ratcatcher Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 If Yingluck wants to work with Abhist she should put an end to her yes men silly charges and ask Abhist to join the cabinet where he can first hand witness their work for the good of Thailand and contribute. Or witness first hand there efforts to bring Thaksin back and insure their victory in the next election. Kinda explains why he is excluded from any decision making policies. Has to wait for them to come to the floor with them, It seems to me the only thing the majority of the Thai's wanted was long live the king. The rest were wanted by a minority. Maybe I missed some thing here. I don't know it was a poll taken up by Thailand the hub of what answers do you want we will get them for you. The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. The Yingluck government offered Abhisit a place in the government which he wisely declined. Abhisit may have been born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but it's not a long spoon thus he's wise not to sup with the devil. The coup d'etat "thing" may never be resolved. Abhisit "won the day" when the Constitutional court removed P.M. Somchai Wongsawat (Thaksin's brother in law) after his party PPP was dissolved 4 years ago and Somchai and other upstanding members were banned from politics for 5 years for vote buying by Yongyuth. Thaksin has offered a "poisoned chalice" but Abhisit, wisely, has declined a drink. By great perseverance Mr Thaksin has been the major, but not only, source of Thailand's political pain over the last five years and probably longer. Thaksin and Abhisit won't be able to resolve their problem with each other as Mr Thaksin insists he has never done anything wrong and refuses to be tried and Mr Abhisit is presently awaiting his day in court on charges leveled against him by the DSI regarding his role as P.M. during the 2010 Red Shirt protests. Both, naturally, claim political motivation. Doing away with either Abhisit or Thaksin will have no effect on the harmony and prosperity of the Thai people. Only a serious effort to stamp out the corruption by the (any) government will cause this prosperity to return to all Thais. . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. What is so remarkable about him declining? It would have been more remarkable if he accepted? Why would they join a government run by a man they despise? The main reason for the political mess over the last 7 years is Thaksin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jawnie Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM isn´t working for reconciliation, she works for her brother. The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM isn´t working for reconciliation, she works for her brother. The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother, which might be why a majority didn't vote for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jawnie Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM isn´t working for reconciliation, she works for her brother. The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother, which might be why a majority didn't vote for her. Er, uh.....who won the election and who is the current PM? Get over it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother, which might be why a majority didn't vote for her. Er, uh.....who won the election and who is the current PM? Get over it..... Still, "all Thais" didn't vote her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM isn´t working for reconciliation, she works for her brother. The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother, which might be why a majority didn't vote for her. At some level I assume you realise the absurdity of your endless denials of the government's solid mandate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 At some level I assume you realise the absurdity of your endless denials of the government's solid mandate. When posters stop using phrases like "the people", "all Thais", and "a majority of the people", then I will stop correcting them. PTP won a majority of the seats. That gives them the right to be in government. Getting 47% of the vote hardly gives you "a mandate", whatever that really means. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM isn´t working for reconciliation, she works for her brother. Sez you I dont think anybody is working for reconcilliation. It wont work because the Thais are suppose to forgive and forget then a few years later a legally elected government is removed, by force in the shape of a coup. I believe what we are seeing is the start of the end game. Thaksin is dismantling the system, the amaat whatever you want to call it so they dont have the power to call another coup. It has started with the rice boys, next it maybe the totally biased media...who knows. The'dying swan'imitation by a retired general,Patak Siam ..."dont worry the armys coming to help us..he then run off the stage to an army base where the commander wont let him in..pathetic if thats the only support the amaat can afford nowadays. Its a lose/lose situation, if you think whats on the horizon in the next few years, for the amaat. Their only hope is to get the army back in office but that is gloves off civil war and condemnation from the free world. Its over, tomorrow, next week, next year or in ten years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 I dont think anybody is working for reconcilliation. It wont work because the Thais are suppose to forgive and forget then a few years later a legally elected government is removed, by force in the shape of a coup. I believe what we are seeing is the start of the end game. Thaksin is dismantling the system, the amaat whatever you want to call it so they dont have the power to call another coup. It has started with the rice boys, next it maybe the totally biased media...who knows. The'dying swan'imitation by a retired general,Patak Siam ..."dont worry the armys coming to help us..he then run off the stage to an army base where the commander wont let him in..pathetic if thats the only support the amaat can afford nowadays. Its a lose/lose situation, if you think whats on the horizon in the next few years, for the amaat. Their only hope is to get the army back in office but that is gloves off civil war and condemnation from the free world. Its over, tomorrow, next week, next year or in ten years Thaksin's dismantling of the system is what led to the unelected caretaker government being ousted by a coup. