Thaksins Drug War

[oldsailor35]

When you go after drug dealers, you're a criminal.

This is Thailand, don't try to understand

When you "go after drug dealers" and shoot innocent people, you're a criminal.

How do you know they were innocent Ask just about any crim and he will tell you that he is innocent and i guess you will believe him

[chachachacha]

No we just expect lazy people to do their own research when it is readily and easily available.

I would normally agree with that, but just because chachachacha is making such an issue over it and appears unable to conduct a simple search, here's a reasonably comprehensive summation:

Thaksin Shinawatra and His Crimes (2001-2010)

http://www.livetradi...-2010-13766.htm

All that does is support my case that they did not hold back charges for when they had him in custody as one of your spin Dr friends hinted. The only charges that are now outstanding are BS political one's . He would argue that all are political & I am sure that if the same focus was put on all the MPs (GANGSTERS) of all parties you would struggle to fill a mini bus with the ones that are not corrupt.

Try & do better next time you give a link . That one was p_ss poor

[jdinasia]

When you go after drug dealers, you're a criminal.

This is Thailand, don't try to understand

When you "go after drug dealers" and shoot innocent people, you're a criminal.

How do you know they were innocent Ask just about any crim and he will tell you that he is innocent and i guess you will believe him

Feel free to research the topic and get back with us But when you gun down anyone without legal justification it is murder even if they are a criminal. (before the board Reds jump on this, last year there was legal justification for the use of lethal force )

[oldsailor35]

One of the charges is he ordered the killing of thousands of drug dealing suspects.

Why don't the police investigate this I wonder?

You might want to look into who carried out the killings.

As I understand it this was a very popular move by Thaksin - and many people still think so. It had the (mostly silent) backing of most parties and politicians. It was mostly foreigners and foreign countries that got upset by Thaksin's murder of thousands. Different police districts were given quotas on how many people they had to kill - and the districts and local police stations made lists of people to fill these quotas. Many influential Thais managed to pay or influence the police to add or substitute names to these lists of personal enemies and business rivals. So many innocent people who had nothing to do with drugs were also killed. To open all this up now to investigation would be to open up a HUGE can of worms. Almost no one is interested in doing that.

REALLY ! can you please point us to the hard evidence of all this or did you get it from your wifes auntie's cousin's brother who just happens to be high up in the Democrats

[jayboy]

Your opinion on Kasit is noted

Your opinion on Thaksin is noted Your assumption that they wanted Thaksin back via extradition is noted but not agreed with. Had they wanted him back I am fairly sure they could have gotten him back. My assumption is that by going for the little case first, they wanted him marginalized outside of Thailand and that they have accomplished that.

I am not sure how you can call armed people involved in an insurrectionist movement "civilians".

Thaksin has been responsible for mowing down unarmed civilians all over the country as you seem to admit, in his "war on drugs."

Your views are similarly noted.My understanding the Thais were never likely to achieve extradition, nor perhaps did the truly influential really want him back.A British lawyer told me a top flight London QC would have made humiliating mincemeat of the Thai Government's case, i.e that there was no political motivation.Cleverly, as you know, since the UK is a friendly government, the Brits simply denied Thaksin a visa

Most of the Redshirts were unarmed civilians.You're surely not disputing that.

I was referring to political violence on the streets of Bangkok in the tradition of Suchinda and now continued under Abhisit.

[chachachacha]

When you go after drug dealers, you're a criminal.

This is Thailand, don't try to understand

When you "go after drug dealers" and shoot innocent people, you're a criminal.

How do you know they were innocent Ask just about any crim and he will tell you that he is innocent and i guess you will believe him

How do you know that every CRIM would say they are innocent ?

I think you will find that the vast majority of detained people admit their offences .

I suppose you believe that everybody that is in prison is guilty & that Thailand is paradice .

[oldsailor35]

I read an interesting theory. Thaksin had the governers in each province draw up a suspect list. Police leaked the list and the kingpins, crooked police killed them to prevent them from being arrested and talking.

Sounds to me like he had a comprehensive plan but the mafia did their thing and Thaksins enemies used the event to smear him.

And still are wherever they possibly can.

[jdinasia]

Your opinion on Kasit is noted

Your opinion on Thaksin is noted Your assumption that they wanted Thaksin back via extradition is noted but not agreed with. Had they wanted him back I am fairly sure they could have gotten him back. My assumption is that by going for the little case first, they wanted him marginalized outside of Thailand and that they have accomplished that.

I am not sure how you can call armed people involved in an insurrectionist movement "civilians".

