Thousands march to US Embassy in Bangkok

[kimamey]

As if the U.S is going to side with rebels to overthrow Thailands elected government. What an absolute pack of Morons these Yellow shirts are. So if the U.S doesn't side with them what are they going to do, resort to violence against the Embassy and demand that the U.S accepts their terms like they are trying to do to the Thai government.

I'd be careful who you call morons. I don't think most of these protesters are yellow shirts. Going to the US embassy was probably just a way to get wider international media attention.

O.k my apologies these redshirt morons who are trying to dispose of the government.

I rather thought you weren't able to conduct a meaningful conversation on this topic and your last one confirms it.

[smotherb]

Yooper, you need to study up on parliamentary democracies (including the Westminster model) and quit trying to make comparisons to a country with a president. In all of Thailand's history with the democracy experiment only one administration has completed its term.

Impeachment is simply the American term for a legal adjudication of the elected head of government, the President, if indeed impeached the president's cabinet and other appointed members of his government may also be relieved of duties. So, any legal adjudication of an elected head of government; like a vote of no confidence, a voter recall, the monarch/head of state asking the head of government to step down, etc., is quite similar in intent. Sidebar: military coups are rarely legal adjudications, and the numbers of governments ousted by any country is a different subject. Also, what makes Thailand a parliamentary democracy?

[Scott]

Some off-topic posts and replies have been removed.

[Benmart]

Exactly. This was a major tactical blunder by the Yellow Shirts and Mr Abashit. First of all, US Embassy has tried very hard to remain neutral, other than mouth standard phrases about democracy and rule of law, which is what they always have to say. Leading a demonstration against them based on ridiculous accusations is going to backfire - unless the Yellow Shirts want to give the country to the Chinese, which I don't think is on their agenda.

The Yellow Shirts might also consider who has been supplying and training the Thai army for the last half century!)

He, Hey Buddies. Be care, the US Embassy guards (Marines) will shot you if you want to brake in. They are not a thai army.

The guards didn't shoot at the Tehran American embassy in 1979 ...

Some posters are clearly confused and shrouded in what might appear to be a fog of paranoia. For the purpose of clarity, and to try to keep the thread on topic, it should be understood that the protestors went to the US embassy for two reasons:

1. To hand in a letter clarifying their position and hopes

2. No doubt to gain publicity for themselves by going to a high-profile and friendly embassy.

• Did they attempt to storm the place? No
• Did they attempt to attack any embassy staff? No
• Did they attempt to ransack the embassy? No
• Was the US flag or other emblem destroyed? No

How one interprets that as marching against the embassy is quite frankly beyond belief.

Their concerns were for the welfare of their own country, Thailand, and to rid it of a corrupt system.

Thank you for your post. It explains the article as I understand it. Those that misinterpreted it as a march on the US Embassy to do "bad", are likely to be reactionaries and see every controversy as an opportunity to throw gasoline on a smoldering ember.

[Benmart]

As if the U.S is going to side with rebels to overthrow Thailands elected government. What an absolute pack of Morons these Yellow shirts are. So if the U.S doesn't side with them what are they going to do, resort to violence against the Embassy and demand that the U.S accepts their terms like they are trying to do to the Thai government.

I'd be careful who you call morons. I don't think most of these protesters are yellow shirts. Going to the US embassy was probably just a way to get wider international media attention.

O.k my apologies these redshirt morons who are trying to dispose of the government.

Better yet. Drop the word moron and explain why you feel they deserve that name. It makes your position much more clear and opens a new dialog.

[Benmart]

...

JT thinks very highly of the US ..."protesting at the embassy of the most powerful nation on the planet"

Apparently the protesters also think the USA is very important as they bothered to protest there at an embassy that has nothing to do with their INTERNAL conflict.

I would hope that we all have a reasonable degree of respect for our own nationalities. Isn't that natural for Thais, Americans, or anyone?

As far as the USA being the most powerful nation on the planet descriptor, that is obviously a fact in terms of both economic and military power. For now anyway. Who can really deny that?

LOL ....

Cherry picking ... gotta love it

. I have no respect for Americans that get indignant about a peaceful protest delivering a letter and a short speech outside of an embassy. Particularly when there is no anti-Americanism present. I would think that an American would not get indignant over a free speech issue. I would think that someone that considers America "the most powerful nation on the planet" would understand that merely presenting that letter publicly brings attention to the cause of the people that were there. Same as it did for the red shirts in April of 2010 I think.

Did you go back and watch the footage of the events at the US embassy? Did you notice that the placards were not in any of the footage there? Does your knee hurt?

edit: in case some people do not know I am from the US.

I'm also a Yank and am watching and listening to this moment in history. Since its not my battle, I will continue to watch and listen...with my mouth opening only for food, water, dental hygiene and the occasional burp.