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The PM has the right to consult with whomever she wishes. All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother when they elected her. Move on...... All Thais knew Thaksin was her brother, which might be why a majority didn't vote for her. Er, uh.....who won the election and who is the current PM? Get over it..... Still, "all Thais" didn't vote her. if the majority is so small and Thaksin is the 'big bad bogeyman" do you think Mark will win the next election. Without the coup Mark wont see the PM Office until at least 2025. Or any other out of touch Democrat. Suthep the voice of the people. Sorry got to stop I've wet my pants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. What is so remarkable about him declining? It would have been more remarkable if he accepted? Why would they join a government run by a man they despise? The main reason for the political mess over the last 7 years is Thaksin. Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 if the majority is so small and Thaksin is the 'big bad bogeyman" do you think Mark will win the next election. Without the coup Mark wont see the PM Office until at least 2025. Or any other out of touch Democrat. Suthep the voice of the people. Sorry got to stop I've wet my pants I don't think Abhisit will win the next election. There might be a small possibility that he (or whoever is the Democrat leader) might lead a coalition, but at this early stage, I am predicting PTP will need (ie won't have their own majority) a coalition to form government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 At some level I assume you realise the absurdity of your endless denials of the government's solid mandate. When posters stop using phrases like "the people", "all Thais", and "a majority of the people", then I will stop correcting them. PTP won a majority of the seats. That gives them the right to be in government. Getting 47% of the vote hardly gives you "a mandate", whatever that really means. You really are going to love it when she get's re-elected................ Might even be good for the country, compared to the alternatives. Chai mai ?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 I dont think anybody is working for reconcilliation. It wont work because the Thais are suppose to forgive and forget then a few years later a legally elected government is removed, by force in the shape of a coup. I believe what we are seeing is the start of the end game. Thaksin is dismantling the system, the amaat whatever you want to call it so they dont have the power to call another coup. It has started with the rice boys, next it maybe the totally biased media...who knows. The'dying swan'imitation by a retired general,Patak Siam ..."dont worry the armys coming to help us..he then run off the stage to an army base where the commander wont let him in..pathetic if thats the only support the amaat can afford nowadays. Its a lose/lose situation, if you think whats on the horizon in the next few years, for the amaat. Their only hope is to get the army back in office but that is gloves off civil war and condemnation from the free world. Its over, tomorrow, next week, next year or in ten years Thaksin's dismantling of the system is what led to the unelected caretaker government being ousted by a coup. Thaksin is just a different crook but still a crook. The system we are talking about is the faceless money people of this country. The government will destroy the rice boys and wont lose much because it will then hold the emergency rice stocks for the nation. Do some research into construction and transport and banking, all the boys are easy to find. There is other industry with amaat faces. We can only go so far down this line before a mod delete comments so I will leave it there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. What is so remarkable about him declining? It would have been more remarkable if he accepted? Why would they join a government run by a man they despise? The main reason for the political mess over the last 7 years is Thaksin. Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Yes. Plenty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 You really are going to love it when she get's re-elected................ Might even be good for the country, compared to the alternatives. Chai mai ?? Can you imagine the riots if the Democrats were able to form a coalition government. That's not a very good alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) if the majority is so small and Thaksin is the 'big bad bogeyman" do you think Mark will win the next election. Without the coup Mark wont see the PM Office until at least 2025. Or any other out of touch Democrat. Suthep the voice of the people. Sorry got to stop I've wet my pants I don't think Abhisit will win the next election. There might be a small possibility that he (or whoever is the Democrat leader) might lead a coalition, but at this early stage, I am predicting PTP will need (ie won't have their own majority) a coalition to form government. Hold your foot up. A couple of things to consider. PTP had a 100 seat majority on its own. It formed a coalition on promises to stop thee smaller parties getting "offers they could not refuse. 7,000,000 extra ballot papers where printed (reported on Thai visa) not a big problem you would think but consider how The Dusit Poll correctly predicted the whole of the country in results yet it was so far off target in Bangkok. Well beyond the 3% + or - Is it possible that some of those 7 million ballot papers found there way into ballot boxes in Bangkok. Dusit have never been this far out in all the time it has been predicting Thailand election outcomes. How silly would the dems have looked if they had lost the majority of seats in Bangkok. Rumours..could be But if not you can bet this Dem indiscretion will reappear just before the next election Edited January 2, 2013 by backtonormal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. What is so remarkable about him declining? It would have been more remarkable if he accepted? Why would they join a government run by a man they despise? The main reason for the political mess over the last 7 years is Thaksin. Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Yes. Plenty. Lets have it then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Democrats striving for mediocrity and not achieving it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Hold your foot up. A couple of things to consider. PTP had a 100 seat majority on its own. It formed a coalition on promises to stop thee smaller parties getting "offers they could not refuse. 