Yingluck Must Decide; This Is Her Biggest Test So Far

[drdoom6996]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

Goodness, so the current gov't could have done nothing better than they have done and it's all the fault of the previous gov't that was in power for a couple of years with two major Red Shirt protests stuck right in the middle.. of course it can't possibly have been looked at during the what 5 or 6 years that the various Thaksin gov'ts were in power before that as well could it?

Your argument is actually quite insulting to anybody with an IQ above 80

I disagree. It is insulting to anyone with an IQ at all.

[Buchholz]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

So did Thaksin, he had considerably longer than the Dems (and didnt have to deal with civil unrest during his tenure)

what did his government do to help prevent the possibility of flooding? Nowt.

Yingluck knew there was a risk of Central Thailand (and Ultimately Bangkok) getting hit by these floods when Chiang Mai and surrounding areas got hit... what preventative measures did she put in place? Nowt.Oh thats not true sorry, she focused her energies on getting her cronies into the positions of power and getting the red-shirts freed... now where are the red shirts? opening mini-states in the north, now where are her cronies? making a pigs-ear of managing this crisis

Convenient to blame the dems, but sadly its a Red government today and Yingluck is doing jack-sh*te except crying on TV and having photo ops with the opposition

more tears today:

"Today I will frankly tell you the truth. I have left no stone unturned in this crisis but I cannot solve it alone. I need cooperation from all sides," a teary-eyed Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra told reporters.

BANGKOK, October 19, 2011 (AFP)

http://www.mysinchew.com/node/65370?tid=37

Edited October 19, 2011 by Buchholz

[ES1]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

BAhahahahah. If your are being totally serious I feel very sorry for you. Otherwise, an obvious troll post.

[MunterHunter]

more tears today:

"Today I will frankly tell you the truth. I have left no stone unturned in this crisis but I cannot solve it alone. I need cooperation from all sides," a teary-eyed Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra told reporters.

BANGKOK, October 19, 2011 (AFP)

http://www.mysinchew...de/65370?tid=37

She should stop crying, with the floods of tears she has shed recently, she is aggravating the situation!

Not to mention that a PM who bursts into tears every 5 minutes is making this country look really weak and pathetic, it cant really be that inspiring for the people of this country either when every time she is faced with a hard decision, she starts to cry... The country needs a strong leader who will make hard decisions for the good of the country, who will act fast in a crisis and tackle a problem head on... instead we have one that cries and moans... really, who elected this joke?

Lastly, its about time she told the truth, shes lied through her teeth (IMHO) every step of the way until now

[serenitynow]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

So did Thaksin, he had considerably longer than the Dems (and didnt have to deal with civil unrest during his tenure)

what did his government do to help prevent the possibility of flooding? Nowt.

Yingluck knew there was a risk of Central Thailand (and Ultimately Bangkok) getting hit by these floods when Chiang Mai and surrounding areas got hit... what preventative measures did she put in place? Nowt.Oh thats not true sorry, she focused her energies on getting her cronies into the positions of power and getting the red-shirts freed... now where are the red shirts? opening mini-states in the north, now where are her cronies? making a pigs-ear of managing this crisis

Convenient to blame the dems, but sadly its a Red government today and Yingluck is doing jack-sh*te except crying on TV and having photo ops with the opposition

more tears today:

"Today I will frankly tell you the truth. I have left no stone unturned in this crisis but I cannot solve it alone. I need cooperation from all sides," a teary-eyed Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra told reporters.

BANGKOK, October 19, 2011 (AFP)

http://www.mysinchew...de/65370?tid=37

As much as the public disdains the actions of this administration thusfar, I think Yingluck has come through it relatively unscathed. Probably due to Thai culture's treatment of gender and relative youth issues.

If she wants to stay relatively untarnished by this, my recommendation is that she make several well publicized firings of much of the dead wood administrtors she has surrounding her. She should then replace them with technocrats (go outside the country if she must to draft them). It shows an admission of not having done enough but also a commitment to doing better. Never give up should be the message, which sure as hell isn't getting out now. She looks utterly defeated instead and that doesn't help anyone..

Edited October 19, 2011 by serenitynow

[Lifer]

Haven't most of you learned years ago that Thailand is dysfunctional? Centuries of psychoanalysis will not help. Things will go on during the year as usual until the next disaster or flood. God help Thailand.

[kkerry]

There are a large number of posters here who would be pleased to see Bangkok underwater if it meant scoring political points on an internet forum, sad people.

[h90]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

So did Thaksin, he had considerably longer than the Dems (and didnt have to deal with civil unrest during his tenure)

what did his government do to help prevent the possibility of flooding? Nowt.

