What if Thailand gave all of Isaan/Laos to the French in the first place?

[wym]

Ol' square face a "semi-socialist" now that's rich.

[monkey4u]

What is if San Marino would have conquered China

What is if Japan would be in Europe

What is if humans would have never develop the wheel

NO wheel

I would have saved thousands on car repairs over my lifetime

[Benmart]

What is if San Marino would have conquered China

What is if Japan would be in Europe

What is if humans would have never develop the wheel

Discussion, however viewed, is the key to understanding. Ridicule, however cloaked, is the precursor of ignorance. Edited February 16, 2014 by Benmart

[kentfx]

Vietnam is a different culture from the Tai family (Thailand, Cambodia, Laos), so I don't think they'll ever want to unify. They have more in common with the CJK, and there's a reason they tend to get lumped into that array.

CJK = China Japan Korea, for those of us not a part of 90dayz private group (thank you, wikipedia)

Edited February 16, 2014 by kentfx

[Mojomor]

These historical hypotheticals can be entertaining, but require some historical plausibility to be truly provocative. The premise here is a bit far-fetched, unfortunately - as the posts would indicate, and the thread is in danger of disintegrating into a barrage of French bashing, which is a bit off-topic. Having lived and worked in a few former French colonies in Africa and the West Indies, I can only say the French legacy of fine gastronomy and romance should not be forgotten.

However, if one wants to discuss a more plausible historical hypothetical: what would have happened if the allies had occupied Thailand after World War Ii? I have heard the Brits wanted to, but the Americans over-ruled them. Does anyone know more abour this?

The end of WW2 in Asia was year later than the end in Europe. People could see what the Russians were intending in Eastern Europe, and USA always had a dislike of communism.

When the war ended in Thailand the British (Churchill) wanted to give the Thais a very bloody nose, as he blamed them for allowing the Japanese use the country as a base for attacking British possessions, namely, Singapore, Malaya, and Burma. To say, they wanted to occupy the country, is probably stretching it. The USA, having seen the situation in Europe, were very concerned about blocking Chinese communism ---- they knew they would need friends in the region in the post war period, so they prevailed on the British to leave it be. Later The USA drew a line through northern Burma, northern Laos, and northern Vietnam, which was the defence line against communism.

Every source one reads in this part of the world, has a large spin factor. Beware. -------

For example the OP uses the term ''Thailand gave Laos to the French''. The reality was the French took it, and then the Thais, recognising the fact, decided to Give it to them. The French took the land north of the Mekong first and later came back for more, taking some land on the southern side across from Luang Prabang.

The OP also got confused over the use of the term Tai which he implies means North. It does not --- it actually means South. Nua is North. He seems to have got confused because the Tai peoples still live in the Yunnan prefecture of China, which is to the north of Thailand.

[coobah666]

We would have better bread

[Kitsune]

But that's a rhetorical question: If it had been a colony like Laos it would have had 2 choices:

1/ Stay part of France and become fully French with all the perks like I described earlier

2/ Become independent and be a separate entity.

Nope. If it had been a colony it would've remained a part of Laos. Isaan is a term assigned by the Thai bureau census to distinguish southern Mekong Laotians (non-commies) and northern Mekong Laotians (Laos proper).

Why would had it been necessarily a part of Laos ?

And more importantly what does it matter or has any relevance today anyway?

Again, you're not reading a dam_n thing before replying. Isaan was always a part of Laos, merely split off due to colonialism and later communism. And it would definitely have relevance since they make the other half of the red shirt population (aka rural people). Someone here clarified that land in Isaan isn't really arable for harvesting rice and crops. I think I'm pretty much done here.

You might be done but I still have the right to answer.

1/ You are writing a topic and I have the kindness to take some of my time to answer, so please moderate your swearing in your replies

2/ Your argument is very dubious; If THL did not have Isaan, the agriculture would have just developed else where in the country, that's all.

There still would be as much Red Shirts but they would not be in Isaan

[Donnie Brasco]

Isaan is not the best place in the country to grow rice. Plenty of labour, no water.

I think all that has really happened is that a bunch of families in Bangkok made a boat load of money out of Isaan.

I often wonder if Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam had become one unified (not in a communist group) group, what would the country be like.

Humans never should have gone to live (and especially farm rice!) in Isaan in large numbers...and you know what? They DIDN'T.

The ancestors of the population of Isaan today were forcibly dragged there ("relocated") by the Thai army, first in 1782 and again (especially) in 1827, after wars with the Lao, with the reasoning that the Lao population would be easier to control if they were on land closer to and more easily administered by Bangkok. Never mind that the land was only barely, if at all, arable.

Thank you Ajarn

Your FACTUAL post is a GEM an absolute GEM of reality in a sea of ignorance ADHD racist opinion.

More please.

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit."

[wym]

lots of energy on a way out hypothetical

[samran]

Somtam would be eaten in baguettes and the Vietnam war and Khmer Rouge would have extended further south and west.

