Domestic Politics Mars Bilateral Ties With The US

[Lite Beer]

EDITORIAL

Domestic politics mars bilateral ties with the US

The Nation July 1, 2012 1:00 am

BANGKOK: -- If Nasa project had been put to Parliament it may have been OK

Some have said that it's easier for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) to go to the moon than Thailand. The issue is how to prevent the sarcasm from becoming well-established reality. Nasa has packed its bag, after a request to use U-tapao airbase for a weather study project triggered a political storm in Thailand. It was a decision greeted differently by people in the divided kingdom. Domestic politics played a big role in the controversy from start to finish, and even the question whether that is good or bad for Thailand will be answered along ideological lines.

What has shot down Nasa's seemingly noble plan? Ask one side of the Thai conflict and they will blame it on sour-grape political saboteurs, those who have to rock the boat on everything the Yingluck government does. Ask the other side and they will cite a "secret" US agenda, an unhappy China and the unwarranted awkward position Thais would find themselves in diplomatically if the Nasa scheme materialised.

The fact that Thai politics dictated the fate of the Nasa plan is undeniable. The truth, however, remains that had the Thai government decided to involve Parliament in the very beginning, the project could have approved in time.

The Nasa scheme came to public attention when Thailand was fixated on "reconciliation" bills and a controversial injunction by the Constitution Court against the charter amendment process. There were windows of opportunity to let Parliament in on the Nasa request to use U-tapao and pass it, using the ruling camp's comfortable command of the House of Representatives. That did not happen, because the government decided that this issue did not concern national security.

It is debatable whether the Nasa issue really concerned national security. It is undisputed that the scheme made China feel uneasy and that the government's unilateral approach was amplifying doubts rather than suppressing them. Involving Parliament from the beginning would not have hurt. That path might have been bumpy or even rocky, but it could have eventually allowed Nasa to land in Thailand.

The issue has generated glimpses of possible shift in diplomatic leverage. Some years ago, there was little need to seriously debate the pros and cons of allowing a US scientific project that might upset Beijing. Today it's different. It's true that Thailand's political turmoil has had a say about the Nasa project, but what initially looked like a smooth passage has become anything but, and that has a lot to do with suspicions about the United States' motives.

Nasa is apparently leaving options open on whether or not it will return to Thailand. But if the Americans want to come back, they will have to prepare for the same set of problems. No matter how long this weather study plan is postponed, the biggest question will remain as to whether this kind of project requires parliamentary approval. The Thai government, meanwhile, has learned its lesson and should know what to do if or when the United States comes back with a request to use U-tapao airbase. After all, "democracy" that the ruling camp proclaims to champion warrants transparency for things like this.

It doesn't matter how much the issue has been politicised. A lot of people say they can't understand the fuss, but the point is that allowing the Thai Parliament to play its role would have made the whole fuss more democratic.

Rumours have begun over how furious the United States has been and how bilateral ties will be affected. Ambassador Kristie Kenney has, however, given an assurance that, disappointed as they are, the Americans still value partnering with Thailand on science, health, the environment, etc, as such cooperation will benefit all. No matter how things evolve regarding the two countries, the U-tapao issue has left a significant imprint on the long relationship. It also confirms the inconvenient truth that diplomacy is something that only looks simple on the surface.

-- The Nation 2012-07-01

[ttelise]

Thailand may end up paying some price then. Export, import, currency, shirt term rates, support packages, gas prices, or something. Yeah, US will deny publically and Thailand will take it up the you know what privately to circumvent larger repercussions. Then again, maybe nothing will happen and we will send Thailand some feed for it's elephants or something.

[animatic]

Some have said that it's easier for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) to go to the moon than Thailand.

Probably not far off the mark...

While NASA is international in it's reach and is partnered with the military in some projects, It is a civilian agency with government funding, and does a great number of non-military projects that historically have had real world trickle-down positive effects from their research and development.

While they are large enough in scope and international interaction to make the State Department argue some of their cases, they primarily are a one to one negotiator for their needs.

