Defense Ministry affirms army will not intervene

BANGKOK, 27 Nov 2013 (NNT) — The Ministry of Defense has expressed its concerns over the current protests and urged demonstrations to not violate the law.

According to Defence Ministry Spokesman Col. Thanatip Sawangsaeng, the army will not intervene in the current ongoing protests, as the Ministry has deemed that the Centre for the Administration of Peace and Order (CAPO) is still capable of managing the crowd.

In regard to the handling of the demonstrators, Col. Thanatip stressed the importance of the procedures carried out by the government’s policy in using patience and non-violent means in resolving the problem.

At the moment, Col. Thanatip added, there is no need for the army to intervene, and that the government has made no requests for it to do so.


-- NNT 2013-11-27

At the moment, Col. Thanatip added, there is no need for the army to intervene, and that the government has made no requests for it to do so.

As if the army needs a request to intervene.

Oh dear no water melons today

And who is the defense minister ?

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

"yet" was the missing word ...

Defence Ministry affirms army will not intervene.

He hopes as he crosses his fingers, as it's a fair change that if they (army) have to intervene it will be good night YL, fugitive and all their rabble.

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

 

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

 

 

 

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

 

 

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

TRT/PT have won the last five general elections in Thailand. What's difficult to understand?

He shouldn't be making any statements..........

Yes, not exactly closing the door on the idea

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

2011, 2007, 2006 (debatable - democrats boycotted), 2005, 2001

That makes 5-nil (or 4-nil if you agree with the court).

Keep in mind to an outside observer - there is only one PM that has ever completed a full term of office in Thailand.

wife just said they are at the ministry of energy now...yet again its peaceful...though if it changes our red posters will be tapping away in a complete frenzy no doubt....well they have been awfully quiet.chomping at the bit ,for scraps..maybe there busy changing avatars again so it looks like theres atleast a round dozen of them..

Defence Ministry affirms army will not intervene

But added that they were just starting the engines on the tanks to make sure they were ready for Children's Day in January.

He should be back in his barrack’s learning the young conscripts to march, should not be commentating on government affairs he is an army employee working for the Thai people.

He should be back in his barrack’s learning the young conscripts to march, should not be commentating on government affairs he is an army employee working for the Thai people.

Not sure why you think he's not entitled to speak on the matter. Thankfully, the government does not have as much command of the army in this country as elsewhere http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1978994,00.html

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

2011, 2007, 2006 (debatable - democrats boycotted), 2005, 2001

That makes 5-nil (or 4-nil if you agree with the court).

Keep in mind to an outside observer - there is only one PM that has ever completed a full term of office in Thailand.

Thanks a lot. I totally forgot that when Abhisit was in power it wasn't the result of an election.

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

2011, 2007, 2006 (debatable - democrats boycotted), 2005, 2001

That makes 5-nil (or 4-nil if you agree with the court).

Keep in mind to an outside observer - there is only one PM that has ever completed a full term of office in Thailand.

Thanks a lot. I totally forgot that when Abhisit was in power it wasn't the result of an election.

To be fair to AV - he was the 3rd PM resulting from the 2007 election results.

As the voters do not vote for the PM, the party that holds a majority (or coalition), selects the PM. When the court dissolved PPP, that changed the balance of power and a coalition headed by the democrats selected AV as PM.

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

2011, 2007, 2006 (debatable - democrats boycotted), 2005, 2001

That makes 5-nil (or 4-nil if you agree with the court).

Keep in mind to an outside observer - there is only one PM that has ever completed a full term of office in Thailand.

Thanks a lot. I totally forgot that when Abhisit was in power it wasn't the result of an election.

well actually it was the result of an election, enough politicians from a number of groups nominated him to be PM, as is usual. The exception to this convention is the PTP, in their case a fugitive criminal makes the appointment.

Hope that clears up any mis-understandings.

4 years ago Suthep was already drawing crosshairs on certain people that did not agree to his judge backed rule.

Hold on, Yingluck is the Minister of Defence so why is she repeating what she has already said as Prime Minister?

I hope she's not talking through two hats.

The man-from-the-Ministry says that the army will not intervene ?

But IMO if there were to be serious violence in Bangkok, then his assertion might well be a case of ... 'Famous Last Words' !

At the moment, Col. Thanatip added, there is no need for the army to intervene, and that the government has made no requests for it to do so.

As if the army needs a request to intervene.

To me ... this says he is on the side of the Government

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

Maybe not 5 but YES they will win again CONVINCINGLY

At the moment, Col. Thanatip added, there is no need for the army to intervene, and that the government has made no requests for it to do so.

As if the army needs a request to intervene.

To me ... this says he is on the side of the Government

As he should be IT IS A LEGALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT elected by the people of Thailand

Can anyone please shed some light on what the BBC says in its final paragraph of this article?

But a more likely scenario would be a fresh general election - and the governing party, which has won the last five, would probably win again, our correspondent adds.

Is the BBC saying if there was a new general election the governing party would get back in again?

I don't understand where they say they won the last five?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25099126

I wasn't following BBC in 2010 but I heard that was about the size of accuracy they used then. I guess when you are half a world away facts are not needed.

You know a country is in deep trouble when a coup would actually be more" democratic" than the current elected government. Following the coup will be a reinstatement of rule of law and respect of judicial decisions, and ironically governance will be more transparent under a military PM than at present. You see, democracy goes beyond merely having won(or bought) an election.

Water cannon could be the solution after starving Suthep etc out

That ought to prevent loss of life if it comes down to it.

Remember in 2008 The BMA refused the police permission to use water cannon arguing that protestors might get ill if they swallowed the water as it wasn't drinking water!

So the police had to resort to teargas.Then we had the guff about exploding chinese made tear gas cannisters but the oddity of 2 people blowing themselves up. Was that by design?

Water cannon could be the solution after starving Suthep etc out

That ought to prevent loss of life if it comes down to it.

Remember in 2008 The BMA refused the police permission to use water cannon arguing that protestors might get ill if they swallowed the water as it wasn't drinking water!

So the police had to resort to teargas.Then we had the guff about exploding chinese made tear gas cannisters but the oddity of 2 people blowing themselves up. Was that by design?

Interestingly enough. .. after the incompetent porntip result (this is the person who told us the bomb detector worked while the maker was in court for fraud in the uk) - the police had another external consultant examine the evidence.

The man who lost his leg was carrying a pipe bomb. The one killed in the jeep cherokee as well, and the woman as well.

All three were killed by home made bombs the pad had. Not the police.

But as a very important person went to the funeral of the woman and condemned the violence by police - they will never release the results

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

 You know a country is in deep trouble when a coup would actually be more" democratic" than the current elected government. Following the coup will be a reinstatement of rule of law and respect of judicial decisions, and ironically governance will be more transparent under a military PM than at present. You see, democracy goes beyond merely having won(or bought) an election.

Indeed so, from reading this forum I have come to the conclusion that it is only democracy if the side you favour wins.

The views of the lower orders, as expressed through the ballot box obviously don't count!

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This time the army stays out of it. Bad for the Democrats you got to wait until 2015 to loose the next election.