Even This National Disaster Is Being Used As A Political Weapon: Thai Opinion

[Credo]

I have no problem with Abhisit visiting the Maldives. One less politician is not a loss, really. He is a former PM and he's been through his own trial by fire. I don't think he has to justify his visit to anyone. Had the government asked him to cancel his visit because he was desperately needed, I am sure he would have.

By the way, the Maldives isn't one of the places I'd head to if I was fearful of floods.

[steveromagnino]

She has my sympathy. There is nothing that can be done to stop the deluge that is befalling the country. Whatever could have been done, would never be done by politicians. Politicians simply lack the expertise and will to handle a natural disaster.

The true test will be the aftermath of the current disaster.

She is a lot stronger than I thought she was. The fact that she has continued to hang in there during these extremely stressful times is amazing.

her ability to poorly mismanage a crisis is only matched by the fervent support she receives from her supporters who can see no wrong.

I don't blame her for the flooding, which was inevitable. I do blame her for deciding to run things and then doing a terrible job; as a private sector CEO I would have expected her, a person with all this private sector experience which we were told is why she will be such a great leader like her brother, to do a better job than me.

So far....I honestly believe I would have done a better job.

As for pointing things out:

- army know how to distribute aid a lot better than PT MPs

- misinformation, media censorship and control has been bordering on ludacris (the rapper, he doesn't like it)

- NGOs are finding FROC difficult to work with

- so far the Democrats have been decidedly helpful in many respects; they would work with Yingluck, but certain other factions in PT refuse to allow it to happen - the reality is the problem is bigger than any political entity; yet there is no mention in the article of Jatuporn's inane ramblings nor the personally witnessed attempts of PT personalities to leverage this into PR for themselves

- PT's focus has been on this harebrained boat scheme which defies physics; in the 4 weeks prior to today, what other serious effort have you seen other than people flying around taking photos?

For all his flaws, the Bangkok Governor has been mostly helpful in all this, and has worked with FROC and the government where possible; however it is dam_n hard to work with someone who is so hopeless in knowing what to do.

This crisis began (for me) in late July/early August with aid distribution and supporting a few NGOs; at that time it seemed that if more water was not drained from the central plains, that there was going to be a submarine style approach to Bangkok.

The crisis that began 4 weeks ago when the crisis was now inevitable is not the crisis that we will flood. It is the mismanagement of it that hurts.

Truth is, no matter how you look at it, the government is doing a poor job. I believe Thaksin, Abhisit, Samak; any of them would have done a better job than this.

At least with Thaksin, we would now be hearing only 1m people affected. Well ok, probably Samak would have been just as hopeless.

[hanuman1]

The underlying debate here is not about pro or anti Thaksin. It's about pro or anti 'bullshit'!

The article is BS. Are you pro or anti?

It is a long opinion piece. Quite hard to define a large body of work which contains many presented facts - the veracity of which I cannot check - as BS or not. Such generalizations I leave to the government-hating faithful.

Easier to spot BS when it applies to smaller chunks of presented fact, as in the posts I replied to which you edited out in your reply.

So I disagree that the article is necessarily BS. And I am anti BS.

Just to mention a couple of points about the article, I did notice that he suggested Yingluck's management qualities were weak (and that's part of something you just called BS?). Also, I thought bringing in the radical diatribe of government-haters commenting on Facebook was ill-judged and only included as a cheap way of garnering some sympathy for the PM as a counterpoint to earlier criticism in the piece. Anti- or pro- gov radicals don't belong in mainstream debate.

I think he was trying to be balanced, but with a bit of sympathy for the government creeping in. The fact that he didn't spend the entire column lambasting everything the government has done is reason enough for the anti-government radicals here (of which I don't think you are one) to consider him out-and-out pro-gov, and by extension (for some people), his piece BS.

Edited October 26, 2011 by hanuman1
profanity edited out

[serenitynow]

She has my sympathy. There is nothing that can be done to stop the deluge that is befalling the country. Whatever could have been done, would never be done by politicians. Politicians simply lack the expertise and will to handle a natural disaster.