[Jingthing]

Thank you for your post. It explains the article as I understand it. Those that misinterpreted it as a march on the US Embassy to do "bad", are likely to be reactionaries and see every controversy as an opportunity to throw gasoline on a smoldering ember.

You're exaggerating. The correct interpretation I think is that it was a protest to solicit support from the U.S for ONE side in a currently brewing potential civil war of a kind in Thailand (that we all hope will not become an ACTUAL one). Also asking the U.S. government to no longer treat the current government of Thailand as the legal one and implying if they do that they have picked that side over theirs. Not the same thing as attacking a foreign embassy, but still pretty unreasonable.

Your use of the word reactionary is also ironic in this context. While not defending the Thaksinistas at all, from an objective point of view the core values of the yellow movement are pretty much reactionary by definition.

Edited November 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[LomSak27]

They would like the US to support them instead of the elected goverment; whats so hard to understand about that?

[Prbkk]

There is no confusion, shroud, fog or paranoia. The lack of clarity is yours. Had the protesters attempted any of those things it is highly likely they would have been SHOT. US embassies are not very welcoming of mobs, rabid or otherwise. This was a stupid stunt reacting to a letter written by Thaksin to George Bush seven years ago. It backfired.

I can't make this multiquote thing work...so maybe this is directed at the wrong poster. sorry

Thank you for your post. It explains the article as I understand it. Those that misinterpreted it as a march on the US Embassy to do "bad", are likely to be reactionaries and see every controversy as an opportunity to throw gasoline on a smoldering ember.

Edited November 30, 2013 by Prbkk

[klikster]

He, Hey Buddies. Be care, the US Embassy guards (Marines) will shot you if you want to brake in. They are not a thai army.

The guards didn't shoot at the Tehran American embassy in 1979 ...

Blame the boss, not the guards -- but I think you already knew that?

[bigbamboo]

Wrong place, the Americans like elections. The Chinese embassy is up the road, lads

And American elections are never fixed either.

Well maybe just the once.

OK, probably twice.

Edited November 30, 2013 by bigbamboo

[theslime]

I thought that the march on the us embassy would be about letting the embassy know ,that please dont invovle your sneaky spy agencies from bull shitting and influencing our nation, like you have done to nearly every country in the world.

[Jingthing]

I thought that the march on the us embassy would be about letting the embassy know ,that please dont invovle your sneaky spy agencies from bull shitting and influencing our nation, like you have done to nearly every country in the world.

Seems you might be saying the protest was anti-American and justifiably so.

[theslime]

I thought that the march on the us embassy would be about letting the embassy know ,that please dont invovle your sneaky spy agencies from bull shitting and influencing our nation, like you have done to nearly every country in the world.

Seems you might be saying the protest was anti-American and justifiably so.

I wouldn,t trust the us government to not be invovled, anyway to get rid of those pesky poor people and let us the moral majority show you the correct way

[Danbit]

From a Thai friend do I understand that the Yellow only take 5% and the Red 25% corruption. It seems as Thais accept it, but only the 5%.

The problem is that Thaksins sister in the Thai family way would giver her brother amnesty and that upset a lot of the Yellows. It seems that both Yelow and Red want the court to get a court case, with the troubel makers.

It is dammed difficult to understand for a Scandinavian where corruption is limited and close to zero.

[Rob8891]

I thought that the march on the us embassy would be about letting the embassy know ,that please dont invovle your sneaky spy agencies from bull shitting and influencing our nation, like you have done to nearly every country in the world.

Seems you might be saying the protest was anti-American and justifiably so.

Personal paranoia and self-interest from some posters is getting really boring. They are off-topic and should have been deleted. The thread is about Thailand, and NOT about some US citizens' hurt feelings. There is a country here - Thailand, remember? - that is rapidly going to hell in a hand basket and yet some people are whining on that the demonstration might have been anti-American.

You made your point. Gt over it. Move on. Give some thought to he welfare of the Thai citizens (take your pic of affiliation, that doesn't matter), just stop being so self-seeking.

[Jingthing]

...

You made your point. Gt over it. Move on. Give some thought to he welfare of the Thai citizens (take your pic of affiliation, that doesn't matter), just stop being so self-seeking.

Oh, so sorry, excuse me. I didn't know Mother Teresa was posting here.

[jayboy]

I am saddened to hear that Abhisit was involved in such a farce. What is the U.S. government supposed to do? Take a side in this internal conflict? It's normal to deal with the current legal government whatever it is when there are relations between nations, and there are relations between the USA and Thailand. It doesn't mean the U.S. government is endorsing the government or fighting the opposition. That's not their role. The USA can't win. When it acts imperialistic it is justifiably dissed and when it doesn't its dissed as well.