Thaksin has been responsible for mowing down unarmed civilians all over the country as you seem to admit, in his "war on drugs."

Your views are similarly noted.My understanding the Thais were never likely to achieve extradition, nor perhaps did the truly influential really want him back.A British lawyer told me a top flight London QC would have made humiliating mincemeat of the Thai Government's case, i.e that there was no political motivation.Cleverly, as you know, since the UK is a friendly government, the Brits simply denied Thaksin a visa

Most of the Redshirts were unarmed civilians.You're surely not disputing that.

I was referring to political violence on the streets of Bangkok in the tradition of Suchinda and now continued under Abhisit.

Hmmmm Thaksin's deaths 2500+? Suchinda? Far different circumstances but an "official" count somewhere around 50 dead and none of them police or military, I don't see you laying this at the feet of the then PM Anand. Abhisit? again not parallel but 91? deaths including police and military. ----- 2500+ versus somewhere over 140 (92 and 2010) --- some of whom (many?) were killed by the insurrectionists themselves. It doesn't surprise me that you appear to write off the exponentially larger number of deaths by Thaksin and focus instead on Suchinda (not Anand) and Abhisit.

I am not disputing that most of the reds were unarmed. I would not classify them as civilians after April 9th and many of them were imho never civilians. You stated he mowed down armed civilians which is just a strange thing to say.

[Moonrakers]

Why do people continue to try to be smart-<deleted> and insist that others produce evidence for every little bloody point that is made.

There is an enormous amount of information on the web. If you aren't going to be bothered to read some of it, why bother to get involved in a thread like this?

You might think that you are coming across as smart and intelligent but you simply just are not. You are just coming across as belligerent, ignorant and pointless.

Here: www.google.com

Use it, it'll expand your mind.

[oldsailor35]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

[oldsailor35]

From beginning to end, the Drug War was Thaksin's "baby"

I agree with you and it was the worst of his crimes.

Care to explain why he was never charged and instead was pursued with relatively trivial offences (in comparison)?

It would be wonderful to receive an honest reply on this.

I'll give it a go.

It would likely implicate members of many of the civil servants at many levels, from the Tambon offices all the way to the top in BKK, so that limits the political will (police, governors appointed from BKK, local administrations etc). That, of course, is supposition. I welcome any reply that has any facts

and 2 (since you are actually asking 2 questions)

You go for the easiest cases to prove and get a conviction on first to limit the actions that Thaksin can take. The other cases are still lined up against Thaksin and can move forward upon his presence in court to answer charges. The criminal conviction already in place sent him scurrying away. I am sure they were hoping he'd just hide out and be a good boy on that first conviction. If you think it is trivial (and by comparison to 2500 extra-judicial killings it is), ask yourself why he didn't show up for sentencing and immediately lodge an appeal. (Appeals require new evidence -- and any way you cut it -- legally his signature on the land deal for his wife was an open and shut case.) Once in jail and less able (not unable) to use soem of his own political juice, some of the other cases could have moved forward. He ran. The appeal would have been denied in all likelihood and staying would have made him available to show up in court to answer the other charges.

The prosecution did the right thing in going for the easy win first. Get the criminal in jail and then work to prosecute the harder cases as you go. Had they gone for a more major case first and failed and THEN followed with a minor one cries of "I am being persecuted" and "politically motivated" would have had more weight.

In the history of my own country there have been major criminals that were never brought down for their serious crimes, but that were brought down on more 'technical crimes" such as tax-evasion.

I am curious about the 'so called' corrupt land deal. Did'nt Mrs Thaksin win in a fair bidding process, because her bid was the highest. ? Whats wrong with that.

[jdinasia]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

HUH? How many years has Thaksin been gone? Zero. He is making announcements about Thai politics daily and is still the man behind the PTP and the UDD. The rest .... "c'mon, get real"

[chachachacha]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

HUH? How many years has Thaksin been gone? Zero. He is making announcements about Thai politics daily and is still the man behind the PTP and the UDD. The rest .... "c'mon, get real"

Dear me

[Robby nz]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

A strange post indeed.

Contains not one single varifiable fact or link to any facts to prove anything writen.

Yet claims others no nothing.

Looks to me like so much other anti Govt propaganda.

[whybother]

When you go after drug dealers, you're a criminal.

This is Thailand, don't try to understand

When you "go after drug dealers" and shoot innocent people, you're a criminal.

How do you know they were innocent Ask just about any crim and he will tell you that he is innocent and i guess you will believe him

Unfortunately, these people couldn't plead their innocence.

