Group Slams Thailand's Alleged Cluster Bomb Use

[TerraPosse]

Thailand admits controversial weapon use

BANGKOK, April 7, 2011 (AFP) - Thailand on Thursday admitted using controversial weapons during a border clash with neighbouring Cambodia in February but insisted it did not classify them as cluster munitions.

Responding to accusations from campaigners, the Thai army said it had used Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DPICM) during the recent heavy fighting on the shared border. [more...]

Full story: http://www.thaivisa....ial-weapon-use/

"Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DPICM)"....oh, so a nice bit of jingoism means it's not a cluster munition anymore and ok to use then? I'd like to hear the radio contact when a field commander ordered a bunch of these fired across the border...

[Buchholz]

...Cluster munitions are a particularly nasty weapon and as defined above should be banned from use. 107 Countries around the world (including incidentally, Cambodia, Indonesia and Malaysia) adopted the convention in 2008. 55 have since gone on to sign/ratify it. Apart from America and Israel, (and I certainly do not hold those up as role models when it comes to use of war weapons) why is it that Thailand feels it necessary to use cluster munitions?

You're being more than a little dishonest here, in fact, just as you accuse the Thai army of doing, you are lying to us. The CMC itself stated "CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia

Thailand and Cambodia should join global treaty banning cluster munitions"

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/

As this suggests, both Thailand and Cambodia have not signed the treaty. Until Cambodia joins the treaty, it really has no right to moan about Thailand using weapons that itself has not ruled out using. While there are NGO's in both countries who are members of the coalition. From the same source:

"Cambodia

• Cambodia CBL (Jesuit Refugee Service)
• World Vision Cambodia

Thailand

• Coalition for Peace and Reconciliation
• Thai Campaign to Ban Landmines
• Handicap International Thailand
• Nonviolence International
• Coalition for Peace and Reconciliation "

Neither country has ratified it, nor stated that they would not use these weapons. (I take it that all the anti cluster bomb posters here are paid up members of at least one of these NGO's? It's all too easy to preach and condemn (and lie) without putting your money where your mouth is).

108 countries have signed the Convention and 56 have ratified:

