Thailand Still At Risk Of Another Coup: Chaturon

[rametindallas]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

[serenitynow]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

There was no legal dictate for the government clinging to power in light of their having resigned and unilaterally retaking the reigns of power. There was in fact a power vacuum and Thailand was on the verge of failed state status. THAT'S why the coup was welcomed by the masses.

[longtimepassed]

No matter how veiled the speculation, do not go there.

2) Not to express disrespect of the King of Thailand or anyone else in the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family. Discussion of the lese majeste law or lese majeste cases is permitted on the forum, providing no comment or speculation is made referencing the royal family. To breach this rule will result in immediate ban.

Several posts have been deleted.

Perhaps this advice should be passed on to several serving politicians....

............and exiled criminal ones

[longtimepassed]

That "something like" is nothing like he said. That is a misquotation taken out of context, from guess where, THE NATION. The full phrase is

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

http://www.thaivisa....is-not-my-goal/

Doesn't sound quite so sinister now, does it? But hey, why not repeat a misquotation thousands of times until everybody thinks that that, is what Thaksin said.....................

Sounds a bit like communism to me...

And doesnt really matter how you read it... the important part there is "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal"

So how do you wanna spin that sunshine?

Well if that sounds like communism to you, fair enough, it's your take on it. I don't need to spin it, sunshine, I just take it in the context it's written - its others that spin it, for their own reasons.

"sunshine" eh ?? what about "old chap" - how condescending!!

[ThaiOats]

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

Totally agree with this post. Vote buying is generally accepted in Thailand or rather, people don't see it to be a big problem. However, in Democracy, it's a huge problem and that's why Thailand still doesn't understand the nature of it. When a corrupt party can almost guarantee it's staying power by vote-buying how else would you get rid of it? Those supporting k. Thaksin, could you please explain how you would go about doing this?

Another example of Democracy gone wrong is Cambodia.

[phiphidon]

Sounds a bit like communism to me...

And doesnt really matter how you read it... the important part there is "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal"

So how do you wanna spin that sunshine?

Well if that sounds like communism to you, fair enough, it's your take on it. I don't need to spin it, sunshine, I just take it in the context it's written - its others that spin it, for their own reasons.

So you can't apply critical thinking or read between the lines on thaksin, as to what he meant, using both his past actions and his interviews and attitude to decipher the meaning? If you only read the characters on the paper, then you're thinking along the lines of the average 'thai rat' newspaper reader. " Just a tool, a vehicle" is like a freudian slip, how he wants to use the concept to manipulate it for personal gain, but as for the common folk, don't set out too expect much. With democracy not a goal, an oligarchy and north korean style monuments of square head DO seem to be the goal.

Obviously not as I disagree with you. Come back to me when we have Army parades down Sukhumvit on Labour Day.

[phiphidon]

Don't worry with Phiphidon. He's entirely predeictable, always wrong and always uninformed. Best just switch him off -...

Your choice, whoever you are.

[phiphidon]

Sounds a bit like communism to me...

And doesnt really matter how you read it... the important part there is "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal"

So how do you wanna spin that sunshine?

Well if that sounds like communism to you, fair enough, it's your take on it. I don't need to spin it, sunshine, I just take it in the context it's written - its others that spin it, for their own reasons.

"sunshine" eh ?? what about "old chap" - how condescending!!

Suggest you address that thought to munterhunter, the originator of said condescending title.See "so how do you wanna spin that sunshine?

[rametindallas]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

There was no legal dictate for the government clinging to power in light of their having resigned and unilaterally retaking the reigns of power. There was in fact a power vacuum and Thailand was on the verge of failed state status. THAT'S why the coup was welcomed by the masses.

I don't disagree with you but my question that is not being answered is about JurgenG's assertion that Dr. Thaksin could be removed through democratic measures without a coup. I would like him or anyone to explain how Dr. Thaksin could be removed WITHOUT a coup, comprende¿

[Siam Simon]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

There was no legal dictate for the government clinging to power in light of their having resigned and unilaterally retaking the reigns of power. There was in fact a power vacuum and Thailand was on the verge of failed state status. THAT'S why the coup was welcomed by the masses.

I don't disagree with you but my question that is not being answered is about JurgenG's assertion that Dr. Thaksin could be removed through democratic measures without a coup. I would like him or anyone to explain how Dr. Thaksin could be removed WITHOUT a coup, comprende¿

Through the general election that was scheduled for 15 October 2006, should a sufficient quantity of Thai voters at that time have wanted him removed.

