Thailand's Thaksin Prepares For War

[CalgaryII]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

Edited February 19, 2012 by CalgaryII

[Skywalker69]

Thaksin is pathologically set on taking full control partly because that was his original aim before being deposed, after his term expired, but also because of the revenge motive. No revenge is complete unless you take MORE than they took from you. He sees them as having taken what he hadn't yet gotten control of.

So he has a war room to track coup makers. This is just claptrap to keep pushing the 'eminent coup button' in his Red Followers. Preaching to the choir. Things have slowed to a crawl for Thaksins personal plans, the Red Troupes are getting restless, and he needs to keep feeding them red meat to make them stay on point till his next move. It also explains the Amsterdam-lead online Perception Management moves we can see lately.

Clearly they are moving to make a bundle on Water Retention and Spillway purchases through their friends, shills and proxies, hence the meeting with real-estate moguls, in secret last week. But before this cash cow of kick-backs can be spread around, he must still keep his street branch placated, and angry. Letting them become complacent isn't an option. Letting them imagine they will be the front line defense against a coup, makes them imagine they are empowered and important.

Let us correct a couple things here without engaging indoctrinated Thaksin haters:

• The coup was a coup against an elected administration. Expiry dates of that Administration was a matter for the next election.
  
• There definitely are those who track the coup-ists. Been there, done that....never again!
  
• To diminish the politicization of a huge swath of the electorate by suggesting their motives are not political, and only linked to their associations is offensive to them to say the least. Arrogantly stated by Oppositional elements who think they are the only ones in a political context, and all others outside of it, antagonize their opposite. Arrogance that places them outside the political electoral sphere.
  
• Being empowered and important is not an illusion. Last July's election demonstrated that very clearly.
  
• To denigrate genuine efforts at solving water and spillway solutions, have the same feel to it as when the Opposition tried to use the disaster for their own political purposes, principally being wall-to-wall FROC flogging during the crisis. Now they are turning their attention to demonizing solutions. A little bit like the Tea Party and other Oppositional elements in the USA blocking all Obama initiatives, for fear he may be succesful.
  

So wrong, 1 During coup Thaksin was not even legally Caretaker Premier.

2 Read the link. I posted here before. Thaksin saying "Democracy is not my goal"

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

3 You Thaksinnistas and Red Shirtinistas is in total denial of this fact.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Skywalker69

[473geo]

Probably just aware that efficient crowd control is essential at these affairs, if the inconvenience to the public is to be kept to a minimum.........a liitle foresight that was found wanting with the previous administration

And with every step boundaries of what it appropriate and/or legal are moved or made less effective. If the control center was just set up to more efficiently deal with crowd control and limit the inconvenience to the general public while some (regularly) protest, surely this CC would fall under the Police Force and not be set up by

"Newly appointed Thai Minister of Defense Air Chief Marshal Sukampon Suwannathat is quietly planning to activate a new "war room", or secretive unofficial command center, to direct mass pro-government "red-shirt" demonstrations planned for the coming months, according to senior Thai military sources familiar with the situation. (from OP)"

You have an issue with utilising experience?

Lots of posters have told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010 would never, ever happen or even be allowed in decent democracies. Special trained units of the police force, that's the way to go.

Are you suggesting that having this CC set up by and under the control of the MoD is something you wouldn't have an issue with?

Well we can have effective control at the high level, MOD, if it makes the control effective, supported on the ground by the police and special trained units of the police force........that way we can possibly avoid a repetition of the Army crowd control methods in 2010 and the ongoing aportioning of blame

[whybother]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threaten their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists is quite unique to Thailand.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

Shooting isn't very social, but grenades, they're much more social.

[bigbamboo]

I can't believe my eyes, suggesting Nazy germany and the early history of Russia could be seen as role models, or at least could be seen as valid / desirable steps in the growth of democracy.

Another troll at work.

Not sure if Geo has been on the Leo or he's just on a wind up! I suspect it's probably both especially since modern day Russia and Germany could hardly be further away from what Lenin and Hitler had in mind.