Country Signature Ratification Afghanistan 03-Dec-08 Albania 03-Dec-08 16-Jun-09 Angola 03-Dec-08 Antigua & Barbuda 16-Jul-10 23-Aug-10 Australia 03-Dec-08 Austria 03-Dec-08 02-Apr-09 Belgium 03-Dec-08 22-Dec-09 Benin 03-Dec-08 Bolivia 03-Dec-08 Bosnia and Herzegovina 03-Dec-08 07-Sep-10 Botswana 03-Dec-08 Bulgaria 03-Dec-08 06-Apr-11 Burkina Faso 03-Dec-08 16-Feb-10 Burundi 03-Dec-08 25-Sep-09 Cameroon 15-Dec-09 Canada 03-Dec-08 Cape Verde 03-Dec-08 19-Oct-10 Central African Republic 03-Dec-08 Chad 03-Dec-08 Chile 03-Dec-08 16-Dec-10 Colombia 03-Dec-08 Comoros 03-Dec-08 28-Jul-10 Congo, Democratic Republic of 18-Mar-09 Congo, Republic of 03-Dec-08 Cook Islands 03-Dec-08 Costa Rica 03-Dec-08 Côte d'Ivoire 04-Dec-08 Croatia 03-Dec-08 17-Aug-09 Cyprus 23-Sept-09 Czech Republic 03-Dec-08 Denmark 03-Dec-08 12-Feb-10 Djibouti 30-Jul-10 Dominican Republic 10-Nov-09 Ecuador 03-Dec-08 11-May-10 El Salvador 03-Dec-08 10-Jan-11 Fiji 03-Dec-08 28-May-10 France 03-Dec-08 25-Sep-09 Gambia 03-Dec-08 Germany 03-Dec-08 08-Jul-09 Ghana 03-Dec-08 03-Feb-11 Guatemala 03-Dec-08 03-Nov-10 Guinea 03-Dec-08 Guinea Bissau 03-Dec-08 29-Nov-10 Haiti 28-Oct-09 The Holy See 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Honduras 03-Dec-08 Hungary 03-Dec-08 Iceland 03-Dec-08 Indonesia 03-Dec-08 Iraq 12-Nov-09 Ireland 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Italy 03-Dec-08 Jamaica 12-Jun-09 Japan 03-Dec-08 14-Jul-09 Kenya 03-Dec-08 Lao PDR 03-Dec-08 18-Mar-09 Lebanon 03-Dec-08 05-Nov-10 Lesotho 03-Dec-08 28-May-10 Liberia 03-Dec-08 Liechtenstein 03-Dec-08 Lithuania 03-Dec-08 24-Mar-11 Luxembourg 03-Dec-08 10-Jul-09 Macedonia, FYR 03-Dec-08 08-Oct-09 Madagascar 03-Dec-08 Malawi 03-Dec-08 7-Oct-09 Mali 03-Dec-08 30-Jun-10 Malta 03-Dec-08 24-Sep-09 Mauritania 19-Apr-10 Mexico 03-Dec-08 06-May-09 Moldova, Republic of 03-Dec-08 16-Feb-10 Monaco 03-Dec-08 21-Sep-10 Montenegro 03-Dec-08 25-Jan-10 Mozambique 03-Dec-08 14-Mar-11 Namibia 03-Dec-08 Nauru 03-Dec-08 Netherlands 03-Dec-08 23-Feb-11 New Zealand 03-Dec-08 22-Dec-09 Nicaragua 03-Dec-08 02-Nov-09 Niger 03-Dec-08 02-Jun-09 Nigeria 12-June-09 Norway 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Palau 03-Dec-08 Panama 03-Dec-08 29-Nov-10 Paraguay 03-Dec-08 Peru 03-Dec-08 Philippines 03-Dec-08 Portugal 03-Dec-08 09-Mar-11 Rwanda 03-Dec-08 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 23-Sept-09 29-Oct-10 Samoa 03-Dec-08 28-Apr-10 San Marino 03-Dec-08 10-Jul-09 São Tomé and Principe 03-Dec-08 Senegal 03-Dec-08 Seychelles 13-Apr-10 20-May-10 Sierra Leone 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Slovenia 03-Dec-08 19-Aug-09 Somalia 03-Dec-08 South Africa 03-Dec-08 Spain 03-Dec-08 17-Jun-09 Sweden 03-Dec-08 Switzerland 03-Dec-08 Tanzania 03-Dec-08 Togo 03-Dec-08 Tunisia 12-Jan-09 28-Sep-10 Uganda 03-Dec-08 United Kingdom 03-Dec-08 4-May-10 Uruguay 03-Dec-08 24-Sep-09 Zambia 03-Dec-08 12-Aug-09

(Edited to add), the table didn't come out right, but there is a glaring gap between Burundi and Cameroon, where phiphidon assures us Cambodia is. (and no, it's not there under Kampuchea either)

I also found an interesting defence of their use:

"He told the BBC: "The very strong military advice is that they are essential."They fulfil a particular role on the battlefield and if we did not use them, we would be putting our own forces at greater and, therefore, unnecessary risk."

He said the cluster bombs were "not indiscriminate" weapons and they were a "more effective and safer" option than unguided weapons when targeting the enemy in a defined area."

No, not the Thai army, but the aptly named UK Defence Secretary at the time of the Iraq war, Geoff Hoon

http://www.dailymail...-used-Iraq.html

55 (or 56, depending on the posts above) have ratified it... that leaves 148 (or 147) countries that have not ratified it.

[ballpoint]

55 (or 56, depending on the posts above) have ratified it... that leaves 148 (or 147) countries that have not ratified it.

That's just of the countries that have actually signed the treaty. A number of others, including the US, Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam, have neither signed nor ratified the treaty. (That is according to the website of the Cluster Munitions Coalition, http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/ the grouping responsible for the treaty. Even under the link that phiphidon gave us, http://www.clusterconvention.org/ratifications-and-signatures/, it states 108 countries have signed and 56 ratified, so I've no idea where he gets his 107 and 55 figures from. His link also lists the Asian countries in each grouping: Signitories: Asia (3) Afghanistan, Indonesia and Philippines, ratifiers: Asia (2) Japan and The Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Again, where he got Cambodia and Malaysia from is also unknown, and blatantly untrue).

