Pheu Thai Welcomes Red-Shirt Leaders As Candidates

[stepenwolf1958]

Nice to know you are so much about my thoughts and words here, even counting all. Thanks for paying so much attention RNZ. But i do nothing now, just asked who are they. I didn't claim "they" are paid staff or volunteers. I just ASKED are they. Learn to make a difference RNZ, please. I am civilized in talk, even with rivals in thinking. Stay calm, will you? No reason to be angry with me, just because i disagree with you or you with me, understand?

I have no anger towards you at all in fact many of your posts make me smile.

However if you want to post you should at least read the rules.

Incidentaly I'm one of the WE who has followed this throughout and has a good understanding of what happened.

Ok, then we solve"problem in communications". I am glad.

But, don't mind me for this, please. Who told you that you are so much well informed, that you have a good understanding of what happened? Many, but MANY Thais are confused so how come you as a farang have better understanding of what happened here, than they do?

Is that your good understanding about your working experience, maybe? Life experience? Or what? I know the occupation could give to man that good understanding, even age.

I am not trying to beat you, ok? I am just curious what makes you be so sure you have good understanding about what happened?

[jdinasia]

I think I am now officially finished with stepenwolf .... he's baiting way too much. All risk and no gain in correcting him.

[stepenwolf1958]

Yes, i am able to admit i don't know something(are you? ). I think it is not shame to admit that we don't know something but however, we have right to have some opinion(even wrong), agree?

BTW, fortunately, here is YOU elevated one, to inform me where is the true, right?

If you can find something that I post that is incorrect, and provide evidence to show it, then I would have no problem admitting it.

You don't have a very good track record of proving ANYONE incorrect though. I don't think it's ever happened.

But given the statements you come out with, I'm not surprised.

I am not trying to prove anyone is incorrect. That's the difference between you and me. I just placed my OPINION, which can be right or wrong but i never, read my lips NEVER, said all i am saying is truth. It's just my opinion, how do i see this all mess and it is the same as you are doing. You have right to have your opinion as i have right to have mine. We could disagree as we do but that doesn't mean that YOU know truth 100% as that what you are calling truth is based on what you read or watch, only. And that what you(or i) watch or read is easy to direct. Doesn't mean newspapers and TV tell the truth. Creating public opinion is easiest by nespapers and tv channels. So, the source of your revealing the truth, possibly is under the dictate so you are also. Possible?

[dominique355]

This is amazing, really.

"Natthawut also called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to make a promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election even if the Democrat is beaten by the Pheu Thai."

Any one in Thailand believe they will admit defeat? What a dream. A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

Adding to the list of things that you know nothing about.

It's amazing how some people have impaired vision and no clue about it. Steppenwolf (note the correct spelling!), I have a surprise for you: There is more in life, and in particular in Thai political life than Red and Yellow.

Anyone, who incites people to burn down the city and then denies all responsibility when his followers actually do it, should not get political immunity for his incitement to commit crimes. He belongs in prison just as much as those who actually started the fire.

[Ricardo]

A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

A clear unambiguous statement-of-fact ...

I was CLEAR that i don't know that so i am asking people who might know that. Any problem about my asking?

... becomes an admission that "I don't know" ...

I just placed my OPINION, which can be right or wrong but i never, read my lips NEVER, said all i am saying is truth. It's just my opinion, how do i see this all mess and it is the same as you are doing. You have right to have your opinion as i have right to have mine.

... which is now "my OPINION"

Time to stop feeding the troll, and use the 'Ignore' button, I fear.

[stepenwolf1958]

This is amazing, really.

"Natthawut also called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to make a promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election even if the Democrat is beaten by the Pheu Thai."

Any one in Thailand believe they will admit defeat? What a dream. A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

Adding to the list of things that you know nothing about.

Yes, hahahaa...and you know sooooo much about it, right? You are an expert about those matters in politic in Thailand? Or you are deep in love with yellows, or to well paid for this, ha? What a man you are, hahahaha...We will see brother, we will see...Don't pull my tongue, ok? You didn't have any need to reply to this my post but you couldn't sit on your hands, right? Hahahah, a jolly man...

It's amazing how some people have impaired vision and no clue about it. Nicely said. Pure democracy-label any one who don't think same as you. Really democratic and parliamentary manner, indeed. Steppenwolf (note the correct spelling!)Thanks for nothing because that ONE P was made intentionally, wise guy, and in time i was going to register here, double p was already in use , I have a surprise for you: There is more in life, and in particular in Thai political life than Red and Yellow. Oh, is that so? Really? Good morning Christopher Columbus. If i died yesterday, i would not know this. Thanks for to inform me(late a bit). Joking you, sorry.

