webfact Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Cambodia Threatens to Open Fire The Cambodian military is mobilizing tanks and armored vehicles towards the Thai-Cambodian border. Cambodia has also threatened to open fire if Thailand does not stop aggravating the situation and interfering with road construction leading to the Preah Vihear Temple. Cambodia's Third Region Army Commander Lieutenant General Sreyderk, who oversees security at the disputed Preah Vihear Temple, stated that the Cambodian military has been mobilizing troops, tanks and heavy artillery towards the border since Friday in preparation for the possibility of a confrontation. The Cambodian military commander said that Thai troops have been aggravating the situation, which has prompted the military to send in tanks and heavy artillery as a defensive precaution. Cambodian Minister Kiew Kanayalit said in an interview that fighting may occur by tomorrow if Thailand does not end their threats or cease interfering with a road construction leading to the Preah Vihear Temple. The Cambodian minister went on to say that the matter involving road construction has yet to be discussed as it cuts through a 4.6 square kilometer disputed area that Cambodia claim belongs to them. The road construction project was initiated in 2008 by a charity organization headed Hun Mana, the sister of Cambodia's Premier Hun sen. Meanwhile, Hun Sen is planning a nationwide local election campaign, scheduled for the beginning of 2012. Many believe the outcome of the upcoming local elections will determine the popularity of the administration, which will be used in the general election at the end of 2013. The Cambodian government registered the 10th century temple as a heritage site in July 2008 despite the fact that the only entrance and other parts of the temple are situated on Thai soil. The successful registration with the UNESCO's World Heritage Committee is believed to have allowed the Cambodian People's Party to win the election in 2008 with more than 123 seats. -- Tan Network 2011-01-31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moo9 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeanpierre Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... the money side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccw Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... My person view of it is: seems to be open to debate given there are so many differrent maps one could draw on either way to get your desired result. But the main thing I see that is separate from the maps is that Thailand has been hosting thousands of cambadians in this area and others; protecting them from their own tyranical murdous government for all those khermer rouge years. The site has been considered thai by those who controlled it ie the thais and now the cambodian authorities have 'some degree of respectability' they are trying to 'reclaim' what they beleive to be theirs. Despite this view of mine i don't think fighting over it is any reasonable course of action. They should sit down and talk it over, maybe reaching a join project status or something where it could be declared a historical park and entry fees split between the 2 nations. But it looks like the cambodian gov is intent on claiming the whole thing; building roads and temples, placks and the rest of it is clearly provocative and with the sole intention of claiming full rights. The thai gov seems to be the more civilised one, calling for talks and reason instead of hot headed actions like those of the various shades of yellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuffki Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Well Thai army did "flex" its muscle few days ago and now for every action there is a reaction. the only difference is Cambodia seems to be pretty serious and i have a feeling willing to go all the way, i am not so sure about Thai military though. What i do not understand is, why Thailand keeps with this stupidity? why not come to an agreement and share the benefits(money from tourism) rather then try to show its military might. Also would it kill Thailand to "help" its neighbor? Thailand already is very well developed compared to Cambodia and gets 16 million tourists per year(well they they claim anyway), so would it really kill if a few of those will spend some money in Cambodia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTumTiger Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Both sides are at fault, for playing this game of cat and mouse. Both sides have internal politics and parties who are using this to support their own limited agenda. Very few have the best interests in mind. This has been going on for decades, and will not be resolved in our lifetimes. Better to just drink another Singha and say "Mai pen rai". Its none of our concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 One off-topic post removed. Discussion of the pro's and con's are permitted, but let's stay on the topic. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTumTiger Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Right on Schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobr Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... Because this dispute was heard and a ruling was made by a World Court in 1962. Thailand lost. That's how long this has been going on and how silly it gets; we do not like the Court verdict so we will ignore it. Stick my fingers in my ears la la la la la la la la la. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blabla1 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yeah,,, a more developed country like Thailand,should sit at a table and talk with the Cambodians, teach by example...yellow and Red ...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong38 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) If Thailand and Cambodia profess to be civilized, then they should both stop sabre rattling and get down to talks, even after fighting there has to be talks to find the end solution, so why dont they both go to the end game, sit down and talk? If its so important why do they not arrange talks now, even if its just to find out what the other sides position is and what is the minimum they will accept? I guess the main difficulty is the upcoming General Election so let to a bit of prep and sort it out once and for all after the new govt takes its place, the current situation is unacceptable as is fighting, neighbours should sort it out in a civilized way. Edited January 31, 2011 by nong38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTumTiger Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 If Thailand profess to be civilized, then they should both stop sabre rattling and get down to talks, even after fighting there has to be talks to find the end solution, so why dont they both go to the end game, sit down and talk? If its so important why do they not arrange talks now, even if its just to find out what the other sides position is and what is the minimum they will accept? I guess the main