The true test will be the aftermath of the current disaster.

She is a lot stronger than I thought she was. The fact that she has continued to hang in there during these extremely stressful times is amazing.

her ability to poorly mismanage a crisis is only matched by the fervent support she receives from her supporters who can see no wrong.

I don't blame her for the flooding, which was inevitable. I do blame her for deciding to run things and then doing a terrible job; as a private sector CEO I would have expected her, a person with all this private sector experience which we were told is why she will be such a great leader like her brother, to do a better job than me.

So far....I honestly believe I would have done a better job.

As for pointing things out:

- army know how to distribute aid a lot better than PT MPs

- misinformation, media censorship and control has been bordering on ludacris (the rapper, he doesn't like it)

- NGOs are finding FROC difficult to work with

- so far the Democrats have been decidedly helpful in many respects; they would work with Yingluck, but certain other factions in PT refuse to allow it to happen - the reality is the problem is bigger than any political entity; yet there is no mention in the article of Jatuporn's inane ramblings nor the personally witnessed attempts of PT personalities to leverage this into PR for themselves

- PT's focus has been on this harebrained boat scheme which defies physics; in the 4 weeks prior to today, what other serious effort have you seen other than people flying around taking photos?

For all his flaws, the Bangkok Governor has been mostly helpful in all this, and has worked with FROC and the government where possible; however it is dam_n hard to work with someone who is so hopeless in knowing what to do.

This crisis began (for me) in late July/early August with aid distribution and supporting a few NGOs; at that time it seemed that if more water was not drained from the central plains, that there was going to be a submarine style approach to Bangkok.

The crisis that began 4 weeks ago when the crisis was now inevitable is not the crisis that we will flood. It is the mismanagement of it that hurts.

Truth is, no matter how you look at it, the government is doing a poor job. I believe Thaksin, Abhisit, Samak; any of them would have done a better job than this.

At least with Thaksin, we would now be hearing only 1m people affected. Well ok, probably Samak would have been just as hopeless.

If Thaksin were here he'd be up in Isaan, high and dry peeling off 1,000 baht notes to grovelling grannies. Media outlets would have been directed to give this coverage priority,

[nurofiend]

I have no problem with Abhisit visiting the Maldives. One less politician is not a loss, really. He is a former PM and he's been through his own trial by fire. I don't think he has to justify his visit to anyone. Had the government asked him to cancel his visit because he was desperately needed, I am sure he would have.

By the way, the Maldives isn't one of the places I'd head to if I was fearful of floods.

of course, you're entitled to you're opinion.

i'll just say, when you're an active politician (and a main party leader at that)..... you don't go on holiday during a national crisis, for obvious reasons.

it's in 'politics 101'

Edited October 26, 2011 by nurofiend

[Lovia]

I can vouch that the government is using this flood for political gains, if not this won't happens.

[glanger]

What a load of nonsense.

You can see where the author is coming from with the divisive "This is what Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is now called and labelled by her upper-class critics."

This author is doing exactly what he accuses others of - using the issue to score political points and to further divide people into them & us.

Fortunately, the whole article is poorly executed.

Excellent points.

She's being derided on her poor perfomance in response to the floods by a lot more people than "her upper class critics."

It's ironic as well to overlook just how upper class she is herself.

His continuing to attempt to drive a further wedege in this so-called class war is certainly divisive.

[Riely]

Well I'm

Anti:..

Bullshit

Stupidity

Terrorist

I'm Pro;

Accountability

Thailand

Capitalism

So I do think the PM is a ignorant, manipulative little sock puppet and I feel for all the non-redshirts afflicted by this tragedy of nature that could have been handled better if Abhisit was still in office.

[serenitynow]

What a load of nonsense.

You can see where the author is coming from with the divisive "This is what Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is now called and labelled by her upper-class critics."

This author is doing exactly what he accuses others of - using the issue to score political points and to further divide people into them & us.