Anyone, who incites people to burn down the city and then denies all responsibility when his followers actually do it, should not get political immunity for his incitement to commit crimes. He belongs in prison just as much as those who actually started the fire.

Off topic, i think but as by the way, i agreed with this your reasoning. Believe it or not.

[chachachacha]

I was CLEAR that i don't know that so i am asking people who might know that. Any problem about my asking?

The statement "A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians" in you first post on the thread is CLEAR that you were blaming Abhisit, not asking a question.

And my post stating that this was ANOTHER subject that you don't know anything about is confirmed by you here.

I would say it is you that knows nothing . I would bet that you also dont believe that bush & blair are not war criminals. I agree with the op that the blood of 90 people is on his hands

[stepenwolf1958]

I was CLEAR that i don't know that so i am asking people who might know that. Any problem about my asking?

The statement "A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians" in you first post on the thread is CLEAR that you were blaming Abhisit, not asking a question.

And my post stating that this was ANOTHER subject that you don't know anything about is confirmed by you here.

I would say it is you that knows nothing . I would bet that you also dont believe that bush & blair are not war criminals. I agree with the op that the blood of 90 people is on his hands

Surely some "well informed" people here never heard of CHAIN COMMAND. It means, PM is Supreme Commander to the Army and whatever that Army made, will be HIS fault, automatically.

Whatever any Field Marshal do, or some blood thirsty idiot in the Army-Supreme Commander, PM, is responsible. But it is like blowing in the wind to telling that fact to some short sighted and stubborn people here.

[stepenwolf1958]

So, at the end of this session, to tell you once again that PM's responsibility is anything that the Army is doing.He is Supreme Commander so even if he didn't make direct order for to open fire to protesters, he is responsible for casualties on both sides and it is by chain command. Period. Whether you like it or not, this is the fact and in case that whole situation would be one day qualified like a crime against civilians, he will be called to the court.

Hague Tribunal used exactly chain command as modus to charge for crime against humanity all political leaders in war in Yugoslavia. You should know that.

And if there it was the most important argument for Tribunal judges and way to arrest and charge political leaders, why do you think here any one would be exempt?

Only one thing is missing. To prove that was a crime against humanity. All the rest is just and only technical and procedural matter.

[sirchai]

Stepenwolf --- your number count is wrong as is your assumption that Abhisit is "directly responsible", but hey, since "the majority" of Thai men have multiple wives in your observation (counting out the fact that women don't outnumber men by that margin) .. should suggest that perhaps your ideas and maths don't tend to match very often

Anything you say, sport, anything...

Ok, put it this way: my assumption is guessing and it's wrong. Ok, so now is clear he didn't order to the Army to open fire to protesters. Then i have to ask you what do you think-who did it if he didn't? Tell me what do you know or think, WHO said to open fire to the people? Make it simple as possible, please.

Ignorance isn't really helpful. A lot of bla, bla. Guess you're a pretty simple guy that you don't understand what actually happened.:jap:

[sirchai]

I was CLEAR that i don't know that so i am asking people who might know that. Any problem about my asking?

The statement "A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians" in you first post on the thread is CLEAR that you were blaming Abhisit, not asking a question.

And my post stating that this was ANOTHER subject that you don't know anything about is confirmed by you here.

I would say it is you that knows nothing . I would bet that you also dont believe that bush & blair are not war criminals. I agree with the op that the blood of 90 people is on his hands

Surely some "well informed" people here never heard of CHAIN COMMAND. It means, PM is Supreme Commander to the Army and whatever that Army made, will be HIS fault, automatically.

Whatever any Field Marshal do, or some blood thirsty idiot in the Army-Supreme Commander, PM, is responsible. But it is like blowing in the wind to telling that fact to some short sighted and stubborn people here.

You're a funny person Mr. Stepenwolf. Why are others 'shortsighted' and stubborn? Isn't it just your own opinion? Why can't you just let other people believe what they want to? Full Stop.

[stepenwolf1958]

Surely some "well informed" people here never heard of CHAIN COMMAND. It means, PM is Supreme Commander to the Army and whatever that Army made, will be HIS fault, automatically.

