Ex-Deputy PM Suthep Grilled Over Thai Protests Deaths

[PaulBax]

Well said AleG, If you were actually here in Thailand when this happened and saw it live on cable T.V I have to add on the red channel, then the Thai army were very patient and tolerated unruley crowds of thousands of people screaming insults at them on load speakers. Marching in their thousands to an army base where Abbhasit was being protected demanding he quit or get out as they put it. The red leaders wanted the army to use force so the government would collaspe due to international condemnation. They marched to the the then PM house, they performed black magic ceromonies at government house, some red shirts even grabbed loaded machine guns off soldiers guarding MP during a house session. So someone had to stop this law and order was at stake. There was the risk of this turning into mass civil unrest. Some people died, no one wants this, but the red shirts just would not stop, turning up the heat every day.

The army should have never been involved at any time! That is the real issue here!

[tukkytuktuk]

Theres a state of emergency a curfew has been enforced. Would this not be the armys job and not the police?

[AleG]

Well said AleG, If you were actually here in Thailand when this happened and saw it live on cable T.V I have to add on the red channel, then the Thai army were very patient and tolerated unruley crowds of thousands of people screaming insults at them on load speakers. Marching in their thousands to an army base where Abbhasit was being protected demanding he quit or get out as they put it. The red leaders wanted the army to use force so the government would collaspe due to international condemnation. They marched to the the then PM house, they performed black magic ceromonies at government house, some red shirts even grabbed loaded machine guns off soldiers guarding MP during a house session. So someone had to stop this law and order was at stake. There was the risk of this turning into mass civil unrest. Some people died, no one wants this, but the red shirts just would not stop, turning up the heat every day.

The army should have never been involved at any time! That is the real issue here!

Indeed, it shouldn't had been necessary to use the army, but the police, once more, proved to be completely useless at keeping law and order if not downright complicit with the Red Shirts.

Of course pushing things until the army was involved was the Red Shirt's masterminds plan all along, they needed people killed and they needed to pin them in the army, the government and the "elites".

Their actions were entirely consistent with that objective, the previous year things didn't go entirely according to plan, so in 2010 instead of waiting for things to self-ignite they unleashed the "Black Shirts" to ensure the necessary level of violence and confrontation would be achieved. Nobody should have died at the Democracy monument that night if an armed militia wouldn't had opened fire on the army lines, and from then on it all went downhill.

[hellodolly]

The government, any government, has the duty to act reasonably, even when others don't. It is unreasonable for government troops to fire into crowds of protesters even when some of those protesters are attacking them. That's just the way it's supposed to work. There is a way for the government to handle such situations without resorting to unrestrained violence. Hundreds of people shot and killed by government troops is not a reasonable response, even when some of the protesters themselves are shooting.

Unless, of course, you are in favor of government by violent and despotic methods. It is the duty of the government to set the standard of reasonableness in such situations, especially when others aren't. Otherwise, you get the situation Thailand has now, which is: trying to find justification for shooting lots on innocent protesters. Because the government acted unreasonably, it will always be wrong to try to justify its actions because of actions by some of the protesters. It can't be done, not completely...not even close.

Hate to put the "cabash" on your street justice approach to public security/safety. But, you arrest people, the guilty people, for the crimes you mention. You don't fire into crowds of protesters indiscriminately. Especially so if it's government troops doing the shooting. Now do you get it?

What do you do when protesters are shooting back at you ... or lobbing grenades?

I don't think you do get it.

whybother

You hit the nail on the head he is clueless.

[whybother]

The government, any government, has the duty to act reasonably, even when others don't. It is unreasonable for government troops to fire into crowds of protesters even when some of those protesters are attacking them. That's just the way it's supposed to work. There is a way for the government to handle such situations without resorting to unrestrained violence. Hundreds of people shot and killed by government troops is not a reasonable response, even when some of the protesters themselves are shooting.

Unless, of course, you are in favor of government by violent and despotic methods. It is the duty of the government to set the standard of reasonableness in such situations, especially when others aren't. Otherwise, you get the situation Thailand has now, which is: trying to find justification for shooting lots on innocent protesters. Because the government acted unreasonably, it will always be wrong to try to justify its actions because of actions by some of the protesters. It can't be done, not completely...not even close.

Any other country would respond to grenades and an armed militia with exactly the same force. A lot of western countries have a police force that are armed as well as the Thai army was in this situation.

People who stand around and support an armed militia are NOT peaceful protesters.

[localsocalman]

I don't understand why the government from that time is being indicted...they were merely quelling a group of terrorist protesters who openly were threatening to fire bomb Bangkok, derail the skytrain, destroy all manner of properties, and who invaded a hospital with intent to harm! and no, I don't have all the evidence from back then to back up this post, but I certainly did see it in the news, heard it from Arisman and his lot, and saw it played out on the TV.

A couple of things

1 When they get Thaksin back are they going to grill him?

2 Are they saying that the actions of the red shirts were OK?

3 That the government should have ignored them and let them continue to hold down town Bangkok as a hostage burn it down or what ever they felt like doing it was OK to invade hospitals?