Edited April 7, 2011 by ballpoint

[Buchholz]

55 (or 56, depending on the posts above) have ratified it... that leaves 148 (or 147) countries that have not ratified it.

That's just of the countries that have actually signed the treaty. A number of others, including the US, Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam, have neither signed nor ratified the treaty. (That is according to the website of the Cluster Munitions Coalition, http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/ the grouping responsible for the treaty. Even under the link that phiphidon gave us, http://www.clusterconvention.org/ratifications-and-signatures/, it states 108 countries have signed and 56 ratified, so I've no idea where he gets his 107 and 55 figures from. His link also lists the Asian countries in each grouping: Signitories: Asia (3) Afghanistan, Indonesia and Philippines, ratifiers: Asia (2) Japan and The Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Again, where he got Cambodia and Malaysia from is also unknown, and blatantly untrue).

I was just emphasizing that 1/4 of the world has ratified the convention and 3/4 of the world have not.

As Pi Sek mentions, if the Cheeseman and the CMC wants to be taken seriously, they really should at least have those numbers reversed.

[Pi Sek]

I was just emphasizing that 1/4 of the world has ratified the convention and 3/4 of the world have not.

As Pi Sek mentions, if the Cheeseman and the CMC wants to be taken seriously, they really should at least have those numbers reversed.

That's exactly what I was saying... but only to add that "the Cheeseman and the CMC" may well have the correct moral standpoint, but it unfortunately seems to be politically unviable to three quarters of the world to sign up for whatever reasons. That's just reality, noone said it was nice.

[phiphidon]

I was just emphasizing that 1/4 of the world has ratified the convention and 3/4 of the world have not.

As Pi Sek mentions, if the Cheeseman and the CMC wants to be taken seriously, they really should at least have those numbers reversed.

That's exactly what I was saying... but only to add that "the Cheeseman and the CMC" may well have the correct moral standpoint, but it unfortunately seems to be politically unviable to three quarters of the world to sign up for whatever reasons. That's just reality, noone said it was nice.

I appreciate your moral viewpoint on this in contrast with others' more, how can I put this poltely, logical stance on particularly unpleasant weaponry. Then again, they like me, have probably not had one of their kids killed or maimed by these devices so it's probably perfectly defensible to argue their case the way they do, if you disregard morality.

[phiphidon]

The CMC admits that there is no legal definition of a cluster munition. Their goal seems to be preventing the use of older bombs which leave unexploded bombs on the ground. A noble cause as the victoms are usually innocent civillians-mostly children. http://www.stopclust...what-is/?id=107

The CMC may have a problem with a definition - I was talking about Convention on Cluster Munitions, my apologies but the CCM are the ones that come up with the definition and they are the ones responsible for the Convention signed or not signed by various countries in Dublin 2008.

[phiphidon]

...Cluster munitions are a particularly nasty weapon and as defined above should be banned from use. 107 Countries around the world (including incidentally, Cambodia, Indonesia and Malaysia) adopted the convention in 2008. 55 have since gone on to sign/ratify it. Apart from America and Israel, (and I certainly do not hold those up as role models when it comes to use of war weapons) why is it that Thailand feels it necessary to use cluster munitions?

You're being more than a little dishonest here, in fact, just as you accuse the Thai army of doing, you are lying to us. The CMC itself stated "CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia

Thailand and Cambodia should join global treaty banning cluster munitions"

http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/

As this suggests, both Thailand and Cambodia have not signed the treaty. Until Cambodia joins the treaty, it really has no right to moan about Thailand using weapons that itself has not ruled out using. While there are NGO's in both countries who are members of the coalition. From the same source:

"Cambodia

• Cambodia CBL (Jesuit Refugee Service)
• World Vision Cambodia

Thailand

• Coalition for Peace and Reconciliation
• Thai Campaign to Ban Landmines
• Handicap International Thailand
• Nonviolence International
• Coalition for Peace and Reconciliation "

Neither country has ratified it, nor stated that they would not use these weapons. (I take it that all the anti cluster bomb posters here are paid up members of at least one of these NGO's? It's all too easy to preach and condemn (and lie) without putting your money where your mouth is).

