The Military Must Learn To Respect The Law And The Govt: Thailand

[gl555]

Simple chain of facts: Thaksin is a democratic (whatever you call "democracy" in this place) elected PM- army ousts him to protect democracy...

Now...where is the mistake in the picture?

Other question: who decides IF and WHEN the military is "needed" to protect democracy?

Thaksin wasn't ousted because he was a threat to democracy (who cares?) or a criminal (what's new?)- he was ousted, because he became too powerfull for certain people and the military was only too willing to oblige. A military coup can never be "right" or "democratic" - and two wrongs don't make one right!

Well to do the right thing for the wrong reasons is still doing the right thing. So good on the military.

A military coup may seem 'wrong' but when parliament and the judiciary aren't doing their jobs to check an extremely corrupt executive, then extraordinary measures are needed.

[hanuman1]

Simple chain of facts: Thaksin is a democratic (whatever you call "democracy" in this place) elected PM- army ousts him to protect democracy...

Now...where is the mistake in the picture?

Other question: who decides IF and WHEN the military is "needed" to protect democracy?

Thaksin wasn't ousted because he was a threat to democracy (who cares?) or a criminal (what's new?)- he was ousted, because he became too powerfull for certain people and the military was only too willing to oblige. A military coup can never be "right" or "democratic" - and two wrongs don't make one right!

Well to do the right thing for the wrong reasons is still doing the right thing. So good on the military.

A military coup may seem 'wrong' but when parliament and the judiciary aren't doing their jobs to check an extremely corrupt executive, then extraordinary measures are needed.

Cant.

[alexakap]

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic.

Simple: "Success is never blamed".

They succeed in da coup, you agree or not - they did. Take it or leave it.

Lots of countries have democracies

Name me even one of those? Where can I see the True Democracy in action?

[gl555]

Simple chain of facts: Thaksin is a democratic (whatever you call "democracy" in this place) elected PM- army ousts him to protect democracy...

Now...where is the mistake in the picture?

Other question: who decides IF and WHEN the military is "needed" to protect democracy?

Thaksin wasn't ousted because he was a threat to democracy (who cares?) or a criminal (what's new?)- he was ousted, because he became too powerfull for certain people and the military was only too willing to oblige. A military coup can never be "right" or "democratic" - and two wrongs don't make one right!

Well to do the right thing for the wrong reasons is still doing the right thing. So good on the military.

A military coup may seem 'wrong' but when parliament and the judiciary aren't doing their jobs to check an extremely corrupt executive, then extraordinary measures are needed.

Cant.

Truth.

[AleG]

Simple chain of facts: Thaksin is a democratic (whatever you call "democracy" in this place) elected PM- army ousts him to protect democracy...

Now...where is the mistake in the picture?

Other question: who decides IF and WHEN the military is "needed" to protect democracy?

Thaksin wasn't ousted because he was a threat to democracy (who cares?) or a criminal (what's new?)- he was ousted, because he became too powerfull for certain people and the military was only too willing to oblige. A military coup can never be "right" or "democratic" - and two wrongs don't make one right!

It can certainly be argued that Thaksin became too powerful for democracy to survive.

That power wasn't for the interest of more and better democracy, it was for his own personal gain.

[whybother]

Better question is to wonder why a head of such a prestigious university with a decent history of political activism actually accepted the request to help write the constitution under the military government.

Of course, brownie points for time served weren't to be expected. Some people just can't help themselves, but there are certain types of people who shouldn't be so obviously politicisied. His job is to run a university, pinning his flag to an army coup isn't the smartest thing in the world to do. But of course, the pooyai thinks he is above criticism, so, so be it. He obviously comes from the same school of political science as Kasit.

Just because he took part in rewriting the constitution does not necessarily mean that he supported the coup. Possibly, he just wanted to make sure that it was done right.

[animatic]

This writer has been waving the flag for Thaksin and the red shirts for a long time now. He's been constantly publishing pro Thaksin articles in The Nation, and every time they print one there is wide spread shock from the red shirt brigade that The Nation would do such a thing

Actually Pavin has been very critical of Thaksin.I'm afraid your comment simply reflects the mindset that any criticism of the unelected elites in Thailand signifies support for Thaksin.It's not a view that's intellectually sustainable but I suppose is way of registering opposition to Thaksin (perfectly reasonable) without any attempt to consider evidence, context and proportionality.OK for forum banter I suppose but not related to reality.