Whatever any Field Marshal do, or some blood thirsty idiot in the Army-Supreme Commander, PM, is responsible. But it is like blowing in the wind to telling that fact to some short sighted and stubborn people here.

You're a funny person Mr. Stepenwolf. Why are others 'shortsighted' and stubborn? Isn't it just your own opinion? Why can't you just let other people believe what they want to? Full Stop.

Thanks for time but i do allow difference in opinions as it's normal thing and i am not underestimating people who think different than i do. You can see above, in my talks to a few of them.

But, to tell you, this about chain command no one can deny. That's the key thing in my hypothetical thinking about who is responsible for those killings. Time will tell.

[Buchholz]

I would say it is you that knows nothing . I would bet that you also dont believe that bush & blair are not war criminals. I agree with the op that the blood of 90 people is on his hands

I can appreciate that in the confusion of so many off-topic posts during the discussion in this thread, but the deaths of 90 people was not in the OP.

It was the opinion of a member in Post # 3, who admitted later he didn't know.

This is pretty much cementing the Reds = PTP = Thaksin rule.

Which has been the reality for quite some time. Every time it comes even close to becoming outdated or inaccurate, one, two, or all three elements come out with some bit in the news that brings it right back into the faces of everyone and solidifies the equation.

Yep,

Thaksin = PTP = Red Shirts

rolls merrily along.

[patjem]

I was CLEAR that i don't know that so i am asking people who might know that. Any problem about my asking?

The statement "A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians" in you first post on the thread is CLEAR that you were blaming Abhisit, not asking a question.

And my post stating that this was ANOTHER subject that you don't know anything about is confirmed by you here.

Yes, it is my opinion that he is responsible and i have RIGHT to form my opinion. Do i? If you would say i have right to have my own opinion then i will ask you what's your problem then?

If you read carefully all, if you take of your yellow coloured eyeglasses, you could see i ADMIT that i wrong, maybe. So i let the space to other to try to explain to me who did it. What's wrong?

Sometimes, when you're verbally stuck in a hole, it may be better to reconsider your position instead of continuing to defend your poor position.... It would have been more ironic if the subject was R. Amsterdam, given the similarity of defending a poor arguments.

[gemini81]

Stepenwolf --- your number count is wrong as is your assumption that Abhisit is "directly responsible", but hey, since "the majority" of Thai men have multiple wives in your observation (counting out the fact that women don't outnumber men by that margin) .. should suggest that perhaps your ideas and maths don't tend to match very often

Anything you say, sport, anything...

Ok, put it this way: my assumption is guessing and it's wrong. Ok, so now is clear he didn't order to the Army to open fire to protesters. Then i have to ask you what do you think-who did it if he didn't? Tell me what do you know or think, WHO said to open fire to the people? Make it simple as possible, please.

As simply as possible .....

OK

1) The reds started the violence.

2) They were in direct violation of the SoE and had armed elements amongst them

3) The government and the army tried repeatedly to convince the non-combatants amongst the reds to leave.

4) They started with less than lethal force until they came under fire from the reds.

5) The reds stated openly they were targeting journalists.

6) The government issued orders were to use less than lethal force where possible.

7) The situation degenerated from there. Fire was coming from BOTH sides. Determining who the shooters were in most cases will prove impossible.

Who is directly responsible for the deaths? The people that were paying the redshirts. The red leadership. The military. The government. ---- If you look at causality then it is the red paymasters and leaders. If you look at who did the killing and under whose orders then it is all of the above. The reds were given the opportunity in March before they started using molotov cocktails/petrol bombs (but after they started grenade attacks) to take a moral victory of elections before the end of the year and pack up and go home. That apparently did not fit with Thaksin's desire to appoint the next Army chief in October, so they stayed and started using scaled up violence.

Appreciate your effort to explain to me what POSSIBLY happened. I am not sarcastic, ok? I appreciate you take your time to answer to me. Really do but i will, according to my life experience, professional experience and my knowledge about those matters, keep my standing, my point of view. Respecting your opinion(or truth based on some evidences, whatever makes you think this way) i will be free to answer to your 7 points one by one, later, if that is fine with you?

indeed that is what happened. not supposedly. are you claiming you don't have access to youtube, facts, or that you weren't here in BKK when this boiled down? 'Cause I was trying to run a business while located in Silom. I'll be damned if that is some fantasy.

[animatic]

I dislike amateur trolls because it's such a pain to weed them out from the professional trolls.