Fortunately, the whole article is poorly executed.

Excellent points.

She's being derided on her poor perfomance in response to the floods by a lot more people than "her upper class critics."

It's ironic as well to overlook just how upper class she is herself.

His continuing to attempt to drive a further wedege in this so-called class war is certainly divisive.

That is what he is being paid to do.

[jayboy]

[quote name='scorecard' timestamp='1319604537' post='4795881'

Have a look at Pavin being interviewed on Channel News Asia (Singapore based) numerous times during the serious problems last year. He is a serious thaksin supported, it comes through again and again in these interviews.

Oh, you have provided another reference your earlier one having demolished your stated position rather than supported it.

Do you have a link to the Channel News Asia interviews so we can judge for ourselves?

[whybother]

<snip>

about the article, obviously he is biased... is that overriding the points he makes? you could argue that for some but not all.. does that then automatically make any point invalid? hell no

<snip>

"Such a stupid bitch, she is!

As dim as a buffalo! She's a bimbo, a brainless Barbie doll. The first female prime minister - who has brought all this bad luck upon the country!

This is what Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is now called and labelled by her upper-class critics."

===> Pointless. And biased. She is being labelled by all her critics. What's the point of mentioning her "upper-class critics".

Much of Thailand has for some time been submerged under floodwaters. Bangkok itself is bracing for raging floods. Soon, the capital could be turned into a giant swimming pool. At the same time, Yingluck is about to drown in the political floods. This is no longer just an issue of natural disaster. It has become a ferocious political game.

===> Valid point. A game with two (or more) teams.

The discourse of "stupidity" is being used prevalently and discursively. Yingluck has been made to represent the face of stupidity. The objective is clear - to discredit her and belittle her endeavours to find solutions to the problem.

In employing this discourse to assess Yingluck's performance, many seem to assume that Thai politics is the realm of the "intelligent". But if it is so, then why did past leaders also fail to solve the relentless problem of annual floods once and for all?

===> Usual issue. Who is blaming her for not solving the annual floods?

If Yingluck is to be judged, then perhaps the word "weak" would be better used to measure her leadership qualities. It is true that Yingluck has responded to the floods too slowly. While she works tirelessly to display her commitment, she fails to produce an integrated approach to ameliorate the grave situation. But it is very convenient, in times of crisis, to condemn others. All fingers are thus pointing at Yingluck's lack of crisis management skills.

===> He got this 110% right.

But would it be fair to put all the blame on Yingluck? Should she alone be held responsible for the overpowering floods? Why was the Royal Irrigation Department keeping huge reserves of water in key dams at the beginning of the monsoon season and refused to release it despite the prolonged and massive rainfall we have seen during this monsoon season? Why did previous governments, which also experienced threatening floods, not put in place an effective flood management system?

===> Once again. No one is blaming her for the floods, just the management and communication.

Rumours, lies and false statements regarding the flood situation have been found on social networking sites. A picture of Yingluck, taken before the July election, which shows her taking a photo from her hand-phone on a helicopter, has been circulated on Facebook, with captions such as: "The nation is in crisis but this bitch is having a good time." Another picture of a Yingluck lookalike partying and drinking whisky from a bottle was also shared in cyberspace.

News of His Majesty the King mentioning that if the floods approach Bangkok, then let the water pass and do not block the Chitralada Palace, was found to be bogus. A photo of Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, taken in 2010, offering bags of commodities, was also intentionally released to mislead some Thais.

===> That's nearly as bad as doctored audio and video.

Could this be a part of a coordinated attack against Yingluck with the aim of destroying confidence in the government?

===> Tinfoil hat time. Coordinated?

Certainly, the opposition Democrat Party has been busy contesting the legitimacy of the Yingluck regime. Its leader, former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, absurdly suggested the declaration of an emergency decree to fight the floods. Through this, the military would be granted full authority to operate in almost any way it likes - a decision that will not be accepted by the current government. Yet, Abhisit did not elaborate on whether the military could handle the problem better than the Yingluck government.

