Staunch Thaksin Foe Takes Command Of Thai Army

[Buchholz]

The stumbling block would appear to be the attempts to divorce the Red Shirts from PTP and from Thaksin.

Until such time as the Red Shirts completely renounce Thaksin and don't make him a core component of their demands and the Pheu Thai Party (as in this case with the aforementioned Pheu Thai Party Deputy Party Leader Surapong Towijakchaikun)

stop playing footsies and saying they can't survive without him, I call their so-called movement a sham and you think it's not.

[GarryP]

I think the stumbling block is that a lot of the posters cannot seem to separate the average poor upcountry person from the red shirts and PTP. And as soon as we mention the rights of the agrarian/labor classes we are lablelled as Taksin and Red Shirt sympathisers/apologists and (admittedly mostly Thais claim this)anti-monarchy, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Now it has become very convenient to use the red label to do nothing for those who need the most help. Oh, eff him, he's a poor farmer so he's a red. Oh, he's from the north east, must be a red, eff him. It has become a case of us and them, which is wrong and as long as it stays that way you are going to get tin pot idiots who have the gift of the gab who will mobilize the masses through false pretences for their own benefit.

This is in addition to the other problem that seems like it will never go away, corruption.

[Buchholz]

I think the stumbling block is that a lot of the posters cannot seem to separate the average poor upcountry person from the red shirts and PTP.

To overcome that stumbling block requires the non-violent Red supporters to remove themselves from the Red leadership and PTP. Until that occurs, the bond that labels them together as one will remain inextricable. I think nothing short of scrapping the Red Shirt movement and starting afresh without those Red leaders and PTP will achieve that.

It can be done as was occurred with the multi-colored shirts removing themselves from the leadership of the Yellows, when there was a differing of opinions with how that movement should move on.

And as soon as we mention the rights of the agrarian/labor classes we are lablelled as Taksin and Red Shirt sympathisers/apologists and (admittedly mostly Thais claim this)anti-monarchy, when nothing could be further from the truth.

That is the problem with their movement. As long as the Thaksin/Red Shirt/PTP connections remain, the labeling is rather justified. When Red Shirts continue to hold Thaksin aloft and the PTP calls him their "policy maker", how can it not be justified? If they wish to divorce themselves from those labels, they need to divorce themselves from the Red leaders and Thaksin.

I find very few posts that don't support the labor class and their legitimate problems. What I see more commonly is suggestions that they find another avenue with which to pursue relief from their admittedly heavy burden. That change will necessarily have to come from them, but for now, too many seem to continue to pursue Thaksin and the Red leaders as their messiah, which is unfortunate, because I don't see them accomplishing their goals while wearing that yoke. It's not going to be an easy task for them, but their worthwhile cause will hopefully be achieved once they strip themselves of those radicals. As for the anti-monarchy claims, I have no doubt that the majority of Reds don't share those views. However, until the Reds come out and completely disown the likes of Giles and Jakrapob, that label, too, will remain. The Reds need to be clear and forthright and loudly proclaim that that aspect of their movement doesn't represent them. Until now, that's not occurred.

Edited October 1, 2010 by Buchholz

[GarryP]

I thought Buchholz was going to get on his soap box and start banging on about Reds this and Reds that, Taksin this and that, etc, like many other TV posters and like some of his previous posts. Instead, what does he do? He gives a reasoned response that I really can't argue with.

Obviously, even people who appear to sit on opposite sides of the fence often have common ground. Nice post sir.

PS I refuse to give your post a positive vote though. It's the principle, dam_n you.

Edited October 1, 2010 by GarryP

[Buchholz]

I thought Buchholz was going to get on his soap box and start banging on about Reds this and Reds that, Taksin this and that, etc, like many other TV posters and like some of his previous posts. Instead, what does he do? He gives a reasoned response that I really can't argue with.

Obviously, even people who appear to sit on opposite sides of the fence often have common ground. Nice post sir.

PS I refuse to give your post a positive vote though. It's the principle, dam_n you.

No problem, the reputation system is over-rated.

And thank you for your compliments. I suppose it was prompted by your reasoned post, which differed from some of the inflamatory name-calling posts that proceeded it.

I guess it's a matter of nice posts beget nice posts.

I've spent far too much time around rural folk and urban poor to ever lambaste them. I really do empathize with their plight, but I'm also realistic enough to say that the Reds and Thaksin and PTP is not the way for them to overcome it.

p.s. I duly greened your post.

[phiphidon]

Not backward in coming forward, our General Prayuth;

"I will try to step back from politics, be clear of it and leave it with the government so that soldiers can do their military work.

But if the nation has not returned to order, the military as a mechanism of the government must help build order first,"

"No one would want a coup if the nation is peaceful and free of unrest,"

I wasn't aware anybody was asking for a coup?