Exactly!!!! Thaksin (and the "red shirt" leaders) are MORE responsible than ANYONE ELSE for the deaths as he encouraged them to defy the government purely to serve HIS interests and the "red shirt" leaders should have accepted Abhisits very reasonable offer of an olive branch for peace in exchange for an early election. After first agreeing to this offer they changed their minds and tried to make more capital from the turmoil and in doing so brought the situation to an ugly end with multiple deaths occurring as a consequence!!!!

All the Democrat government were attempting to was bring this unsatisfactory "barricading" of Bangkok to an end and resolve everything by peaceful means but the opposition had other ideas and the rest, as they say, is history!!!.

Exactly! Thaksin fomenting the terrorism by his weekly/daily addresses. Thaksin and the PTP leaders are directly responsible for the fires, terror and deaths. The government did everything possible to maintain peace and order and fairly negotiated. The guilty ones know who they are as does PM Yingluck

[animatic]

I don't understand why the government from that time is being indicted...they were merely quelling a group of terrorist protesters who openly were threatening to fire bomb Bangkok, derail the skytrain, destroy all manner of properties, and who invaded a hospital with intent to harm! and no, I don't have all the evidence from back then to back up this post, but I certainly did see it in the news, heard it from Arisman and his lot, and saw it played out on the TV.

Because those alleged terrorist are now IN the government as MP's and committee members. Not to mention the smidgin of pure revenge they want to take. Revenge on an enemy is face made.

If they can screw up Abhisit and Suthep for anything, they will, because they don't want them as viable replacement government members ever again. They were not easy to remove before and they want them permanently sidetracked or ruined if possible.

Edited December 11, 2011 by animatic

[animatic]

The government, any government, has the duty to act reasonably, even when others don't. It is unreasonable for government troops to fire into crowds of protesters even when some of those protesters are attacking them. That's just the way it's supposed to work. There is a way for the government to handle such situations without resorting to unrestrained violence. Hundreds of people shot and killed by government troops is not a reasonable response, even when some of the protesters themselves are shooting.

Unless, of course, you are in favor of government by violent and despotic methods. It is the duty of the government to set the standard of reasonableness in such situations, especially when others aren't. Otherwise, you get the situation Thailand has now, which is: trying to find justification for shooting lots on innocent protesters. Because the government acted unreasonably, it will always be wrong to try to justify its actions because of actions by some of the protesters. It can't be done, not completely...not even close.

Hate to put the "cabash" on your street justice approach to public security/safety. But, you arrest people, the guilty people, for the crimes you mention. You don't fire into crowds of protesters indiscriminately. Especially so if it's government troops doing the shooting. Now do you get it?

What do you do when protesters are shooting back at you ... or lobbing grenades?

I don't think you do get it.

All 'policing forces' are typically given alternate contingency orders to 'use the minimal force needed to get the job done', once ordered to get the job done. But 'force as needed' if things escalate on the opposing side.

After the April debacle they had ever reason to assume they needed to be prepared to use deadly force 'if necessary' because it was being used against them. Not disproportionate force, but just enough to end the stalemate.

The obvious aim of the red riot was to FORCE the use of FORCE, as a political bargaining chip to remove Abhisit, Suthep and the Dems from the control of the country, and permanently as political rivals, while reinstalling Thaksin eventually as their leader / controller.

This is just more of the same game plan to sideline the Dems as a force against them. As was noted in a recent article, this is a " Hostile take over of Thailand, by business interests"

Edited December 11, 2011 by animatic

[yellow1red1]

Thaksin is a rookie and needs to take a chapter from the Suthep play book.

Suthep, in two years in office, more than doubled his net worth from 39 million to 95 million.

Let us know when it reaches into the hundreds of billions, like the "rookie."

or even into the hundreds of millions like many of those in the current Cabinet.

good to see opposing thinkers agreeing that they are ALL crooks. @ unamin,,, Suthep's exploits go back a lot furter than 2 yers. his corruption land scandal brought down the only, and I mean ONLY, 1/2 decent, and I mean 1/2 rotten PM Thailand ever had.anyway yes Thaksin's a crook, yes Suthep is a crook,,, name 1 of them that isn't, try try try

[rubl]

Thaksin is a rookie and needs to take a chapter from the Suthep play book.

Suthep, in two years in office, more than doubled his net worth from 39 million to 95 million.

Let us know when it reaches into the hundreds of billions, like the "rookie."

or even into the hundreds of millions like many of those in the current Cabinet.

good to see opposing thinkers agreeing that they are ALL crooks. @ unamin,,, Suthep's exploits go back a lot furter than 2 yers. his corruption land scandal brought down the only, and I mean ONLY, 1/2 decent, and I mean 1/2 rotten PM Thailand ever had.anyway yes Thaksin's a crook, yes Suthep is a crook,,, name 1 of them that isn't, try try try

Assuming we're only talking politicians here, may I mention k. Chuan Leekpai who probably is in a league of/on his own