Suthep defends his riot control role in 2010

[332]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Don't shotgun shells have a tendancy to, you know, spread out?

How close would one have to be to someone to ensure that only below their knees were hit?

[catweazle]

I'm not a Suthep lover, but let's give this guy some slack, shall we?

Firstly he deserves respect for admitting that he alone gave the order, without any fingerpointing and blaming others since most Thai officials actually would.

Secondly the reds AND the mysterious men in black (perhaps they were sweating Black Water?) were armed, wore body armor and started to burn down vital areas of Bangkok city, including Siam Paragon after weeks of demolishing noodle shops and putting countless other local business people, from roadside Som Tam sellers over t-shirt and souvenir shops to car sellers out of business by turning the area they lived and worked at into a war zone, using small children as shields. Leftist liberal media hailed them as "freedom fighters" - freedom my #$$ ! If someone shoots at me, I shoot back, simple as that !!! If I am in charge and someone shoots with life rounds at my soldiers, I hellyeah order them to return fire. So what?

Anyone who is too blind-eyed and deaf to realize that back then forces behind the curtain and most likely originating from another country were trying to destabilize the country, should go home and watch Teletubbies for the rest of their miserable lifes...

Edited June 9, 2014 by catweazle

[whybother]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level when men in black emerged from among the rioters and started to fire at soldiers with assault rifles!!

Would it not have been more fitting for him to order the soldiers to shoot at the men in black instead!!!! What a crazy bizarre thing to say. This man is a lunatic, always has been. Besides, the way i remember it back then is i was deprived of attending my young sisters funeral. The airport was taken hostage by thousands of people in yellow shirts.

The yellow shirt airport protests were in 2008. The red shirt protests (what this topic is about) were in 2010.

The quote about my sisters funeral was not directly referring to a date it was something that directly effected me through Thailand's political turmoil in the past. No idea what years any of it was. Not particularly interested. I specifically posted to say the orders he gave where bizarre and crazy.

Why did you even bring up your sister's funeral then?

What orders would you give to deal with armed protesters?

[FangFerang]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Some buildings still upstanding thanks to him putting an end to the ludicrous terror and rioting, looting and burning.

The rioting, looting and burning started after people were shot -- below the knee. Having friends, family and coworkers gunned down tends to make decision making less of an intellectual exercise and more of a berserker rage. Even better, the mall that burned down was the only mall downtown that had insurance to cover "uprisings". I know some insurance investigators that would have LOVED that case.

Yellows and Reds are equally vile liars, cheats and murderers.

Anyone who falls in love with their own opinions is taking a shortcut to simple-mindedness.

[pmugghc]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Not justifying orders, decision or application - but I think instructions to aim bellow knee level (or similar phrasing) aren't that

rare in other armies as well. This is more about defining that the shooting is not intended to kill, setting an upper bar the

soldiers. Would be pretty standard to set something of the sort as guideline.

Obviously, better in theory than in practice.

Not sure if it has much to do with Suthep being a fine upstanding gentleman or not, it is more a procedural decision someone

has to take and be responsible for. I am guessing the army generals weren't going anywhere without clear signed orders, and

that Suthep was It (not saying he was unwilling or forced to).

You are taking B/S i am an ex soldier and you ARE NOT taught to aim below the knees you are taught only one method. Shoot for the chest and shoot to kill. End of story.

I don't know which army you were in, perhaps the Waffen SS? But I think it's a nonsense statement. Did you ever do guard duty? Did you shoot to kill right away? Did the British in northern Ireland use your method!

Perhaps Fat Haggis would like to comment?

Edited June 9, 2014 by pmugghc

[pmugghc]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level when men in black emerged from among the rioters and started to fire at soldiers with assault rifles!!

Would it not have been more fitting for him to order the soldiers to shoot at the men in black instead!!!! What a crazy bizarre thing to say. This man is a lunatic, always has been. Besides, the way i remember it back then is i was deprived of attending my young sisters funeral. The airport was taken hostage by thousands of people in yellow shirts.

The yellow shirt airport protests were in 2008. The red shirt protests (what this topic is about) were in 2010.

