protesting peacefully or had any intention of ending the protests peacfully but had the sole intention of trying to bring down the Government and cause chaos.

I hope that the ones who have orchestrated the events that have unfolded have their day in court and pay dearly for their crimes against their own people and country.

I also hope that if it's proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Thaksin bankrolled the recent protests that he faces the courts and is sentenced appropriately, IMO for treason and terrorism.

Thailand at this moment in time needs strong leadership to keep the country as stable as possible and IMO Abhisit has been strong and I can't see who would be able to fill his boots at this time of crisis.

Amazing.

[whybother]

If he proceeds with what massacre?

He's already rejected third party intervention. He's already rejected dissolution.

Do you think the reds would accept anyone in power unless they're red?

Most of the by-elections since the last general election have gone against the reds. The reds are not winning any new friends with their efforts at the moment, and with their *less than majority* result in the last election, they are unlikely to get into power in the next election.

Abhisit lost friends by not acting quickly enough in bringing the protests under control. These people are not going to be voting red, so they will still be voting Democrat or someone who is going to go into coalition with the Democrats.

IMO, the reds will not win the next election, and they will continue their protests after that because they don't understand that in a democracy, the *majority* get to run the government.

If you are correct then why not have another election and shut the reds up? Abhisit can retain his position.

Once again, what massacre? It's standard for red propagandists to spout lies without any evidence or reason isn't it.

The reds need to learn to wait for elections every 4 years, when they're scheduled. Until then, they can campaign freely (unlike non-red parties in red areas).

Are you having a problem with a direct question. You are diverting. Abhisit did not wait for 4 years. A military coup did just fine.

Believe it or not I am not a red supporter but the ludicrous spewing is difficult to take. A reality check would do you good.

I'm having a problem getting a direct answer. You said "If he proceeds with a potential massacre then he loses." I asked "What massacre?"

It's seems to be you that is doing the diverting. I asked you twice, and you brought up completely different points.

"Abhisit did not wait for 4 years. A military coup did just fine."

It was Thaksin that didn't wait 4 years. He called a new election after just one year after previously winning a "majority". Then it was Thaksin trying to stay on beyond the constitutional time as care-taker PM that brought on the coup. The last election was in 2007. Currently the majority of elected MPs are supporting Abhisit. The reds need to wait until either the Democrats are disbanded, or the next election in December 2011.

Please, if anything I have stated is ludicrous, please explain where I have gone wrong.

[Kilgore Trout]

Er.... what's a Lincoln Log? In the UK we have a Lincoln Biscuit. Did he invent that too?

P&M

Lincoln logs were often seen floating in the presidential toilet

[whybother]

Are you having a problem with a direct question. You are diverting. Abhisit did not wait for 4 years. A military coup did just fine.

Believe it or not I am not a red supporter but the ludicrous spewing is difficult to take. A reality check would do you good.

You have a very good point. Neither did Abhisit wait for 4 years, after he lost the previous election to Samak.

Abhisit didn't need to wait. The PPP dug their own hole.

[expat8]

Massacre defined as shooting 40+ people shot in the head and counting. More people being killed and we are hearing small fragments of information to confirm. Point is: more people are being shot.

Abhisit called for an election when it was safe to do so. No politician calls for an election he thinks he will lose. Abhisit got his position as a result of a military coup. He did not wait 4 years to get his position.

The majority of PMs voted the way they did as a result of changing political positions. Not he Political position they they were elected to hold.

Yes the majority of the PMs support Abhisit because they changed their political position. Not the one they were elected to hold.

I put to you, have an election now and see if you can make these same statements. I think not.

I know I will be suspended soon from these forum speaking this way.

[expat8]

Er.... what's a Lincoln Log? In the UK we have a Lincoln Biscuit. Did he invent that too?

P&M

Lincoln logs were often seen floating in the presidential toilet

Thank you for the comic relief!!

[sbk]

Follow the forum rules, refrain from inflammatory posts and flaming and you have no reason to be suspended from this forum.

[expat8]

Er.... what's a Lincoln Log? In the UK we have a Lincoln Biscuit. Did he invent that too?

P&M

Lincoln logs were often seen floating in the presidential toilet

Thank you for the comic relief!!

[viking75]

More good press for our fearless pm http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/as...nd-1977647.html

Don't suppose he actually did any shooting himself unless they have a gun that can fire out of underground bunkers and hit targets 10 miles away.

Talk of which, the small thai apologist on CRES with glasses now has a twitch of epic size. I think maybe when he talk, he see Thaksin come in room with testicle removing scissors and three katoeys to remove his trousers.

[whybother]

Massacre defined as shooting 40+ people shot in the head and counting. More people being killed and we are hearing small fragments of information to confirm. Point is: more people are being shot.

Abhisit called for an election when it was safe to do aso. No politician calls for an election he thinks he will lose. Abhisit got his position as a result of a military coup. He did not wait 4 years to get his position.

The majority of PMs voted the way they did as a result of changing political positions. Not he Political position they they were elected to hold.

Yes the majority of the PMs support Abhisit because they changed their political position. Not the one they were elected to hold.

I put to you, have an election now and see if you can make these same statements. I think not.

I know I will be suspended soon from these forum speaking this way.

When there are thousands protesting, and there are many that are shooting and throwing grenades at soldiers, 40 isn't a massacre. It's unfortunate, but what would you expect when you shoot at soldiers. Soldiers are still being shot at. Soldiers are still shooting back.