108 countries have signed the Convention and 56 have ratified:

Country Signature Ratification Afghanistan 03-Dec-08 Albania 03-Dec-08 16-Jun-09 Angola 03-Dec-08 Antigua & Barbuda 16-Jul-10 23-Aug-10 Australia 03-Dec-08 Austria 03-Dec-08 02-Apr-09 Belgium 03-Dec-08 22-Dec-09 Benin 03-Dec-08 Bolivia 03-Dec-08 Bosnia and Herzegovina 03-Dec-08 07-Sep-10 Botswana 03-Dec-08 Bulgaria 03-Dec-08 06-Apr-11 Burkina Faso 03-Dec-08 16-Feb-10 Burundi 03-Dec-08 25-Sep-09 Cameroon 15-Dec-09 Canada 03-Dec-08 Cape Verde 03-Dec-08 19-Oct-10 Central African Republic 03-Dec-08 Chad 03-Dec-08 Chile 03-Dec-08 16-Dec-10 Colombia 03-Dec-08 Comoros 03-Dec-08 28-Jul-10 Congo, Democratic Republic of 18-Mar-09 Congo, Republic of 03-Dec-08 Cook Islands 03-Dec-08 Costa Rica 03-Dec-08 Côte d'Ivoire 04-Dec-08 Croatia 03-Dec-08 17-Aug-09 Cyprus 23-Sept-09 Czech Republic 03-Dec-08 Denmark 03-Dec-08 12-Feb-10 Djibouti 30-Jul-10 Dominican Republic 10-Nov-09 Ecuador 03-Dec-08 11-May-10 El Salvador 03-Dec-08 10-Jan-11 Fiji 03-Dec-08 28-May-10 France 03-Dec-08 25-Sep-09 Gambia 03-Dec-08 Germany 03-Dec-08 08-Jul-09 Ghana 03-Dec-08 03-Feb-11 Guatemala 03-Dec-08 03-Nov-10 Guinea 03-Dec-08 Guinea Bissau 03-Dec-08 29-Nov-10 Haiti 28-Oct-09 The Holy See 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Honduras 03-Dec-08 Hungary 03-Dec-08 Iceland 03-Dec-08 Indonesia 03-Dec-08 Iraq 12-Nov-09 Ireland 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Italy 03-Dec-08 Jamaica 12-Jun-09 Japan 03-Dec-08 14-Jul-09 Kenya 03-Dec-08 Lao PDR 03-Dec-08 18-Mar-09 Lebanon 03-Dec-08 05-Nov-10 Lesotho 03-Dec-08 28-May-10 Liberia 03-Dec-08 Liechtenstein 03-Dec-08 Lithuania 03-Dec-08 24-Mar-11 Luxembourg 03-Dec-08 10-Jul-09 Macedonia, FYR 03-Dec-08 08-Oct-09 Madagascar 03-Dec-08 Malawi 03-Dec-08 7-Oct-09 Mali 03-Dec-08 30-Jun-10 Malta 03-Dec-08 24-Sep-09 Mauritania 19-Apr-10 Mexico 03-Dec-08 06-May-09 Moldova, Republic of 03-Dec-08 16-Feb-10 Monaco 03-Dec-08 21-Sep-10 Montenegro 03-Dec-08 25-Jan-10 Mozambique 03-Dec-08 14-Mar-11 Namibia 03-Dec-08 Nauru 03-Dec-08 Netherlands 03-Dec-08 23-Feb-11 New Zealand 03-Dec-08 22-Dec-09 Nicaragua 03-Dec-08 02-Nov-09 Niger 03-Dec-08 02-Jun-09 Nigeria 12-June-09 Norway 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Palau 03-Dec-08 Panama 03-Dec-08 29-Nov-10 Paraguay 03-Dec-08 Peru 03-Dec-08 Philippines 03-Dec-08 Portugal 03-Dec-08 09-Mar-11 Rwanda 03-Dec-08 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 23-Sept-09 29-Oct-10 Samoa 03-Dec-08 28-Apr-10 San Marino 03-Dec-08 10-Jul-09 São Tomé and Principe 03-Dec-08 Senegal 03-Dec-08 Seychelles 13-Apr-10 20-May-10 Sierra Leone 03-Dec-08 03-Dec-08 Slovenia 03-Dec-08 19-Aug-09 Somalia 03-Dec-08 South Africa 03-Dec-08 Spain 03-Dec-08 17-Jun-09 Sweden 03-Dec-08 Switzerland 03-Dec-08 Tanzania 03-Dec-08 Togo 03-Dec-08 Tunisia 12-Jan-09 28-Sep-10 Uganda 03-Dec-08 United Kingdom 03-Dec-08 4-May-10 Uruguay 03-Dec-08 24-Sep-09 Zambia 03-Dec-08 12-Aug-09