[whybother]

I am curious about the 'so called' corrupt land deal. Did'nt Mrs Thaksin win in a fair bidding process, because her bid was the highest. ? Whats wrong with that.

It was corrupt because Thaksin signed off on it while he was PM. That was against the law. Pretty simple really.

[whybother]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

Do you know any facts, or have you just taken your views hook, line and sinker from the red shirt and Thaksin propaganda?

[chachachacha]

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

Do you know any facts, or have you just taken your views hook, line and sinker from the red shirt and Thaksin propaganda?

Do you ? As far as I see ,there is a certain group of dreamers here . They also seem to be on the side of Murder & slaughter on the streets of BKK . Junta supporters.

[whybother]

Do you ? As far as I see ,there is a certain group of dreamers here . They also seem to be on the side of Murder & slaughter on the streets of BKK . Junta supporters.

And there are a certain group on here that just trot out propaganda like "murder and slaughter" and "junta" when their "facts" get shown to be <deleted>.

[chachachacha]

I am curious about the 'so called' corrupt land deal. Did'nt Mrs Thaksin win in a fair bidding process, because her bid was the highest. ? Whats wrong with that.

It was corrupt because Thaksin signed off on it while he was PM. That was against the law. Pretty simple really.

So Technical .

Just politically motivated . To try to justify the overthrow of the elected Government. . It also bought them time to sort their Junta Government by proxy . I seem to remember that when they took power they awarded themselves massive rises in salaries. Was this ever investigated ? NO. because they have been the Gun of power ever since.

Do you think that what they want now is a request to the government ? It is a demand to their proxy puppets. The same people on here that say Thaksin is corrupt also support everything Bush done ,That says it all really

[Moonrakers]

The same people on here that say Thaksin is corrupt also support everything Bush done ,That says it all really

Wibble

[chachachacha]

I'll give it a go.

It would likely implicate members of many of the civil servants at many levels, from the Tambon offices all the way to the top in BKK, so that limits the political will (police, governors appointed from BKK, local administrations etc). That, of course, is supposition. I welcome any reply that has any facts

and 2 (since you are actually asking 2 questions)

You go for the easiest cases to prove and get a conviction on first to limit the actions that Thaksin can take. The other cases are still lined up against Thaksin and can move forward upon his presence in court to answer charges. The criminal conviction already in place sent him scurrying away. I am sure they were hoping he'd just hide out and be a good boy on that first conviction. If you think it is trivial (and by comparison to 2500 extra-judicial killings it is), ask yourself why he didn't show up for sentencing and immediately lodge an appeal. (Appeals require new evidence -- and any way you cut it -- legally his signature on the land deal for his wife was an open and shut case.) Once in jail and less able (not unable) to use soem of his own political juice, some of the other cases could have moved forward. He ran. The appeal would have been denied in all likelihood and staying would have made him available to show up in court to answer the other charges.

The prosecution did the right thing in going for the easy win first. Get the criminal in jail and then work to prosecute the harder cases as you go. Had they gone for a more major case first and failed and THEN followed with a minor one cries of "I am being persecuted" and "politically motivated" would have had more weight.

In the history of my own country there have been major criminals that were never brought down for their serious crimes, but that were brought down on more 'technical crimes" such as tax-evasion.

I knew I would never receive a sensible reply from the person actually addressed.We should aim to make this the tone for future exchanges

We should actually aim even more readily for exchanges that don't involve your typically derogatory and inflammatory tone, of which you've been reminded of on countless occasions. When your antagonistic and belittling style of posting is so prevalent, it's no wonder posters are hesitant to respond your posts.

Incidentally I do seriously maintain that the lesser charges were relativaly trivial.

I, personally, don't view billions and billions in corruption, removing the separation of powers resulting in personally beneficial changing of the laws, the initiation of pie-in-the-sky programs that only benefited himself and his cronies, attempted bribery of courts, or many of the other crimes for which outstanding warrants still exist (as outlined in the link in Post # 80) against him as, "relatively trivial."

.

Just more spin & crap .Just because you keep saying the same thing dont think anybody is fooled

[whybother]

So Technical .

Just politically motivated . To try to justify the overthrow of the elected Government. . It also bought them time to sort their Junta Government by proxy . I seem to remember that when they took power they awarded themselves massive rises in salaries. Was this ever investigated ? NO. because they have been the Gun of power ever since.

Do you think that what they want now is a request to the government ? It is a demand to their proxy puppets. The same people on here that say Thaksin is corrupt also support everything Bush done ,That says it all really

Technical? Politically motivated? It was clearly against the law. It was clearly conflict of interest.

