Surapong, the Poker Player:

I see your one bully (Suthep), and I raise you two (Chalerm and Jatuporn)

the pot is Yingluck

Nice of Surapong to offer someone else's services for the debate.

Surapong's main message is correct: a public debate will do nothing to solve the conflict. Discussions mediated by the UN is the only way forward at this point.

Public debate of ideas is the basis of Democracy, so that the electorate can make informed decisions at the time of casting their votes.

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

debate ? he means punch up surely

Over to you bully boy suthep !

But he "Suthep" will go down in history as a Hero... unlike you who will just go down..!

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Gee mate.... get a life...!

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Even her family know that she is totally incompetent, but getting a vote of no confidence from The Gimp, it doesn't get much worse

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Ferwert, you need to go and take your meds dear boy.

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters as evidenced on Social Media last night, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Ferwert, you need to go and take your meds dear boy.

LOL

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

Nonsense!

Representatives of the government in negotiations are fully authorized to make binding decisions which are then enacted through parliament.

A recent example of this would be the representatives sent to the UN by the Syrian government to negotiate and make decisions on behalf of the Syrian government in discussions with the various rebel factions.

So send Chalerm in that capacity - Call Surapongs bluff.

Chalerm and Suthep. Hand to hand. No need for Don King here. This fight sells itself.

Yingluck has never had a debate with anyone. Not with Abhisit, not with Suthep. Imagine Obama getting elected as president without ever having to have a debate with his opponents. You can't. He would get crucified.

I find that very peculiar. How can the public make an informed decision if the candidate has never talked about his/her policies in public? This is a flaw in the Thai democracy. They don't make rational informed decisions after studying the facts and they don't penalize a candidate for mistakes.

One side wants open debate

One side wants SECRET talks

hahahahahahahahahahah

Rubbish. You missed the point. A debate was not requested by Suthep. He wanted to televise the negotiations. Not the same thing.

So Suthep wants to talk to the organ grinder and he is offered the monkey.

Isn't the organ grinder in Dubai ? I thought it was the monkey he wanted to talk to...

Ok if I understand Chalerm and Jatuporn are chief of caretaker government

DPM Surapong seems a bit reluctant to volunteer. No guessing why, he's less competent than his cousin (take your pick).

A massed debate with Chalerm, Jutuporn Suthep? indeed this might well be worth asking the Oxford Union to host.

Or in reality the local K.3 class at the local school would be a far more suitable venue for all those dummies and toys thrown out of the pram and playpen.

"He said that the TV appearance would look like a debate rather than a negotiation to resolve a conflict. If Mr Suthep is sincere about talks to settle the conflict, he suggested that the two sides should hold talks in closed doors, he added". Why negotiate behind closed doors? I thought Pheu Thai was the party for democracy. What are they afraid the public will know about.

The above statement itself proves beyond doubt

1) Yingluck should not be PM

2) Pheu Thai are definatley trying to hide something

3) Yingluck if you are innocent, turn up to court like the Democrat leader did, to face your accusers

4) when your brother asked you to be his stooge, you agree so you must accept what you recieve

Over to you bully boy suthep !

If Suthep agrees then will Chalerm and Jatuporn have the authority to make binding statements / agreement that can lead to a lasting resolution during the debate - statements which YL and the rest of PTP will be obliged to stick to.

I'd beat my life that answer from within the ranks of the PTP would probably be hell no!! Which makes Surapongs idea rather pointless as it would just be a 'talking shop' rather than a negotiation on ending the political impasse.

I personally would love to see Suthep and Chalerm go head to head, especially with Chalerm taking binding decisions on PTP behalf. His track record is brilliant - Didn't he agree to be beheaded if Taksin wasn't back by the end of 2013?

The basic premise of this argument is false.

It suggests that binding agreements about Thailand's governance can be made in a forum outside Parliament, and ignoring the majority electorate who have allocated places in that Parliament.

Debating, arguing, negotiating or whatever one wants to call it, with the coup-monger leadership is no different than the speeches, pontifications, harangues and getting up on a soapbox which are part of an election campaign.

For the coup-monger leadership to think they can make progress outside Parliamentary and Electoral Democracy is not only an affront to an electoral majority, but reflective of their basic anti-democracy philosophy.

That said, one also does not acquiesce to a weakening opponent. Sparsely populated blocked streets by dwindling protesters, is at the roots of this sudden Suthep conversion to discussions. Trying to set the stage for such discussions with great bombast, is merely a bluff seeking to maintain a false aura of dealing from a position of strength.

When one cannot "force the issue any further", one quickly pivots to negotiations, before such a weakened position becomes apparent.

But as Ms. Y. stated, that will only occur within a constitutionally supported set of rules detailing Thailand's Democratic and Electoral democracy form of Govt...

Those things are non-negotiable....It implies that discussions and considering political alternatives in a binding sort of way, will only occur within a Parliamentary setting, not one within such discussion proposals envisioned by anti-democratic forces.