[hanuman1]

I think the stumbling block is that a lot of the posters cannot seem to separate the average poor upcountry person from the red shirts and PTP.

To overcome that stumbling block requires the non-violent Red supporters to remove themselves from the Red leadership and PTP. Until that occurs, the bond that labels them together as one will remain inextricable. I think nothing short of scrapping the Red Shirt movement and starting afresh without those Red leaders and PTP will achieve that.

It can be done as was occurred with the multi-colored shirts removing themselves from the leadership of the Yellows, when there was a differing of opinions with how that movement should move on.

And as soon as we mention the rights of the agrarian/labor classes we are lablelled as Taksin and Red Shirt sympathisers/apologists and (admittedly mostly Thais claim this)anti-monarchy, when nothing could be further from the truth.

That is the problem with their movement. As long as the Thaksin/Red Shirt/PTP connections remain, the labeling is rather justified. When Red Shirts continue to hold Thaksin aloft and the PTP calls him their "policy maker", how can it not be justified? If they wish to divorce themselves from those labels, they need to divorce themselves from the Red leaders and Thaksin.

I find very few posts that don't support the labor class and their legitimate problems. What I see more commonly is suggestions that they find another avenue with which to pursue relief from their admittedly heavy burden. That change will necessarily have to come from them, but for now, too many seem to continue to pursue Thaksin and the Red leaders as their messiah, which is unfortunate, because I don't see them accomplishing their goals while wearing that yoke. It's not going to be an easy task for them, but their worthwhile cause will hopefully be achieved once they strip themselves of those radicals. As for the anti-monarchy claims, I have no doubt that the majority of Reds don't share those views. However, until the Reds come out and completely disown the likes of Giles and Jakrapob, that label, too, will remain. The Reds need to be clear and forthright and loudly proclaim that that aspect of their movement doesn't represent them. Until now, that's not occurred.

I too agree in the main with this last post of yours (not sure about the monarchy bit though), but when I or others allude to the same thing in our own posts, we get shrugged of as 'apologists' for people whose actions we never endorsed in the first place.

If this exchange of posts has at least in some people's minds raised the idea that not all red shirt wearers are the same in their motivations and approach to getting what they want, then I will happily post no more on the subject.

[Buchholz]

In that regard, the Reds need to reach a consensus then and clearly dissociate themselves from Thaksin/PTP/Giles/Arisaman/et al and move on.

If they allow any of those contingents to remain connected without a denunciation, then the Reds are unavoidably tied to them and all their misdeeds.

Unfortunately for the non-violent rural Reds and non-violent urban poor Reds, that's highly improbable.

Given the enormity of that task, as said, I think they are best off scrapping it all and coming up with new leaders, new agendas, new goals, new methods, and a new color, if they have to have a color.

[whybother]

Not backward in coming forward, our General Prayuth;

"I will try to step back from politics, be clear of it and leave it with the government so that soldiers can do their military work.

But if the nation has not returned to order, the military as a mechanism of the government must help build order first,"

"No one would want a coup if the nation is peaceful and free of unrest,"

I wasn't aware anybody was asking for a coup?

Didn't the red shirts say at one point that they wanted a coup? With their supporters in the army leading it, of course.

[Pi Sek]

I thought Buchholz was going to get on his soap box and start banging on about Reds this and Reds that, Taksin this and that, etc, like many other TV posters and like some of his previous posts. Instead, what does he do? He gives a reasoned response that I really can't argue with.

Obviously, even people who appear to sit on opposite sides of the fence often have common ground. Nice post sir.

PS I refuse to give your post a positive vote though. It's the principle, dam_n you.

No problem, the reputation system is over-rated.

And thank you for your compliments. I suppose it was prompted by your reasoned post, which differed from some of the inflamatory name-calling posts that proceeded it.

I guess it's a matter of nice posts beget nice posts.

I've spent far too much time around rural folk and urban poor to ever lambaste them. I really do empathize with their plight, but I'm also realistic enough to say that the Reds and Thaksin and PTP is not the way for them to overcome it.

p.s. I duly greened your post.

You see, this is "reconciliation". It's lovely to see. The only reason that people get so jai lon about all this is because they genuinely believe they are on the side of right. The fact is that they are both right... just not totally right.

[Pi Sek]

Not backward in coming forward, our General Prayuth;

"I will try to step back from politics, be clear of it and leave it with the government so that soldiers can do their military work.

But if the nation has not returned to order, the military as a mechanism of the government must help build order first,"

"No one would want a coup if the nation is peaceful and free of unrest,"

I wasn't aware anybody was asking for a coup?

Actually, the PAD protests in 2006 (pre-coup) were exactly that. Very small numbers though, nothing like the 2008 protests. FYI I agreed with the PAD at that point.

[rixalex]

If this exchange of posts has at least in some people's minds raised the idea that not all red shirt wearers are the same in their motivations and approach to getting what they want, then I will happily post no more on the subject.