Abhisit has also worked closely with MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra, the Bangkok governor, to compete, not cooperate, with the government. While many brand Yingluck as stupid, Sukhumbhand showed his superstitious faith in a Khmer ritual of "chasing water" in his search for a solution to the threat of floods in the city. He was intensely protective about his turf. At one point he declared, "Listen to me and only me. I will tell you when to evacuate."

===> Biased. What have the Democrats said about the "legitimacy of the Yingluck regime" during this time? They have criticized her management, but legitimacy? Why is suggesting declaring an SOE absurd? If it gets the flood and relief efforts coordinated and managed properly, then it's a good thing. If Yingluck thinks she can deal without it, then fine. It doesn't make the suggestion absurd. Abhisit has been working with both Yingluck and Sukhumband. Not competing. Sukhumband has been dealing with only Bangkok, because that's his jurisdiction. He said "Listen to me and only me" because there were confusing messages coming from the government.

Meanwhile, footage of the military going into affected areas to aid flood victims is impressive. But the military, like the Bangkok governor, has functioned almost independently from the government. There is clearly a sense of competition between the government and its rivals. Some of the fiercest critics of the government have called for Yingluck to resign. Yingluck's supporters interpret such competition and the pressure to remove her from power as part of a plot to stage a "water coup".

===> The Bangkok governor had been working independently of the government, because the government weren't involving him. If the military have been working independently of the government, that says more about the government's management than it does about the military. People have called for Yingluck to resign because she doesn't know what she's doing and she's not putting people in place that do. The Samut Prakarn governor was removed for exactly that reason.

This competition, even during the height of the crisis, unveils a reality in Thailand: this is a deeply fragmented society in which political ideologies have overshadowed public responsibility and the urgency for national survival. It is no longer a country where its members are willing to forge ahead and leave their differences behind. Eliminating political adversaries, at the expense of a national catastrophe, is seemingly acceptable today.

===> Which side is he criticising here?

The last crusade to save the capital from the floods also reflects a self-interested mentality among Bangkok residents. Bangkok, once again, is a symbol of contentious politics. Other provinces have long suffered from floodwaters that do not seem to go away. It is a case of a great disparity between the people residing in the rural and urban areas.

For now, those who are complaining the most, the loudest, are the Bangkok residents, who have over the past two months been so fortunate to have been kept dry. Yingluck has fallen into the trap of political disparity: she recognises the absolute necessity to rescue Bangkok to please her Bangkok critics, but earlier acted so slowly to prevent surrounding provinces from being inundated.

===> The big question is, why did she act so slowly to prevent the surrounding provinces from being inundated? Saving Bangkok is not just about pleasing her Bangkok critics. It's about saving the Thai economy. If Bangkok is badly flooded, the people affected in Thailand will be tripled (or more). It is an economic necessity to save Bangkok. That's why Sukhumband didn't want to let it flood, and why Yingluck hasn't changed that stance.

[glanger]

I agree.Pavin's arguments are persuasive

Pavin is on the payroll and you of all people should know that.

Perhaps his ouvre gives a clue:

"External link"

hahahaha

wow.

With his descriptions of Thaksin in his book, he loses a lot of credibility, but it puts today's article in perspective.

He played him so much up then and now he's playing up his sister.

[serenitynow]

Have a look at Pavin being interviewed on Channel News Asia (Singapore based) numerous times during the serious problems last year. He is a serious thaksin supported, it comes through again and again in these interviews.

Oh, you have provided another reference your earlier one having demolished your stated position rather than supported it.

Do you have a link to the Channel News Asia interviews so we can judge for ourselves?

He and Thaksin have some views they share which we can't talk about as I'm sure you're well aware.

[animatic]

She has my sympathy. There is nothing that can be done to stop the deluge that is befalling the country. Whatever could have been done, would never be done by politicians. Politicians simply lack the expertise and will to handle a natural disaster.