My comment was not an advocation of any particular historical path, merely that many countries have and will make their own journey, and will continue to do so........if allowed

Indeed the fact that Germany and Russia have evolved into something that "could hardly be further away from what Lenin and Hitler had in mind" underlines my point

I guess you missed that in your enthusiasm to somehow link me to Lenin and Hitler.......a poor attempt at criticism by association

So why use these two failed regimes to support your argument?

[OZEMADE]

I don’t know what all the hype and excitement is all about, it's just the media sensationalising about a room that has always been there?

It’s got nothing to do with Yingluck or her brother Thaksin; the info came from someone, according to senior Thai military sources, with nothing better to do with his time.

Nothing exciting to write about. The headline is all hype and crap.

Thailand's Thaksin prepares for war. A headline that is very misleading.

But obviously, enough to get the TVF members fighting amongst themselves. Mission accomplished.

Well, "according to senior Thai military sources" it does have something to do with Thaksin:

The war room, created at the direction of fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra

It doesn't have anything to do with Yingluck, as she's being kept in the dark ... as usual. She is only PM after all.

Both of your quotes are still from a Senior Thai Military source. Who is the mysterious Thai Military source spreading trivial rubbish.

[rubl]

Well we can have effective control at the high level, MOD, if it makes the control effective, supported on the ground by the police and special trained units of the police force........that way we can possibly avoid a repetition of the Army crowd control methods in 2010 and the ongoing aportioning of blame

2008-10-07

"Thai police fire teargas to disperse demonstrators: 118 injured"

http://www.chinapost...Thai-police.htm

2008-10-07

"One protester lost a foot and another had his leg severed by exploding gas canisters, prompting Deputy Prime Minister {General] Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to take responsibility and quit. He said he had asked police to exercise restraint, according to Reuters."

http://www.pbs.org/n...land_10-07.html

Anyway we cannot have MoD in control. This type of control falls under the Ministry of Interior and with the current government Dept. PM Chalerm with his police background and general integrity should be the man in charge. That should be clear and obvious [sic]

Edited February 19, 2012 by rubl

[473geo]

I can't believe my eyes, suggesting Nazy germany and the early history of Russia could be seen as role models, or at least could be seen as valid / desirable steps in the growth of democracy.

Another troll at work.

Not sure if Geo has been on the Leo or he's just on a wind up! I suspect it's probably both especially since modern day Russia and Germany could hardly be further away from what Lenin and Hitler had in mind.

My comment was not an advocation of any particular historical path, merely that many countries have and will make their own journey, and will continue to do so........if allowed

Indeed the fact that Germany and Russia have evolved into something that "could hardly be further away from what Lenin and Hitler had in mind" underlines my point

I guess you missed that in your enthusiasm to somehow link me to Lenin and Hitler.......a poor attempt at criticism by association

So why use these two failed regimes to support your argument?

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

[whybother]

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

I don't know how you can justify using "where they are now" as a reason for Thailand to go through what they did to get there.

[pastitche]

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

I don't know how you can justify using "where they are now" as a reason for Thailand to go through what they did to get there.

I don't believe that he did suggest that; why do you? Edited February 19, 2012 by pastitche

[Orac]

Thaksin is pathologically set on taking full control partly because that was his original aim before being deposed, after his term expired, but also because of the revenge motive. No revenge is complete unless you take MORE than they took from you. He sees them as having taken what he hadn't yet gotten control of.

So he has a war room to track coup makers. This is just claptrap to keep pushing the 'eminent coup button' in his Red Followers. Preaching to the choir. Things have slowed to a crawl for Thaksins personal plans, the Red Troupes are getting restless, and he needs to keep feeding them red meat to make them stay on point till his next move. It also explains the Amsterdam-lead online Perception Management moves we can see lately.

Clearly they are moving to make a bundle on Water Retention and Spillway purchases through their friends, shills and proxies, hence the meeting with real-estate moguls, in secret last week. But before this cash cow of kick-backs can be spread around, he must still keep his street branch placated, and angry. Letting them become complacent isn't an option. Letting them imagine they will be the front line defense against a coup, makes them imagine they are empowered and important.