The quote about my sisters funeral was not directly referring to a date it was something that directly effected me through Thailand's political turmoil in the past. No idea what years any of it was. Not particularly interested. I specifically posted to say the orders he gave where bizarre and crazy.

So you don't even remember the year of your sister's funeral?

[AleG]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

.....so how did 90+ peacefull protesters - most of which were sheltering in a temple - were shot and killed by high powered sniper rifles?

Shotgun below the knee my azz. This wanna-be dictator directly ordered the slaughter of nearly 100 inocent men, women and children and should be tried at an international court of justice for crimes against humanity!

This is who Suthep had to deal with, a heavily armed militia operating within the Red Shirts, if they wouldn´t had showed up at Democracy Monument to speed up the martyr manufacturing process nobody would had died there. The blood of all those killed in 2010 rest with this people and those they worked for.

[Fat Haggis]

Suthep doesn't need to take the fall for anything. We've been over this many times before. Under the SoE in place at the time, the PM is immune to prosecution.

And that small armed and willing element? I call bullshit. It was a very large and well armed element being sheltered willingly by everyone else. I call a spade a spade.

This has been gone over a number of times but it appears that you have not been listening. abhisit and suthep will only be immune from prosecution under the SoE IF the response to the perceived threat is seen to be proportionate.

I would imagine the imposition of live fire zones, the use of snipers and around 80 plus unarmed civilians having been shot dead may be stretching the definition of proportionate somewhat.

Oh give up the emotive garbage. Using snipers to identify and selectively remove threats (eg. people with guns) makes good sense given the circumstances. It's way, way better than having terrified infantry hose down the street with automatic weapons.

Here's another hard question for you: Big sign says "live fire zone". You going to go inside?

Actually no it doesn't make good sense, as there's every probability of the round passing right through the "target" and striking someone who isn't holding a weapon.

ROE's for the most will state that targets have to be positively Identified, and aimed shots are to be fired, and that extreme care must be taken to avoid "collateral" damage.

Every single day I brief my local guards up about the RUF(Rules in the Use of Force) and GR( Graduated Response) as there are times when you may indeed have a gunman pointing his weapon at you, but he/she/they are in a crowd, under our RUF/GR and the local law, we cannot engage these targets without the risk of injuring other persons within the vicinity.

Most country's ROE's are pretty generic, I also seem to recall being given a presentation by the JAG prior to a deployment with an American Company, and they used videos to ask the question "Shoot or Not to shoot" and the audience participation was interesting, in most scenarios as soon as anyone see a weapon, they said "shoot" and the JAG Officer finished, with "Congratulations for those that answered shoot on examples X, Y and Z , you'll now be facing criminal prosecution"

Thailand may very well have different ROE's but I'd disagree that using "counter snipers" on crowds is/was a good thing. Snipers can and often do invariably miss, there's lots of variables to take in the moment before the shot is taken, whilst the RTA Snipers may indeed have been of an exceptional standard of marksmanship, the kinetic energy of a High Velocity round is more than capable of passing clean through a target without dropping or killing him. "Shoot or not to shoot" that call can only be made by the guy looking down the scope at his intended target.

[whybother]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Some buildings still upstanding thanks to him putting an end to the ludicrous terror and rioting, looting and burning.

The rioting, looting and burning started after people were shot -- below the knee. Having friends, family and coworkers gunned down tends to make decision making less of an intellectual exercise and more of a berserker rage. Even better, the mall that burned down was the only mall downtown that had insurance to cover "uprisings". I know some insurance investigators that would have LOVED that case.

Yellows and Reds are equally vile liars, cheats and murderers.

Anyone who falls in love with their own opinions is taking a shortcut to simple-mindedness.

The rioting actually started before anyone was shot. The red shirts invaded government house and Thaicom. At Thaicom they threw Molotov cocktails and attacked the soldiers forcing the soldiers to withdraw.

... sent from my phone.

[Equalizer]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level when men in black emerged from among the rioters and started to fire at soldiers with assault rifles!!