Yingluck knew there was a risk of Central Thailand (and Ultimately Bangkok) getting hit by these floods when Chiang Mai and surrounding areas got hit... what preventative measures did she put in place? Nowt.Oh thats not true sorry, she focused her energies on getting her cronies into the positions of power and getting the red-shirts freed... now where are the red shirts? opening mini-states in the north, now where are her cronies? making a pigs-ear of managing this crisis

Convenient to blame the dems, but sadly its a Red government today and Yingluck is doing jack-sh*te except crying on TV and having photo ops with the opposition

more tears today:

"Today I will frankly tell you the truth. I have left no stone unturned in this crisis but I cannot solve it alone. I need cooperation from all sides," a teary-eyed Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra told reporters.

BANGKOK, October 19, 2011 (AFP)

http://www.mysinchew.com/node/65370?tid=37

no tears...there is already too much water....

And she should not do it alone, she should let the army do it and bring her Ministers back in the zoo, where they come from.

[soundman]

Post with vulgar/inflammatory language has been removed from view.

[Gers1873]

I agree with the PM and her ministers the rain is very wet this year.

Not too controversial I trust.

[DieterWiehe]

Thai Government

flood prevention in the dry season ??

come on we will not know where to add to the height of the dikes.

this we will no if it floods than we remember and mark the spot for future development

come on let the army take over , at least only one man gives the command.

[garrfeild]

Such a long winded article which avoids the real question, The question should be is a person fit for the job they were elected to.

[scotbeve]

Yes she must decide now is her brother more important than Thailand.

The title should have read Yingluck should have decided long ago.

If she decides now to put the well fare of Thailand first she will be able to help with the relief.

If she had decided long ago she could have helped to lesson the damage done.

The flood is a natural disaster and could not be stopped but early action could have lessened the damage done.

Once again hellodolly, you only have one reasonably logical / fair sentence in your usual rants... The last sentence was close however you forgot to edit/add .... stopped if proper actions by previous government administrations 50 to 200 years ago had been implemented ....

[animatic]

The Dems had years to address water management issues, including the current crisis which began under their watch, and now we are now seeing the results.

Goodness, so the current gov't could have done nothing better than they have done and it's all the fault of the previous gov't that was in power for a couple of years with two major Red Shirt protests stuck right in the middle.. of course it can't possibly have been looked at during the what 5 or 6 years that the various Thaksin gov'ts were in power before that as well could it?

Your argument is actually quite insulting to anybody with an IQ above 80

Actually this was closer to 7.5 years of the last 10 that Team Thaksin has mismanaged Thailand watershed situation. And believe me their cronies built LOTS of BIG stuff in those years in office3. Most with little or know consideration of watersheds or run off issues.

More appropriately it's just simply insulting to every hopeful Thai citizen.

Edited October 19, 2011 by animatic

[rubl]

There are a large number of posters here who would be pleased to see Bangkok underwater if it meant scoring political points on an internet forum, sad people.

Mind you, somehow I think lots of Thai people with up to METERS of water flooding their house wouldn't mind at all if/when their fellow Thai in the not yet flooded part of Bangkok would take their fair share. Difficult to feel sorry for non-flooded Bangkok when you have had water streaming through your living room for months now

[DocN]

There are a large number of posters here who would be pleased to see Bangkok underwater if it meant scoring political points on an internet forum, sad people.

Mind you, somehow I think lots of Thai people with up to METERS of water flooding their house wouldn't mind at all if/when their fellow Thai in the not yet flooded part of Bangkok would take their fair share. Difficult to feel sorry for non-flooded Bangkok when you have had water streaming through your living room for months now

...and that is bexause they don't under-sa-tand! I have all the sym´- and empathy for them and I think it is horrible, what is going on here. But what actually would "flooding" Bangkok help? Sometimes it has to be a decission to sacrifice the well being of a few to safe the bigger number. Bangkok as a financial hub of the country, Bangkok as the first stop for millions of tourists (high season is around the corner), Bangkok as home to millions on relatively small space...would hit the country harder as (sorry to say) an industrial and a historical park in Ayutthaya. The people outside Bangkok, who would like to see Bangkok drown would suffer even more and on a longr term.

Having said all that: by now, I am willing to say, that IMHO a controlled flow of flood water through Bangkok might actually help. But than: controlled? How? By who?

[OzMick]

This situation reminds me of the insane asylum where they test patients due for release by taking them into the bathroom, showing them a bath-tub full of water, and then offering them a choice of a teaspoon, a cup or a bucket to use to empty the tub.

Which would you choose?

*

*

*

*

*

*

Sane people choose to pull the plug.

[tlansford]

The Dems had years to address water management issues

The Thaksins ver. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and now 4.0 had three times as long to address water management issues as the Dems.

.

soapbox up :::

ya, that's right ! And, and, uhhhhh, oh yeah !! the last democratically elected democratic gov't - you know, the one back in the 90's that fell due to corruption charges, they had the chance to do something, too, and before them, the military junta after the 92 coup could have taken action as well, & & & & &

you guys are alllllll so funny (of course I don't mean just this exchange, its been days and days of the same thing) ... The land-management issues didn't happen overnight. How long did it take to build up BKK and fill in those canals without providing any compensation for mother nature? How long has deforestation been going on, illegal squatting in reserves, ???