Let us correct a couple things here without engaging indoctrinated Thaksin haters:

• The coup was a coup against an elected administration. Expiry dates of that Administration was a matter for the next election.
  
• There definitely are those who track the coup-ists. Been there, done that....never again!
  
• To diminish the politicization of a huge swath of the electorate by suggesting their motives are not political, and only linked to their associations is offensive to them to say the least. Arrogantly stated by Oppositional elements who think they are the only ones in a political context, and all others outside of it, antagonize their opposite. Arrogance that places them outside the political electoral sphere.
  
• Being empowered and important is not an illusion. Last July's election demonstrated that very clearly.
  
• To denigrate genuine efforts at solving water and spillway solutions, have the same feel to it as when the Opposition tried to use the disaster for their own political purposes, principally being wall-to-wall FROC flogging during the crisis. Now they are turning their attention to demonizing solutions. A little bit like the Tea Party and other Oppositional elements in the USA blocking all Obama initiatives, for fear he may be succesful.
  

So wrong, 1 During coup Thaksin was not even legally Caretaker Premier.

2 Read the link. I posted here before. Thaksin saying "Democracy is not my goal"

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

3 You Thaksinnistas and Red Shirtinistas is in total denial of this fact.

Not sure of the importance of the legality of Thaksins position at the time - there were quite a few constitutional issues that arose out of the failed election from earlier in the year. If the inference is that he was refusing to give up power and had to be ousted then that doesn't gel with the fact that a Royal Decree came into effect on 24th August setting an election date of 15th October.

[473geo]

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

I don't know how you can justify using "where they are now" as a reason for Thailand to go through what they did to get there.

really.......and where in this thread have I advocated that Thailand must exactly follow the path of Russian and Germany.........jesus you guys are real desperate........countries morph into what they need to be eventually......as I said previously but obviously missed by many of you.....let Thailand progress by experience of success and failure.......as have many other countries........and if you check your history books you will find that on occasion, but almost without exception that journey is very rocky at times

[whybother]

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

I don't know how you can justify using "where they are now" as a reason for Thailand to go through what they did to get there.

I don't believe that he did suggest that; why do you?

Here's why:

...

Indeed the fact that Germany and Russia have evolved into something that "could hardly be further away from what Lenin and Hitler had in mind" underlines my point

...

[whybother]

Not sure of the importance of the legality of Thaksins position at the time - there were quite a few constitutional issues that arose out of the failed election from earlier in the year. If the inference is that he was refusing to give up power and had to be ousted then that doesn't gel with the fact that a Royal Decree came into effect on 24th August setting an election date of 15th October.

The problem being that there was no election commission at that stage, so it was going to be quite difficult to organise an election in 7 weeks.

[473geo]

Well we can have effective control at the high level, MOD, if it makes the control effective, supported on the ground by the police and special trained units of the police force........that way we can possibly avoid a repetition of the Army crowd control methods in 2010 and the ongoing aportioning of blame

2008-10-07

"Thai police fire teargas to disperse demonstrators: 118 injured"

http://www.chinapost...Thai-police.htm

2008-10-07

"One protester lost a foot and another had his leg severed by exploding gas canisters, prompting Deputy Prime Minister {General] Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to take responsibility and quit. He said he had asked police to exercise restraint, according to Reuters."

http://www.pbs.org/n...land_10-07.html

Anyway we cannot have MoD in control. This type of control falls under the Ministry of Interior and with the current government Dept. PM Chalerm with his police background and general integrity should be the man in charge. That should be clear and obvious [sic]

Do you think Thailand is incapable of learning from previous mistakes......this is the only reason I can think for bringing up this old confrontation.....

It is time to encourage team work perhaps Chalerm will be grateful for any assistance provided........but I guess you are empowered to speak for him and the government......so I stand corrected

Edited February 19, 2012 by 473geo

[Orac]

Not sure of the importance of the legality of Thaksins position at the time - there were quite a few constitutional issues that arose out of the failed election from earlier in the year. If the inference is that he was refusing to give up power and had to be ousted then that doesn't gel with the fact that a Royal Decree came into effect on 24th August setting an election date of 15th October.