7,000,000 extra ballot papers where printed (reported on Thai visa) not a big problem you would think but consider how The Dusit Poll correctly predicted the whole of the country in results yet it was so far off target in Bangkok. Well beyond the 3% + or - Is it possible that some of those 7 million ballot papers found there way into ballot boxes in Bangkok. Dusit have never been this far out in all the time it has been predicting Thailand election outcomes. How silly would the dems have looked if they had lost the majority of seats in Bangkok. Rumours..could be But if not you can bet this Dem indiscretion will reappear just before the next election I'll ignore the conspiracy theories. The PTP had a 100 seat gap over the Democrats. That doesn't mean that they have to lose 100 seats to lose the election. They had a 15 seat majority, so if they lost 16 seats, theoretically, the rest could form government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Yes. Plenty. Lets have it then There is a lot of interesting reading here for a start. When you've finished that, get back to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 The Yingluck government offered Khun Abhisit a place in her government. Which remarkably he declined. Sooner or later the coupes de terre thing and the Taksin & Abhisit thing has to be resolved. OK Abhisit won the day on Taksin's demise. Taksin has offered an olive branch. Whether by intent or naivety Abhisit seems have been the major source of Thailand political pain. If Taksin and Abhisit can't resolve their problem with each other I think Thailand must do away with both of them in order to bring harmony and prosperity back to the people. What is so remarkable about him declining? It would have been more remarkable if he accepted? Why would they join a government run by a man they despise? The main reason for the political mess over the last 7 years is Thaksin. Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Yes. Plenty. Please display, as it were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Hold your foot up. A couple of things to consider. PTP had a 100 seat majority on its own. It formed a coalition on promises to stop thee smaller parties getting "offers they could not refuse. 7,000,000 extra ballot papers where printed (reported on Thai visa) not a big problem you would think but consider how The Dusit Poll correctly predicted the whole of the country in results yet it was so far off target in Bangkok. Well beyond the 3% + or - Is it possible that some of those 7 million ballot papers found there way into ballot boxes in Bangkok. Dusit have never been this far out in all the time it has been predicting Thailand election outcomes. How silly would the dems have looked if they had lost the majority of seats in Bangkok. Rumours..could be But if not you can bet this Dem indiscretion will reappear just before the next election I'll ignore the conspiracy theories. The PTP had a 100 seat gap over the Democrats. That doesn't mean that they have to lose 100 seats to lose the election. They had a 15 seat majority, so if they lost 16 seats, theoretically, the rest could form government. if them two get convicted you will be two seats down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 At some level I assume you realise the absurdity of your endless denials of the government's solid mandate. When posters stop using phrases like "the people", "all Thais", and "a majority of the people", then I will stop correcting them. PTP won a majority of the seats. That gives them the right to be in government. Getting 47% of the vote hardly gives you "a mandate", whatever that really means. Still in denial.Do you seriously think that any serious source believes the government has no mandate? You remind me of those barmy and deranged right wing American fanatics who argue Obama has no mandate.We have all seen the numbers from the last election here.The key point is that there are rules to the parliamentary democracy system, and all but fruit cakes don't question the outcome.As it happens Yingluck won a pretty convincing victory, far more so than that of say David Cameron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backtonormal Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 !3000 posts and thats the best thread you can give. Please rearrange in corner backed to arrived at my current feelings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Any evidence to support the assertion in your last sentence ?? Yes. Plenty. Lets have it then There is a lot of interesting reading here for a start. When you've finished that, get back to me. Er..........nearly right. Thai Visa is not really a creditable source of information. Got any other ideas / sources ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Er..........nearly right. Thai Visa is not really a creditable source of information. Got any other ideas / sources ?? If you can't find it there, you're not really interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Still in denial.Do you seriously think that any serious source believes the government has no mandate? You remind me of those barmy and deranged right wing American fanatics who argue Obama has no mandate.We have all seen the numbers from the last election here.The key point is that there are rules to the parliamentary democracy system, and all but fruit cakes don't question the outcome.As it happens Yingluck won a pretty convincing victory, far more so than that of say David Cameron. Can you please explain "mandate" to me. What defines "a mandate"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ratcatcher Posted January 2, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2013 Still in denial.Do you seriously think that any serious source believes the government has no mandate? You remind me of those barmy and deranged right wing American fanatics who argue Obama has no mandate.We have all seen the numbers from the last election here.The key point is that there are rules to the parliamentary democracy system, and all but fruit cakes don't question the outcome.As it happens Yingluck won a pretty convincing victory, far more so than that of say David Cameron. Can you please explain "mandate" to me. What defines "a mandate"? Just to break the tension here, it's an occasion for gay guys to get together. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now