Yes, yes, very critical of Thaksin. Every article he makes a small comment about Thaksin may have some minor flaw then goes on to write a lengthy support of him and his movement. All part of the strategy

Exactly. Can't let your godheads seem TOO perfect.

Just better than everyone else. Just more of the social con-job.

[billd766]

AFAIR back in 2001 just after Thai Rak Thai won the election he made his statuary declaration of assets and make what he said was a genuine mistake.

This part is from Wikipedia

Thaksin Shinawatra and the allegation of hiding assets and stocks

After the sounding victory of Thaksin Shinawatra's party, Thai Rak Thai, in 2001 election, the Anti-Corruption Committee filed a case charging him as hiding a handful of assets in form of stocks, which is unlawful due to the 1997 Constitution. According to Thai law, senior government officials are required to declare their assets, along with those of their spouses and children under the age of 20, to the NCCC when they start and finish their terms in office. However Thaksin could escape the guilty as the judges ruled 8 to 7. Thaksin said it was his 'honest mistake'.

On the same day he was found not guilty another TRT politician whose name I have forgotten claimed the same thing but was found guilty.

In the years following 2 of the judges in Thaksins caes said that as he had just won an election they couldn't find him guilty even thougth he had broken the law at that time.

Now IF he was found guilty (as he should have been) perhaps there would not have been all these problems, so maybe Thailand should reverse all the decisions and laws from that point and not just back to the last coup.

[Thai at Heart]

Better question is to wonder why a head of such a prestigious university with a decent history of political activism actually accepted the request to help write the constitution under the military government.

Of course, brownie points for time served weren't to be expected. Some people just can't help themselves, but there are certain types of people who shouldn't be so obviously politicisied. His job is to run a university, pinning his flag to an army coup isn't the smartest thing in the world to do. But of course, the pooyai thinks he is above criticism, so, so be it. He obviously comes from the same school of political science as Kasit.

Just because he took part in rewriting the constitution does not necessarily mean that he supported the coup. Possibly, he just wanted to make sure that it was done right.

I am sure this is how he saw it. However, reconciling the idea of writing a constitution under military rule is quite a stretch. We all know the pretty sweeping changes that it brought in, and how it was voted on, so I don't think we can say that it went very far to extending democracy. Then of course, it provided get out of jail cards for the coup makers, so it becomes even more of a stretch.

The 1997 constitution wasn't perfect, but there is nothing said to say that any law has to stay the way it is forever, however, it is the complete inability for the constitution to stand up to real world problems such as potential dictators getting free reign to modify laws which extend their stay beyond the stated term etc, which show that it was badly written in the first place.

I don't know of every country or jurisdiction where say a PM's conduct was absolutely identical to Thaksin's, but there are some. So why does it need a massive re-write to sort it out. Looking at the experience of other countries isn't wrong if it provides a practical workeable answer. The problem is that writing these documents becomes a crap fight of opposing interests and views instead of a working framework that can be added to and amended to the benefit of the people by strengthening the rights of people within the system.

As an example, the way things are written today, there is an incredible conflict between the interests of the "people" and those of the state in that it is taken to be read that the interests of the people are represented by maximising the revenue of state organisations. This mere conflict means that we get the CAT debacle and a train system that is falling to bits because the reality is that government organisations should not be run for the benefit of the company and the employees but for the consumers alone.

It is situations like this that absolutely paralyse certain issues within the country simply because the academics of this country find it impossible to empathise with the reality of those around them. They parrot the ideal of some kind of Siamese utopia, which never has and never will be created until enough people stand up and write the rules simply and selflessly about in who's interests parliament, civil servants, and the army MUST act, and if they can be proven not to, an independent judiciary with some form of precedent law MUST be empowered to remove these people from their responsibility. Otherwise the arbitrary judgement of coup and constitutional re-write to tackle the latest issue of the day will continue and the country will continue to take 1 step forward and 2 back forever.

But since when do turkey's vote for xmas?

[plumeria]

The Army were dead right to oust Thaksin, Thailand was headed for another Phillipine-like, Marcos dictatorship with Thaksin at the helm.... the only way out was the quiet and silent coup. At that time almost no one in Thailand complained , it was so obvious what Thaksin was up to. It was a coup for the people and for freedom ..... and for "True Democracy"....!