The true test will be the aftermath of the current disaster.

She is a lot stronger than I thought she was. The fact that she has continued to hang in there during these extremely stressful times is amazing.

Amazing??? What was the alternative?

And, don't forget as a long-time "clone" she doesn't think or feel much -so "hanging in" is easy - she will hang in until redeployed from afar.

Actually her government will be judged by the people at the next election in about 3 and half years time unless she decides to call an earlier one

"unless she decides to call an earlier one"

"There's the rub" considering only ONE government has lasted 4 years,

and we know much more these days about what went on DURING those 4 years,

the likelihood of this one lasting 3.5 years is pretty marginal at best.

And when the 111 are out and screaming for a pice of the pie, the ONLY thing holding back a snap election will be the memories of this flood in the populace.

[glanger]

Have a look at Pavin being interviewed on Channel News Asia (Singapore based) numerous times during the serious problems last year. He is a serious thaksin supported, it comes through again and again in these interviews.

I watch Channel News Asia quite regularly and yes, he voiced quite a biased and slanted to Thaksin views.

[hammered]

"unless she decides to call an earlier one"

"There's the rub" considering only ONE government has lasted 4 years,

and we know much more these days about what went on DURING those 4 years,

the likelihood of this one lasting 3.5 years is pretty marginal at best.

And when the 111 are out and screaming for a pice of the pie, the ONLY thing holding back a snap election will be the memories of this flood in the populace.

True but we dont know how that will play out yet and the reconstruction period may well be more important on that front and a lot of the upcountry flood anger is directed at "Bangkok" for not opening the gates, so whether anger will see any real shift is moot. Governments the world over try to call an election at a time good for them. Im sure Yingluck (ably advised by Thaksin) will do the same, and the 111 or however remain alive, interested in national politics and not in Newin's camp want to be in power too when elected.

In honesty I think her extreme opponents would rather some other form of intervention or accident than to risk an election even after the floods.

[Who, me ?]

The Democrats have now admitted that former PM Abhisit flew off to the Maldives, throwing in the lie that it was a 'diplomatic visit' despite no record of it from official Maldive sources.

Hey, you are back? Well, you could have saved us your red sh*t propaganda again

[glanger]

her ability to poorly mismanage a crisis is only matched by the fervent support she receives from her supporters who can see no wrong.

I don't blame her for the flooding, which was inevitable. I do blame her for deciding to run things and then doing a terrible job; as a private sector CEO I would have expected her, a person with all this private sector experience which we were told is why she will be such a great leader like her brother, to do a better job than me.

So far....I honestly believe I would have done a better job.

As for pointing things out:

- army know how to distribute aid a lot better than PT MPs

- misinformation, media censorship and control has been bordering on ludacris (the rapper, he doesn't like it)

- NGOs are finding FROC difficult to work with

- so far the Democrats have been decidedly helpful in many respects; they would work with Yingluck, but certain other factions in PT refuse to allow it to happen - the reality is the problem is bigger than any political entity; yet there is no mention in the article of Jatuporn's inane ramblings nor the personally witnessed attempts of PT personalities to leverage this into PR for themselves

- PT's focus has been on this harebrained boat scheme which defies physics; in the 4 weeks prior to today, what other serious effort have you seen other than people flying around taking photos?

For all his flaws, the Bangkok Governor has been mostly helpful in all this, and has worked with FROC and the government where possible; however it is dam_n hard to work with someone who is so hopeless in knowing what to do.

This crisis began (for me) in late July/early August with aid distribution and supporting a few NGOs; at that time it seemed that if more water was not drained from the central plains, that there was going to be a submarine style approach to Bangkok.

The crisis that began 4 weeks ago when the crisis was now inevitable is not the crisis that we will flood. It is the mismanagement of it that hurts.

Truth is, no matter how you look at it, the government is doing a poor job. I believe Thaksin, Abhisit, Samak; any of them would have done a better job than this.

At least with Thaksin, we would now be hearing only 1m people affected. Well ok, probably Samak would have been just as hopeless.