There was a coup. It was illegal. There were elections. The PPP formed a coalition government. The PPP got caught cheating. MPs decided they didn't like the way the PPP governed, so changed their support to the Democrats. The PPP could have called elections before they were disbanded, but they thought they would keep the support of the smaller parties. Why didn't they call elections then? Instead they gambled and went to the parliamentary vote, as they did with Somchai. They lost. Abhisit didn't need to wait 4 years, but only because of the PPP's incompetence.

Some of the smaller parties campaigned that they wouldn't support the PPP, and then they did. Later they changed their minds and supported Abhisit. So the changes went both ways.

A government should not have to call elections because a minority mob demands it. The minority mob should wait for elections.

It's not my choice to call elections, it's the government's. But I support their position not to.

I don't see why you would get banned for having a civil discussion, unless it was your flaming that just got deleted. If so, sorry I missed it.

[expat8]

Er.... what's a Lincoln Log? In the UK we have a Lincoln Biscuit. Did he invent that too?

P&M

Lincoln logs were often seen floating in the presidential toilet

Thank you for the comic relief!!

[lannarebirth]

Massacre defined as shooting 40+ people shot in the head and counting. More people being killed and we are hearing small fragments of information to confirm. Point is: more people are being shot.

Abhisit called for an election when it was safe to do so. No politician calls for an election he thinks he will lose. Abhisit got his position as a result of a military coup. He did not wait 4 years to get his position.

The majority of PMs voted the way they did as a result of changing political positions. Not he Political position they they were elected to hold.

Yes the majority of the PMs support Abhisit because they changed their political position. Not the one they were elected to hold.

I put to you, have an election now and see if you can make these same statements. I think not.

I know I will be suspended soon from these forum speaking this way.

Interestingly enough, telling lies is not against the TV forum rules. There would be a hel_l of a lot fewer posts here if it were. My guess is you will be suspended when you post inflammatory comments after another poster refutes one by one the points you try to make.

[h90]

I think, what Abhisit did wrong, was that he did everything too late, and too weak. At least the protesters should be questioned 1 week and charged with 20.000 Baht each, else it is still a profit for them and they will be here again April 2011.

As well Jatuporn is free again (because he is MP) and Thaksin is again not a Terrorist.

that means he is simply too weak for the job, a real war leader would not let Jatuporn go free and would let the army take the judge for questioning immediately.

[SomTumTiger]

I think, what Abhisit did wrong, was that he did everything too late, and too weak. At least the protesters should be questioned 1 week and charged with 20.000 Baht each, else it is still a profit for them and they will be here again April 2011.

As well Jatuporn is free again (because he is MP) and Thaksin is again not a Terrorist.

that means he is simply too weak for the job, a real war leader would not let Jatuporn go free and would let the army take the judge for questioning immediately.

Yes, that "Following the law" is always a kicker.

[gemini81]

More good press for our fearless pm http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/as...nd-1977647.html

Don't suppose he actually did any shooting himself unless they have a gun that can fire out of underground bunkers and hit targets 10 miles away.

Talk of which, the small thai apologist on CRES with glasses now has a twitch of epic size. I think maybe when he talk, he see Thaksin come in room with testicle removing scissors and three katoeys to remove his trousers.

how much did Thaksin pay you to post that?

In no way were those people victims, told time and again to get out. Then they try to hide out in a temple to act like they're innocent. Thats as bad as Thaksin hiding out in Europe to avoid charges.

This journalist's account is bunk. Soldiers don't come in firing aimlessly like its a video game near the temple. If that were true, they all would've been laid down dead.

[expat8]

Massacre defined as shooting 40+ people shot in the head and counting. More people being killed and we are hearing small fragments of information to confirm. Point is: more people are being shot.

Abhisit called for an election when it was safe to do aso. No politician calls for an election he thinks he will lose. Abhisit got his position as a result of a military coup. He did not wait 4 years to get his position.

The majority of PMs voted the way they did as a result of changing political positions. Not he Political position they they were elected to hold.

Yes the majority of the PMs support Abhisit because they changed their political position. Not the one they were elected to hold.

I put to you, have an election now and see if you can make these same statements. I think not.

I know I will be suspended soon from these forum speaking this way.

When there are thousands protesting, and there are many that are shooting and throwing grenades at soldiers, 40 isn't a massacre. It's unfortunate, but what would you expect when you shoot at soldiers. Soldiers are still being shot at. Soldiers are still shooting back.

There was a coup. It was illegal. There were elections. The PPP formed a coalition government. The PPP got caught cheating. MPs decided they didn't like the way the PPP governed, so changed their support to the Democrats. The PPP could have called elections before they were disbanded, but they thought they would keep the support of the smaller parties. Why didn't they call elections then? Instead they gambled and went to the parliamentary vote, as they did with Somchai. They lost. Abhisit didn't need to wait 4 years, but only because of the PPP's incompetence.

Some of the smaller parties campaigned that they wouldn't support the PPP, and then they did. Later they changed their minds and supported Abhisit. So the changes went both ways.

A government should not have to call elections because a minority mob demands it. The minority mob should wait for elections.

It's not my choice to call elections, it's the government's. But I support their position not to.

I don't see why you would get banned for having a civil discussion, unless it was your flaming that just got deleted. If so, sorry I missed it.

If we can, let's be civil for a moment. 40+ people killed is just what we have heard. You said the army has been shot at. I will not dispute you on the definition of what "shoot" is but you have to agree soldiers are not dying and civilians are. I believe there are more civilians dying now. You can dispute that. That's ok. And yes the red shirts are causing damage, I do not dispute that as well. If you have been in Thailand any amount of time you understand these people are emotional people and they are a bit reactionary. Can a THAI leader not do better and not kill his own race? If he is a true leader can he not find a way?

Edited May 20, 2010 by expat8