There was no overthrow of an elected government. There was an overthrow of a care-taker government, that was trying to change laws (which you can't do while in care-taker mode) to avoid a legitimate election.

Sort out what Junta government? How did Thaksin's charges affect any government?

What's to be investigated. The Junta were the government. They gave themselves pay rises. I'm not saying I agree with it, but what's to investigate? It's not like it was secret.

Bush??? What's he got to do with anything. But, just for the fun of it, can you please point me to any post, pro- or anti-Thaksin, that supports Bush.

Proxy puppets? You're pro-Thaksin and complaining about proxy puppets.

Do you really want to go back to the corruption of Thaksin?

[TheLaughingMan]

Why do people continue to try to be smart-<deleted> and insist that others produce evidence for every little bloody point that is made.

There is an enormous amount of information on the web. If you aren't going to be bothered to read some of it, why bother to get involved in a thread like this?

You might think that you are coming across as smart and intelligent but you simply just are not. You are just coming across as belligerent, ignorant and pointless.

Here: www.google.com

Use it, it'll expand your mind.

THANKYOU! Seems obvious but apparently google is still an elusive and confusing concept to some posters.

You know it all posters in here are wandering around like a mob of sheep Baa Baaaaaaaaaaaaa Baa Baaa! Really none of you know the real facts, but you just take a line and believe it fullstop. You are a propaganda ministers dream. How many years has Thaksin been gone now ? Wake up and get a life.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

The truth is Thailand has been a military run country since the 1920's. Nothing has really changed in all that time except they have to be more careful how they kill people what with internet and phone cameras.

[jdinasia]

I am curious about the 'so called' corrupt land deal. Did'nt Mrs Thaksin win in a fair bidding process, because her bid was the highest. ? Whats wrong with that.

It was corrupt because Thaksin signed off on it while he was PM. That was against the law. Pretty simple really.

More accurately that is described as abuse of power. It was simply against the law as you state. For her to purchase the land, as her husband he had to sign off on it and to do so was illegal. Who, in Thailand, would bid against the premier's wife? The land went at below market value.

[SteeleJoe]

This is one of the arguments that are even more pointless than most arguments on forums (I made the mistake of inadvertantly getting involved in one last before I realized what I was dealing with) because both sides are never in any way going to concede anything by the other no matter how valid and at least one side is willing to dispense with any semblance of objectivity (not to mention civility): ultimately you have two sides who aren't communicating anything -- and have absolutely zero chance of getting the other side to see things even a little bit differently, let alone change their position -- but just trying to score points.

So I'm extremely reluctant to weigh in at all and even less to try and lay out a well constructed and rational argument (and do the presenting of facts required for that). At the same time I do have to say that it genuinely astonishes me that there are people that would unconditionally and vehemently defend Thaksin and deny that he is what he is. I'm not surprised that people condemn eh current government or its means of getting power -- I'd find it hard to find much if anything good to say about any part of the Thai political system. It's easy for me to see why people wouldn't be happy with the status quo (I'm not) or the establishment. I can even get my head around the idea of people thinking Thailand was better off with Thaksin -- though I don't agree. But to ddeny the facts? To refuse to acknowledge the reality of what he is and what he did?

Mind-boggling.

But here's a couple things I'd say about what's been in this thread:

I was referring to political violence on the streets of Bangkok in the tradition of Suchinda and now continued under Abhisit.

Violence on the streets goes back 20 years before Suchinda. But while what happened in '92 is arguably analogous to the events in '73 and '76, that which happened last year are much less so. And to cal it "a tradition" that "has continued" seems sort of silly given the intervals and different circumstances.

Far different circumstances but an "official" count somewhere around 50 dead and none of them police or military, I don't see you laying this at the feet of the then PM Anand. Abhisit? again not parallel but 91? deaths including police and military. ----- 2500+ versus somewhere over 140 (92 and 2010) --- some of whom (many?) were killed by the insurrectionists themselves. It doesn't surprise me that you appear to write off the exponentially larger number of deaths by Thaksin and focus instead on Suchinda (not Anand) and Abhisit.

• With all due respect, to rely on the government statistics on that is foolish; that's not even trying to account for the disappearances.
• Anand Panyarachun was NOT the PM when the crimes took place. Rightly or wrongly he is widely regarded as one the very few (or only?) Thai player who is virtually above reproach and pro-democracy. Suchinda was not only runnig the troops, he was the PM.

Think about the mess that the country is in right now with the army going 'apeshit' and getting bigger and bigger budgets, buying useless equipment etc. Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like, police taking bribes and so on. Its a fact that there is now more corruption than there was in Taksins day. C'mon get real.