[jdinasia]

I dislike amateur trolls because it's such a pain to weed them out from the professional trolls.

I finally clicked that ignore button after the PM is responsible for the actions of the army (and not the orders given by the PM) and when one of them sadly misstated facts about the sworn allegiance of the military. Note, I am NOT making the argument that anyone other than the commanders on the ground are ever responsible for the actions of troops that commit acts outside of the rules of engagement for 2 reasons 1) It isn't true and 2) to make that statement in Thailand might lead to some rather serious charges.

[truethailand]

This is amazing, really.

"Natthawut also called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to make a promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election even if the Democrat is beaten by the Pheu Thai."

Any one in Thailand believe they will admit defeat? What a dream. A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

Adding to the list of things that you know nothing about.

i think you will find Mr Wolf is correct. "Mark" claimed recently that his government are in charge of the army. So as the leader of said government he must have agreed on any operational plan to disperse protestors. Potential fatality figures would have been banded around the table and deemed acceptable, so either somebody disregarded orders and shot to kill innocent people or he accepted fatalities of a level we may never be privvy to, he signed the death warrant of mainly innocent Thai nationals. Dont talk about black shirts, grenades etc because I will talk about dead journalists, dead nurses and wounded medics

[truethailand]

Stepenwolf --- your number count is wrong as is your assumption that Abhisit is "directly responsible", but hey, since "the majority" of Thai men have multiple wives in your observation (counting out the fact that women don't outnumber men by that margin) .. should suggest that perhaps your ideas and maths don't tend to match very often

Anything you say, sport, anything...

Ok, put it this way: my assumption is guessing and it's wrong. Ok, so now is clear he didn't order to the Army to open fire to protesters. Then i have to ask you what do you think-who did it if he didn't? Tell me what do you know or think, WHO said to open fire to the people? Make it simple as possible, please.

simple, the red were responsible

they should not have been there

no reds, no deaths, no problem.........

The violence started in April when the army (army used loosely) tried to corner the reds and assinate a few leaders. As they were incapable one regiment fired a grenade into anothere regiment and all hell lets loose. It worries me that you cannot see the otherside of any argument. Is every thing said in defence of the reds a lie and evrything that the government media broadcast irrefutable proof. <snip>

Edited February 28, 2011 by craigt3365
Flame Removed

[truethailand]

Stepenwolf --- your number count is wrong as is your assumption that Abhisit is "directly responsible", but hey, since "the majority" of Thai men have multiple wives in your observation (counting out the fact that women don't outnumber men by that margin) .. should suggest that perhaps your ideas and maths don't tend to match very often

Anything you say, sport, anything...

Ok, put it this way: my assumption is guessing and it's wrong. Ok, so now is clear he didn't order to the Army to open fire to protesters. Then i have to ask you what do you think-who did it if he didn't? Tell me what do you know or think, WHO said to open fire to the people? Make it simple as possible, please.

simple, the red were responsible

they should not have been there

no reds, no deaths, no problem.........

if the reds where firing all these grenades and M16 how many soldiers died. Dont include the soldiers in April thats open to debate, something we wont get with this regime

[jdinasia]

Wrong again tt.....

If the plan was laid out to not use lethal force unless confronted with lethal force then someone (arguably) broke the rules of engagement, then it is the commander on the ground that is responsible. All that commander has to do is state "we were under fire". Since ALL sides admit that firefights were happening, then it becomes a new beast. The "he signed the death warrant of mainly innocent Thai nationals" is hyperbole at its highest. The fact that the reds were armed isn't disputed and mixing with armed people involved in an insurrectionist/terrorist action is stupidity.

Were some innocents killed? I am sure! Were they killed by fighters from BOTH sides? probably. It is sad and it was totally avoidable, had the reds only accepted the promised elections during the negotiations in March before they (the reds) escalated the violence on the 9th of April.

[animatic]

This is amazing, really.

"Natthawut also called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to make a promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election even if the Democrat is beaten by the Pheu Thai."