Edited July 1, 2012 by animatic

[retarius]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

[ttelise]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

Although US gets intelligence from satellites, drones and etc., why does US need Thailand air base to launch these old hunk if junk outdated "spy planes" to surreptitiously spy on China?

Cannot they accomplish same launching from US airbases in Japan, Phillipines or other locations if China is the target? I just do not understand the logistical or tactical advantage of this Thailand base over other current bases for purposes of spying on China or why we would use outdated very old technology from Thailand when we gave some super high tech stuff for millitary intelligence.

[MikeThaison]

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

Well you should probably stop making predictions. Have you ever heard of a satellite? You ever seen Google maps? Well the US government has cameras on satellites that are 1000X better quality. *FACEPALM* Thinking the US needs planes flying over China (which they weren't) to "spy" on China GO BACK to 1960!

I could understand if the TV conspiracists nuts came out and said, "this could be a symbolic gesture of the US trying to contain the influence of China in Asia." That seams plausiable. But if you really think the US needs 1 airstrip in Thailand to "spy on China" your just loony.

[Reasonableman]

Thank goodness, we've repelled a "Bay of Pork" invasion.

[Lifer]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

What a load of CRAP!

[crobe]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

You answered the first question yourself, the plane is a "converted" spyplane - it was never built to take passengers and any extra space is now taken up by atmospheric sensing equipment

The NASA plan was to ship the equipment by boat on the 1st June - which is where the "already shipped" rumour came from - but with the hold in approval this was not completed.

And to the last question - because of this plane needing a very long runway and the past ties to Thailand (such as the Cobra Gold) the base at U-tapao is the most suitable in the region

As to your other questions it is all politics, but I would also like to know who it was that made the first connection between this campaign and the visa for Thaksin- maybe it was not a politician at all, maybe it was all made up by the newspaper...

[anon467367354]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

[tzthib]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

How do you use a plane to spy on China if you arent flying OVER China? And besides, we have satellites to do this kind of stuff now. Operating a satellite would be much easier and give better intelligence. Furthermore, the US has plenty of bases in Asia, why would they need another that doesnt even border China? Simply put, people who believe this is a spy mission are..well..morons.

This seems to me to be a shift towards China, which is odd since the US is the MUCH larger trading partner. Why are the Thais choosing China at this time, and put almost 1/5 of their economy at risk? It seems like the ones running this show are morons also.

The US should take their trade elsewhere. There is no reason to to waste time here in Thailand, for the Thais have never been grateful for the help they have received from the US. Why should they be expected to be loyal now?

Edited July 1, 2012 by tzthib

[Unkomoncents]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

If the US really wanted to "secretly" spy on China, they've done a horrible, horrible job. Everyone knows about it. Spying implies that the surveillance is only known to those doing the watching. I seriously doubt that America intended to use outdated spy planes to keep an eye on China. There are a thousand more clandestine ways of getting that kind of information nowadays. As other posters have noted, NASA is a civilian agency. While it would be foolish to suggest that the US's (and therefore NASA's) interests are transparent and straightforward, it's just illogical to think that this was the motive in this particular case.

[phl]

Whatever the reasons behind using Utapao, US has been a friend to Thailand and helped out on every single occasion.

Same can not be said about China.

The refusal was simply stupid for too many reasons to list.

If Thai government was really all that worried about "spying" they could have agreed with certain conditions imposed.

There were million and 1 conditions they could have set, instead of just not responding and playing silly monkey games.

Will there be a positive out of this one for Thailand? i doubt it.

China could not care less about Thailand, never did and never will, they will not thank Thailand or back Thailand.

US no doubt will not make public fuss over it, but behind closed doors, Thailand may find itself stuck on certain lists for longer than they wish.

All in all a very silly, immature and not government alike response.

[Sateev]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

Please expound on the "more than enough technology around" to do the specific studies NASA proposed.

Oh, wait, you can't, because you haven't a clue...sorry.