Would it not have been more fitting for him to order the soldiers to shoot at the men in black instead!!!! What a crazy bizarre thing to say. This man is a lunatic, always has been. Besides, the way i remember it back then is i was deprived of attending my young sisters funeral. The airport was taken hostage by thousands of people in yellow shirts.

The yellow shirt airport protests were in 2008. The red shirt protests (what this topic is about) were in 2010.

The quote about my sisters funeral was not directly referring to a date it was something that directly effected me through Thailand's political turmoil in the past. No idea what years any of it was. Not particularly interested. I specifically posted to say the orders he gave where bizarre and crazy.

Why did you even bring up your sister's funeral then?

What orders would you give to deal with armed protesters?

Armed protesters is not the case in detail. There where a number of armed individuals who used the protesters as cover. What can you do in those circumstances! No a lot really to be honest if you want zero casualties. Personally myself i would have used rubber bullets, tear gas and a strategically placed unit of highly trained snipers to try to take out the armed individuals and to minimize the risk to unarmed individuals.

[Crushdepth]

Little man has served his purpose and is now on his way....down.

Given the number of laws he's broken recently it would be hard to explain NOT locking him up. On the other hand I've never seen anyone important go to jail in Thailand.

[Baerboxer]

Any you would stop reds trying to set fire to a petrol truck just how? Blowing air?

Baton rounds (Plastic/Rubber bullets) they worked alright for us in Northern Ireland, I can't recall live ammo having ever been used when we were Duty Internal Security Company. I believe that the ROE's changed significantly in NI after Bloody Sunday.

The Army and their Commanders on the ground during these riots in 2010 have been given immunity from prosecution, they're the ones who changed their ROE's when live rounds were used.

It's very easy to sit and quarter back what various people should have done, I'm basing my post on past experience, but I can assure you, as an 18 year old, getting petrol bombed and rocks thrown at you by thousands of pissed off protesters is a very scary and intimidating experience, and the Young Thai soldiers would have felt the same fear and apprehension I did during the 1980's with nothing but a perspex 6 foot shield in your hands (rifles were slung over our backs)

It's very easy to sit in judgement, and there's a saying in the Military, it's better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6.

The Red Shirts were armed with things that carried a lot more punch than molotovs and rocks, so you may try to extrapolate from your experience what the Thai conscripts had to deal with.

yes, and the PIRA and the INLA were always in the wings with a lot more than rocks and petrol bombs too in Northern Ireland, did I say that the red shirts were not armed ? I'm putting it into context that being on the front line, is not a place many can handle, it's terrifying, it's the unknown that is the greatest fear, now knowing if you're up to the job in the first place, it's the unknown that you can't see that cause the biggest fears.

I'm not sure if you're having a dig here or pointing out the similarities of having been there done that ?

Indeed. Your descriptive of past experiences gives a useful analogy about what young Thai soldiers went through too.

The PIRA and INLA used hidden snipers throughout the troubles in NI. In urban contexts they could be firing from a block of flats,someone's house or business premises. Here, the red shirts had so called "men in black" snipers similarly positioned and taking pot shots both at the military and innocent by standers.

The red shirts employed the tactics of intimidation, snipers, petrol bombs and grenade attacks in 2010 to get their own way and/or provoke a more serious conflict. They employed similar attacks in 2013/4 on anti-Thaksin protesters - random grenade attacks and shootings. In 2010 they were entrenched rioters and were warned live firing would be used. In 2013/4 the military dealt with their much smaller number and fragmented grouping without firing shots; despite the rhetoric from certain individual leaders promising mass uprisings and violent confrontations.

PTP approached things differently. A PM calling for peace and non-violence and CAPO seemingly able to predict when and where random attacks would occur but unable to prevent these attacks or catch the culprits. Although murder charges were filed against Yingluck and Chalerm and have to be investigated.

At least now, with the clear out of ineffective or "influenced" senior police officers and the military keeping a watchful eye, the violence has reduced considerably.

[jope]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

fortunatley your not a judge with a pre-planned verdict eh

The idea of a (political) verdict in Thailand that is NOT pre-planned is laughable.