Very good post that highlights a number of her shortcomings during all of this.

Your focus on those things that she did have control over is noteworthy.

I noticed you left out Somchai in your list of who could have done a better job.

Have to agree with that

He'd be crawling over flood walls now the same as he did at Parliament when PM.

[scorecard]

I have no problem with Abhisit visiting the Maldives. One less politician is not a loss, really. He is a former PM and he's been through his own trial by fire. I don't think he has to justify his visit to anyone. Had the government asked him to cancel his visit because he was desperately needed, I am sure he would have.

By the way, the Maldives isn't one of the places I'd head to if I was fearful of floods.

of course, you're entitled to you're opinion.

i'll just say, when you're an active politician (and a main party leader at that)..... you don't go on holiday during a national crisis, for obvious reasons.

it's in 'politics 101'

Did he go on 'holiday'? I read different.

[YellowFeverCAD]

What a load of nonsense.

You can see where the author is coming from with the divisive "This is what Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is now called and labelled by her upper-class critics."

This author is doing exactly what he accuses others of - using the issue to score political points and to further divide people into them & us.

Fortunately, the whole article is poorly executed.

Exactly... any other time and I mean ANY other time a Nation article is posted all the usual red shirt apologists are in here in a flash saying what a biased paper it is and nothing written in it can be trusted etc..etc.. but suddenly this Nation piece is ok.. because they can get behind it I guess..

Plus as stated really the mud slinging in this piece of tripe is simply the other side of the same coin... both sides are using this flood as a political tool

[ramrod711]

She has my sympathy. There is nothing that can be done to stop the deluge that is befalling the country. Whatever could have been done, would never be done by politicians. Politicians simply lack the expertise and will to handle a natural disaster.

The true test will be the aftermath of the current disaster.

She is a lot stronger than I thought she was. The fact that she has continued to hang in there during these extremely stressful times is amazing.

i wish her success, i don't like her brother or the red shirts that she has been stuck with but at least she isn't chalerm

[glanger]

I can vouch that the government is using this flood for political gains, if not this won't happens.

Sorry to hear about your aunt and her family's experience.

I hope they can get help.

More than political gains, that situation really puts the "political weapon" of the title into focus.

The government should try to stop doing that against people just because they aren't red shirts.

Edited October 26, 2011 by glanger

[jayboy]

He and Thaksin have some views they share which we can't talk about as I'm sure you're well aware.

Actually I'm not aware and have no idea what you are talking about.

If however this is a backdoor way of suggesting Thaksin is unpatriotic on a particular issue (using the same careful language ) you are barking up the wrong tree.A couple of years ago this suggestion was made quite frequently by his enemies, less so recently because it is so obviously a lie and a stupid one at that because so easily disproven.

[puntmeister]

"Why is declare a SOE absurd. It not only gives the military the ability to do things, it also gives the government more power to do what it needs to do.

"

Prior to reading this article, I hadn't put the pieces together - I actually found it absurd they HADN'T declared a state of emergency. Now I get it.

There is competition between the government (lead by Yingluck/red shirts) and the military (by and large yellow shirts, Abhisit types).

There is some irresponsibility on both sides. If the military could be more effective in aiding the flood victims via a SOE, then certainly Yingluck

is to blame for failing to issue it.

However, another piece of the puzzle: The US sent 4 ships to aid, but were rebuffed - apparently, by the Thai military. Why would the Thai military send

the US ships (chock full of helicopters and drinking water production systems) on their way? Pure speculation, but perhaps they want the

situation to get worse, pushing it to the brink, so that an SOE will have to be declared, and they thus gain the control they seek?

Whatever their intentions, it was highly irresponsible for the military to reject such potentially effective assistance from the US Navy.

Furthermor - I concur, Yingluck's management may be subpar, but its not terribly fair to expect much more - its the worst flooding since 1942. And the root

problems stem not from current mismanagement, but failure to adequately prepare for many years. There's been plenty of expert analysis suggesting

the flood problems would get progressively worse - to the point of wiping out Bangkok - yet, they've been dismissed by pretty much all of the governments.