difficulty is the upcoming General Election so let to a bit of prep and sort it out once and for all after the new govt takes its place, the current situation is unacceptable as is fighting, neighbours should sort it out in a civilized way. Does the headline say "Thailand Threatens to Open Fire on Cambodia"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkksteviejai Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Flatten it and build a Big C. Acting like flippin kids the pair of em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Reading other reports it would seem that the Thai Govt is attempting to get Hun Sen to the table to talk. Just what they would say is another thing. There looks to be no advantage to Thailand in having a confrontation let alone a war. On the other hand Hun Sen, a dictator who ousted an elected Govt in a Coup, has elections coming up. First local then national and needs something to show what a strong leader he is so he can get a true mandate to govern. Mind you in his position he can easily rig an election but he possibly thinks be stirring up nationalism he can get elected sort of honestly. The joint governing of the area for the benefit of both would be the sensible solution...but then we have clowns like the yellows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjay0 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... Which side is playing foul? Which side went looking for other maps than the ones used in the original decision? If left alone both governments would be able to work it out. The final result will be a agreement between the two that will not make either side ecstatic but they will be happy in that they came to a doable answer. The Yellow shirts would never let Cambodia fire on Thai's. One of there demands is that Thailand start it. I read it on another thread some where. If the Yellow shirts feel so strongly about there demands why don't they go up there and start moving the Cambodians out of there. They have as much authority to do that as the army does. Oops I showed them up for the phoniness they are. When you think of it they are experienced at illegally occupying property they have no rite to. Well speak of the devil here they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's over oil ladden seabed, nationalistic face and possibly Thaksin stirring the pot still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soutpeel Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's over oil ladden seabed, Sure about that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DP25 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's over oil ladden seabed, nationalistic face and possibly Thaksin stirring the pot still. I can see the last two, but how does this tiny area a couple hundred kilometers from the ocean affect the ocean boundary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fookhaht Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) I made four visits to Khao Phra Vihan from 2003 to 2007. Most TV posters would laugh incredulously at what the two countries are fighting over. It's not even the temple ruins themselves. It's over a little patch of scrub land which is mainly comprised of what looks like burnt stone and dead tumbleweeds. It's a pitiful little postage stamp of no-man's land worth absolutely nothing--agriculturally, culturally, socially--any way you cut it. The foreground in the below picture is quite near the point of contention, not the temple ruins at the brow of the hill. The disputed area, itself, is totally worthless. This fact highlights even more that both countries are grandstanding on this affair, catering to the advantages and whims of internal politics in each nation. Edited January 31, 2011 by Fookhaht Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fookhaht Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's over oil ladden seabed, nationalistic face and possibly Thaksin stirring the pot still. I can see the last two, but how does this tiny area a couple hundred kilometers from the ocean affect the ocean boundary? I believe the poster who used this term "oil ladden seabed" [sic] is referring to an ancient oil-laden seabed which has been thrust up as a result of tectonic plate action over the centuries. This probably gives the "burnt rock" look of the area surrounding the southern slopes of the temple. Truly an ugly, dismal-looking piece of land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatouthruthefog Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 <br />Flatten it and build a Big C.<br /><br />Acting like flippin kids the pair of em.<br /><br /><br /><br />Nice one! Brief and to the point! But instead of demolition followed by a Big C, how about turning all this nonsense in to creating something utterly Unique in the world? A 2-Nation Heritage site (mainly Cambodian because that goes along with the last court decision and it IS on their side of the border); with the access in Thailand (as geography dictates); a 'visa free zone' there for all (once you've booked in from either aside) OR a proper border crossing and a BIG casino off to the Cambo side and a HUGE duty free on the Thai side. Both "temples of mamon" accessible to all, like THE temple itself! Err, is this a Buddhist temple??? Did the Lord Buddha teach us about the "middle path"??? Isn't this IT??? Or, like all major contenders here, am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Wasn't this whole thing decided on in a number of court cases and the UN with Thailand coming out the loser? After 100 years isn't it about time Thailand let this go? I am fairly confident they could work something out with Cambodia to prevent Thailand from losing face in terms of shared access to the temple. I mean when all is said and done it is not like this is some big source of revenue or strategic military location. It is just symbolic and although I could be wrong, it appears the Cambodians have been fairly accommodating in terms of dealing with this issue ... especially given the fact the temple land is legally recognized as their land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackthorn2005 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 We are in the year 2011, we are confronted with a ridiculous conflict between two nations (one much more developed than the other) and why the heck is there not a way to discuss this matter in a civilized, meaningful way? I am still puzzled which side is playing foul, as there is this UN agreement etc.... Because this dispute was heard and a ruling was made by a World Court in 1962. Thailand lost. That's how long this has been going on and how silly it gets; we do not like the Court verdict so we will ignore it. Stick my fingers in my ears la la la la la la la la la. Additionally, because the UN no longer has the power it once had. It is just another barking dog. Look around the rest of the world, they are being ignored or kicked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tig28 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 If Thailand and Cambodia