(Edited to add), the table didn't come out right, but there is a glaring gap between Burundi and Cameroon, where phiphidon assures us Cambodia is. (and no, it's not there under Kampuchea either)

I also found an interesting defence of their use:

"He told the BBC: "The very strong military advice is that they are essential."They fulfil a particular role on the battlefield and if we did not use them, we would be putting our own forces at greater and, therefore, unnecessary risk."

He said the cluster bombs were "not indiscriminate" weapons and they were a "more effective and safer" option than unguided weapons when targeting the enemy in a defined area."

No, not the Thai army, but the aptly named UK Defence Secretary at the time of the Iraq war, Geoff Hoon

http://www.dailymail...-used-Iraq.html

Firstly let me say that Geoff Hoon is not a person you should quote in defence (scuse the pun) . Just one quote about the Kosovo campaign (incidentally where the RAF used cluster munition)

"According to the reports we have gathered, mostly from the refugees, it appears that around 10,000 people have been killed in more than 100 massacres. The final toll may be much worse,"

But back to your post. You accuse me of lying, no more subtle than that. I accused the Thai Army of lying about the use of cluster munition - They did. The Thai Foreign Minister has confirmed this as has the Thai Ambassador to the UN. Would you care to retract your accusation?

With respect to the numbers involved in the signatories of the Convention of Cluster Munitions. I stated that 107 countries had adopted the Convention as either States Parties or Signatories, including Cambodia amongst others. Check the link again before you accuse me of lying:

States adopting the convention on cluster munitions in 2008

107 states adopted the convention in Dublin on 30 May 2008:

Asia: Brunei Darussalam,Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines and Timor-Leste

Source: http://www.clusterco...and-signatures/

For anybody else who jumped on the bandwagon and accused me of lying, please take note, it's not a particularly pleasant trait

[phiphidon]

...

I wouldn't have thought you could get much clearer than that. If you mean that countries would sign up if they could get away with the cluster munitions they have by the mere fact of changing the definition I would be personally be very against that idea. A DPICM is a cluster bomb by any other name. Cluster munitions are a particularly nasty weapon and as defined above should be banned from use. 107 Countries around the world (including incidentally, Cambodia, Indonesia and Malaysia) adopted the convention in 2008. 55 have since gone on to sign/ratify it. Apart from America and Israel, (and I certainly do not hold those up as role models when it comes to use of war weapons) why is it that Thailand feels it necessary to use cluster munitions?

Actually, the 107 nations didn't adopt the convention, they agreed to the wording of the convention. But what's the point of saying the wording is ok, if you don't actually ratify it?

I would put all the countries that haven't ratified it in the same basket, regardless of whether they think the wording is OK or not.

Read the quote again. 107 states adopt the convention. sorry my interpretation i.e states = countries.

[Buchholz]

...

I wouldn't have thought you could get much clearer than that. If you mean that countries would sign up if they could get away with the cluster munitions they have by the mere fact of changing the definition I would be personally be very against that idea. A DPICM is a cluster bomb by any other name. Cluster munitions are a particularly nasty weapon and as defined above should be banned from use. 107 Countries around the world (including incidentally, Cambodia, Indonesia and Malaysia) adopted the convention in 2008. 55 have since gone on to sign/ratify it. Apart from America and Israel, (and I certainly do not hold those up as role models when it comes to use of war weapons) why is it that Thailand feels it necessary to use cluster munitions?

Actually, the 107 nations didn't adopt the convention, they agreed to the wording of the convention. But what's the point of saying the wording is ok, if you don't actually ratify it?

I would put all the countries that haven't ratified it in the same basket, regardless of whether they think the wording is OK or not.

Read the quote again. 107 states adopt the convention. sorry my interpretation i.e states = countries.

Ratification : a treaty is generally open for signature for a certain time following the conference which has adopted it.

However, a signature is not binding on a State unless it has been endorsed by ratification.

The only term that really matters is ratify the convention.