Should such an idea progress, I can imagine the electoral majority being up in arms, about how their votes are so diminished.

we live on different planets

My wife and all her friend have said they will not longer protest if there is a debate on National TV

They want piece

Thank god farlang can not vote in Thailand

we would be back to the American Civil War

One side wants open debate

One side wants SECRET talks

hahahahahahahahahahah

Nothing changes then!!

One side wants open debate

One side wants SECRET talks

hahahahahahahahahahah

Rubbish. You missed the point. A debate was not requested by Suthep. He wanted to televise the negotiations. Not the same thing.

Yes it was the PTP that said it would be debate

and after realising what they had said

said we not want a debate,, ( could reveal to much to the thai people)

I would be useless for Suthep to negotiate with just one person (be it caretaker-PM or whoever) unless it would be with Thaksin himself. Nobody in the government can make real decisions without approval from Thaksin. So what's there to negotiate?

A massive own goal by Surapong. It's bad enough to hint that Yingluck is not up to the job of defending the government but to actually come out and say it is downright embarrassing. And then he puts the tin lid on it by suggesting that PM wannabe Chalerm would be a better choice!

If she isn't good enough then why is she in the top job?

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Two things about this:

1 why should Suthep have a debate with Chalerm of Jatuporn? Are they the leaders of this govt?

2 Even Surapong admits that Yingluck is no match for Suthep...

It shows the trust the PT has in their dear leader.

Likewise, why should Yingluck have a debate with Bully Boy Suthep, Is he leader of the opposition ?.

Both Bully Boy and Jutaporn have very little office, Jutaporn is a party spokesman but Bully Boy a nobody.

Yep ! Bully Boy how about a chat with Jutaporn, or are you too gutless for that and only take on weaker women.

Well, Mr Surapong, debate or not, Yingluck is, supposedly, Thailand's political leader. Hence, it is to be expected that she should be able to hold her own in a one-on-one discussion. Any debate involving Chalerm or Jatuporn would inevitably degenerate into a garbled melee. Come to that, why don't you accept Suthep's challenge on behalf of Yingluck?

Mr Surapong further said that if Mr Suthep really wanted a public debate then the latter should better challenge Chalerm Yubamrung, director of Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order, or red-shirt core leader Jatuporn Promphan which would be a better match instead of Ms Yingluck who could not match Mr Suthep anyway.

Two things about this:

1 why should Suthep have a debate with Chalerm of Jatuporn? Are they the leaders of this govt?

2 Even Surapong admits that Yingluck is no match for Suthep...

It shows the trust the PT has in their dear leader.

Likewise, why should Yingluck have a debate with Bully Boy Suthep, Is he leader of the opposition ?.

Both Bully Boy and Jutaporn have very little office, Jutaporn is a party spokesman but Bully Boy a nobody.

Yep ! Bully Boy how about a chat with Jutaporn, or are you too gutless for that and only take on weaker women.

You do realise it is supposed to be about talks between the Government and the PDRC, not PTP and the Dems, right? Suthep is the leader of the PDRC and Yingluck is the leader of the Government.

I can understand that the Government does not want to have such a dialogue in front of the cameras, as that would just them play to the cameras and stand a hard line - no one would want to appear soft in front of the nation, ergo it would be a failure. Surapong's, or rather YL's, response should have been, not to offer up irrelevant replacements without the power to negotiate, they should have offered up a compromise such as an independent (most likely trusted foreign intermediary) to chair a say, 3 on 3 team - closed door. That way the intermediary can report/publish the final agreement (or none) without all the juxtapositioning and airing of dirty laundry - after all it is a result that is wanted, and peace or a least cessation of violence and escalation to civil war.

BTW: Thatcher was a women - Merkel is a woman - I am sure few would like to take either on in a debate when they were (are) leaders of their respective countries!

Amazing. Yingluck no confidence to match Suthep. Wonder why that is yet she is running the country. She is a music hall joke. Ha Ha.

Make it in English too - I just love watching Yingluck debate in English - she's so inspirational! Whenever she debates in English she makes me believe, if she can become PM, then I could achieve anything!

Good to see the PTP have so much faith in their dear leader.

Still, I would like to see Chalerm, renowned for his gift of the gab, in a debate with Suthep. Pure comedy.

It amuses me to see some quoting "dear leader" as is used in North Korea where there are no elections but appointed leaders which is the very opposite to what Yingluck wants, she wants free elections, however old Bully Boy Suthep is the one who wants to be "dear leader".............you know, no elections, government to be by appointment with him, no doubt in the background telling his team what they can and cannot do. And he has plenty of land in the south where he can put those in camps for education if they happen to object. He really thinks that he is already there with his orders and demands. Sooner or later, this Bully Boy of a Benito is going to come down to earth with a mighty crash, and the sooner the better for Thailand.