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic. Lots of countries have democracies but they weren't the results of coups they were the reults of elections. A minority stages a coup and that is democracy? geez I would hate to live under your regime. The likes of Burma and many other places around the world were the results of coups, democracies I think not.

The "Thai Way" may not be the American way but anybody with a real understanding of the situation knows a Thai coup is an effective way to flush the toilet and reset the game and give the people a chance to try a new approach.

If we are going to negate results of military coup d'etat here then we'd have to turn the clock back nearly half a century.

So what Thailand needs is a "true" democracy like the USA where presidents can negate constitutions by inside jobs and executive decrees?

So Thailand needs a "true" democracy like the USA where corporations have the rights of people?

So Thailand needs a "true" democracy like the USA where money can buy the Senate and House of Representatives through lobbyists and whatever the 1% of the citizens decide is most profitable is what becomes government policy?

Thailand already apes the USA far too much and is already implementing the same plan to concentrate government in the hands of few.

I cheer whenever Thailand does things the "Thai way" and thinks outside the box and gives the average person the slightest hope they might be able to hang onto a small measure of control of their own country.

A coup in Thailand tends to be a clever chess game and rarely is anyone hurt. Even when someone does get hurt it is usually accidental.

The military are no angels but it's an ingredient in the mix that keeps things interesting and ensures that no plan by the super rich is a sure thing.

It may be the military that do the "unspeakable" and solve the "unsolvable" and prevent the "unthinkable" and get Thailand over the looming "Big Bump in the Road".

Look how ludicrous the situation is now that we cannot speak frankly or TVF moderators will kill the post or lock the thread and we have to refer to extremely important issues and questions as things like the "Big Bump in the Road".

Maybe I have too much hope in natural Thai abilities but look at Muay Thai. Thais can accomplish something when they set their minds to it.

We may not agree with the plan or the result but look what Taksin has accomplished. Now we just need a good person to get behind the wheel of the car.

And I keep hoping they will come up with an alternative form of government that is not overly influenced by the current American game plan and more outside the box like the "Non-aligned Movement" of the past.

[KKvampire]

There was a removing of a Government lead by someone who has since been convicted of financial criminal activities, and there was an election within a year of the removal . Of course a certain faction didnt like it when their coalition partners left them so they resorted to violence,Chachavalpongpun doesnt know what he's talking about.

Edited October 12, 2011 by KKvampire

[drdoom6996]

What about the Goverment respecting the law ,the Boss as proved already he doesnt

Right On. I wonder where that company gets its money from?

[drdoom6996]

The Army were dead right to oust Thaksin, Thailand was headed for another Phillipine-like, Marcos dictatorship with Thaksin at the helm.... the only way out was the quiet and silent coup. At that time almost no one in Thailand complained , it was so obvious what Thaksin was up to. It was a coup for the people and for freedom ..... and for "True Democracy"....!

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic. Lots of countries have democracies but they weren't the results of coups they were the reults of elections. A minority stages a coup and that is democracy? geez I would hate to live under your regime. The likes of Burma and many other places around the world were the results of coups, democracies I think not.

THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[drdoom6996]

Thaksin is once again being used to explain all the bad things that have gone wrong in our domestic politics.

That is so wrong! Not sure where the writer was during Thaksin was in power.

"he was the main driving force" for all this mess. "He amplifies all the bad thai's habit to the new level." He shows it. with the right amount of money, tactic and timing he can do whatever and no one can touch him under what i call twisted democracy!

Then the military feel the same and they did what they have done. Those wearing yellow feel the same, they close down the airport and gave full support to the military. The red saw it and they too want to do the same and they burn down Bangkok.

Thaksin might not be the most honest and ethical man in the Kingdom, but overthrowing him in a coup was wrong and deplorable.

Now that I am totally agree.

Thailand without military coups? It could be in dream. I don't know if they have class in "how to launch a coups" in the thai's military academy or not. It seem like they must have.

( just look at the country's history of democracy!)

What history of democracy??

[drdoom6996]

All they need to do is take a legal system or constitution word for word from another country which has a constitutional monarchy as its system and follow the rules.

This endless "thai-ification" of laws simply ends up with the law being subverted. The system is either capable of standing rigorous testing or not. The mere fact that they keep re-writing bits and bobs here and there to suit the flavour of the day shows that it is not capable of explaining and codifying what the roles of the army, parliament, civil service and their relationship to and the rights of the people.