Anything short of ratification indicates non-adoption as it's un-enforceable and non-binding and as said, only 55 countries have ratified the convention AKA 1/4 of the world. 3/4 has not.

.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Buchholz

[geriatrickid]

Cambodia - who still has not cleared all its land-mines and always trying to say - poor us and get grants, backing from NGO's and UN etc. Yet right now they are building roads and shipping arms and munitions into the border area. No point crying foul. Rules of engagement don't have to be argued. People in glass houses etc ...

Considering the large number of mines, it would take decades and thousands of man hours to clear the mines.

You do realize that a similar situation exists with WWII North African regions, don't you? The Germans who laid most of the mines with the British who laid some of them never bothered to clean up their mess.

Cambodia has every right to defend itself. I didn't know that building a road was a war crime.

[geriatrickid]

How about some of the apologists look at the big picture?

First the government denied using the munitions. Then, when the evidence was conclusive and the lie exposed, the government admitted to their use. That speaks volumes in itself.

The ordinance may be technically legal, but the decision to deploy and use provides an indication of the government's moral position.

[whybother]

How about some of the apologists look at the big picture?

First the government denied using the munitions. Then, when the evidence was conclusive and the lie exposed, the government admitted to their use. That speaks volumes in itself.

The ordinance may be technically legal, but the decision to deploy and use provides an indication of the government's moral position.

Who in the government denied or admitted to their use?

edit: actually, found one:

"Thai government spokesman, Panitan Wattanayagorn, denied cluster munitions were used. "Thai military also indicated very clearly that they have not used any other weapons as suggested by Cambodia, particularly cluster bombs.""

Edited April 8, 2011 by whybother

[geriatrickid]

You're being more than a little dishonest here, in fact, just as you accuse the Thai army of doing, you are lying to us. The CMC itself stated "CMC condemns Thai use of cluster munitions in Cambodia Thailand and Cambodia should join global treaty banning cluster munitions"

http://www.stopclustermunitions.

As this suggests, both Thailand and Cambodia have not signed the treaty. Until Cambodia joins the treaty, it really has no right to moan about Thailand using weapons that itself has not ruled out using. While there are NGO's in both countries who are members of the coalition. From the same source:

---SNIP---

In respect to your statement, your logic has failed. It doesn't matter if a nation was a signatory. Rather, what matters is who deployed and used the munitions first. Thailand used the munitions first. The moral and legal responsibility rests with Thailand for that decision. Was there a compelling reason to use the ordinance? The circumstances of the border skirmish do not support such a position as there was no likelihood of Cambodia over running Thailand with the nation in danger of falling to invaders, nor was there even a state of war. One can post all sorts of treaty references, but it is irrelevant when there is no treaty in place. It's all about who used the ordinance.

[geriatrickid]

How about some of the apologists look at the big picture?

First the government denied using the munitions. Then, when the evidence was conclusive and the lie exposed, the government admitted to their use. That speaks volumes in itself.

The ordinance may be technically legal, but the decision to deploy and use provides an indication of the government's moral position.

Who in the government denied or admitted to their use?

edit: actually, found one:

"Thai government spokesman, Panitan Wattanayagorn, denied cluster munitions were used. "Thai military also indicated very clearly that they have not used any other weapons as suggested by Cambodia, particularly cluster bombs.""

The denials go back several months;

The Suranaree Task Force denied the allegations. Its spokesman Col. Chinnakaj Rattanajitti, described the allegation as intentional Cambodian misinformation. The Col. was quoted in Thai media as stating that the Thai military strictly followed the rules of engagement and other related United Nations charters and that the ordinance is not used and was not part of thai military operations. (Google the date of 11-Feb-2011 and his name)

Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon on April 8 was quoted in multiple news sources (with the exception of the Nation I believe) of denying the use of the ordinance. Google his name and April 8 and you will see his definitive statement . "No cluster bombs here. We have strictly complied with international laws banning their use,"

Now, if we have an admission that the ordinance was used and multiple denials from the government and the defense minister, then what do you call that? Do you think the minister mislead the public? I don't know what the SOP in Thailand is, but in other countries if a minister is caught in a similar situation such as this, he resigns or is fired.

