Thai Society At Risk, For Goodness' Sake: Army Chief

[tragickingdom]

Maybe the Thai police is untrained but untrained police are better than murderous soldiers. Never mind, we see in Argentina and Chili that the pardons that military people give themselves are eventually repealed and they spend their old days behind bars. Moreover Prayuth and Anupong has ordered to use live ammunition on protestors, that is precisely the reason why their is an international arrest warrant against Khadaffi and soon against the Syrian leadership. The army strongmen are in line for a big surprise. Do not be surprised that when they are on holiday in England, Spain or another country that they will arrested because there is a complaint filed by a citizen.

The army is not trained to deal with civilians troubles but the police are. If the truth ever gets out it will take many years. (Bloody Sunday Northern Ireland is a prime example of highly trained professional soldiers trying to control a crowd)

There have been a lot of mistakes made on both sides and each pointing the finger but for each finger you point three look back at you. I hope that after the elections Mrs Changers and myself can go about our business in our usual happy way but I have reservations.

The Thai police aren't trained to deal with violent mobs.

Look at the mess they made of the yellow shirt protests, and during the red shirt protests they let the red shirts do what ever they wanted.

[whybother]

The army is not trained to deal with civilians troubles but the police are. If the truth ever gets out it will take many years. (Bloody Sunday Northern Ireland is a prime example of highly trained professional soldiers trying to control a crowd)

There have been a lot of mistakes made on both sides and each pointing the finger but for each finger you point three look back at you. I hope that after the elections Mrs Changers and myself can go about our business in our usual happy way but I have reservations.

The Thai police aren't trained to deal with violent mobs.

Look at the mess they made of the yellow shirt protests, and during the red shirt protests they let the red shirts do what ever they wanted.

Maybe the Thai police is untrained but untrained police are better than murderous soldiers. Never mind, we see in Argentina and Chili that the pardons that military people give themselves are eventually repealed and they spend their old days behind bars. Moreover Prayuth and Anupong has ordered to use live ammunition on protestors, that is precisely the reason why their is an international arrest warrant against Khadaffi and soon against the Syrian leadership. The army strongmen are in line for a big surprise. Do not be surprised that when they are on holiday in England, Spain or another country that they will arrested because there is a complaint filed by a citizen.

How are murderous police better than murderous soldiers?

[KRS1]

Part quote from article:

".....Abhisit is a "good man" to his supporters even though he presided over the bloodiest military suppression in Bangkok's history. Between April and May 2010, at least 92 persons died, mostly red shirts, and 2,000 were injured......"

"....bloodiest military suppression in BAngkok's history...."

I suggest this is wrong!

The earlier coup conducted by suchinda and cohorts gunned down over 200 unarmed civilians who were just protesting and not involved in activities like building baricades, not involved in burning down government buildings, shopping centres etc., and were not inciting others to bring gasoline to BAngkok, etc. And on top of that 200+ bodies disappeared and have never been found.

There are also other earlier examples there was severe violence including the public hanging of university students.

Abhisit did not set out to gun people down, he set out to try to contain the situation and to return BAngkok to normalcy.

But, no matter how you see it, the deaths are very regrettable.

The current government held off on violence for as long as they could, even allowing the military to go in WITHOUT weapons to try and control the mobs. The reds were blatantly using home made bombs and firearms to injure and kill the unarmed soldiers.

The people who were killed after the government gave the greenlight to fight back were all in the battle zones, obviously these people who were killed were engaging the thai military.

What do you expect when you are throwing bombs made from red bull bottles and taking shots at the army? All they had to do was stop attacking the military, who did not throw the first punch, the red shirts did that.

Is there a reason to set buildings on fire, and close roads?

[KRS1]

" He also had conveniently forgotten to point out that the burning of buildings in Bangkok and elsewhere came after the month-long bloody suppression, and did not take place right after the first slaughter of 20 people on April 10."

Perhaps because it was part of the plan?