• If this is your idea of the Army going 'apeshit' then you need some historical perspective.
• If you think Taxi and Tuk Tuk drivers doing what they like is either new or one of the more serious things going on, you need a broader and more historical perspective.
• If you think police taking bribes is in any way new or even worse than before you need...well, you get the idea.
• More corruption? I'd like to see some sort of evidence of that.

am curious about the 'so called' corrupt land deal. Did'nt Mrs Thaksin win in a fair bidding process, because her bid was the highest. ? Whats wrong with that.

Cronysim. Guess why her bid was accepted as the highest? And yes, conflict of interest.

I seem to remember that when they took power they awarded themselves massive rises in salaries.

Interesting. I myself don't seem to remember that. Source?

The same people on here that say Thaksin is corrupt also support everything Bush done ,That says it all really

I supported virtually nothing Bush ever did. I think he was a disaster for the US and the world.

Thaksin IS corrupt. And that's not even the worst thing about him.

(And he and Bush got along just fine, by the way.)

And finally -- I can't find the quote (I confess I haven't carefully read some of the thread -- too many diatribes -- but someone said that we should view it as progress that the military makes the denials it is making and thus implicitly acknowledges that intervention in politics is wrong; I agree that that is an indication of progress however I would temper optimism with the fact that that change actually happened decades ago -- and still we have the question of a coup on the horizon. (I remember in circa '93 when I subscribed to the view of many political analysts of the time that Thailand had moved past that -- how naive we were).

Sorry, to anyone who bothered to read this, if it is poorly written but it's off the top of my head as I'm pressed for time - and to be honest I haven't got the ambition to take more care with it (and even if I had maybe it wouldn't be much better).

EDIT for format problems

Edited April 7, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[jdinasia]

Steelejoe,

I will happily accept your correction to my post (regarding anand), as for the official number??? who knows. I can't even get a number estimate on how many were disappeared. (used advisedly against the idea that they just ran away, and instead that they were forced disappearances at the hands of Suchinda. Anand may have been 'better than average" or not, I seem to remember him setting Suchinda up quite nicely but honestly I would have to read up on the period again to know

[SteeleJoe]

Oops! Just found out that my reference to someone citing relative improvement in regard to the political role of the military was in fact about a post on another thread altogether. Solly.

JD:

1) No one knows, it's true -- but I think that easily the preponderance of the evidence points to a higher number than 50 (in addition to the fact that it's very safe to assume that the powers that be would reduce the actual figure) and that, as I meant too imply , the numbers from the government are of little -- use other than to be able to say that we know that it certainly was at least as many as 50.

2) I was far too unqualified in my praise of Anand (even though I did temper it): at the time he seemed like a freakin' angel given what Thailand had had for so long and what it was in the midst of. And there were many really good things to say about him and his government (and which were said by all the right folks here and abroad). But in retrospect there are some things that ultimately reflect at least somewhat poorly on him. Some of that however can be perhaps partially explained by things that can't be mentioned.

In any case, no criticism of you as was meant by anything I said but I commend your good grace in acknowledging a crucial error. (Crucial in that I wouldn't want to assign the blame for what happened to Anand or, even less, diminish the blame due Suchinda and his crew)

[jdinasia]

SJ .. criticism of an inaccurate post is welcome. While I understand your POV about the numbers in 1992, that they could be much higher, one would think that a reasonably accurate number could be derived from adding confirmed deaths to the number of "disappeared". The political climate afterwards was heavy, even possibly heavy enough to keep people quiet .... back then ... but today?

[SteeleJoe]

one would think that a reasonably accurate number could be derived from adding confirmed deaths to the number of "disappeared". The political climate afterwards was heavy, even possibly heavy enough to keep people quiet .... back then ... but today?

Yes, I'd agree that that'd be a reasonable means of speculating on a decent approximation but the problem is that -- as you say -- we don't have the numbers of disappeared; and moreover there are other plausible, even likely, explanations for some of the disappearances that are not in fact the fault of the government of the time. But most importantly I don't think there's any reason to believe that even the perpetrators know how many victims there were (and doubt it was recorded -- or could have been).

So those are reasons why even today we perhaps can get no real idea. There are other potential reasons, among them those which have, again, to do with things that are still extant but can't be spoken of. (That is NOT meant as a veiled accusation of complicity by anyone or anything and it requires context and explication that can not be provided so I would caution anyone against attempting to publicly interpret what I've said).

EDIT FOR TYPO

Edited April 7, 2011 by SteeleJoe