The problem being that there was no election commission at that stage, so it was going to be quite difficult to organise an election in 7 weeks.

You are right of course and it would have been difficult - the Senate Committee had a short list on 15th August and was then given 20 days to pick them. It was clearly a problem that the previous commission had collectively fallen on their swords having written their resignation letters in prison, however, the principal was there to have elections and it wasn't Thaksin who wanted to delay them.

[blows]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

From the OP ["red-shirt" demonstrations planned for the coming months]

[waza]

I wouldn't put much weight on the "facts" on that article, but a large Red Shirt mass rally would be the perfect (coincidentally of course!) time for Thaksin to simply drop by at Suvharnabumi. There would be a conveniently large group of fanatics at hand to stand behind him and justice. Justice of course highly unlikely to come from the government as I don't think they'll lift a finger to enforce court rulings against their boss; so that would leave the army to have a go at apprehending Thaksin. There a Ready-Made mob comes very handy, specially if they just happen to be heavily armed, again.

I doubt very much if Thaksin is brave enough to put himself any where near harm, better to do it all from a long way away

Edited February 19, 2012 by waza

[AleG]

I wouldn't put much weight on the "facts" on that article, but a large Red Shirt mass rally would be the perfect (coincidentally of course!) time for Thaksin to simply drop by at Suvharnabumi. There would be a conveniently large group of fanatics at hand to stand behind him and justice. Justice of course highly unlikely to come from the government as I don't think they'll lift a finger to enforce court rulings against their boss; so that would leave the army to have a go at apprehending Thaksin. There a Ready-Made mob comes very handy, specially if they just happen to be heavily armed, again.

I doubt very much if Thaksin is brave enough to put himself any where near harm, better to do it all from a long way away

Not saying it would be likely, but if he would be returning any day soon, that's how I would expect him to pull it off. Lots and lots of human shields and a ready-mob to clear his path.

[theanimaster]

What if we all got this wrong and the Redshirts and Yellowshirts are all the same -- The current government and the Democrats are all in this whole charade? They've definitely got us all fooled.

I mean, you ~DO~ need a cause, right? Brilliant performance!

[longway]

ianf, #37

Do some people have no idea at all about what the red movement represents? Such naievity is astounding! The reds fought for democracy. Really? Do we now have a democratic government in Thailand? I am sorry chaps, this is about anti-democracy and the struggle of one man to become the supreme dictator. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Count me as one of the people who have a very good idea of what the Red Shirt Movement represents.

Given my grizzled no-nonsense perceptiveness, not many who know me, would consider my naiive as ianf would seek to characterize me..

The comments above are strongly indicative that the author has had little, if any, meaningful interaction with the Red Shirts. His take is perfectly aligned with the anti-Red Shirt Opposition agenda. That agenda being one of demonizing these people by reducing their political motivations to a simplified non-political context....focussed on what the author describes above, devoid of political insight.

This is grossly offensive to these people, and is the height of arrogance as represented by the elite, pinnacled by Abhi, who couldn't get elected of his life depended on it.

Without belabouring the point, suffice it to say that this Political Movement came into being as an oppositional movement to a coup. A political motivation if there ever was one. As much as the coup-ists beat on them until the last election, they held true to their goal.

They achieved it last July.

Nothing more, nothing less, and also not very complicated.

You say ....Count me as one of the people who have a very good idea of what the Red Shirt Movement represents. ....

So why don't you enlighten us, and explain why they have never produced any literature whatever which explains the true meaning of democracy, and why none of their leaders, including the paymaster have never given a stand up presentation about this subject, and share just when did the paymaster flip from his oft mentioed ''' I have no interest in democracy / democracy is not important for Thailand ''' backed up by gagging and harrassing the media. Just for a start.

Perhaps you'd like to also enlighten us about what the red shirts are going to do, in some structured way to build pure quality democarcy and also share what their structured approach is to stopping abuse of fair and balanced application of the law.