The term slaughter, to me indicating deliberate killing, always seems mis-applied in regard to these events. From past experience with military rifles, I can assure that a 30 round magazine fired into a packed crowd would cause multiple deaths - I'm thinking 20+. Why? Unless they strike bone, copper jacketed military rounds will pass through a body, or if they strike bone they tend to fragment and the fragments will emerge causing further injury. A 7.62 NATO round will pierce a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree; in VN an Aus killed 2 fellow servicemen and permanently disabled a third with the one shot.

Given that the normal carry was 5 magazines or 150 rounds PER SOLDIER, it becomes patently obvious that no free-for-all shoot-to -kill order was given or condoned. I am sure (at least hope) anyone with any military experience would agree.

A 7.62 nato round will not pass through a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree. I've shot many trees with this round.

But i agree it was not a free for all, 92 is a very restrained number.

[hammered]

Rather than repeat all the arguments of entrenched position, it would help to have some South African style Truth and Reconcilliation process linked to acceptance of the election result. A bit like that Jon Ungpakorn article in the unmentionable news source. The hatred and poltics of hate cant continue forever, and it isnt helpful to the country. Everyone has to compromise to some degree

[relidiousenut]

The army is not trained to deal with civilians troubles but the police are. If the truth ever gets out it will take many years. (Bloody Sunday Northern Ireland is a prime example of highly trained professional soldiers trying to control a crowd)

There have been a lot of mistakes made on both sides and each pointing the finger but for each finger you point three look back at you. I hope that after the elections Mrs Changers and myself can go about our business in our usual happy way but I have reservations.

The Thai police aren't trained to deal with violent mobs.

Look at the mess they made of the yellow shirt protests, and during the red shirt protests they let the red shirts do what ever they wanted.

Maybe the Thai police is untrained but untrained police are better than murderous soldiers. Never mind, we see in Argentina and Chili that the pardons that military people give themselves are eventually repealed and they spend their old days behind bars. Moreover Prayuth and Anupong has ordered to use live ammunition on protestors, that is precisely the reason why their is an international arrest warrant against Khadaffi and soon against the Syrian leadership. The army strongmen are in line for a big surprise. Do not be surprised that when they are on holiday in England, Spain or another country that they will arrested because there is a complaint filed by a citizen.

How are murderous police better than murderous soldiers?

He said untrained police not murderous police

We live in a third World country where the Military are a separate entity from the populace. In your country and mine, the Military is there to protect the people and to serve the people. You probably wouldnt have it any other way.

The Military comes under the War office, the War office is a Government department. The Government was elected by a majority vote by democratic means. It could never be that the Military could or would interfere with voting. The people of your country or mine would not accept it, would you not give the Thai people the same respect?

War does not determine who is right It determines who is left

Edited June 29, 2011 by metisdead
Font normalized, please use default forum font when posting.

[whybother]

How are murderous police better than murderous soldiers?

He said untrained police not murderous police

We live in a third World country where the Military are a separate entity from the populace. In your country and mine, the Military is there to protect the people and to serve the people. You probably wouldn't have it any other way.

The Military comes under the War office, the War office is a Government department. The Government was elected by a majority vote by democratic means. It could never be that the Military could or would interfere with voting. The people of your country or mine would not accept it, would you not give the Thai people the same respect?

War does not determine who is right It determines who is left

The police killed people during the yellow shirt protests. That makes them murderous.

[Felt 35]

Many Thais continue to root for their good people

The government is us; we are the government, you and I. ~ Theodore Roosevelt

[Thaddeus]

Nearly all Sciences throughout history have been subject to change (the World is flat, No it is round) At the time you can not call it knowledge, it was belief and has changed, the belief changes but knowledge can not change. Knowledge belongs to the Individual

Now you are just playing with words.

FYI the Earth isn't round, they used to think it was a sphere, then an oblate spheroid, but recent measurements from satellites suggest that the Earth is, in fact, slightly pear-shaped. I beleive that it is all going pear shaped anyway.

[cfsprinkler]

Basically, the OP stated that a coup is likely.

[unanimosity]

" He also had conveniently forgotten to point out that the burning of buildings in Bangkok and elsewhere came after the month-long bloody suppression, and did not take place right after the first slaughter of 20 people on April 10."