Of course, this will never happen because how could it be possible to implement a foreign concept into Thai culture the people will cry? But then they can't have their cake and eat it. The constitution in Thailand has been subvertered, re-written, bent and busted so many times because this is exactly the way some people want it. They don't want a clear, concise and simple role for the parties I mentioned earlier that stands the test of time, because it would render hundreds of powerbrokers completely redundant over night, or make it far more simple for the people to hold them accountable for their decisions and conduct.

My daughters teachers told her that she would get 100% on her test as the Thai constitution is ever changing and the teachers can't explain it properly. Even if they do explain it properly, it gets changed. Then the teachers have to try and explain/teach the children why. Example, Taksin changers the law the day before he sells Shincorp so he pays no taxes. How many people and projects would that tax money have helped?

[drdoom6996]

This person isn't pro-Thaksin and if you know the history of Thammassat and its stand against military dictatorships you'll know that he's right. However, he's treading a dangerous line if you read between the lines of what he's saying. Students at Thammassat have frequently been the target of military and extrajudicial police purges in the past because they have spoken up too often about freedom and democracy. During bad old days students there were hung from trees and beaten to death.

He may not be pro Thaksin but I find it amusing that he states that the military must respect the law and the government and yet pointedly ignores all the times Thaksin hasn't! Thaksin to him is just someone who 'might not be the most honest and ethical man in the Kingdom'. Hardly seems fair don't you think?

Thanksin wasn't a military dictator but he sure as Hell was trying to be one. Luckily he got thrown out first.

Correct

[drdoom6996]

Better question is to wonder why a head of such a prestigious university with a decent history of political activism actually accepted the request to help write the constitution under the military government.

Of course, brownie points for time served weren't to be expected. Some people just can't help themselves, but there are certain types of people who shouldn't be so obviously politicisied. His job is to run a university, pinning his flag to an army coup isn't the smartest thing in the world to do. But of course, the pooyai thinks he is above criticism, so, so be it. He obviously comes from the same school of political science as Kasit.

MONEY

[Thai at Heart]

All they need to do is take a legal system or constitution word for word from another country which has a constitutional monarchy as its system and follow the rules.

This endless "thai-ification" of laws simply ends up with the law being subverted. The system is either capable of standing rigorous testing or not. The mere fact that they keep re-writing bits and bobs here and there to suit the flavour of the day shows that it is not capable of explaining and codifying what the roles of the army, parliament, civil service and their relationship to and the rights of the people.

Of course, this will never happen because how could it be possible to implement a foreign concept into Thai culture the people will cry? But then they can't have their cake and eat it. The constitution in Thailand has been subvertered, re-written, bent and busted so many times because this is exactly the way some people want it. They don't want a clear, concise and simple role for the parties I mentioned earlier that stands the test of time, because it would render hundreds of powerbrokers completely redundant over night, or make it far more simple for the people to hold them accountable for their decisions and conduct.

My daughters teachers told her that she would get 100% on her test as the Thai constitution is ever changing and the teachers can't explain it properly. Even if they do explain it properly, it gets changed. Then the teachers have to try and explain/teach the children why. Example, Taksin changers the law the day before he sells Shincorp so he pays no taxes. How many people and projects would that tax money have helped?

the fact that it got that far was because the system caved in expediently when he was caught making a shonky asset declaration several years previous. This single act of short termism has condemned Thailand to a mess. Why? Because the judiciary didn't do its job, pure, plain and simple. And whilst Thaksin may be the biggest story since sliced bread for the last 10 years, there are I can safely say been thousands of instances where the pooyai has screwed the little guy and the courts have helped him. So as I say, instead of having a judiciary that can essentially make it up as they go along, how about having one that simply interprets the law fairly?

I mean honestly, would you have ever thought twice about nicking a sweet from a candy store as a kid it your parents would have said "Good on ya son, you did it for the good of your family" and the police said "Its ok, no harm no foul".

Edited October 12, 2011 by Thai at Heart

[drdoom6996]

"Thaksin might not be the most honest and ethical man in the Kingdom, but overthrowing him in a coup was wrong and deplorable"

So Thaksin breaking the law it's OK, but law must be upheld at all costs... except for Thaksin.... and no double standards!

And not to forget that at that moment Thaksin wasn't premier anymore. His 3 month caretaker time was expired and there were not enough MPs.

No No No we have to forget that. God will be returning. And the rule of the law that still exists will be leaving.