Edited September 19, 2011 by Siam Simon

[ThaiOats]

Such a controversial issue among many but none of them are ever up for debate. Can't let Thai people hear reasons from both sides and let them think for themselves can we...

[ThaiOats]

Through the general election that was scheduled for 15 October 2006, should a sufficient quantity of Thai voters at that time have wanted him removed.

Only if Thailand was a true democracy. Vote buying and paying off the poor who'd worship you like god for 100 baht to sign a piece of paper is hardly a democracy. Warren Buffet should be the next PM of Thailand.

[cdnvic]

Next person who alleges that another is being paid to post gets suspended. If you can't have an intelligent debate without making cheap shots go somewhere else please.

[Siam Simon]

Through the general election that was scheduled for 15 October 2006, should a sufficient quantity of Thai voters at that time have wanted him removed.

Only if Thailand was a true democracy. Vote buying and paying off the poor who'd worship you like god for 100 baht to sign a piece of paper is hardly a democracy. Warren Buffet should be the next PM of Thailand.

The 'vote buying' justification for anti-democratic shenanigans is just as big a red herring as the 'poor people don't understand the issues' one. People of a certain political leaning hang desperately on to them as a last line of defence when the political debate has moved on.

[ThaiOats]

Political debate between whom, the Thai people or the foreigners on TVF? Thaksin became what he is today mainly because he exploited those "red herrings". It's simple, there's nothing sophisticated or grand about the way he works and there shouldn't be. If you want to make it so that the less educated understand you, you would KISS. Put yourself in the shoes of an uneducated poor working person who was promised to be rich in 6 months, increased minimum wage and tax rebate on cars, sounds pretty good doesn't it? Thaksin is already well known for his handouts. We (I'm hoping you too) on the other hand, would question some of these promises and would likely doubt them or realize the consequences of such ill-planned policies. It's not so much that they don't understand, I'll give them more credit than that, but it's more like they don't care about what goes on in the rest of the country or world. Mind you, the success of Thai Democracy and it's government is gauged upon the price of pork and eggs, a point that has already been mentioned elsewhere.

Just to back my point up, why did YS avoid a debate with Abhisit? Shouldn't the public have the rights to hear the reasons and then think for themselves or perhaps PTP want to keep the public uninformed so that they can continue to pull the strings without the public 'thinking'. Unbelievably, I still don't understand how Thai people can possibly be so naive to want a convicted criminal back to run a country. How much credibility can you give to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government. Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

After the coup, Thailand may have had a chance at heading towards a true Democracy, with or without Abhisit. But one thing is for sure, Thaksin is a far cry from Democracy.

Edited September 19, 2011 by ThaiOats

[mca]

Strictly speaking any coup is illegal. Some clearly so, some less when lots of people agree it was a good idea. The September 2006 coup followed an episode of a caretaker PM trying to wear down some legal framework he saw as obstruction to his 'we can rule for twenty years'. That still doesn't make it a legal coup, but goes a bit to explain why it slowly had become unavoidable.

At the moment we have a new parliament, MPs, a PM choosen by those MPs, a cabinet. Personally I'm still a bit puzzled about UDD MPs and our ever smiling PM Ms. Yingluck, but so be it. It's only when the PM, her cabinet and advisors start to modify structures, laws and other things just to get 'big brother' Thaksin back, that we are in danger of the people who started to defy k. Taksin will do so again. Remember k. Thaksin saying something like 'democracy is not my goal'

That "something like" is nothing like he said. That is a misquotation taken out of context, from guess where, THE NATION. The full phrase is

"Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress."

http://www.thaivisa....is-not-my-goal/

Doesn't sound quite so sinister now, does it? But hey, why not repeat a misquotation thousands of times until everybody thinks that that, is what Thaksin said.....................

Since when is a "something like 'democracy is not our goal'" a misquotation when you dig up the real phrase, being "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal.".

The "democracy as tool" and "the goal is lifestyle, happiness, national progress" suggest something really sinister. "You have 'bread and games', don't bother me about democracy". A variant on the slogan "Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts". One man, one party, no compromise. Very sinister indeed.

