Pretty in pink: Thai Army chief proposes curtains for bunkers

[Gandtee]

He seems like a nice boy

[beautifulthailand99]

They are very camouflaged already - had real problems spotting this one..

[Jonmarleesco]

As if four years-plus of protests, counter protests, counter counter protests, multi-coloured shirts and persistent government excesses hadn't already managed to impact Bangkok - and Thailand's - image.

But it wouldn't come as any surprise that flowers and curtains are what Yingluck had in mind.

[jimbeam1]

my god, is this woman serious, she wants the army bunkers to have pink cutains and soldiers to not carry weapons, what a wacko. I can see it now, the reds attack the army and they throw flowers at them in defence while the reds blow them

away with the weapons yl takes away from the army.

Someone needs to stop this woman before she totally screws the country, sorry, she has already done that, make that, someone needs to stop here before she turns everyone into "pretties" like her.

I must have missed it. can you show us where she said pink curtains.

jb1

[DLP]

T.I.T. unbelievable

[dighambara]

Pure idiocy - ROTFLMAO

The purpose of an opening in a bunker wall is to provide a field of fire..LOL

[tomyummer]

I'm beginning to mix up 'The Nation' with 'Not the Nation' because these daily headlines and stories are equally ridiculous. Thailand is the land of lampoon.

[The Deerhunter]

According to the NATION's report.

-----Prayuth added that the army did not take sides, neither the protesters nor the government. "We provide safety and protection to ensure that no violence happens," he said.-----

IMO, soldiers should always be on the side of a government to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

-----The army has deployed the soldiers to the capital after a series of violent incidents during the antigovernment protests, which resulted in deaths and injuries on both sides.-----

Did the army's deployment of soldiers in the capital in consultation and cooperation with the CMPO? Was it at the order of a government and/or CMPO?

The army has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

Your opinion is technically questionable. Soldiers swear allegiance to the king and are there to protect the country (probably including from secession threats. They also will have some official emergency peacekeeping role in their standing orders.

Law enforcement agencies (read police) have done a very poor job of either defending the protesters or investigating the numerous attacks. Before you counter that the protesters "wont let them inside the protest area" let me say (1) Obviously, they do not trust the police inside their area, and (2) Protecting the protesters is better achieved from outside, where grenade fire-arm attacks originate. Please do not disappoint me. Do reply that the protesters probably shoot & bomb themselves. (And no, I don't think the unfortunate Red guard found in the river, beat himself up.) I abhor & reject all the violence associated with the political struggles in the Land of Smiles.

[The Deerhunter]

Why are they still protecting the protest sites when the protest sites have been closed down?

Um. There are over 100 of them in various parts of Bangers. Without stretching your cognitive powers too much, you could probably deduce that they are there to prevent a possible repeat of 2010 when a peaceful protest from the north arrived and proceeded to loot & burn parts of the city.

[The Deerhunter]

According to the NATION's report.

-----Prayuth added that the army did not take sides, neither the protesters nor the government. "We provide safety and protection to ensure that no violence happens," he said.-----

IMO, soldiers should always be on the side of a government to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

-----The army has deployed the soldiers to the capital after a series of violent incidents during the antigovernment protests, which resulted in deaths and injuries on both sides.-----

Did the army's deployment of soldiers in the capital in consultation and cooperation with the CMPO? Was it at the order of a government and/or CMPO?

The army has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

The army's job is to follow government instructions within the framework of the law. It should also be noted that, this being a constitutional monarchy, there is also a higher authority which can override or intervene in the government's instructions, although for pragmatic and traditional reasons this has only done in extremis. The army is not here to support the government in a political sense (yes, I know, I'm getting to that); it is obliged to refuse government orders that are illegal; and ultimately it is responsible to the head of state rather than the government.

I do not entirely agree that it has impeded rule of law. Obviously there is an extensive tradition of illegal military coups, but the fact is that whenever the shit hits the fan the police have proved utterly useless and it is the army that eventually restores law and order, albeit frequently at the expense of the government which are generally breaking the law left right and centre. Yes it sucks, but this is a developing country, a lot of shit doesn't work and if "rule of law" actually existed in Thailand it just wouldn't be necessary.

