Army Will Always Be A Part Of Thai Politics

[metroman]

I have seen Thai politics since Thanon Kittachorn in the 70s so I am aware of the influence of the army. Play ball with the army or ........

[selftaopath]

The biggest problem for Thailand is that the generals haven't quiet come to terms with a civilian government running the show,although running in the shadows , to save face, they are in charge of key departments, this was the trade off for a civilian government, pity ,generals are war mongers , because that's their trade, so they only know confrontation, generals should do what they think they know best at running, an army and let the people run the country.

"Generals are war mongers" you say? Perhaps their primary interest - all 100 of them - is accumulating pesonal wealth. I still can not figure out what 100 generals do in a country the size of Thailand. How many generals does Australia/England/ U.S.A. have???? LOL ah this place is funny or is it sad?

[hammered]

The army is for killing invading armies at the border. They have no role in crowd control unless you want to kill people. That's what armies do. Crowd control is police work.

The army needs to be under civilian control for military purposes only and stay out of politics and police work.

In the 60's America armed the police force and even gave them a navy. But the Army didn't like it and there was a war between the Army and Police force. The Army won and America went home.

Try reading operation seabord. I think that was the name or if not that will get you to the story.

Wasnt there a bit of drug trade involved in that too?

[jayjayjayjay]

The army is for killing invading armies at the border. They have no role in crowd control unless you want to kill people. That's what armies do. Crowd control is police work.

The army needs to be under civilian control for military purposes only and stay out of politics and police work.

Very few understand that irrelevant of the allegiances to elected or non elected persons in high places, without the above being the first rule of a constitution AND adhered to, Thailand is going nowhere fast. JR

[SamritT]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

[phetaroi]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it would be better to speak for yourself or say something like, "Some of us," or "Many of us." You imply that 100% of Bangkokians agree with your position.

[Insight]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it would be better to speak for yourself or say something like, "Some of us," or "Many of us." You imply that 100% of Bangkokians agree with your position.

I don't "she's" that far off. There's a reason the police are going on a big PR offensive since May 19th, with (IMO) unconvincing billboards up everywhere stating you can "trust" the Thai police.

[overhaul38]

I would be interested in knowing how many generals and colonels there are in the Thai army and how they acquired their immense wealth. Certainly not from their salary.

No disrespect, just curious.

[overhaul38]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it would be better to speak for yourself or say something like, "Some of us," or "Many of us." You imply that 100% of Bangkokians agree with your position.

I don't "she's" that far off. There's a reason the police are going on a big PR offensive since May 19th, with (IMO) unconvincing billboards up everywhere stating you can "trust" the Thai police.

This is why I always keep B200 attached to my drivers license.

[elkangorito]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

If the police were paid appropriately & trained appropriately, they would be considerable useful at their job.

[ysaan]

The army did not listen to Mr. Thaksin, because it considers itself above the rule of elected officials.

Wrong. Although the army does consider itself to be a watchdog of corrupt elected officials with a mandate to step in when they get too far out of line. I, for one, applaud them for this. They have proven themselves to be much more responsible than our so called "elected" officials.

It was not Mr. Thaksin's fault because the army ignored the instructions of an elected government. General Prem of the Royal Guards said as much. Why would Mr. Thaksin have been any different than the elected officials that preceded or followed him?

None of the other officials are demagogues intent on eviscerating the democratic institutions of this country. Thaksin was a particularly nasty evil that needed to be dealt with harshly. Nobody else since has risen to this level of malevolence.

It is particularly insulting to one's common sense to have the author attempt to pass of his misleading statement as fact. After all, Mr. Thaksin was overthrown by means of a military coup. The current PM is to a large extent at the mercy of the military as he too serves at the pleasure of the military

As it should be until the Thai voters begin to understand the responsibilities that a democracy carries along with the rights it endows. There needs to be an unelected group of responsible people to safeguard the country while the electorate becomes educated and responsible enough to handle the job themselves.

This is why England had a House of Lords for centuries. As an American I don't really understand the details of the non elected positions in the British government. I suspect today they are largely ceremonial, but I think only this year they finally decided to do away with all of them and move to a completely elected upper chamber.

In any case, Thailand needs the military to safeguard democracy until the Thai population is capable of doing it themselves, because we don't have a House of Lords. That is exactly what General Prayuth meant, and what both you and this author don't understand.

The Thai citizens will have taken a huge step towards this goal when they realize that criminals like Thaksin should be incarcerated for life, and that if they feel there are double standards, the solution is to help punish everyone else who has committed wrongs, not to burn down the country until the crimes of their saviour are forgiven. As long as even a single person still supports the square faced criminal, the military can not renounce its responsibilities to the country.

wrong.

Massacring poor people and keep them starving just to favour few multibillionaire families is not democracy.

Thailand is one of the world most unfair regime ,where a very small elite threaths the rest of the population as sub-humans, make them work like slave and give them not any right whatsoever, no medical care nor any political right, not any civil right, not any insurance ,nothing.

You maybe enjoy from the absolute misery of millions of people because you want cheap services and want to live cheap here ,and doing so you show no respect whatsover for the Thai people.

Thais have the same rights of you ,the europeans, australians, japanese and koreans to be free. Thais are not stupid nor methally undeveloped, they have just been crushed and massacred for decades.