Any one in Thailand believe they will admit defeat? What a dream. A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

Adding to the list of things that you know nothing about.

i think you will find Mr Wolf is correct. "Mark" claimed recently that his government are in charge of the army. So as the leader of said government he must have agreed on any operational plan to disperse protestors. Potential fatality figures would have been banded around the table and deemed acceptable, so either somebody disregarded orders and shot to kill innocent people or he accepted fatalities of a level we may never be privvy to, he signed the death warrant of mainly innocent Thai nationals. Dont talk about black shirts, grenades etc because I will talk about dead journalists, dead nurses and wounded medics

Nixon or Johnson were in charge of the army at the time of the Mai Lai massacre. As heads of the armed forces they made sure the individuals on the ground who did this were punished, as heads of the army this was their job, not to accept personal responsibility for global orders they gave that were incorrectly followed, or ignored.

If they ordered the massacre themselves that is a different matter, but they didn't and Abhisit did not order an massacre of Thai citizens either. He ordered that 'law and order be restored' and 'the rallys be stopped from disrupting Bangkok any further'. That this could have caused violence is a given, but one side, the Red Leaders had the full ability to stop the violence and go home, and the legal onus was on them to do so, they chose to wait until force was the only option.

Edited February 27, 2011 by animatic

[TAWP]

This is amazing, really.

"Natthawut also called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to make a promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election even if the Democrat is beaten by the Pheu Thai."

Any one in Thailand believe they will admit defeat? What a dream. A men who is responsible(directly) for the death of 90 civilians to admit defeat?

90 civilians? You might want to revise that number, as the oft quoted 91 dead includes soldiers and police-officers too...

[TAWP]

So, at the end of this session, to tell you once again that PM's responsibility is anything that the Army is doing.He is Supreme Commander so even if he didn't make direct order for to open fire to protesters, he is responsible for casualties on both sides and it is by chain command. Period. Whether you like it or not, this is the fact and in case that whole situation would be one day qualified like a crime against civilians, he will be called to the court.

Hague Tribunal used exactly chain command as modus to charge for crime against humanity all political leaders in war in Yugoslavia. You should know that.

And if there it was the most important argument for Tribunal judges and way to arrest and charge political leaders, why do you think here any one would be exempt?

Only one thing is missing. To prove that was a crime against humanity. All the rest is just and only technical and procedural matter.

What you are saying is that you don't even know who is the 'supreme commander' of the armed forces, alrighty...here is a hint: It is not the PM.

[webfact]

Top red shirts to run for pheu thai in poll

By The Nation

The opposition Pheu Thai Party yesterday agreed to have the seven recently bailed-out red-shirt leaders as election candidates.

"The party resolved to welcome the red-shirt leaders and we don't think that fielding them as candidates will affect our political base in Bangkok," party executive Anudit Nakhonthap said.

Deputy party spokesman Jirayu Huangsup said the executive board discussed the red-shirt leaders' stated desire to contest the next election under the Pheu Thai banner and decided to accept them.

The seven leaders, who were bailed last week after nine months in detention, are seeking to prevent themselves being jailed again by becoming members of parliament.

Jirayu said the party has yet to consider the home provinces of the red-shirt leaders to determine whether they should be fielded in a constituency or placed on the party list.

The party may wait to announce the candidacies of the red-shirt leaders during the last period or after the House is dissolved, he said.

The executive board meeting, which included party chairman Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, party MPs' chairman Chalerm Yoobamrung and party leader Yongyuth Wichaidit, also resolved to introduce the direct-election candidates tomorrow.

Red-shirt leaders, including the seven recently bailed, gathered at Pathum Wanaram Temple at 10am yesterday to make merit for those killed during the May 19 crackdown on red-shirt protesters.

They included Natthawut Saikua, Kwanchai Praipana and Weng Tojirakarn as well as Thida Thawornset, acting chairwoman of the red-shirt movement.

Natthawut said former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra phoned the seven leaders from abroad to congratulate them on their release.

Natthawut called on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to promise that his Democrat Party would accept the results of the next election, even if the Democrats were beaten by Pheu Thai.

-- The Nation 2011-02-28

[stepenwolf1958]

I dislike amateur trolls because it's such a pain to weed them out from the professional trolls.

I finally clicked that ignore button after the PM is responsible for the actions of the army (and not the orders given by the PM) and when one of them sadly misstated facts about the sworn allegiance of the military. Note, I am NOT making the argument that anyone other than the commanders on the ground are ever responsible for the actions of troops that commit acts outside of the rules of engagement for 2 reasons 1) It isn't true and 2) to make that statement in Thailand might lead to some rather serious charges.

Thank you for ignore button on me. Will be easier to me then. BTW...that much about democratic, civilized way of talk with people who are having different opinion than you do, and about willingness and readiness to accept the fact that every problem has TWO sides. Thank you once again for to ignore me. I feel fine because that shows how much you are "democratic" person.