Korat would have had a grand boulevard and maybe some pretty buildings for some of you blokes to wax lyrical about, and there would be a website called Lao visa where all you blokes could whinge about the nasty cheating locals and why couldn't Laos be as forward looking as their southern Siamese neighbour which had the generous visa rules and the more developed economy.

[90dayz]

Vietnam is a different culture from the Tai family (Thailand, Cambodia, Laos), so I don't think they'll ever want to unify. They have more in common with the CJK, and there's a reason they tend to get lumped into that array.

CJK = China Japan Korea, for those of us not a part of 90dayz private group (thank you, wikipedia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJK_characters

The term CJKV means CJK plus Vietnamese, which constitute the main East Asian languages.

[90dayz]

These historical hypotheticals can be entertaining, but require some historical plausibility to be truly provocative. The premise here is a bit far-fetched, unfortunately - as the posts would indicate, and the thread is in danger of disintegrating into a barrage of French bashing, which is a bit off-topic. Having lived and worked in a few former French colonies in Africa and the West Indies, I can only say the French legacy of fine gastronomy and romance should not be forgotten.

However, if one wants to discuss a more plausible historical hypothetical: what would have happened if the allies had occupied Thailand after World War Ii? I have heard the Brits wanted to, but the Americans over-ruled them. Does anyone know more abour this?

The end of WW2 in Asia was year later than the end in Europe. People could see what the Russians were intending in Eastern Europe, and USA always had a dislike of communism.

When the war ended in Thailand the British (Churchill) wanted to give the Thais a very bloody nose, as he blamed them for allowing the Japanese use the country as a base for attacking British possessions, namely, Singapore, Malaya, and Burma. To say, they wanted to occupy the country, is probably stretching it. The USA, having seen the situation in Europe, were very concerned about blocking Chinese communism ---- they knew they would need friends in the region in the post war period, so they prevailed on the British to leave it be. Later The USA drew a line through northern Burma, northern Laos, and northern Vietnam, which was the defence line against communism.

Every source one reads in this part of the world, has a large spin factor. Beware. -------

For example the OP uses the term ''Thailand gave Laos to the French''. The reality was the French took it, and then the Thais, recognising the fact, decided to Give it to them. The French took the land north of the Mekong first and later came back for more, taking some land on the southern side across from Luang Prabang.

The OP also got confused over the use of the term Tai which he implies means North. It does not --- it actually means South. Nua is North. He seems to have got confused because the Tai peoples still live in the Yunnan prefecture of China, which is to the north of Thailand.

Thanks for clarifying this. The earliest "Tais" did infact, migrate from Yunnan province to Siam.

[Bender]

France would be a nice place to travel or even to live !!!

I have been in France, and I have to say you could not meet more ignorant people, I knew a Frenchman here for quite a long time, and along with two guys from Yorkshire, they were very unpopular among the other Farangs in the surrounding area. Now they are gone and there is no problem with anybody.

I can't help but wonder just how long you were in France? Having worked there, may I disagree?

I was in Paris for only three days, and it was enough. Just my experience, and what dreadful people the French guy and the two Yorkshire guys here in Thailand were. The French guy actually got put in hospital by a young Thai guy because of his dreadful attitude.

out of curiosity, how old was the french? 60 or 70 yo?

how many young thai men? 3 or 10?

[ultimate weapon]

These historical hypotheticals can be entertaining, but require some historical plausibility to be truly provocative. The premise here is a bit far-fetched, unfortunately - as the posts would indicate, and the thread is in danger of disintegrating into a barrage of French bashing, which is a bit off-topic. Having lived and worked in a few former French colonies in Africa and the West Indies, I can only say the French legacy of fine gastronomy and romance should not be forgotten.

However, if one wants to discuss a more plausible historical hypothetical: what would have happened if the allies had occupied Thailand after World War Ii? I have heard the Brits wanted to, but the Americans over-ruled them. Does anyone know more abour this?

The end of WW2 in Asia was year later than the end in Europe. People could see what the Russians were intending in Eastern Europe, and USA always had a dislike of communism.

When the war ended in Thailand the British (Churchill) wanted to give the Thais a very bloody nose, as he blamed them for allowing the Japanese use the country as a base for attacking British possessions, namely, Singapore, Malaya, and Burma. To say, they wanted to occupy the country, is probably stretching it. The USA, having seen the situation in Europe, were very concerned about blocking Chinese communism ---- they knew they would need friends in the region in the post war period, so they prevailed on the British to leave it be. Later The USA drew a line through northern Burma, northern Laos, and northern Vietnam, which was the defence line against communism.

Every source one reads in this part of the world, has a large spin factor. Beware. -------

For example the OP uses the term ''Thailand gave Laos to the French''. The reality was the French took it, and then the Thais, recognising the fact, decided to Give it to them. The French took the land north of the Mekong first and later came back for more, taking some land on the southern side across from Luang Prabang.

The OP also got confused over the use of the term Tai which he implies means North. It does not --- it actually means South. Nua is North. He seems to have got confused because the Tai peoples still live in the Yunnan prefecture of China, which is to the north of Thailand.