IMHO there is no rule of law in Thailand. The reason you don't get mugged in the street is largely because of social convention.

I can see that you were trying to give a balanced view on the loyalty, duties and responsibilities of the Army. However, I think you strayed into a territories that do not exist - higher authority's overriding and intervention, there was no illegal government orders, the HOS of Thailand is not to involve in political matters and he did not issue any order.

Your comment and opinion, however, did not answer my questions.

The Army's actions and inaction has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

"The Army's actions and inaction has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law."

Please provide examples of this claim. I seem to have completely missed seeing any. Just asking???

[The Deerhunter]

According to the NATION's report.

-----Prayuth added that the army did not take sides, neither the protesters nor the government. "We provide safety and protection to ensure that no violence happens," he said.-----

IMO, soldiers should always be on the side of a government to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

-----The army has deployed the soldiers to the capital after a series of violent incidents during the antigovernment protests, which resulted in deaths and injuries on both sides.-----

Did the army's deployment of soldiers in the capital in consultation and cooperation with the CMPO? Was it at the order of a government and/or CMPO?

The army has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

The army's job is to follow government instructions within the framework of the law. It should also be noted that, this being a constitutional monarchy, there is also a higher authority which can override or intervene in the government's instructions, although for pragmatic and traditional reasons this has only done in extremis. The army is not here to support the government in a political sense (yes, I know, I'm getting to that); it is obliged to refuse government orders that are illegal; and ultimately it is responsible to the head of state rather than the government.

I do not entirely agree that it has impeded rule of law. Obviously there is an extensive tradition of illegal military coups, but the fact is that whenever the shit hits the fan the police have proved utterly useless and it is the army that eventually restores law and order, albeit frequently at the expense of the government which are generally breaking the law left right and centre. Yes it sucks, but this is a developing country, a lot of shit doesn't work and if "rule of law" actually existed in Thailand it just wouldn't be necessary.

IMHO there is no rule of law in Thailand. The reason you don't get mugged in the street is largely because of social convention.

I can see that you were trying to give a balanced view on the loyalty, duties and responsibilities of the Army. However, I think you strayed into a territories that do not exist - higher authority's overriding and intervention, there was no illegal government orders, the HOS of Thailand is not to involve in political matters and he did not issue any order.

Your comment and opinion, however, did not answer my questions.

The Army's actions and inaction has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

"The Army's actions and inaction has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law."

Please provide examples of this claim. I seem to have completely missed seeing any. Just asking???

[The Deerhunter]

There's a very old maxim that sometimes women should be seen and not heard.... and here's an example of why.

It was bad enough that Yingluck (who was as qualified for the position as General Prayuth was to be a supermodel) was foisted on the army in the first place. This had to be some kind of cruel revenge on her brother's part but to have her actually telling them what to do must be even more galling.

To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?

"To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?"

Sarcasm right? Given that his actions throughout this terrorist uprising have been tantamount to mutiny!

Mutiny? Are you serious? By whose definition? Ah, yes, Yours!!!! Oh well, never mind. No one takes statements like that seriously on this forum except you & your 6 or 8 mates.

[ArtHay]

The comment is obviously sarcasm born of arrogance.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[fasteddie]

There's a very old maxim that sometimes women should be seen and not heard.... and here's an example of why.

It was bad enough that Yingluck (who was as qualified for the position as General Prayuth was to be a supermodel) was foisted on the army in the first place. This had to be some kind of cruel revenge on her brother's part but to have her actually telling them what to do must be even more galling.

To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?

"To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?"

Sarcasm right? Given that his actions throughout this terrorist uprising have been tantamount to mutiny!

Mutiny? Are you serious? By whose definition? Ah, yes, Yours!!!! Oh well, never mind. No one takes statements like that seriously on this forum except you & your 6 or 8 mates.