[stepenwolf1958]

So, at the end of this session, to tell you once again that PM's responsibility is anything that the Army is doing.He is Supreme Commander so even if he didn't make direct order for to open fire to protesters, he is responsible for casualties on both sides and it is by chain command. Period. Whether you like it or not, this is the fact and in case that whole situation would be one day qualified like a crime against civilians, he will be called to the court.

Hague Tribunal used exactly chain command as modus to charge for crime against humanity all political leaders in war in Yugoslavia. You should know that.

And if there it was the most important argument for Tribunal judges and way to arrest and charge political leaders, why do you think here any one would be exempt?

Only one thing is missing. To prove that was a crime against humanity. All the rest is just and only technical and procedural matter.

What you are saying is that you don't even know who is the 'supreme commander' of the armed forces, alrighty...here is a hint: It is not the PM.

Well, i don't know anything about Monarchies in the world and Constitution of any Monarchy in the world. I thought it is PM, like in my country.

And now you confuse me. TRUETHAILAND member said here it is PM(by PM's statement) and now you are saying it is not PM. Ok, if not PM, then someone should to say that here so we would not waste time thinking it is PM.

[whybother]

Well, i don't know anything about Monarchies in the world and Constitution of any Monarchy in the world. I thought it is PM, like in my country.

And now you confuse me. TRUETHAILAND member said here it is PM(by PM's statement) and now you are saying it is not PM. Ok, if not PM, then someone should to say that here so we would not waste time thinking it is PM.

And another one on the list.

According to wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Commanders_of_the_Royal_Thai_Armed_Forces_Headquarters various generals have been Supreme Commander of the Thai Armed Forces. In 2008, the name was changed to "Chief of Defense Forces", so the title "Supreme Commander" doesn't exist now.

The King is Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Thai Armed Forced and the Cabinet is the instrument through which national security policy is formulated. A National Security Council, composed of a number of ministers, is charged with coordinating the maintenance of national security.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/thailand/mod.htm

[stepenwolf1958]

Well, i don't know anything about Monarchies in the world and Constitution of any Monarchy in the world. I thought it is PM, like in my country.

And now you confuse me. TRUETHAILAND member said here it is PM(by PM's statement) and now you are saying it is not PM. Ok, if not PM, then someone should to say that here so we would not waste time thinking it is PM.

And another one on the list.

According to wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Commanders_of_the_Royal_Thai_Armed_Forces_Headquarters various generals have been Supreme Commander of the Thai Armed Forces. In 2008, the name was changed to "Chief of Defense Forces", so the title "Supreme Commander" doesn't exist now.

The King is Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Thai Armed Forced and the Cabinet is the instrument through which national security policy is formulated. A National Security Council, composed of a number of ministers, is charged with coordinating the maintenance of national security.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/thailand/mod.htm

Thanks whybother.

This makes all be clearer.

Some one should say to the reds that PM is wrong address to blame for, so they should stop attacking him about it all.

In the other hand, truethailand said here that PM stated in public that govt is in charge for the army. Again confusion?

[timekeeper]

Stepenwolf --- your number count is wrong as is your assumption that Abhisit is "directly responsible", but hey, since "the majority" of Thai men have multiple wives in your observation (counting out the fact that women don't outnumber men by that margin) .. should suggest that perhaps your ideas and maths don't tend to match very often

Anything you say, sport, anything...

Ok, put it this way: my assumption is guessing and it's wrong. Ok, so now is clear he didn't order to the Army to open fire to protesters. Then i have to ask you what do you think-who did it if he didn't? Tell me what do you know or think, WHO said to open fire to the people? Make it simple as possible, please.

simple, the red were responsible

they should not have been there

no reds, no deaths, no problem.........

The violence started in April when the army (army used loosely) tried to corner the reds and assinate a few leaders. As they were incapable one regiment fired a grenade into anothere regiment and all hell lets loose. It worries me that you cannot see the otherside of any argument. Is every thing said in defence of the reds a lie and evrything that the government media broadcast irrefutable proof. <snip>

don't worry about me, my position is clear, there is no question about my position, i hate reds, i hate Thaksin and i refuse to listen to even reasonable argument from Red traitors and their lying supporters

as to what i write, that's my business not yours until the mods say otherwise

Edited February 28, 2011 by craigt3365
quoted flame removed