And yes their is deep inequity in this country, the poor / the rural poor have a tough time and get little respect from their own who have found their way to the feeding trough. They deserve better, so what is their structured strategy to achieve change. You claim to have access to these folks, why not share all of the above, maybe we might all learn something.

Or, is it a secret? Or, is there in fact no substance, meaning that your just a troll?

Waiting.

Conjure up a country that has a perfect Government?

That is what a Red Shirt Government looks like

Meanwhile in the real world you have conjured a government where Chalerm is not only, laughably, a minister responsible for police affairs and constitutional amendments, he is literally a burst of tears away from being the next PM. Bravo .

[longway]

Answer to was his Government legitimate.......No.

Wrong answer.

Elections legitimize a Government.

Parliamentary manueverings resulting in a clear anti-majority result is illegitimate.

Any semblance of legitimacy of such parliamentary manueverings were thoroughly discounted, given its coup underpinnings.

One can understand very quickly why those concerned, are very vigilant with respect to coups, as the headline of this thread suggests.

This is all very easy for me.

I sure wouldn't want to be in the position of defending a coup and all its' political and constitutional aftermath.

You guys are really struggling with that.

"as the headline of this thread suggests."

Remember, the information in this article, if there is an inkling of truth in it, is coming to us via the military. We should naturally ask ourselves why the military would want people to know/believe this. People with different political views will have different answers to that question.

"I sure wouldn't want to be in the position of defending a coup and all its' political and constitutional aftermath."

As you will have noticed, many here do not have a struggle at all with this point. They view a coup as a part of Thai democracy. I do not share that view. Regardless of the tyranny of a given leader, there are constitutional processes to resolve conflicts. Regardless of the difficulty of following constitutional processes, in the end I believe doing so is much better for the development of Thai democracy.

Just a final note for coup proponents : why did the coup occur just 5 weeks prior to an election?

You miss the point, its not about supporting a coup but understand that the reason that coups occur is that the rule of law is not followed by anyone in power.

If a civilian government, no matter how popular, is not subject to the rule of law and takes control of an army not subject to the rule of law, what have you solved? All you have now is the control of both in one set of lawless hands. is this really better?

What is required before anything can progress is ensuring that the rule of law is followed, this is where it becomes very apparent that the reds are not a democracy movement, they are an pro-thaksin and anti-army coalition. They are only interested in mob rule.

[tlansford]

-sniper -

Wrong answer.

Elections legitimize a Government.

Parliamentary manueverings resulting in a clear anti-majority result is illegitimate.

Any semblance of legitimacy of such parliamentary manueverings were thoroughly discounted, given its coup underpinnings.

One can understand very quickly why those concerned, are very vigilant with respect to coups, as the headline of this thread suggests.

This is all very easy for me.

I sure wouldn't want to be in the position of defending a coup and all its' political and constitutional aftermath.

You guys are really struggling with that.

"as the headline of this thread suggests."

Remember, the information in this article, if there is an inkling of truth in it, is coming to us via the military. We should naturally ask ourselves why the military would want people to know/believe this. People with different political views will have different answers to that question.

"I sure wouldn't want to be in the position of defending a coup and all its' political and constitutional aftermath."

As you will have noticed, many here do not have a struggle at all with this point. They view a coup as a part of Thai democracy. I do not share that view. Regardless of the tyranny of a given leader, there are constitutional processes to resolve conflicts. Regardless of the difficulty of following constitutional processes, in the end I believe doing so is much better for the development of Thai democracy.

Just a final note for coup proponents : why did the coup occur just 5 weeks prior to an election?

You miss the point, its not about supporting a coup but understand that the reason that coups occur is that the rule of law is not followed by anyone in power.

If a civilian government, no matter how popular, is not subject to the rule of law and takes control of an army not subject to the rule of law, what have you solved? All you have now is the control of both in one set of lawless hands. is this really better?

What is required before anything can progress is ensuring that the rule of law is followed, this is where it becomes very apparent that the reds are not a democracy movement, they are an pro-thaksin and anti-army coalition. They are only interested in mob rule.

The civilian gov't is subject to the rule of law.