So does this mean more of this faction are becoming more anti-American? How does their level of anti-Americanism compare to the red and PTP side? As an American living in Thailand, I suppose it would be useful to know.

You are right.To me one of the saddest aspects of this saga is the failure of Abhisit and Korn to show any kind of moral backbone.To oppose the government aggressively is absolutely legitimate but their cynical opportunism and hypocrisy in the last few weeks is sickening.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

[isawasnake]

This is the only country that I know of that does not even know how, when and where to protest. They can't even get that right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_73NU6OlNuw

[SeabagsFull]

^{Why does every country that has a problem turn to USA either to blame or to ask for support.}

I'm not American, but have to question what on earth has to do with the current issues in Thailand? Are these people now so desperate and delusional that they are imagining enemies on every corner? Abhisit led this march? Just becoming crazy.........

Bizzare that they would march and protest the American embassy. These are supposedly educated class people?

What the demonstrators did was to deliver a message to the U.S. Ambassador; that is all. That's why the embassy has remained open.

So what's their rub with the U.S.?

At the heart of the people's division is the belief that the pro-Thaksin camp wants to end the monarchy as it exists today, while those against him are seen as Royal loyalists bent on preserving Thailand's unique king-government & people relationship. In fact, making its rounds on the Web is a supposed plan for Cambodia to assist Thailand in duplicating its governmental setup (e.g., the PM would have full control of all monies & appointments). With HM getting on in years, many feel that their time is running out to save Thailand, that without a strong king Thailand could end up as property belonging to a few other countries (e.g., Singapore, Cambodia, China).

It has long been held that former PM Thaksin was aided by the U.S. CIA, that he was not smart enough to have both planned & coordinated, for example, the Finland Project. There is some sense to this belief.

After 9/11, former U.S. President Bush went on the offensive with his, "You're either with us ..." speech. His influence had a great deal to do with PM Thaksin's declaring war on the insurgents in the south & sending in troops that escalated the conflict there.

Additionally, President Bush was behind Thailand's outlawing live sex acts (August 2003 or 2004).

The west, the U.S. in particular, has long frowned on monarchies of any kind. Considering Thailand's long & troubled flirtation with Democracy, it's understandable why some -- but not I -- would want to see an end to them worldwide.

With former PM Thaksin still pulling the strings in Thailand, & taking the above into account, it makes sense to me that Abhisit & the demonstrators would ask the U.S. to stay out of this.

Edited December 2, 2013 by SeabagsFull

[zydeco]

^{Why does every country that has a problem turn to USA either to blame or to ask for support.}

I'm not American, but have to question what on earth has to do with the current issues in Thailand? Are these people now so desperate and delusional that they are imagining enemies on every corner? Abhisit led this march? Just becoming crazy.........

Bizzare that they would march and protest the American embassy. These are supposedly educated class people?

What the demonstrators did was to deliver a message to the U.S. Ambassador; that is all. That's why the embassy has remained open.

So what's their rub with the U.S.?

At the heart of the people's division is the belief that the pro-Thaksin camp wants to end the monarchy as it exists today, while those against him are seen as Royal loyalists bent on preserving Thailand's unique king-government & people relationship. In fact, making its rounds on the Web is a supposed plan for Cambodia to assist Thailand in duplicating its governmental setup (e.g., the PM would have full control of all monies & appointments). With HM getting on in years, many feel that their time is running out to save Thailand, that without a strong king Thailand could end up as property belonging to a few other countries (e.g., Singapore, Cambodia, China).

It has long been held that former PM Thaksin was aided by the U.S. CIA, that he was not smart enough to have both planned & coordinated, for example, the Finland Project. There is some sense to this belief.

After 9/11, former U.S. President Bush went on the offensive with his, "You're either with us ..." speech. His influence had a great deal to do with PM Thaksin's declaring war on the insurgents in the south & sending in troops that escalated the conflict there.

Additionally, President Bush was behind Thailand's outlawing live sex acts (August 2003 or 2004).

The west, the U.S. in particular, has long frowned on monarchies of any kind. Considering Thailand's long & troubled flirtation with Democracy, it's understandable why some -- but not I -- would want to see an end to them worldwide.

With former PM Thaksin still pulling the strings in Thailand, & taking the above into account, it makes sense to me that Abhisit & the demonstrators would ask the U.S. to stay out of this.

What ever influence the US has in Thailand is minute when compared to that of China. Why didn't they take on the Chinese embassy, whose ambassador just the other day went out of his way to praise Yingluck for her handling of the protests?

[Somtamnication]

Strange. Asking the US govt to support them. The US never supports "democratic" reforms, so why go there?

[englishoak]

Strange. Asking the US govt to support them. The US never supports "democratic" reforms, so why go there?

Cheap publicity stunt.