In Europe and even in England you'd have a national uproar if someone tried that. Things really changed since the 1930sh

Reading your post rubi mate you actually put "something like 'democracy is not my goal'"

[Babcock]

Political debate between whom, the Thai people or the foreigners on TVF? Thaksin became what he is today mainly because he exploited those "red herrings". It's simple, there's nothing sophisticated or grand about the way he works and there shouldn't be. If you want to make it so that the less educated understand you, you would KISS. Put yourself in the shoes of an uneducated poor working person who was promised to be rich in 6 months, increased minimum wage and tax rebate on cars, sounds pretty good doesn't it? Thaksin is already well known for his handouts. We (I'm hoping you too) on the other hand, would question some of these promises and would likely doubt them or realize the consequences of such ill-planned policies. It's not so much that they don't understand, I'll give them more credit than that, but it's more like they don't care about what goes on in the rest of the country or world. Mind you, the success of Thai Democracy and it's government is gauged upon the price of pork and eggs, a point that has already been mentioned elsewhere.

Just to back my point up, why did YS avoid a debate with Abhisit? Shouldn't the public have the rights to hear the reasons and then think for themselves or perhaps PTP want to keep the public uninformed so that they can continue to pull the strings without the public 'thinking'. Unbelievably, I still don't understand how Thai people can possibly be so naive to want a convicted criminal back to run a country. How much credibility can you give to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government. Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

After the coup, Thailand may have had a chance at heading towards a true Democracy, with or without Abhisit. But one thing is for sure, Thaksin is a far cry from Democracy.

As I understand it there was no vote buying in the northeast of thailand at the election. Look what happened?

Abhisit couldn't lie straight in bed. How could you debate with such a man?

[Siam Simon]

Political debate between whom, the Thai people or the foreigners on TVF? Thaksin became what he is today mainly because he exploited those "red herrings". It's simple, there's nothing sophisticated or grand about the way he works and there shouldn't be. If you want to make it so that the less educated understand you, you would KISS. Put yourself in the shoes of an uneducated poor working person who was promised to be rich in 6 months, increased minimum wage and tax rebate on cars, sounds pretty good doesn't it? Thaksin is already well known for his handouts. We (I'm hoping you too) on the other hand, would question some of these promises and would likely doubt them or realize the consequences of such ill-planned policies. It's not so much that they don't understand, I'll give them more credit than that, but it's more like they don't care about what goes on in the rest of the country or world. Mind you, the success of Thai Democracy and it's government is gauged upon the price of pork and eggs, a point that has already been mentioned elsewhere.

Just to back my point up, why did YS avoid a debate with Abhisit? Shouldn't the public have the rights to hear the reasons and then think for themselves or perhaps PTP want to keep the public uninformed so that they can continue to pull the strings without the public 'thinking'. Unbelievably, I still don't understand how Thai people can possibly be so naive to want a convicted criminal back to run a country. How much credibility can you give to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government. Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

After the coup, Thailand may have had a chance at heading towards a true Democracy, with or without Abhisit. But one thing is for sure, Thaksin is a far cry from Democracy.

Most of the first paragraph is just more window dressing for the 'poor people don't understand the issues' line of reason.

Second paragraph: YS avoided a debate with Abhisit because she's not up to it. The person who should have been debating with Abhisit (a reminder of Pheu Thai's campaign slogan: Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts) was unable have such a debate in Thailand. Giving credibility to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government? Where you florm mistah? Pillaging from the public coffers is a way of life in Thailand, from top to bottom. Thaksin is only a criminal because he excluded the wrong people from access to said coffers. I'm all for chasing Thaksin for his assortment of crimes, but this needs to start at the beginning if Thailand is going to modernise. Singling out one politician because he p1ssed off the wrong people doesn't even start to address this huge issue. There are plenty of people still alive who were involved in all sorts of criminality before Thaksin came to prominence. Start at the beginning and work through.

After the coup, Thailand has been in the biggest mess in it's modern history, and has, at times, been as far away from being a true democracy as it's been in modern times. Coups are as far a cry from democracy as it gets. General elections are democracy.

[Buchholz]

Political debate between whom, the Thai people or the foreigners on TVF? Thaksin became what he is today mainly because he exploited those "red herrings". It's simple, there's nothing sophisticated or grand about the way he works and there shouldn't be. If you want to make it so that the less educated understand you, you would KISS. Put yourself in the shoes of an uneducated poor working person who was promised to be rich in 6 months, increased minimum wage and tax rebate on cars, sounds pretty good doesn't it? Thaksin is already well known for his handouts. We (I'm hoping you too) on the other hand, would question some of these promises and would likely doubt them or realize the consequences of such ill-planned policies. It's not so much that they don't understand, I'll give them more credit than that, but it's more like they don't care about what goes on in the rest of the country or world. Mind you, the success of Thai Democracy and it's government is gauged upon the price of pork and eggs, a point that has already been mentioned elsewhere.