Perhaps because it was part of the plan?

The term slaughter, to me indicating deliberate killing, always seems mis-applied in regard to these events. From past experience with military rifles, I can assure that a 30 round magazine fired into a packed crowd would cause multiple deaths - I'm thinking 20+. Why? Unless they strike bone, copper jacketed military rounds will pass through a body, or if they strike bone they tend to fragment and the fragments will emerge causing further injury. A 7.62 NATO round will pierce a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree; in VN an Aus killed 2 fellow servicemen and permanently disabled a third with the one shot.

Given that the normal carry was 5 magazines or 150 rounds PER SOLDIER, it becomes patently obvious that no free-for-all shoot-to -kill order was given or condoned. I am sure (at least hope) anyone with any military experience would agree.

Hard to agree, bud, when the army were issued M-16s which use 5.56mm ammunition. 7.62mm NATO rounds are used in in belt-feed M60 machine guns, and in M14s. Your assumptions are groundless speculation..

[anterian]

From reading all the comments it is clear that most people have become entrenched in their views, there are no grays, all is black and white (or if you prefer red and yellow). Even purportedly neutral articles such as the above display bias with emotive language. If we assume that most users of this forum are people born into long established democratic countries it is clear that democracy is still a struggling infant in our global culture. In Thailand it shows all the signs of being stillborn.

Edited June 29, 2011 by metisdead
Please use default forum font when posting.

[OzMick]

" He also had conveniently forgotten to point out that the burning of buildings in Bangkok and elsewhere came after the month-long bloody suppression, and did not take place right after the first slaughter of 20 people on April 10."

Perhaps because it was part of the plan?

The term slaughter, to me indicating deliberate killing, always seems mis-applied in regard to these events. From past experience with military rifles, I can assure that a 30 round magazine fired into a packed crowd would cause multiple deaths - I'm thinking 20+. Why? Unless they strike bone, copper jacketed military rounds will pass through a body, or if they strike bone they tend to fragment and the fragments will emerge causing further injury. A 7.62 NATO round will pierce a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree; in VN an Aus killed 2 fellow servicemen and permanently disabled a third with the one shot.

Given that the normal carry was 5 magazines or 150 rounds PER SOLDIER, it becomes patently obvious that no free-for-all shoot-to -kill order was given or condoned. I am sure (at least hope) anyone with any military experience would agree.

Hard to agree, bud, when the army were issued M-16s which use 5.56mm ammunition. 7.62mm NATO rounds are used in in belt-feed M60 machine guns, and in M14s. Your assumptions are groundless speculation..

WELL SURPRISE SURPRISE! 7.62 are also used in a lot of rifles made outside of the USA, that's why it's called a 7.62 NATO. I am well aware that the RTA use M-16s, but I was using as an example the rounds that I trained with. Do you think the higher velocity 5.56s are not lethal? What would happen if you fired a magazine into a closely packed crowd of protesters?

You might like to look at the previous discussion on strawman arguments. Or stand back a bit, geez all those trees are a forest!

[OzMick]

" He also had conveniently forgotten to point out that the burning of buildings in Bangkok and elsewhere came after the month-long bloody suppression, and did not take place right after the first slaughter of 20 people on April 10."

Perhaps because it was part of the plan?

The term slaughter, to me indicating deliberate killing, always seems mis-applied in regard to these events. From past experience with military rifles, I can assure that a 30 round magazine fired into a packed crowd would cause multiple deaths - I'm thinking 20+. Why? Unless they strike bone, copper jacketed military rounds will pass through a body, or if they strike bone they tend to fragment and the fragments will emerge causing further injury. A 7.62 NATO round will pierce a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree; in VN an Aus killed 2 fellow servicemen and permanently disabled a third with the one shot.

Given that the normal carry was 5 magazines or 150 rounds PER SOLDIER, it becomes patently obvious that no free-for-all shoot-to -kill order was given or condoned. I am sure (at least hope) anyone with any military experience would agree.

A 7.62 nato round will not pass through a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree. I've shot many trees with this round.

But i agree it was not a free for all, 92 is a very restrained number.