Thanks for clarifying this. The earliest "Tais" did infact, migrate from Yunnan province to Siam.

The original thai ppl came from china. A place called sip song panna i believe. Over the centuries they conquered different regions and kingdoms etc and the various thai ethnic groups you see have been "thaified" It's a process that occurs everywhere. Like the chinese of today all speak mandarin but before china was unified it wasn't like that and the issue of mandarin being widely spoken is being a modern construct as policies implemented by the chinese govt.

The tai or the dai still reside in china today and they are the ancestors of the thai ppl.Many cultural similarities like the water festival also celebrated by the laos, burmese etc. There has been some confusion between tai and thai because tai in thai language means south but there is an ethnic group or rather a number of groups called "tai".

[Kitsune]

French people are ignorant

They cause trouble everywhere they are

They have a dreadful attitude

That's what happens when you have a president that can't keep his pants on.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Kitsune

[simon43]

So far as French bashing we have :

French people are ignorant

They cause trouble everywhere they are

They have a dreadful attitude

If it were about Thai people the topic would be closed by now; but it's OK to bash French, everyone hates the French !

But they doi have some redeaming factors:

- French bread

- French wine

- French cuisine

- French women (no, scrub that one, armpits hairier than a gorilla...)

Only joking on that last point of course

[Aforek]

French bashing again so many clichés and idées reçues about a country that passionates you ( love or hate ) : 4 pages already and topic closed again I suppose : I am proud that my country brings so much passion; please, go on, it's so funny

[Kitsune]

So far as French bashing we have :

French people are ignorant

They cause trouble everywhere they are

They have a dreadful attitude

If it were about Thai people the topic would be closed by now; but it's OK to bash French, everyone hates the French !

But they doi have some redeaming factors:

- French bread

- French wine

- French cuisine

- French women (no, scrub that one, armpits hairier than a gorilla...)

Only joking on that last point of course

- French fries over-saturated fat will kill you

- French kiss, mix your bacterias with strangers ewww

- French letters: Madame de Sevigne, writing in 1671, dismissed it as "armour against enjoyment and a spider's web against danger"

- French dressing is actually American

It's not the armpits you have to worry about, it's the smell, French people don't wash it's a fact.

[NoshowJones]

Bender, the French guy is in his mid fifties, the Thai guy only a teenager and by himself. He did attack the Frenchman from behind though with a sharp weapon into his face, otherwise he would have been no match for him. Just like the Thais, the French are not known for their bravery.

[Kitsune]

Bender, the French guy is in his mid fifties, the Thai guy only a teenager and by himself. He did attack the Frenchman from behind though with a sharp weapon into his face, otherwise he would have been no match for him. Just like the Thais, the French are not known for their bravery.

Oh yes we forgot : The French are coward

Anybody else ?

[thailandbeachisland]

People who are proud to be French are just as ridiculous as people who are proud to be Thai...

But actually anybody who is proud to be born somewhere he didn't decide in a country he didn't decide from parents he didn't decide, etc... MUST BE QUITE STUPID ANYWAY !

Edited February 24, 2014 by thailandbeachisland

[marko kok prong]

The french have made their mark on Indo-China more than brits probably like to acknowledge. Vientienne, Pnom Penh and in particularly Saigon/HCM are architectually on another level than any Thai city. Long wide boulevards, proper city planning, fantastic parks with tall old trees. Baguettes and real coffee. Saigon center is like a small version of asian Paris, infinitely more pleasent and aestically pleasing than the generic and ugly modern Thai architecture. Saigon was for a time the capital of Indo-China and with good reason.

As always, the socialists and communists in Laos, Cambodja and Vietnam managed to set the countries back to stone age agrarian society, but the infastructure left by the french will allow these countries to blow by Thailand as their wealth grows. After all, when it comes to quality of life, it is not only about being bombarded with commercials everywhere (as is the case in Thailand), but also about having access to a nice cooling park with old trees, nice architecture and gastronomy that is above sugar and chili.

The reason that Laos, Cambodja and Vietnam is behind is due to marxism and socialism, just like Cuba and as always, the marxists managed to get support for their case by disguising themselves as nationalists who would drive the foreigners out.

It's a dam_n shame, but to conclude on the question, I believe Isaan would have been much, much better off if the french had been there and lifted them into the modern age. Unfortunately, the Isaanites now seem to fall under sway of semi-socialist populists like Taksin.

i agree,thai towns and cities have to be amongst the ugliest i have seen anywhere,i think this is due to the fact in the old days most houses would be built from wood,which does not last, i would love to see how it would of looked in the 1920s or something full of traditional thai houses,unfortunatley today most construction looks pretty awful.

[marko kok prong]

Bender, the French guy is in his mid fifties, the Thai guy only a teenager and by himself. He did attack the Frenchman from behind though with a sharp weapon into his face, otherwise he would have been no match for him. Just like the Thais, the French are not known for their bravery.

i would say he is lucky,usually it would have been at least ten thais on one.