[OzMick]

I suppose it should work the other way too. BP has an article where Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha was inspecting RTA sand-bagging in Pathum Thani when he was verbally abused by red-shirts.

Even when they are working their butt off to help............... Personally, I would have ordered the troops to take a few hours rest, but I'm petty like that.

While we are discussing respecting the law, it is reported that R. Amsterdam is in BKK despite having lesse majeste charges brought over his book on the BKK Red-shirt uprising (he call it something different, of course). As another US citizen was recently arrested on similar charges, it will be interesting to see if having your employer's BIL as CoP makes for the usual double standards.

He should defend himself, then he will have 2 fools for clients.

[DocN]

Again: WHO decides WHEN and IF a coup should take place? What does an elected PM have to do to be "coup- worthy"? Steal? Kill? ...or just step on someones toes and trigger a bad reaction? It's so easy to say, that Thaksin was a criminal (yes- he was) and so had to be ousted. What next?

[AleG]

the fact that it got that far was because the system caved in expediently when he was caught making a shonky asset declaration several years previous. This single act of short termism has condemned Thailand to a mess. Why? Because the judiciary didn't do its job, pure, plain and simple. And whilst Thaksin may be the biggest story since sliced bread for the last 10 years, there are I can safely say been thousands of instances where the pooyai has screwed the little guy and the courts have helped him. So as I say, instead of having a judiciary that can essentially make it up as they go along, how about having one that simply interprets the law fairly?

I mean honestly, would you have ever thought twice about nicking a sweet from a candy store as a kid it your parents would have said "Good on ya son, you did it for the good of your family" and the police said "Its ok, no harm no foul".

Miserable be the generation that needs to judge its judges.

[serenitynow]

Again: WHO decides WHEN and IF a coup should take place? What does an elected PM have to do to be "coup- worthy"? Steal? Kill? ...or just step on someones toes and trigger a bad reaction? It's so easy to say, that Thaksin was a criminal (yes- he was) and so had to be ousted. What next?

Well, in the case of the 2006 coup there was a power vacuum. No PM and no longer a caretaker PM. The story you read here from many posters that a democratically elected and serving PM was arbitrarily deposed by the military is just not so.

[AleG]

Again: WHO decides WHEN and IF a coup should take place? What does an elected PM have to do to be "coup- worthy"? Steal? Kill? ...or just step on someones toes and trigger a bad reaction? It's so easy to say, that Thaksin was a criminal (yes- he was) and so had to be ousted. What next?

I would say that a caretaker PM officially renouncing his position after his term has expired and then unilaterally deciding that he is PM once again makes a strong case for strong measures.

[Thai at Heart]

the fact that it got that far was because the system caved in expediently when he was caught making a shonky asset declaration several years previous. This single act of short termism has condemned Thailand to a mess. Why? Because the judiciary didn't do its job, pure, plain and simple. And whilst Thaksin may be the biggest story since sliced bread for the last 10 years, there are I can safely say been thousands of instances where the pooyai has screwed the little guy and the courts have helped him. So as I say, instead of having a judiciary that can essentially make it up as they go along, how about having one that simply interprets the law fairly?

I mean honestly, would you have ever thought twice about nicking a sweet from a candy store as a kid it your parents would have said "Good on ya son, you did it for the good of your family" and the police said "Its ok, no harm no foul".

Miserable be the generation that needs to judge its judges.

Well it has been largely a misery for the last 10 years or so in terms of democracy and political stability, and yet the world fortunately does keep turning.

[tlansford]

The Army were dead right to oust Thaksin, Thailand was headed for another Phillipine-like, Marcos dictatorship with Thaksin at the helm.... the only way out was the quiet and silent coup. At that time almost no one in Thailand complained , it was so obvious what Thaksin was up to. It was a coup for the people and for freedom ..... and for "True Democracy"....!

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic. Lots of countries have democracies but they weren't the results of coups they were the reults of elections. A minority stages a coup and that is democracy? geez I would hate to live under your regime. The likes of Burma and many other places around the world were the results of coups, democracies I think not.

I will try. I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance, used when politicians begin to exploit the democratic system. Thaksin was blatantly corrupting democracy, enacting laws for his own benefit, stacking the police and military with his family members, buying up opposition politicians.

Burma, and other countries that have coups, are military junta dictatorships, Thailand is not. Elections were held in Thailand reasonably quickly after the coup, and Thaksin's party allowed to regain power. That they were caught in electoral fraud and bribery is the risk that they took, and paid the price for.