[Fat Haggis]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Not justifying orders, decision or application - but I think instructions to aim bellow knee level (or similar phrasing) aren't that

rare in other armies as well. This is more about defining that the shooting is not intended to kill, setting an upper bar the

soldiers. Would be pretty standard to set something of the sort as guideline.

Obviously, better in theory than in practice.

Not sure if it has much to do with Suthep being a fine upstanding gentleman or not, it is more a procedural decision someone

has to take and be responsible for. I am guessing the army generals weren't going anywhere without clear signed orders, and

that Suthep was It (not saying he was unwilling or forced to).

You are taking B/S i am an ex soldier and you ARE NOT taught to aim below the knees you are taught only one method. Shoot for the chest and shoot to kill. End of story.

I don't know which army you were in, perhaps the Waffen SS? But I think it's a nonsense statement. Did you ever do guard duty? Did you shoot to kill right away? Did the British in northern Ireland use your method!

Perhaps Fat Haggis would like to comment?

Centre of Mass, nothing more, nothing less. I have instructed local Nationals for the past 10 years , it's always been "centre of mass".

Whilst also conducting Close protection out here for many years as well, not only was it centre of mass, it was shoot till the target was completely immobilized, until it it was no longer a threat to you, your client, or your team mates. Overkill perhaps, but this is the way many Tier 1 Special Operations Units teach how to shoot, and to make it clear, I am Not, and never have been Special Operations, I have however been taught to shoot and trained in CQ shooting by former CAG/SEAL/SAS/SBS members as they have been for most of my time out here my Bosses. I have never been taught, nor instructed any student, or team mate to shoot anything other than centre of mass.

There's many arguments about "where" to shoot, but getting shot in the femoral/brachial artery by a 9mm/5.56mm/7.62mm is still going to ruin your day, and unless you have good medics close by, you're going to bleed out in less than 2 minutes, less if you're already in a heightened state of anxiety. "shooting someone who has a weapon in the legs isn't going to stop him from still being able to use the weapon" ... so it's "centre of mass" till there's no chance he can

I hope that's a satisfactory reply, and not necessarily the one you were looking for?

[love1012]

Some buildings still upstanding thanks to him putting an end to the ludicrous terror and rioting, looting and burning.

80 plus civilians were killed before any buildings were set alight or looting occurred. Still what's a few dead civilians when the Bangkok Bank building is being threatened.......

Where do you people get your moral sense from?

RUBBISH - you either have a short memory or your a liar!! over 60 were killed by red shirts and thaksins hired Cambodians. DONT presume to tell me about 2010 i was there and saw it myself - you need to sort the facts out in your mind and stop blaming others for the demise of your tin pot Dubai demi god!!

You were running around ground zero with all this mayhem going on, and seen with your own eyes red-shirts and Cambodians

killing people (with apparently some of them killing their own)?

Is there any official or half official line of inquiry that suggests this?

running? Ground zero ?? `killing their own?? are you delirious?? `Were not talking about 9/11 you know!!

[love1012]

Some buildings still upstanding thanks to him putting an end to the ludicrous terror and rioting, looting and burning.

80 plus civilians were killed before any buildings were set alight or looting occurred. Still what's a few dead civilians when the Bangkok Bank building is being threatened.......

Where do you people get your moral sense from?

RUBBISH - you either have a short memory or your a liar!! over 60 were killed by red shirts and thaksins hired Cambodians. DONT presume to tell me about 2010 i was there and saw it myself - you need to sort the facts out in your mind and stop blaming others for the demise of your tin pot Dubai demi god!!

I wouldn't normally grace your posts with a reply but calling me a liar and insisting that over 60 civilians were killed by Red Shirts and that Thaksin hired Cambodians is not what one would expect from someone who claims she/he is an intelligent Thai wife.

Perhaps your "husband" could refresh your memory on just what happened in 2010?

What would you know about memory yours are all of bars in nana and excerpts from truth today !! So come on - how many WERE killed by red shirts - lets see if you have the same moral fibre as K ~Suthep does!! Same you can only criticise him and not measure up to his sense of ales and honesty - Yes Shinwatras are far more your style and level of ethics!!