Just to back my point up, why did YS avoid a debate with Abhisit? Shouldn't the public have the rights to hear the reasons and then think for themselves or perhaps PTP want to keep the public uninformed so that they can continue to pull the strings without the public 'thinking'. Unbelievably, I still don't understand how Thai people can possibly be so naive to want a convicted criminal back to run a country. How much credibility can you give to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government. Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

After the coup, Thailand may have had a chance at heading towards a true Democracy, with or without Abhisit. But one thing is for sure, Thaksin is a far cry from Democracy.

Well put.

Be nice if the other responders to your post would answer one of your questions directed at them and reposted below. So far, none have, preferring instead to go off the rails with obfuscations of irrelevance to your post.

Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Buchholz

[Siam Simon]

Political debate between whom, the Thai people or the foreigners on TVF? Thaksin became what he is today mainly because he exploited those "red herrings". It's simple, there's nothing sophisticated or grand about the way he works and there shouldn't be. If you want to make it so that the less educated understand you, you would KISS. Put yourself in the shoes of an uneducated poor working person who was promised to be rich in 6 months, increased minimum wage and tax rebate on cars, sounds pretty good doesn't it? Thaksin is already well known for his handouts. We (I'm hoping you too) on the other hand, would question some of these promises and would likely doubt them or realize the consequences of such ill-planned policies. It's not so much that they don't understand, I'll give them more credit than that, but it's more like they don't care about what goes on in the rest of the country or world. Mind you, the success of Thai Democracy and it's government is gauged upon the price of pork and eggs, a point that has already been mentioned elsewhere.

Just to back my point up, why did YS avoid a debate with Abhisit? Shouldn't the public have the rights to hear the reasons and then think for themselves or perhaps PTP want to keep the public uninformed so that they can continue to pull the strings without the public 'thinking'. Unbelievably, I still don't understand how Thai people can possibly be so naive to want a convicted criminal back to run a country. How much credibility can you give to the Thai people when they let criminals and pillagers be a part of their government. Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

After the coup, Thailand may have had a chance at heading towards a true Democracy, with or without Abhisit. But one thing is for sure, Thaksin is a far cry from Democracy.

Well put.

Be nice if the other responders to your post would answer one of your questions reposted below. So far, none have, preferring instead to go off the rails with obfuscations of irrelevance to your post.

Seriously, do YOU see nothing wrong with this picture?

.

Aw, bless!

[whybother]

...

After the coup, Thailand has been in the biggest mess in it's modern history, and has, at times, been as far away from being a true democracy as it's been in modern times. Coups are as far a cry from democracy as it gets. General elections are democracy.

I think you'll find that Thailand was in a mess from early 2006 when someone changed the law so that he could make lots of money.

[JurgenG]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

That's an opinion that is expressed in the source that can not be cited. And these people are not opinion leaders, if they print that it's because it's what more and more people think.

It's not only opposition supporters that have been silenced during the past 5 years but also, actually I would say mostly, moderate democrats that have never been comfortable with the violent extremists some chose to associate with and never thought that a coup was the right path to democracy. I say mostly because the opponents of the coup were able to regroup and organize themselves, but the moderate democrats were stuck between a rock and hard place, more and more isolated as Sondhi and his thugs raise the bar days after days. At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily, it was really scary, you could then really undertand the feelings and the fears of the people during the cultural revolution. Honestly at that time the position of a government opponent was much more comfortable than the position of a moderate democrat.

Regarding what would have happen without the coup, we will never know. But the coup being a total failure, even more than that when one thinks of the damage done, the alternative couldn't have been worse, that's for sure,

Edited September 20, 2011 by JurgenG

[Buchholz]

At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily

Corroboration or samples, please, of your wild allegation.

[jayboy]

At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily

Corroboration or samples, please, of your wild allegation.

It's not a wild allegation as I suspect you know perfectly well.

I am not sure of calls for murder but as a matter of undeniable fact (I saw them) there were pages on Facebook stating "I enjoy seeing redshirt corpses".

I don't for a moment believe this was typical of the opposition to the redshirts, but equally there was a psychotic element as JurgenG has pointed out.

To be fair I have also seen some completely unacceptable material on redshirt leaning sites.In a bitter conflict of this kind, it is sadly inevitable that crazies emerge.Decent people of all political persuasions should have no truck with this.

[Buchholz]

At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily

Corroboration or samples, please, of your wild allegation.