profess to be civilized, then they should both stop sabre rattling and get down to talks, even after fighting there has to be talks to find the end solution, so why dont they both go to the end game, sit down and talk? If its so important why do they not arrange talks now, even if its just to find out what the other sides position is and what is the minimum they will accept? I guess the main difficulty is the upcoming General Election so let to a bit of prep and sort it out once and for all after the new govt takes its place, the current situation is unacceptable as is fighting, neighbours should sort it out in a civilized way. What is there to discuss?? It has already been decided! In June1962,the International Court of Justice weighed all the evidence --- and decided that the Preah Vihear Temple was in Cambodia. Thailand had presented arguments to the court that the Temple was in Thailand. These arguments failed. http://www.scribd.co...of-Preah-Vihear Why would any country cede part of its territory to another?? -- particularly under threat of military action. These current military actions by Cambodia are possibly re-actions to threats of military force by Thailand if they did not get what they want over this (already settled) matter. Not just threats from the " crazies" --- but from the Prime Minster (when addressing a meeting of the PAD last week) ---- he told them that if the matter was not settled (to Thai satisfaction) Thailand would cancel the year 2000 Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries and use both diplomatic and military means to resolve the matter. Does anyone -- faced with these most un-diplomatic threats -- propose that Cambodia should sit on its hands and do nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilHarries Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's over oil ladden seabed, nationalistic face and possibly Thaksin stirring the pot still. I can see the last two, but how does this tiny area a couple hundred kilometers from the ocean affect the ocean boundary? I believe the poster who used this term "oil ladden seabed" [sic] is referring to an ancient oil-laden seabed which has been thrust up as a result of tectonic plate action over the centuries. This probably gives the "burnt rock" look of the area surrounding the southern slopes of the temple. Truly an ugly, dismal-looking piece of land. There are disputed areas of seabed where there are very likely hydrocarbon deposits. I think both the governments consider any compromise shown at Prear Vihear would weaken their position vis-a-vis the bigger prize offshore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpoint Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 The issue isn't so much the temple itself, but the land around it. If you look at the aerial photo, taken from the Korat magazine website, you can clearly see that the temple sits on a triangular plateau, and is bounded by cliffs. Thailand is to the left, Cambodia to the right. Rather than draw the border along the natural cliff edge, which would put the temple and all the land around it in the hands of Thailand, the French map artificially truncated this triangular plateau in order to place the temple in Cambodia. The 1962 ruling was purely to decide on whether the temple belonged to Thailand or Cambodia. It ruled in favour of the latter, but failed to clearly demarcate the actual border across the plateau, leading to the 4.6 sq. km currently in dispute. For the Cambodians to mobilise their army, and actually make threats of war, because a small bunch of nationalists are holding a protest in Bangkok, speaks volumes about just how "civilised' at least one of the sides is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillwilliams999 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 For every tank that Cambodia mobilize, Thailand can mobilize 10 tanks. Thailand can easily out number the Cambodian. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/IndoChina1886.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 The issue isn't so much the temple itself, but the land around it. If you look at the aerial photo, taken from the Korat magazine website, you can clearly see that the temple sits on a triangular plateau, and is bounded by cliffs. Thailand is to the left, Cambodia to the right. Rather than draw the border along the natural cliff edge, which would put the temple and all the land around it in the hands of Thailand, the French map artificially truncated this triangular plateau in order to place the temple in Cambodia. The 1962 ruling was purely to decide on whether the temple belonged to Thailand or Cambodia. It ruled in favour of the latter, but failed to clearly demarcate the actual border across the plateau, leading to the 4.6 sq. km currently in dispute. For the Cambodians to mobilise their army, and actually make threats of war, because a small bunch of nationalists are holding a protest in Bangkok, speaks volumes about just how "civilised' at least one of the sides is. Don't kid yourself. It is ALL about the temple and everything else is just bitterness over the temple. The boundaries were drawn on a map that Thailand accepted and distributed throughout Thailand as an official map. Regardless if this was a mistake or not, it happened and the land belongs to Cambodia as does the temple built by the Khmer Empire (Cambodia) 1,000 years ago. There are no resources Thailand is interested regarding their claimed disputes of land around the temple. It is simply a way to act as a bitter loser in a battle. Regardless who the land and temple should belong to, the fact remains Cambodia won the rights to the land and the map created in the early 1900's contains the official boundary. I would love for Thailand to be the victor in this but the fact remains they lost and it is time to move on and work out an agreement with Cambodia for equal access to the area and I am sure Cambodia would oblige. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumball Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 'jillwilliams999' timestamp='1296482993' post='4188018'] For every tank that Cambodia mobilize, Thailand can mobilize 10 tanks. Thailand can easily out number the Cambodian. http://upload.wikime...doChina1886.jpg For the type of terrain , the choice of tanks could prove illogical , posturing more than propogating , small boys emulating superman , besides , a water canon using gasoline could defeat a large number of tanks and infantry quite quickly . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuffki Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 For every tank that Cambodia mobilize, Thailand can mobilize 10 tanks. Thailand can easily out number the Cambodian. http://upload.wikime...doChina1886.jpg And according to which source do you come up with idea that Thailand has 10 times more tanks? or better military? Do you forget which on of the 2 has been in the war for a number of years and who stil has landmines all over the place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now