I don't think anyone could dispute the fact that red shirt wearers have varying views and ideas, and that not all favour violence, not all are anti monarchy, and not all believe that Thaksin is some kind of saint.

What is however a matter of dispute is whether the red shirt movement as a whole is being driven and directed by individuals who do consider violence as a valid method of achieving their aims, who do harbour anti monarchy views, and who do wish to see Thaksin whitewashed of his crimes and back leading the country. I believe this is the case. I believe that regardless of whatever good intentions certain red shirt supporters may have, the movement as a whole will never represent their view nor their interests. And that's why i oppose people who wear the red shirt or people who come on this forum to defend them. Not because of who they are, be they poor farmers or rich socialites, and not because of their own personal beliefs, whatever they may be, but because the movement that they give weight to by their support is utterly rotten right to the core.

[Buchholz]

I thought Buchholz was going to get on his soap box and start banging on about Reds this and Reds that, Taksin this and that, etc, like many other TV posters and like some of his previous posts. Instead, what does he do? He gives a reasoned response that I really can't argue with.

Obviously, even people who appear to sit on opposite sides of the fence often have common ground. Nice post sir.

PS I refuse to give your post a positive vote though. It's the principle, dam_n you.

No problem, the reputation system is over-rated.

And thank you for your compliments. I suppose it was prompted by your reasoned post, which differed from some of the inflamatory name-calling posts that proceeded it.

I guess it's a matter of nice posts beget nice posts.

I've spent far too much time around rural folk and urban poor to ever lambaste them. I really do empathize with their plight, but I'm also realistic enough to say that the Reds and Thaksin and PTP is not the way for them to overcome it.

p.s. I duly greened your post.

You see, this is "reconciliation". It's lovely to see. The only reason that people get so jai lon about all this is because they genuinely believe they are on the side of right. The fact is that they are both right... just not totally right.

It also represents the inadequacies of many of the stereotypes that inaccurately fail to include the reality of the rich, elite Reds and poor, rural Yellows.

Edited October 1, 2010 by Buchholz

[bikersiam]

the army have no busisness dabbling in politics

get back to your hole and stay there

[Pi Sek]

the army have no busisness dabbling in politics

get back to your hole and stay there

Whilst I acknowledge your justified opinion, I disagree - to quote the popular expression, "there's a time and place for everything".

With the current state of the constitution and Thai Law in general, I believe the army should interfere in politics if/when someone exploitative enough gets to a position where they can damage the country - Thaksin being a great example, in my most honest opinion. I think that several countries might actually benefit in the long term (but certainly not in the short term) by a bloodless coup as was the case in 2006. I think that Thaksin was removed for the benefit of the country, although (again) there were very few short term benefits.

The problem with the army dabbling in politics is that only a few people are in a position to decide upon the conditions that make military interference possible, so that's obviously going to be open to fierce criticism from the masses.

Cynical anecdotal replies to the above, to try and lighten peoples' moods:

- The army should dabble in politics, as practice for the next time they are required to intervene.

- The army have plenty of business dabbling in politics (As do the US army, etc!)

[GarryP]

Didn't the last US general who stuck his nose into politics get removed from his position (and he was quite popular too). Hardly likely to happen here.

[animatic]

You guys are just a bloody mobious loop.

Time to snip it an reroute into a productive discussion...

[hammered]

Military appointments are all about power and power cliques. This one is no different from say when Thaksin stuck his cuz into the same position.

It also seems a lot of combat troops have been promoted too, which is not common.

[animatic]

Military appointments are all about power and power cliques. This one is no different from say when Thaksin stuck his cuz into the same position.

It also seems a lot of combat troops have been promoted too, which is not common.

Seems it is felt that having as bit more teeth to back their bark is called for in the foreseeable future. Not a great sign, but in light of the coming inevitable change above, having more functional soldiers, rather than purely numbers of soldiers, near the top commanders, does seem warranted from their point of view.

In too near a future the 'national crying' will stop, but the infighting will go for broke.

And he who has the best team, and luck, will likely come up on top.

They are preparing for this.

Edited October 2, 2010 by animatic

[Buchholz]

The other paper is reporting that Army Chief General Prayuth has dispatched notification to former Army Chief General Chaisit Shinawatra directing Thaksin's cousin to leave his his free Army-provided residence that Chaisit has been occupying since his retirement five years ago.

Army regulations stipulate retirees can only reside in free Army-provided homes for one year following their retirement.

.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Buchholz

[Thai at Heart]

The other paper is reporting that Army Chief General Prayuth has dispatched notification to former Army Chief General Chaisit Shinawatra directing Thaksin's cousin to leave his his free Army-provided residence that Chaisit has been occupying since his retirement five years ago.

Army regulations stipulate retirees can only reside in free Army-provided homes for one year following their retirement.

.

Would be a little interesting to know how often that rule is strictly enforced.