The question then, is why has PM Abhisit not acted? I believe that we again have another example of PM Abhisit's capabilities as PM. The longer this situation continues, the greater the likelihood of thailand facing international sanctions.

[ballpoint]

Firstly let me say that Geoff Hoon is not a person you should quote in defence (scuse the pun) . Just one quote about the Kosovo campaign (incidentally where the RAF used cluster munition)

"According to the reports we have gathered, mostly from the refugees, it appears that around 10,000 people have been killed in more than 100 massacres. The final toll may be much worse,"

But back to your post. You accuse me of lying, no more subtle than that. I accused the Thai Army of lying about the use of cluster munition - They did. The Thai Foreign Minister has confirmed this as has the Thai Ambassador to the UN. Would you care to retract your accusation?

With respect to the numbers involved in the signatories of the Convention of Cluster Munitions. I stated that 107 countries had adopted the Convention as either States Parties or Signatories, including Cambodia amongst others. Check the link again before you accuse me of lying:

States adopting the convention on cluster munitions in 2008

107 states adopted the convention in Dublin on 30 May 2008:

Asia: Brunei Darussalam,Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines and Timor-Leste

Source: http://www.clusterco...and-signatures/

For anybody else who jumped on the bandwagon and accused me of lying, please take note, it's not a particularly pleasant trait

Well stop doing it then. As per your link, Cambodia "adopted" the convention in 2008, but has neither signed nor ratified it. Jumping on the bandwagon and saying you will do something, when you have no intention of actually doing so is just as morally repugnant, if not more so, than ignoring it all together. Why won't they even sign it? What have they got to hide?

[phiphidon]

Firstly let me say that Geoff Hoon is not a person you should quote in defence (scuse the pun) . Just one quote about the Kosovo campaign (incidentally where the RAF used cluster munition)

"According to the reports we have gathered, mostly from the refugees, it appears that around 10,000 people have been killed in more than 100 massacres. The final toll may be much worse,"

But back to your post. You accuse me of lying, no more subtle than that. I accused the Thai Army of lying about the use of cluster munition - They did. The Thai Foreign Minister has confirmed this as has the Thai Ambassador to the UN. Would you care to retract your accusation?

With respect to the numbers involved in the signatories of the Convention of Cluster Munitions. I stated that 107 countries had adopted the Convention as either States Parties or Signatories, including Cambodia amongst others. Check the link again before you accuse me of lying:

States adopting the convention on cluster munitions in 2008

107 states adopted the convention in Dublin on 30 May 2008:

Asia: Brunei Darussalam,Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines and Timor-Leste

Source: http://www.clusterco...and-signatures/

For anybody else who jumped on the bandwagon and accused me of lying, please take note, it's not a particularly pleasant trait

Well stop doing it then. As per your link, Cambodia "adopted" the convention in 2008, but has neither signed nor ratified it. Jumping on the bandwagon and saying you will do something, when you have no intention of actually doing so is just as morally repugnant, if not more so, than ignoring it all together. Why won't they even sign it? What have they got to hide?

Did I or did I not say say that Cambodia adopted the convention? Am I correct? Am I lying? No, so climb down off that high horse of yours, and accept the fact you are wrong in accusing me of lying - As I say it's not a particularly pleasant trait.

[swillowbee]

Firstly let me say that Geoff Hoon is not a person you should quote in defence (scuse the pun) . Just one quote about the Kosovo campaign (incidentally where the RAF used cluster munition)

"According to the reports we have gathered, mostly from the refugees, it appears that around 10,000 people have been killed in more than 100 massacres. The final toll may be much worse,"

But back to your post. You accuse me of lying, no more subtle than that. I accused the Thai Army of lying about the use of cluster munition - They did. The Thai Foreign Minister has confirmed this as has the Thai Ambassador to the UN. Would you care to retract your accusation?

With respect to the numbers involved in the signatories of the Convention of Cluster Munitions. I stated that 107 countries had adopted the Convention as either States Parties or Signatories, including Cambodia amongst others. Check the link again before you accuse me of lying:

States adopting the convention on cluster munitions in 2008

107 states adopted the convention in Dublin on 30 May 2008:

Asia: Brunei Darussalam,Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines and Timor-Leste

Source: http://www.clusterco...and-signatures/

For anybody else who jumped on the bandwagon and accused me of lying, please take note, it's not a particularly pleasant trait

Well stop doing it then. As per your link, Cambodia "adopted" the convention in 2008, but has neither signed nor ratified it. Jumping on the bandwagon and saying you will do something, when you have no intention of actually doing so is just as morally repugnant, if not more so, than ignoring it all together. Why won't they even sign it? What have they got to hide?