[Morch]

Not justifying orders, decision or application - but I think instructions to aim bellow knee level (or similar phrasing) aren't that

rare in other armies as well. This is more about defining that the shooting is not intended to kill, setting an upper bar the

soldiers. Would be pretty standard to set something of the sort as guideline.

Obviously, better in theory than in practice.

Not sure if it has much to do with Suthep being a fine upstanding gentleman or not, it is more a procedural decision someone

has to take and be responsible for. I am guessing the army generals weren't going anywhere without clear signed orders, and

that Suthep was It (not saying he was unwilling or forced to).

You are taking B/S i am an ex soldier and you ARE NOT taught to aim below the knees you are taught only one method. Shoot for the chest and shoot to kill. End of story.

I don't know which army you were in, perhaps the Waffen SS? But I think it's a nonsense statement. Did you ever do guard duty? Did you shoot to kill right away? Did the British in northern Ireland use your method!

Perhaps Fat Haggis would like to comment?

Centre of Mass, nothing more, nothing less. I have instructed local Nationals for the past 10 years , it's always been "centre of mass".

Whilst also conducting Close protection out here for many years as well, not only was it centre of mass, it was shoot till the target was completely immobilized, until it it was no longer a threat to you, your client, or your team mates. Overkill perhaps, but this is the way many Tier 1 Special Operations Units teach how to shoot, and to make it clear, I am Not, and never have been Special Operations, I have however been taught to shoot and trained in CQ shooting by former CAG/SEAL/SAS/SBS members as they have been for most of my time out here my Bosses. I have never been taught, nor instructed any student, or team mate to shoot anything other than centre of mass.

There's many arguments about "where" to shoot, but getting shot in the femoral/brachial artery by a 9mm/5.56mm/7.62mm is still going to ruin your day, and unless you have good medics close by, you're going to bleed out in less than 2 minutes, less if you're already in a heightened state of anxiety. "shooting someone who has a weapon in the legs isn't going to stop him from still being able to use the weapon" ... so it's "centre of mass" till there's no chance he can

I hope that's a satisfactory reply, and not necessarily the one you were looking for?

I think this might be seen to some as being in contrast with your previous post (dealing with ROE, RUF and GR).

When push comes to shove, what you wrote above is absolutely right - and I think most soldiers would do that anyway, regardless, if under threat. Thing is until threat is obvious, there are them rules - doesn't always make sense, but it's like that.

As in your previous example, these regulations are not about achieving the best response in terms of neutralizing the enemy,

but more to do with covering legal issues and minimizing collateral damage.

[Morch]

80 plus civilians were killed before any buildings were set alight or looting occurred. Still what's a few dead civilians when the Bangkok Bank building is being threatened.......

Where do you people get your moral sense from?

RUBBISH - you either have a short memory or your a liar!! over 60 were killed by red shirts and thaksins hired Cambodians. DONT presume to tell me about 2010 i was there and saw it myself - you need to sort the facts out in your mind and stop blaming others for the demise of your tin pot Dubai demi god!!

You were running around ground zero with all this mayhem going on, and seen with your own eyes red-shirts and Cambodians

killing people (with apparently some of them killing their own)?

Is there any official or half official line of inquiry that suggests this?

running? Ground zero ?? `killing their own?? are you delirious?? `Were not talking about 9/11 you know!!

So you haven't actually been there when the shooting was going on and did not actually see, with your own eyes, red-shirts

and Cambodians killing red-shirts (or other civilians)?

Or did you simply mean that you were in Bangkok and followed the news like most everyone else?

[pmugghc]

When I went through the draft we were taught different ROEs for 1) war situations and 2) peace-time for guard duty. In the 2nd scenario we had to go through several steps before commencing shoot-to-kill.

[pmugghc]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Not justifying orders, decision or application - but I think instructions to aim bellow knee level (or similar phrasing) aren't that

rare in other armies as well. This is more about defining that the shooting is not intended to kill, setting an upper bar the

soldiers. Would be pretty standard to set something of the sort as guideline.

Obviously, better in theory than in practice.

Not sure if it has much to do with Suthep being a fine upstanding gentleman or not, it is more a procedural decision someone

has to take and be responsible for. I am guessing the army generals weren't going anywhere without clear signed orders, and

that Suthep was It (not saying he was unwilling or forced to).