You hunt trees? I admit that time may ave increased the diameter of the tree a bit, but I do clearly remember Fieldcraft 101, that quite a few fresh faces picked a tree to hide behind, and the instructor clearly demonstrated that standing behind a tree was NOT a good idea.

[metisdead]

Removed a post (and response) that alluded others were paid to post. If you have any actual evidence please forward it to support. If it's just a lame debating tactic, further references like that may find you without posting rights.

[philw]

From reading all the comments it is clear that most people have become entrenched in their views, there are no grays, all is black and white (or if you prefer red and yellow). Even purportedly neutral articles such as the above display bias with emotive language. If we assume that most users of this forum are people born into long established democratic countries it is clear that democracy is still a struggling infant in our global culture. In Thailand it shows all the signs of being stillborn.

Sadly, you are correct.

There is not much hope on ThaiVisa, it has become far too polarised and there is much hatred evident.

Pity.

[myfriendu]

[

Look at the mess they made of the yellow shirt protests, and during the red shirt protests they let the red shirts do what ever they wanted.

Maybe the Thai police is untrained but untrained police are better than murderous soldiers. Never mind, we see in Argentina and Chili that the pardons that military people give themselves are eventually repealed and they spend their old days behind bars. Moreover Prayuth and Anupong has ordered to use live ammunition on protestors, that is precisely the reason why their is an international arrest warrant against Khadaffi and soon against the Syrian leadership. The army strongmen are in line for a big surprise. Do not be surprised that when they are on holiday in England, Spain or another country that they will arrested because there is a complaint filed by a citizen.

How are murderous police better than murderous soldiers?

He said untrained police not murderous police

We live in a third World country where the Military are a separate entity from the populace. In your country and mine, the Military is there to protect the people and to serve the people. You probably wouldn’t have it any other way.

The Military comes under the War office, the War office is a Government department. The Government was elected by a majority vote by democratic means. It could never be that the Military could or would interfere with voting. The people of your country or mine would not accept it, would you not give the Thai people the same respect?

War does not determine who is right It determines who is left

well what ever you say what we all know and have seen.blackshirts gangsters fired on the army and started all this shit.and when you kill army they have to get involed uk.eu .usa likewise.

this is thailand,never forget you dont like then go.

up to you

[khaowong1]

Yep, way too many good people out there. How do you rank saints?

Don't worry Gen. Prayuth will be there to help god sort them out.

or Buddha, which ever works for him.

[Thaimaishoe]

The article was fair and unbiased, I think so many miss the point, Biased is what decides how people vote, not reasoning. It is bigotry to say they are all wrong we are all right,

Arrogance and Bigotry, The article points out that all participating parties are far from squeaky clean, those that can not see it are indeed dinosaurs, small brain big action and eventually extinct so that the rest can move on. Sad so Sad

You are probably correct, but only because you setup a straw man. Most people aren't saying "they are all wrong and we are all right". Well, maybe some of the reds are. But most others are saying our side has many problems, but Thaksin is truly evil and anything is better than him.

Recognizing the realities of moral character is neither bigotry nor arrogance. It is honesty. I might call Abhisit good, in that I think he sincerely wants to implement an egalitarian society. Beyond that, I don't think there are any others currently on the ballot, and one good man doesn't make a government. I think if you truly want to elect good people, you must do as the PAD say and vote NO, and keep voting NO until people of good moral character are placed on the ballot for you to choose.

Of course, this is a fairy tale and we all know it. The Thais are going to vote for whoever their patron is, and they are further going to demand that his transgressions be placed above the law. After all, he is sharing with them and they are pretty contemptuous of their fellow countrymen so who cares about everyone else. This is the reality in Thailand.

It isn't arrogance or bigotry that shapes what we have today. It is the genuine lack of a moral compass and respect for their fellow man displayed by many Thais, common or elite. As for the remainder who could not ordinarily be classified in this group, it is fear of further tyranny that is driving them to respond to the threat using the lowest common denominator of morality.