[thaicbr]

He and Thaksin have some views they share which we can't talk about as I'm sure you're well aware.

Actually I'm not aware and have no idea what you are talking about.

If however this is a backdoor way of suggesting Thaksin is unpatriotic on a particular issue (using the same careful language ) you are barking up the wrong tree.A couple of years ago this suggestion was made quite frequently by his enemies, less so recently because it is so obviously a lie and a stupid one at that because so easily disproven.

So easily disproven. Really...How ?

[Gers1873]

Natural disasters are by definition unpredictable and difficult to deal with. Just look at the situation in Turkey.

No leader can stop the torrential deluge but what a strong leader (like Mrs Thatcher) would do is TAKE CHARGE. Unfortunately the PM demonstrates no leadership qualities and comes across like a 'deer caught in a trucks headlights'.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way......

[thaicbr]

Natural disasters are by definition unpredictable and difficult to deal with. Just look at the situation in Turkey.

No leader can stop the torrential deluge but what a strong leader (like Mrs Thatcher) would do is TAKE CHARGE. Unfortunately the PM demonstrates no leadership qualities and comes across like a 'deer caught in a trucks headlights'.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way......

or as she is currently doing collecting chq's on TV

[Langsuan Man]

The problem lies with the "patronage " system in place in Thailand. No matter who is in charge there will be incompetence by those who are appointed to important positions purely for political reasons

In most western countries the political swings are minimized by a strong (and unfortunately sometimes obtuse) professional civil servant class , who are able to keep political interference to a minimum and therefore keep the institutional memory alive

But when you have to give up important ministerial positions to get parliamentary votes any government is going to be ineffectual since the bureaucrats are scared of the new boss and won't / can't stick up for what is the right thing to do

[puntmeister]

Natural disasters are by definition unpredictable and difficult to deal with. Just look at the situation in Turkey.

No leader can stop the torrential deluge but what a strong leader (like Mrs Thatcher) would do is TAKE CHARGE. Unfortunately the PM demonstrates no leadership qualities and comes across like a 'deer caught in a trucks headlights'.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way......

Some more so, some less so (predictable).

Flooding in Thailand, and in Bangkok in particular, is/was fairly predictable. In fact, many scientists have been saying it was inevitable for the flooding situation to get progressively worse.

As with most things, its difficult to predict when something will happen, but, for many things, its relatively easy to predict whether something will happen.

It was easy to predict that heavy floodind would plague Thailand (especially considering there have been heavy floods for many years already - just not as bad as this year). Failing to adequately prepare, failing to design and implement systems to mitigate the inevitable floods, was highly irresponsiible.

For this, we all know who to blame: Not the Red Shirts, not the Yellow Shirts, but pretty much ALL Thais, with their 'Mai Ben Rai' attitude, disdain for complex thought, and resulting failure to think in a big-picture, long-term way.

[puntmeister]

The problem lies with the "patronage " system in place in Thailand. No matter who is in charge there will be incompetence by those who are appointed to important positions purely for political reasons

In most western countries the political swings are minimized by a strong (and unfortunately sometimes obtuse) professional civil servant class , who are able to keep political interference to a minimum and therefore keep the institutional memory alive

But when you have to give up important ministerial positions to get parliamentary votes any government is going to be ineffectual since the bureaucrats are scared of the new boss and won't / can't stick up for what is the right thing to do

Solid analysis of the nuances of how governments work. I lived/worked in Washington DC for a long time. You are absolutely right - the political appointees (rolling in and out every 4 to 8 years) are nearly worthless. Its the non-partisan civil servants that keep the machine running. In the US, the percent of the governing agences that are run by political appointees, versus civil servants, is small enough to not seriously affect their effectiveness. To be honest, I don't know what the ratio/dynamic is like in Thailand - but I wouldn't be surprised that you are correct.