It's not a wild allegation

Then it shouldn't be too difficult to corroborate or provide samples, because as you say yourself you never saw what JurgenG is alleging in his post.

You also failed to provide any direct linkage as was also alleged by JurgenG.

.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Buchholz

[jayboy]

At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily

Corroboration or samples, please, of your wild allegation.

It's not a wild allegation as I suspect you know perfectly well.

Then it shouldn't be difficult to corroborate or provide samples, because as you say yourself you never saw what JurgenG is alleging in his post.

You also failed to provide any direct linkage as was alleged by JurgenG.

I think my post speaks for itself, and I am certainly not going to forage for threats by crazies or photographs of dead people.

Your post also speaks for itself.

[Buchholz]

Corroboration or samples, please, of your wild allegation.

It's not a wild allegation

Then it shouldn't be too difficult to corroborate or provide samples, because as you say yourself you never saw what JurgenG is alleging in his post.

You also failed to provide any direct linkage as was also alleged by JurgenG.

I am certainly not going to forage for threats by crazies or photographs of dead people.

Well then, thanks, anyway.

We'll just wait for JurgenG then to provide corroboration or samples to his wild allegation.

.

[LindsayBKK]

I would have liked one while Yingluck was out of the country but she is back

another Shinawatra out of Thailand would have been good.

[hammered]

When more and more people are engaged in politics, and that is one thing Thaksin has made sure of on both sides, if there is no way for conflict resolution at a political level, then extremism and extreme actions and extreme threats are inevitable. The coup guaranteed that was going to happen although probably few realised it at the time and that is likely why so many who supported it or accepted it at the time now wish it had never happened. What would have happened if a democratic route had been followed is obviously open to conjecture, but the chances are it wouldnt have been as bad as what we have seen, and it whatever had happened it would have occurred through a democratic framework and that would have been a leeson that would shape the countries future democracy. As it stands now we are back at the beginning on the democracy curve and with worse conflicts to solve than existed back then

[hammered]

There will be no more coup for three main reasons ;

- Thai people are tired of violence, they are tired of division, they want peace and reconciliation. Don't forget the coup was not (officially) against Thaksin but to put an end to street violence. How many people were in the street following the election in July? How many people were in the street following the call of the "multi color shirts" ? Most democrats supporters believe the democrats have been given a fair chance, they lost, it's over now until the next election.

- An increasing number of democrats are now voicing the opinion that the coup was not only useless but actually counterproductive. If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem, he will probably be history by now instead of the popular super hero that he has become.

- The army has no more incentive to stage a coup, quite the opposite. It was useless, didn't solve anything as we are today back to square one, and it landed them in trouble, both nationally and internationally.

And I will add a fourth reason. The PAD, that was instrumental in Thaksin demise, is now recognize for what it is, a force of destruction at the service of a couple of selfish ultra extremist mad men.

So IMO, definitively, no more coup

"If Thaksin opponents had followed the democratic path to solve the Thaksin problem"

This is the part I have trouble with. While I condemn the coup and believe the coup makers should be serving long prison sentences, no one has explained just how Dr. Thaksin could have been removed otherwise. If you would be so kind as to explain how a resigned, caretaker PM who was 90 days past the time limit to hold new elections could be removed democratically I would be ever so grateful. Please, take it step by step as I was completely unaware of any alternatives.

That's an opinion that is expressed in the source that can not be cited. And these people are not opinion leaders, if they print that it's because it's what more and more people think.

It's not only opposition supporters that have been silenced during the past 5 years but also, actually I would say mostly, moderate democrats that have never been comfortable with the violent extremists some chose to associate with and never thought that a coup was the right path to democracy. I say mostly because the opponents of the coup were able to regroup and organize themselves, but the moderate democrats were stuck between a rock and hard place, more and more isolated as Sondhi and his thugs raise the bar days after days. At some point there were call for murder in Manager and the associated Facebook networks almost daily, it was really scary, you could then really undertand the feelings and the fears of the people during the cultural revolution. Honestly at that time the position of a government opponent was much more comfortable than the position of a moderate democrat.

Regarding what would have happen without the coup, we will never know. But the coup being a total failure, even more than that when one thinks of the damage done, the alternative couldn't have been worse, that's for sure,

Good point on the silencing of certain Democrats. There are a small (?) group of democrats who always wanted to do the deal rather than taking the ever increasing authoritarian route. Remember how the party undermined Sukhumband for trying to negotiate and end to the Bangkok standoff with Thaksin while maintaining pretty good relations with the reds. There were others in parliament too.