You are taking B/S i am an ex soldier and you ARE NOT taught to aim below the knees you are taught only one method. Shoot for the chest and shoot to kill. End of story.

I don't know which army you were in, perhaps the Waffen SS? But I think it's a nonsense statement. Did you ever do guard duty? Did you shoot to kill right away? Did the British in northern Ireland use your method!

Perhaps Fat Haggis would like to comment?

Centre of Mass, nothing more, nothing less. I have instructed local Nationals for the past 10 years , it's always been "centre of mass".

Whilst also conducting Close protection out here for many years as well, not only was it centre of mass, it was shoot till the target was completely immobilized, until it it was no longer a threat to you, your client, or your team mates. Overkill perhaps, but this is the way many Tier 1 Special Operations Units teach how to shoot, and to make it clear, I am Not, and never have been Special Operations, I have however been taught to shoot and trained in CQ shooting by former CAG/SEAL/SAS/SBS members as they have been for most of my time out here my Bosses. I have never been taught, nor instructed any student, or team mate to shoot anything other than centre of mass.

There's many arguments about "where" to shoot, but getting shot in the femoral/brachial artery by a 9mm/5.56mm/7.62mm is still going to ruin your day, and unless you have good medics close by, you're going to bleed out in less than 2 minutes, less if you're already in a heightened state of anxiety. "shooting someone who has a weapon in the legs isn't going to stop him from still being able to use the weapon" ... so it's "centre of mass" till there's no chance he can

I hope that's a satisfactory reply, and not necessarily the one you were looking for?

This isn't consistent with your posts re Northern Ireland. Why did you use rubber bullets then?

[Dogmatix]

I don't recall any reports of red shirts killed with shotgun blasts. Nearly all seemed to have died from high velocity rifle rounds. Thus it should follow that no one died as a result of Suthep's orders. Instead, they must have been killed by soldiers who disobeyed his orders or by gunmen from their own side.

I am not sure how, as head of CRES, he could have avoided allowing troops who came under fire from the red shirt gunman to return fire to protect themselves and their comrades. Using only shotguns and aiming below the knees would have been an inadequate response. The troops would have had to try to get dangerously close to the gunmen for their shotguns to be effective and immobilising an enemy so that he can't retreat leaves him no option but to use his assault rifle to try to kill you. Most soldiers are not very good shots and they are trained to aim at the chest to give the best chance of hitting the enemy. Any red shirt gunmen that presented themselves as targets were likely to have been 100-200 metres away and the only chance of hitting them would have been with a rifle aimed at the chest. On the other hand there were no reports of any red shirt gunmen being hit. Their tactics were lifted straight from the IRA in Northern Ireland. Have hidden gunmen fire on troops facing unarmed protestors to provoke return fire on the protestors while the gunmen melt away leaving their own people to cop it from the frightened soldiers.

On one clip I saw shot by a Western news cameraman the commentator was pointing out troops firing on red shirts. In fact they were but the red shirts were about 200 metres away and the soldiers were firing shotguns at them and none of them were falling down because they were well out of range of shotgun fire. It seemed like the soldiers were just trying to scare them away.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Dogmatix

[Fat Haggis]

Yes, I should actually have made that part more clearer, the decision to go "noisy" is the where the Graduated Response has failed, and then your RUF we use the terminology RUF as opposed to ROE's as we're a civilian entity, whereas the ROE's are specific to the Military, from 2004 to around 2008 we operated under US CENTCOM RUF.

The previous example is one where you're in a close proximity to a potential threat, where split decisions have to be made, however when you're in a stand off location, you have more time in which to apply the ROE/RUF not so much the Graduated Response as that involves being able to communicate with the threat, that's not so easy when you're in a position several hundred Metres away in an overwatch, and it's even more difficult when you're being shot at and you can't see from where it's coming from.