Did I or did I not say say that Cambodia adopted the convention? Am I correct? Am I lying? No, so climb down off that high horse of yours, and accept the fact you are wrong in accusing me of lying - As I say it's not a particularly pleasant trait.

... girls, girls, please! ... the liars here are the Thai government and the Thai military ... see new thread "Thailand admits controversial weapons use".

... no one in the world who reads can be surprised by offical Thai government lies ... lying is accepted as a common practice by Thais themselves, one of Thailand's "cultural values", and recognized more and more by people the world over.

... for myself, if their lips are moving, I just assume they are lying ... breaks my heart, but that is the safest policy, especially when it comes to Thai officialdom ... Thais simply cannot be trusted to consistently tell the truth ... you never know when they are lying, so you must assume at any time and on any point they could be lying.

Edited April 8, 2011 by swillowbee

[Buchholz]

How about some of the apologists look at the big picture?

First the government denied using the munitions. Then, when the evidence was conclusive and the lie exposed, the government admitted to their use. That speaks volumes in itself.

The ordinance may be technically legal, but the decision to deploy and use provides an indication of the government's moral position.

Who in the government denied or admitted to their use?

edit: actually, found one:

"Thai government spokesman, Panitan Wattanayagorn, denied cluster munitions were used. "Thai military also indicated very clearly that they have not used any other weapons as suggested by Cambodia, particularly cluster bombs.""

Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon on April 8 was quoted in multiple news sources (with the exception of the Nation I believe) of denying the use of the ordinance. Google his name and April 8 and you will see his definitive statement . "No cluster bombs here. We have strictly complied with international laws banning their use,"

Now, if we have an admission that the ordinance was used

Interesting that in the same article, the Thailand Ambassador to the UN is denying that he ever admitted to the use of cluster bombs and the CMC distorted what he said and turned it into an "admission."

Cheeseman strikes again.

.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwon on April 8 was quoted in multiple news sources (with the exception of the Nation I believe) of denying the use of the ordinance. Google his name and April 8 and you will see his definitive statement . "No cluster bombs here. We have strictly complied with international laws banning their use,"

Now, if we have an admission that the ordinance was used

Interesting that in the same article, the Thailand Ambassador to the UN is denying that he ever admitted to the use of cluster bombs and the CMC distorted what he said and turned it into an "admission."

Cheeseman strikes again.

.

It's a shame that the source of your comments cannot be published in full (or even at all on this forum).

The Thai Ambassador to the UN actually said that the Thai Army used DPICM (Dual purpose Improved Coventional Munitions) and that Thailand did not recognise that DPICM's are the same as cluster munitions. He further said that the CMC misunderstood him and tried to claim that Thailand had really used cluster munitions - which in the definition of CMC, they did. Thailand disagrees with this definition obviously.

So its down to definitions - when is a DPICM, an artillery or surface to surface missile warhead designed to burst into sub munitions not a cluster bomb, an artillery or surface to surface missle warhead designed to burst into sub munitions?

[jayboy]

Interesting that in the same article, the Thailand Ambassador to the UN is denying that he ever admitted to the use of cluster bombs and the CMC distorted what he said and turned it into an "admission."

Cheeseman strikes again.

Usual tactics.Uncritical support for the Thai authorities, particularly when the military is involved, and personal attacks on independent sources - in this case Ms Cheeseman of CMC but previously with journalists.

If the Thai military was known for its transparency and honesty, one might give them the benefit of the doubt.

[ballpoint]

Did I or did I not say say that Cambodia adopted the convention? Am I correct? Am I lying? No, so climb down off that high horse of yours, and accept the fact you are wrong in accusing me of lying - As I say it's not a particularly pleasant trait.

Yes, you are correct. There is too much misunderstanding and jumping to conclusions on this forum. Please accept my apologies.

[manarak]

Thailand used banned munitions in temple clash, say activists

And one more lie.

These munitions are neither banned in Thailand nor are they in Cambodia.