Edit: BTW, I would like to point out that the above displays my bias that egalitarian societies are better than totalitarian ones. This is, of course, a product of my Western upbringing. Someone without this inclination may not believe that his neighbor is the equal of himself. Given that slavery was tolerated in the US, this wasn't even true of the West 2 centuries ago. So I'm probably being unfairly judgemental in the above.

Lets not beat around the symantic bush, slavery was not "tolerated", it was codified in no less than the Constitution of the United States. And forget 2 centureis ago, it was only 4 decades ago that the civil rights movement arguably attained its goals.

However correcting your agregious US history errors does not justify posting on a forum dedicated to Thailand.

"Most people aren't saying "they are all wrong and we are all right". Well, maybe some of the reds are." Sorry but YOU are the one setting up the straw man... and knocking it down in the same sentance! Correct me if I am wrong, but was not Thatksin ELECTED by popular vote? Was not Thaksin deposed by The Army? Did not the Army Install the current Government? So how do you come to the conclusion... "I might call Abhisit good, in that I think he sincerely wants to implement an egalitarian society." How would you know? He is the despotic leader imposed on the Thais after their legitemate Gov. has been deposed! He has also had 5 years in which to call new elections... not even the intractable US takes that long to correct its mistakes *Caugh* George Bush!

[JAG]

"A 7.62 nato round will not pass through a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree. I've shot many trees with this round."

Did the trees shoot back? Did they fire first? we should be told....

On a more serious note the Royal Thai Police may be untrained in Riot Control, possibly because it suits a number of parties to keep them shall we say - somewhat inadequate - maybe they are not that politically reliable?

Edited June 29, 2011 by JAG

[Mitker]

Not really that familiar with all that is pointed out.

But I am with some of the items and the points were taking out of context.

Such as presiding over a bloody conflict the Nation forgot to mention he did not start it and good person number 1 was protecting Thailand in the only way the instigators would allow.

Yes he presided over it. It was his duty to do so Any one in the PM position would have had to do the same thing It is there job.

Can you imagine good person number 2 with his bloody record in the position of PM? Now that is scarey.

Agree totally.

[Ricardo]

<snip for brevity>

He is the despotic leader imposed on the Thais after their legitemate Gov. has been deposed! He has also had 5 years in which to call new elections... not even the intractable US takes that long to correct its mistakes *Caugh* George Bush!

PM-Abhisit came to power in Decmber-2008, after the previous PPP-led coalition-government of PM-Somchai fell apart, that is two-and-a-half years ago, so how can PM-Abhisit possibly have "had 5 years in which to call new elections" ?

[KRS1]

" He also had conveniently forgotten to point out that the burning of buildings in Bangkok and elsewhere came after the month-long bloody suppression, and did not take place right after the first slaughter of 20 people on April 10."

Perhaps because it was part of the plan?

The term slaughter, to me indicating deliberate killing, always seems mis-applied in regard to these events. From past experience with military rifles, I can assure that a 30 round magazine fired into a packed crowd would cause multiple deaths - I'm thinking 20+. Why? Unless they strike bone, copper jacketed military rounds will pass through a body, or if they strike bone they tend to fragment and the fragments will emerge causing further injury. A 7.62 NATO round will pierce a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree; in VN an Aus killed 2 fellow servicemen and permanently disabled a third with the one shot.

Given that the normal carry was 5 magazines or 150 rounds PER SOLDIER, it becomes patently obvious that no free-for-all shoot-to -kill order was given or condoned. I am sure (at least hope) anyone with any military experience would agree.

A 7.62 nato round will not pass through a 2 foot diameter hardwood tree. I've shot many trees with this round.

But i agree it was not a free for all, 92 is a very restrained number.

You hunt trees? I admit that time may ave increased the diameter of the tree a bit, but I do clearly remember Fieldcraft 101, that quite a few fresh faces picked a tree to hide behind, and the instructor clearly demonstrated that standing behind a tree was NOT a good idea.

Yes i've hunted and killed many trees. They were my enemy, but never shot back so i stopped.

[SantiSuk]

Girls here used to tell me 'you (are a ) good person' right after 'you hansum man' and '55 years - not old - ching ching'. So I know for a fact that Thais can't really judge who is a good person