Instead of the rule of law, the army uses tanks.

Certainly there could be a lot less corruption in Thai gov't. But it is necessary to not resort to non-democratic means when solving problems of governance.

[Ijustwannateach]

Haven't bothered to read the no-doubt mind-numbing bickering. At this point, I just hope that if it means a red/yellow conflict-free year, then I hope we have another $@#%^@# flood.

[OzMick]

You will see they were brought into the discussion by Rubl he was making the link with the pro government organised marches..........my response was to state they had evolved to where they are now.....if they have not evolved to where they are now.....I stand corrected......

I don't know how you can justify using "where they are now" as a reason for Thailand to go through what they did to get there.

really.......and where in this thread have I advocated that Thailand must exactly follow the path of Russian and Germany.........jesus you guys are real desperate........countries morph into what they need to be eventually......as I said previously but obviously missed by many of you.....let Thailand progress by experience of success and failure.......as have many other countries........and if you check your history books you will find that on occasion, but almost without exception that journey is very rocky at times

The really rocky bit for both Germany and Russia began with a strong man emerging with his own private militia and overthrowing the government - in Germany, by election.

[OzMick]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

[blows]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Even Hitler knew he needed to get the military on his NAZI party side to take over Germany. It appears that the red shirts and black shirts also had ex members and active members of the military on their side as well. The rule of law means nothing without a police and military enforcer supporting that rule of law. Members of the military swear oaths to defend the country and its laws. Who else is going to stop war lord types with their own thug army from breaking the nations laws and terrorizing citizens? Had the military not sided with the NAZI, Hitler would not have been able to do anything. Same with Thanksin, if he ever gets enough of the RTA on his side, who will stop him and enforce the country's rule of law, instead of the rule of a dictator?

[Orac]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Yet again comparisons to Hitler brought into the equation. The main reason that Hitler was able to gain power was through the bannng of the opposition parties , both the communists by setting fire to Berlin and then pinning the blame on them for it which allowed him to pass the Enabling Act and then the further banning of other political parties. He took the full reigns of power through an act abolishing the presidency on the death of Von Hindenberg.

I think we are a long way from this sort of stuff by Thaksin who actually appears to have the popular support at the ballot box and no need to abolish any parties. I can see why people have a problem with Thaksin and I also think he is bad for the country, however, to question the democratic means he has used to gain power is ridiculous considering the non-democratic means that are constantly used to try to keep him away from it.

[Orac]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Even Hitler knew he needed to get the military on his NAZI party side to take over Germany. It appears that the red shirts and black shirts also had ex members and active members of the military on their side as well. The rule of law means nothing without a police and military enforcer supporting that rule of law. Members of the military swear oaths to defend the country and its laws. Who else is going to stop war lord types with their own thug army from breaking the nations laws and terrorizing citizens? Had the military not sided with the NAZI, Hitler would not have been able to do anything. Same with Thanksin, if he ever gets enough of the RTA on his side, who will stop him and enforce the country's rule of law, instead of the rule of a dictator?

Another ridiculous argument this time instead of defending democracy it is the rule of law that needs to be defended. You can't get any more illegal than a military coup less than a month before scheduled elections and then rewriting the constitution afterwards to exonerate yourself.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Orac

[Reasonableman]

And the current proposed rewrite is designed to do what?

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Even Hitler knew he needed to get the military on his NAZI party side to take over Germany. It appears that the red shirts and black shirts also had ex members and active members of the military on their side as well. The rule of law means nothing without a police and military enforcer supporting that rule of law. Members of the military swear oaths to defend the country and its laws. Who else is going to stop war lord types with their own thug army from breaking the nations laws and terrorizing citizens? Had the military not sided with the NAZI, Hitler would not have been able to do anything. Same with Thanksin, if he ever gets enough of the RTA on his side, who will stop him and enforce the country's rule of law, instead of the rule of a dictator?

Another ridiculous argument this time instead of defending democracy it is the rule of law that needs to be defended. You can't get any more illegal than a military coup less than a month before scheduled elections and then rewriting the constitution afterwards to exonerate yourself.