[brianP]

How many Chinese Thai live in Thailand? Now Thai-Thai and Lao-Thai and Burma-Thai are the basic groups making up Thailand along with the Chinese-Thai. How come Chinese-Thai own and control more than these other groups? And why do they treat the others so awful? How come the most distrustful and deceiving of the above groups are, well you can figure it out. When Mandarin and Chinese dialects are the second language,what purpose does this have in Thailand? I think too many are more loyal to their original homeland. Blood is thicker than water, USA doesn't have a chance in these matters, oh that's right China owns most of USA already! Is Thailand the next on the sleeping tigers list???

[phl]

How many Chinese Thai live in Thailand? Now Thai-Thai and Lao-Thai and Burma-Thai are the basic groups making up Thailand along with the Chinese-Thai. How come Chinese-Thai own and control more than these other groups? And why do they treat the others so awful? How come the most distrustful and deceiving of the above groups are, well you can figure it out. When Mandarin and Chinese dialects are the second language,what purpose does this have in Thailand? I think too many are more loyal to their original homeland. Blood is thicker than water, USA doesn't have a chance in these matters, oh that's right China owns most of USA already! Is Thailand the next on the sleeping tigers list???

China owns most of USA? please feel free to provide some evidence to support your assertive statement

[marinediscoking]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

The US military already has a small military property and permanent presence in bangkok called JUSTMAG.

[rakman]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

A DC-8 is a former passenger aircraft. A Gulfstream-V is a business jet. Only the ER-2 (Environmental Research -2) derived from the TR-1/U-2 spy plane, in airframe only. Notice how the ER-2 from NASA is painted white? Even NASA's U-2s were painted white.

The reason for using Thailand's airport is the mission time aloft is much greater using a local airport. Mission instruments in these planes don't leave much room for passengers or observers. Plus, legal liability in the event of an accident is also a reason for no passengers during the flying.

This mission had been planned and permission requested a long time ago. NASA, even though a government agency, doesn't have the authority to ask another country for permission to spend time on a mission. NASA has to ask the State Department to ask the equivalent Thai department to ask the proper authorities to allow the visit. Usually, this takes a lot of time and effort. Time ran out, and the visits by the Admiral and Hillary were attempts to get a decision. Time ran out, mission cancelled. It didn't help that the Thai change in government put a delay or change in decision.

It's a shame that the program was cancelled. Often missions like this bring about better understanding of atmospheric science and relations of academics and the people in general. I'm sure this would have put a few million dollars into the Thai economy as well.

In order for these missions to get good data, they basically fly a path vertically lined up separated by tens of thousands of feet, flying different altitudes to collect data. Its a highly coordinated flying along with synchronizing scientific satellite passes.

Put away the tin foil hats.. Intelligence gathering is last thing on most of NASA's scientists minds.

[who]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

I'll bet that this guy can't find his way to the bathroom without help.

.

Edited July 1, 2012 by metisdead
: Font reset to default forum font; Arial size 14.

[Crushdepth]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

Oh come on. Technology has moved on and the US does *not* need such planes to spy on anyone. Case in point - the NRO just donated two spare spy satellites to NASA that are *better than Hubble*, for scientific use. Presumably, whatever they kept for themselves is even better than that.

Incredible as it may seem, NASA has occasionally been known to conduct scientific research. Tinfoil hats are not required to explain this.

Edited July 1, 2012 by Crushdepth

[Thai at Heart]

Thailand successfully played many powers off against one another 200 years ago. It isas though they think this type of n on committal politics is still relevant today.

There is a name for characters who will sleep with anyone for a short term buck. Pattaya is full of them .

[Thai at Heart]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

The US military already has a small military property and permanent presence in bangkok called JUSTMAG.

Utapao has a permanent presence.

[phl]

Thailand successfully played many powers off against one another 200 years ago. It isas though they think this type of n on committal politics is still relevant today.

There is a name for characters who will sleep with anyone for a short term buck. Pattaya is full of them .

police volunteers?

[DP25]

This seems to me to be a shift towards China, which is odd since the US is the MUCH larger trading partner. Why are the Thais choosing China at this time, and put almost 1/5 of their economy at risk? It seems like the ones running this show are morons also.