[ysaan]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

If the police were paid appropriately & trained appropriately, they would be considerable useful at their job.

Not at all.

Humble Thais are much more honest than rich people.

The richer the bigger cheaters.

The problem is all system is crooked, police are given green light to do what they want, going to collect bribes from street vendors like they were tax collectors and so on.

They do so because they are allowed to do so.

The system is all sick, the society should be re-written with a different menthality, in which the politicians, policemen, soldiers and in general civilian and military public servants really needs they are serve the people not crush them and the ordinary citizens feel they are in charge and not feel terrorized any time they see a uniform.

[phetaroi]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it would be better to speak for yourself or say something like, "Some of us," or "Many of us." You imply that 100% of Bangkokians agree with your position.

I don't "she's" that far off. There's a reason the police are going on a big PR offensive since May 19th, with (IMO) unconvincing billboards up everywhere stating you can "trust" the Thai police.

That's not my point. She said "we". Who is her "we"? Do we know the percentages of people that might want or not want more military presence in Bangkok? She may be right, but she is simply assuming what she thinks is what everybody thinks.

[Insight]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

Who is "we"? Perhaps it would be better to speak for yourself or say something like, "Some of us," or "Many of us." You imply that 100% of Bangkokians agree with your position.

I don't "she's" that far off. There's a reason the police are going on a big PR offensive since May 19th, with (IMO) unconvincing billboards up everywhere stating you can "trust" the Thai police.

That's not my point. She said "we". Who is her "we"? Do we know the percentages of people that might want or not want more military presence in Bangkok? She may be right, but she is simply assuming what she thinks is what everybody thinks.

A sweeping generalisation perhaps, but the fact remains that not many had a problem with the army's presence - at least in Bangkok - after May 19th, just like not many had a problem with them in the aftermath of the coup. (O/T but a few months after the coup the welcome did begin to fade - guess similar could be expected if the army were still on the streets now).

[mark45y]

We welcome more army to be based and patrol Bangkok street. Can no longer trust the Red police.

If the police were paid appropriately & trained appropriately, they would be considerable useful at their job.

Your argument suggests that professions that are paid well are not corrupt. You might want to look at Thai and even American politicians who are paid well but still in most peoples eyes corrupt.

I would also suggest that cops in Singapore 50 years ago were also corrupt but are not corrupt now. There is quite a bit more to be considered than simple pay scales.

It the top is corrupt it flows downhill. Nothing is going to change in any organization unless the boss wants change and the boss does have to set the example.

[naiharn]

As it should be until the Thai voters begin to understand the responsibilities that a democracy carries along with the rights it endows. There needs to be an unelected group of responsible people to safeguard the country while the electorate becomes educated and responsible enough to handle the job themselves.

And who is going to decide when the electorate is sufficiently 'educated' and 'responsible'? The whole essence of democracy is that everyone has a say in choosing a government, and by definition no-one is able to say "you are not educated enough, so I won't let you vote" to someone else.

If indeed there is an educational level that needs to be reached, what is being done to achieve this? Is the Thai education system carrying out this task? It would seem not. Thailand has been a constitutional monarchy for almost 80 years, 3 generations, and still we have people like you saying that the populace can't be trusted to vote 'properly'.

This is why England had a House of Lords for centuries.

Rubbish. You completely misunderstand the history and purpose of the House of Lords. And Britons have been voting (at least in some measure) for hundreds of years, and you have to go back an awful long way to find any militaristic power taking away their right to vote.

As an American I don't really understand the details of the non elected positions in the British government.

Then why mention them?

Also as an American you would know that the citizens of your own country had the right to vote from the very day your country was formed. How is that they were at the correct 'educational level' in the late 1700s, but 220 years later Thais cannot be trusted with this right?

I suspect today they are largely ceremonial, but I think only this year they finally decided to do away with all of them and move to a completely elected upper chamber.

In any case, Thailand needs the military to safeguard democracy until the Thai population is capable of doing it themselves, because we don't have a House of Lords. That is exactly what General Prayuth meant, and what both you and this author don't understand.

The Thai citizens will have taken a huge step towards this goal when they realize that criminals like Thaksin should be incarcerated for life, and that if they feel there are double standards, the solution is to help punish everyone else who has committed wrongs, not to burn down the country until the crimes of their saviour are forgiven. As long as even a single person still supports the square faced criminal, the military can not renounce its responsibilities to the country.

What you are really arguing is that Thai people cannot be allowed to vote unless they vote for someone you like. Don't try to dress that up as democracy. It is not.

[hammered]

Interestingly, one school of thought goes that the recent military and police reshuffles signal that there is not going to be a Thaksin fronted party leading a government any time soon. This opens up an opportunity for BJT to revisit the great suck and target PTP MPs who dont want to go hungry for a prolonged period. The original great suck was by Thaksin when he set up TRT. Some Thai cartoonists are already playing with this idea again.

[Gnarpjohan]

"Generals are war mongers" you say? Perhaps their primary interest - all 100 of them - is accumulating pesonal wealth. I still can not figure out what 100 generals do in a country the size of Thailand. How many generals does Australia/England/ U.S.A. have???? LOL ah this place is funny or is it sad?

100 generals? Add another zero to the number and then some...