One of the Principles within a contact, and when to shoot is called "reaction to effective enemy fire" that's a broad statement, but the reality is it's classed as "effective" when you start to take casualties, that's the difficult part to control, as it's all too easy to start blatting away firing in all directions wasting precious ammo, and not have a scooby where the bad guys are. I would think that's one of the reasons why the 700K rounds expended would be more believable, then you have to locate the bad guys, and then suppress his position which allows your counter sniper teams to take up their positions, again suppresive fire in a gun battle even lasting 10-15 minutes can rack up 1000's of rounds used and that's with blokes who are highly trained and been on the two way range. 700K used isn't beyond belief under the circumstances during the Bangkok crackdown.

[Thaiready]

I think he was dropped on his head at birth

[catweazle]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Some buildings still upstanding thanks to him putting an end to the ludicrous terror and rioting, looting and burning.

The rioting, looting and burning started after people were shot -- below the knee. Having friends, family and coworkers gunned down tends to make decision making less of an intellectual exercise and more of a berserker rage. Even better, the mall that burned down was the only mall downtown that had insurance to cover "uprisings". I know some insurance investigators that would have LOVED that case.

Yellows and Reds are equally vile liars, cheats and murderers.

Anyone who falls in love with their own opinions is taking a shortcut to simple-mindedness.

WRONG! Whybother's reply has the answer! And bearboxer actually summed it all up for you:

"The PIRA and INLA used hidden snipers throughout the troubles in NI. In urban contexts they could be firing from a block of flats,someone's house or business premises. Here, the red shirts had so called "men in black" snipers similarly positioned and taking pot shots both at the military and innocent by standers.

The red shirts employed the tactics of intimidation, snipers, petrol bombs and grenade attacks in 2010 to get their own way and/or provoke a more serious conflict. They employed similar attacks in 2013/4 on anti-Thaksin protesters - random grenade attacks and shootings. In 2010 they were entrenched rioters and were warned live firing would be used. In 2013/4 the military dealt with their much smaller number and fragmented grouping without firing shots; despite the rhetoric from certain individual leaders promising mass uprisings and violent confrontations.

PTP approached things differently. A PM calling for peace and non-violence and CAPO seemingly able to predict when and where random attacks would occur but unable to prevent these attacks or catch the culprits. Although murder charges were filed against Yingluck and Chalerm and have to be investigated.

At least now, with the clear out of ineffective or "influenced" senior police officers and the military keeping a watchful eye, the violence has reduced considerably."

[BillyBobThai]

I told you guys that I didn't do it.

[Fat Haggis]

Suthep admitted ordering troops to shoot at rioters with real shotguns but at below the knee level

Oh, that's OK then. What a fine upstanding gentleman.

Not justifying orders, decision or application - but I think instructions to aim bellow knee level (or similar phrasing) aren't that

rare in other armies as well. This is more about defining that the shooting is not intended to kill, setting an upper bar the

soldiers. Would be pretty standard to set something of the sort as guideline.

Obviously, better in theory than in practice.

Not sure if it has much to do with Suthep being a fine upstanding gentleman or not, it is more a procedural decision someone

has to take and be responsible for. I am guessing the army generals weren't going anywhere without clear signed orders, and

that Suthep was It (not saying he was unwilling or forced to).

You are taking B/S i am an ex soldier and you ARE NOT taught to aim below the knees you are taught only one method. Shoot for the chest and shoot to kill. End of story.

I don't know which army you were in, perhaps the Waffen SS? But I think it's a nonsense statement. Did you ever do guard duty? Did you shoot to kill right away? Did the British in northern Ireland use your method!

Perhaps Fat Haggis would like to comment?

Centre of Mass, nothing more, nothing less. I have instructed local Nationals for the past 10 years , it's always been "centre of mass".

Whilst also conducting Close protection out here for many years as well, not only was it centre of mass, it was shoot till the target was completely immobilized, until it it was no longer a threat to you, your client, or your team mates. Overkill perhaps, but this is the way many Tier 1 Special Operations Units teach how to shoot, and to make it clear, I am Not, and never have been Special Operations, I have however been taught to shoot and trained in CQ shooting by former CAG/SEAL/SAS/SBS members as they have been for most of my time out here my Bosses. I have never been taught, nor instructed any student, or team mate to shoot anything other than centre of mass.