This issue is not about your little political jousting. And it's not 3 months old, 1 year old, 5 years, or 10 years.

People die because of this and it is a decades long neglect of the environment, zoning, and environmental management. It is not about which party is right/wrong.

soapbox down :::

Have a good night everyone. I hope that none of your homes are under water.

Edited October 19, 2011 by tlansford

[rubl]

There are a large number of posters here who would be pleased to see Bangkok underwater if it meant scoring political points on an internet forum, sad people.

Mind you, somehow I think lots of Thai people with up to METERS of water flooding their house wouldn't mind at all if/when their fellow Thai in the not yet flooded part of Bangkok would take their fair share. Difficult to feel sorry for non-flooded Bangkok when you have had water streaming through your living room for months now

...and that is bexause they don't under-sa-tand! I have all the sym´- and empathy for them and I think it is horrible, what is going on here. But what actually would "flooding" Bangkok help? Sometimes it has to be a decission to sacrifice the well being of a few to safe the bigger number. Bangkok as a financial hub of the country, Bangkok as the first stop for millions of tourists (high season is around the corner), Bangkok as home to millions on relatively small space...would hit the country harder as (sorry to say) an industrial and a historical park in Ayutthaya. The people outside Bangkok, who would like to see Bangkok drown would suffer even more and on a longr term.

Having said all that: by now, I am willing to say, that IMHO a controlled flow of flood water through Bangkok might actually help. But than: controlled? How? By who?

Just to be sure. I do understand some of the reasoning to keep inner Bangkok dry. Still as I indicated, try to tell people who have had water in their house for months. Just saying "it's for the greater good' won't cut it. Tourist season, farang coming? What about "back to normal by mid-November", just another month of wet feet? My sense of humour would fail me for sure

[Buchholz]

The Dems had years to address water management issues

The Thaksins ver. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and now 4.0 had three times as long to address water management issues as the Dems.

.

<snip>

This issue is not about your little political jousting. And it's not 3 months old, 1 year old, 5 years, or 10 years.

<snip>

You should direct your efforts to qualtrough who initiated it. My post simply put the specific reality to his in regards to the time frame.

If you wish to go back further that's fine. That's your own jousting.

.

.

[scotbeve]

The Dems had years to address water management issues

The Thaksins ver. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and now 4.0 had three times as long to address water management issues as the Dems.

.

<snip>

This issue is not about your little political jousting. And it's not 3 months old, 1 year old, 5 years, or 10 years.

<snip>

You should direct your efforts to qualtrough who initiated it. My post simply put the specific reality to his in regards to the time frame.

If you wish to go back further that's fine. That's your own jousting.

.

.

Bucholz,

From an engineering point of view, IMO the best time to have done some major flood litigation projects would have been after the major flood of 1942. The city was less "geh-gat" and land expropriation would have cost way much less (if not free). Laws of the waterways could have been established, etc. It would still be the Venice of the East!

[DocN]

There are a large number of posters here who would be pleased to see Bangkok underwater if it meant scoring political points on an internet forum, sad people.

Mind you, somehow I think lots of Thai people with up to METERS of water flooding their house wouldn't mind at all if/when their fellow Thai in the not yet flooded part of Bangkok would take their fair share. Difficult to feel sorry for non-flooded Bangkok when you have had water streaming through your living room for months now

...and that is bexause they don't under-sa-tand! I have all the sym´- and empathy for them and I think it is horrible, what is going on here. But what actually would "flooding" Bangkok help? Sometimes it has to be a decission to sacrifice the well being of a few to safe the bigger number. Bangkok as a financial hub of the country, Bangkok as the first stop for millions of tourists (high season is around the corner), Bangkok as home to millions on relatively small space...would hit the country harder as (sorry to say) an industrial and a historical park in Ayutthaya. The people outside Bangkok, who would like to see Bangkok drown would suffer even more and on a longr term.

Having said all that: by now, I am willing to say, that IMHO a controlled flow of flood water through Bangkok might actually help. But than: controlled? How? By who?

Just to be sure. I do understand some of the reasoning to keep inner Bangkok dry. Still as I indicated, try to tell people who have had water in their house for months. Just saying "it's for the greater good' won't cut it. Tourist season, farang coming? What about "back to normal by mid-November", just another month of wet feet? My sense of humour would fail me for sure

Yeah right "farang coming"...and with them a LOT of money to keep rebuilding the country. And that is only one, small part, where Bangkok actually is NEEDED! But let me put it even more simple: NOW: houses around Bangkok destroyed, Bangkok dry. THAN: houses around Bangkok destroyed, houses IN Bangkok destroyed! A house that is already under water will not - miraculously- be dried down, just because you flood more houses!