Ozmick, with all due respect, and I know we don't agree (at all) politically, but I think you are living in some kind of bizarre dream-land.

The pro-cons of the coup overthrowing Taksin have been debated already, I don't intend to go into that.

Rather the statement : " I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance"

A military that is responsible only to itself, and answers only to itself in no way shape or form can be a check, nor a balance.

[serenitynow]

The Army were dead right to oust Thaksin, Thailand was headed for another Phillipine-like, Marcos dictatorship with Thaksin at the helm.... the only way out was the quiet and silent coup. At that time almost no one in Thailand complained , it was so obvious what Thaksin was up to. It was a coup for the people and for freedom ..... and for "True Democracy"....!

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic. Lots of countries have democracies but they weren't the results of coups they were the reults of elections. A minority stages a coup and that is democracy? geez I would hate to live under your regime. The likes of Burma and many other places around the world were the results of coups, democracies I think not.

I will try. I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance, used when politicians begin to exploit the democratic system. Thaksin was blatantly corrupting democracy, enacting laws for his own benefit, stacking the police and military with his family members, buying up opposition politicians.

Burma, and other countries that have coups, are military junta dictatorships, Thailand is not. Elections were held in Thailand reasonably quickly after the coup, and Thaksin's party allowed to regain power. That they were caught in electoral fraud and bribery is the risk that they took, and paid the price for.

Ozmick, with all due respect, and I know we don't agree (at all) politically, but I think you are living in some kind of bizarre dream-land.

The pro-cons of the coup overthrowing Taksin have been debated already, I don't intend to go into that.

Rather the statement : " I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance"

A military that is responsible only to itself, and answers only to itself in no way shape or form can be a check, nor a balance.

If you think the military is only accountable to itself I would humbly suggest that you don't fully understand Thai culture. Thailand is such an insular society I would suggest, unless you come from a long line of sharecroppers or are a migrant worker, that there are only 2-3 degrees of separation between all Thai people. Those at the top and those nearer the bottom. The military here may be part of the kleptocracy, but its not oppressive in any way. Not to Thais anyway.

[tlansford]

It is now time for Thailand to cultivate a new culture in which the military must operate strictly within the framework of the law and under the auspices of an elected government.

Agree 100% with this perspective.

A real democracy in Thailand (IMO) is not possible without this step.

[Crushdepth]

The Army were dead right to oust Thaksin, Thailand was headed for another Phillipine-like, Marcos dictatorship with Thaksin at the helm.... the only way out was the quiet and silent coup. At that time almost no one in Thailand complained , it was so obvious what Thaksin was up to. It was a coup for the people and for freedom ..... and for "True Democracy"....!

Can you please explain how a coup is democratic. Lots of countries have democracies but they weren't the results of coups they were the reults of elections. A minority stages a coup and that is democracy? geez I would hate to live under your regime. The likes of Burma and many other places around the world were the results of coups, democracies I think not.

I will try. I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance, used when politicians begin to exploit the democratic system. Thaksin was blatantly corrupting democracy, enacting laws for his own benefit, stacking the police and military with his family members, buying up opposition politicians.

Burma, and other countries that have coups, are military junta dictatorships, Thailand is not. Elections were held in Thailand reasonably quickly after the coup, and Thaksin's party allowed to regain power. That they were caught in electoral fraud and bribery is the risk that they took, and paid the price for.

Ozmick, with all due respect, and I know we don't agree (at all) politically, but I think you are living in some kind of bizarre dream-land.

The pro-cons of the coup overthrowing Taksin have been debated already, I don't intend to go into that.

Rather the statement : " I look at the coup as the ultimate check and balance"

A military that is responsible only to itself, and answers only to itself in no way shape or form can be a check, nor a balance.

It's the check you get when you don't have a balance. Fix the governance, put politicians under rule of law along with everyone else and the coups will go away. Because there will be no need for them.

Leave the system broken and...well we already live there.

[serenitynow]

It is now time for Thailand to cultivate a new culture in which the military must operate strictly within the framework of the law and under the auspices of an elected government.

Agree 100% with this perspective.

A real democracy in Thailand (IMO) is not possible without this step.

That IS the most ideal situation, but the only party who pledged to do that just got voted out of office. It was replaced by a party seeking to put family members at the uppermost echelons of power in the Army. You can't be an idealist here; at least not yet. It's always a choice between least worst outcomes.