That used to be true but not anymore, China is the much larger trading partner now. Total trade with China last year was US$65 billion vs $35 billion with the US. Largest export destination for Thailand now is China, then Japan, then the US. Largest import is Japan, then China and the US is only in 4th place.

[kerryk]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

You do know that the US built U-Tapao and had 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft stationed in Thailand for 10 years not too long ago? And that they left with no problems very politely when asked.

[kerryk]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

You do know that the US built U-Tapao and had 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft stationed in Thailand for 10 years not too long ago? And that they left with no problems very politely when asked.

[phl]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

You do know that the US built U-Tapao and had 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft stationed in Thailand for 10 years not too long ago? And that they left with no problems very politely when asked.

not to mention along with building the airport, the 50000 troops directly and indirectly contributed to establishment and development of surroundings areas, yes including Pattaya(no matter how hard it gets bashed, not only its a well developed city for Thailand, but also feeds half of Isaan)

[geriatrickid]

personally I don't buy the weather study reason for using the airport. There is more than enough technology around to do that. It looked me as a foot in the door kind of thing.

Yes, there is equipment, but Thailand does not have it.

Thailand didn't exactly distinguish itself in the lead up to to last year's flooding did it? Let's look at more explicit example of how Thailand's neglect of basic science has cost it in terms of the loss of life and property: Tsunamis.

Thailand did not even have a basic tsunami warning system until 2010. Although there are now two tsunameter buoys, in the Andaman, Thailand still relies in large part on the USGS Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the Australian Tsunami Warning Center for warnings. What expertise , technology and funds did Thailand contribute to the Indian Ocean tsunami warning system? Here's a hint: The system was developed and implemented by a Canadian company and an Indian company with deployment assistance from the Indian navy.

Please don't pronounce that Thailand has the equipment, let alone the expertise for advanced quantitative mathematical analysis of the weather, because it does not. Thailand's science community is unappreciated, underfunded and neglected. They are asked to undertake tasks for which they are not given enough support to accomplish.

[kerryk]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

You do know that the US built U-Tapao and had 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft stationed in Thailand for 10 years not too long ago? And that they left with no problems very politely when asked.

not to mention along with building the airport, the 50000 troops directly and indirectly contributed to establishment and development of surroundings areas, yes including Pattaya(no matter how hard it gets bashed, not only its a well developed city for Thailand, but also feeds half of Isaan)

We really didn't do much for Pattaya. This was Pattaya when I was there as a soldier.

Edited July 1, 2012 by kerryk

[phl]

There are some unanswered questions on this:

1) The planes planned to be used on this mission are converted spy planes. The media show pictures of a very large 4-engined plane but we are told that there is not enough room on board for a Thai observer. Why?

2) The Nasa chap in charge of the mission said that equipment had already been transported here. This was denied by our government in the wake of the outcry. Did somebody 'mis-speak' or was this just a plain old lie?

3) Who planted the rumor that the quid pro quo for permission to use U-Tapao was a US visa for Thaksin? Was it Yingluck, or was it someone from the Democrat camp seeking to make a cheap political gain?

4) Why do we only hear about the temporary weather mission in the media now? What happened to the permanent loss of sovereignty from the 'humanitarian' mission...this appears to have faded into the background? Is this an intentional fading so that we have a big hue and cry about the weather mission and then parliament then approves the permanent US base?

5) Why is U-Tapao so essential to the mission....planes are moveable things...why can't they take off from some other airport, and fly to the Asian cloud? Is it that the long runway is essential to getting the spy-planes into the air?

I'm not someone who usually makes predictions but here is one....this is a spying on China mission by the US military using NASA as a front...as such, the request will be resurrected by the US in the not too distant future, and it will become a permanent fixture on Thai soil.

You do know that the US built U-Tapao and had 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft stationed in Thailand for 10 years not too long ago? And that they left with no problems very politely when asked.

not to mention along with building the airport, the 50000 troops directly and indirectly contributed to establishment and development of surroundings areas, yes including Pattaya(no matter how hard it gets bashed, not only its a well developed city for Thailand, but also feeds half of Isaan)

We really didn't do much for Pattaya. This was Pattaya when I was there as a soldier.

you living artifact