There's many arguments about "where" to shoot, but getting shot in the femoral/brachial artery by a 9mm/5.56mm/7.62mm is still going to ruin your day, and unless you have good medics close by, you're going to bleed out in less than 2 minutes, less if you're already in a heightened state of anxiety. "shooting someone who has a weapon in the legs isn't going to stop him from still being able to use the weapon" ... so it's "centre of mass" till there's no chance he can

I hope that's a satisfactory reply, and not necessarily the one you were looking for?

This isn't consistent with your posts re Northern Ireland. Why did you use rubber bullets then?

Because when I was in Northern Ireland, I was a serving soldier, and we had the yellow card rules to follow, and it didn't allow the targeting of petrol bombers, and that the use of Baton rounds were used in the Internal Security Role, not in open situations, we did carry them on Patrol in Urban areas however, but the same principal applied, in that you were always taught to aim the baton gun, I think we called them FRG's as in Federal Riot Guns, at the centre of mass, getting hit by a baton round in most cases will knock the wind out of you, and put you on your back and also it has a very limited range, we're talking about 50-100M's here. A Baton Round/Rubber bullet is not like getting hit by a marshmallow, it's a solid piece of rubber, it looks like a flat nosed dildo, and many protesters in NI were hit in the head by these things, and died.

The other examples are of being in close proximity to a threat and having to make snap decisions that make you go from 1-4 and flash to bang in seconds, pertaining to the GR/RUF.

[thumper101]

I guess the soldiers who fired below the knees were not sharpshooters. There sites must have been off a meter or so.

Nope.. Suthep ordered them to put a bullet through their brains.

Hence, shoot at their feet.

[Morch]

Yes, I should actually have made that part more clearer, the decision to go "noisy" is the where the Graduated Response has failed, and then your RUF we use the terminology RUF as opposed to ROE's as we're a civilian entity, whereas the ROE's are specific to the Military, from 2004 to around 2008 we operated under US CENTCOM RUF.

The previous example is one where you're in a close proximity to a potential threat, where split decisions have to be made, however when you're in a stand off location, you have more time in which to apply the ROE/RUF not so much the Graduated Response as that involves being able to communicate with the threat, that's not so easy when you're in a position several hundred Metres away in an overwatch, and it's even more difficult when you're being shot at and you can't see from where it's coming from.

One of the Principles within a contact, and when to shoot is called "reaction to effective enemy fire" that's a broad statement, but the reality is it's classed as "effective" when you start to take casualties, that's the difficult part to control, as it's all too easy to start blatting away firing in all directions wasting precious ammo, and not have a scooby where the bad guys are. I would think that's one of the reasons why the 700K rounds expended would be more believable, then you have to locate the bad guys, and then suppress his position which allows your counter sniper teams to take up their positions, again suppresive fire in a gun battle even lasting 10-15 minutes can rack up 1000's of rounds used and that's with blokes who are highly trained and been on the two way range. 700K used isn't beyond belief under the circumstances during the Bangkok crackdown.

Fighting was over in less than 24 hours (most of it much earlier).

Not sure how many soldiers actively participated and actually how many armed black/red-shirts were involved.

Considering it was not a huge area, perhaps not as many soldiers in fire zone, to avoid confusion.

700K rounds, in that time frame and within a limited area.....place should have been riddled with bullets. Not that there

weren't signs, but didn't seem all that bad, really, apart from the burned buildings.

[thaiguzzi]

O, so these japanees and italian journalists, as well as those civilians at the temple in a red cross tent, and another some 80 civilians, they all were armed and not shot at head and hart

The elite yellow farangs, forget about this

Its a nice counter balance to hubbies of ex bar girl red shirt families, and their lost cause. The yin and the yang. Elite thinkers and bar fly drinkers, hahaha.

Gemini.. he's just so ....yawn ... predictable ...

[SABloke]

A question to some of our Vets...to clarify what the keyboard warriors from both sides are arguing about: If you were deployed in your capital city, had permision and/or orders to use live rounds and were being shot at, would you retaliate or defect immediately? Only a real soldier could understand what goes on in another soldiers mind...that's why I'm asking. Most here don't have a cluem