The general has repeatedly refused requests (orders) from his C in C, personally promised to protect and uphold the rights of the people to freely exercise their right to vote and didn't lift a finger to help them, moved troops on to the streets of Bangkok without orders from, and against the wishes of the government.

Mutiny!

Sent from my LG-P880 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Thaddeus]

dupe

Edited March 11, 2014 by Thaddeus

[Thaddeus]

There's a very old maxim that sometimes women should be seen and not heard.... and here's an example of why.

It was bad enough that Yingluck (who was as qualified for the position as General Prayuth was to be a supermodel) was foisted on the army in the first place. This had to be some kind of cruel revenge on her brother's part but to have her actually telling them what to do must be even more galling.

To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?

"To the general's credit he has handled this and the entire political crisis impeccably. Worth of the Nobel Peace Prize nomination perhaps?"

Sarcasm right? Given that his actions throughout this terrorist uprising have been tantamount to mutiny!

Mutiny? Are you serious? By whose definition? Ah, yes, Yours!!!! Oh well, never mind. No one takes statements like that seriously on this forum except you & your 6 or 8 mates.

The general has repeatedly refused requests (orders) from his C in C, personally promised to protect and uphold the rights of the people to freely exercise their right to vote and didn't lift a finger to help them, moved troops on to the streets of Bangkok without orders from, and against the wishes of the government.

Mutiny!

Whereas The Police were repeatedly ordered to protect and uphold the rights of people protesting peacefully, and the only finger they lifted was to point it at someone else.

Par for the course.

Edited March 11, 2014 by Thaddeus

[fasteddie]

The general has repeatedly refused requests (orders) from his C in C, personally promised to protect and uphold the rights of the people to freely exercise their right to vote and didn't lift a finger to help them, moved troops on to the streets of Bangkok without orders from, and against the wishes of the government.

Mutiny!

Whereas The Police were repeatedly ordered to protect and uphold the rights of people protesting peacefully, and the only finger they lifted was to point it at someone else.

Par for the course.

Try to keep up! this post is about the army.

[Thaddeus]

The general has repeatedly refused requests (orders) from his C in C, personally promised to protect and uphold the rights of the people to freely exercise their right to vote and didn't lift a finger to help them, moved troops on to the streets of Bangkok without orders from, and against the wishes of the government.

Mutiny!

Whereas The Police were repeatedly ordered to protect and uphold the rights of people protesting peacefully, and the only finger they lifted was to point it at someone else.

Par for the course.

Try to keep up! this post is about the army.

Try to keep up?

I stated the fundamental reason why The Army are there.

[MGP]

According to the NATION's report.

-----Prayuth added that the army did not take sides, neither the protesters nor the government. "We provide safety and protection to ensure that no violence happens," he said.-----

IMO, soldiers should always be on the side of a government to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

-----The army has deployed the soldiers to the capital after a series of violent incidents during the antigovernment protests, which resulted in deaths and injuries on both sides.-----

Did the army's deployment of soldiers in the capital in consultation and cooperation with the CMPO? Was it at the order of a government and/or CMPO?

The army has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.

Well if they stop sociopathic animals from launching grenades into crowds, and save one child's life, it will all be worthwhile, right?

Of course, it is worthwhile to save the life of a child but this is not what I was stressing. What is worrying is that the army's inaction and actions has resulted even the death of children and prompted me to mention that "The army has certainly make it very hard and has impeded law enforcement agencies to reinstate law and order and the enforcement of rule of law.".

The dem's pdrc/pcad rallies/demonstrations had put the children in danger:

ChildrenAtRally.jpg CHildrenAtRally2.jpg ChildrenAtRally3.jpg

ChildrenAtRally4.jpg ChildrenAtRally5.jpg ChildrenAtRally6.jpg

No. It is the rampant corruption, abuse of power, and disrespect of the law that is putting the future of those children and the future of this nation in danger. The protesters are fighting for the future of those children, and the army is protecting their right to protest peacefully.

And by the way: my relatives, friends and coworkers have been protesting for the last 4 months and they are not "dem's pdrc/pcad". They are honest and responsible Thai citizens

Edited March 11, 2014 by MGP