Prayut will not commit to poll date

[whybother]

Come on guys, corruption is a lame excuse for the coup, most know the reason and there will be no election until after everything is done and dusted.

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

[rubl]

And after this elaborate process, the NCPO will simply go ahead and implement the reforms they need to keep the "right" people in power.

That's the number one excuse for not cooperating I think. Assume and follow on that assumption.

Anyway, although not wanting to interfere in the NRC process and work, the NCPO has listened to various complaints and has suggested the NRC to invite some foreign observers. No names have been given but Immigration is already processing the required documents to make them legal

NRC observers.jpg

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Military-outlines-sweeping-political-reforms-to-NR-30245054.html

Even though the military only made "suggestions", one does not ignore suggestions in this political climate. The first thing that the NRC received, on their first day of work, was the NCPO's shopping list. I consider this to be interference.

Didn't the NCPO already indicate at the first mention of reforms and how to handle procedures, structure, population of structure, the items for the reforms ? Isn't this reflected in the NRC committees on various subjects? Isn't a gentle reminder of what rather than how is appropriate? Is the NCPO not the right party to mention possible reforms in the political sector?

As for ignoring suggestions, well, it would seem seven or so NLA members have stepped down already even though they were selected / appointed. I may have missed the announcement from the NCPO about public execution, guillotine kindly donated by Robespierre, to be broadcasted on all channels of course.

But you're getting closer, away from 'NCPO will simply go ahead and implement the reforms they need'. Now that I call progress. There's hope yet, for posters that is, unfortunately I'm not so sure.about Thailand. Maybe those three aliens could take over for a while.

Edited October 20, 2014 by rubl

[brucec64]

And after this elaborate process, the NCPO will simply go ahead and implement the reforms they need to keep the "right" people in power.

That's the number one excuse for not cooperating I think. Assume and follow on that assumption.

Anyway, although not wanting to interfere in the NRC process and work, the NCPO has listened to various complaints and has suggested the NRC to invite some foreign observers. No names have been given but Immigration is already processing the required documents to make them legal

NRC observers.jpg

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Military-outlines-sweeping-political-reforms-to-NR-30245054.html

Even though the military only made "suggestions", one does not ignore suggestions in this political climate. The first thing that the NRC received, on their first day of work, was the NCPO's shopping list. I consider this to be interference.

Didn't the NCPO already indicate at the first mention of reforms and how to handle procedures, structure, population of structure, the items for the reforms ? Isn't this reflected in the NRC committees on various subjects? Isn't a gentle reminder of what rather than how is appropriate? Is the NCPO not the right party to mention possible reforms in the political sector?

As for ignoring suggestions, well, it would seem seven or so NLA members have stepped down already even though they were selected / appointed. I may have missed the announcement from the NCPO about public execution, guillotine kindly donated by Robespierre, to be broadcasted on all channels of course.

But you're getting closer, away from 'NCPO will simply go ahead and implement the reforms they need'. Now that I call progress. There's hope yet, for posters that is, unfortunately I'm not so sure.about Thailand. Maybe those three aliens could take over for a while.

The NCPO will implement their reforms through an elaborate charade because, apparently, "you can still fool some of the people all of the time."

[Robespiere]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

[whybother]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

So they "took to the streets" because of the amnesty bill, as I said.

They continued the protests because of the incompetence and corruption, and also because they didn't accept that PTP "winning" an election would legitimise the things that PTP wanted to do.

Then, after a number of shootings and bombings and deaths, and no prospect of a solution, the army decided to step in.

[rubl]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Military-outlines-sweeping-political-reforms-to-NR-30245054.html

Even though the military only made "suggestions", one does not ignore suggestions in this political climate. The first thing that the NRC received, on their first day of work, was the NCPO's shopping list. I consider this to be interference.

Didn't the NCPO already indicate at the first mention of reforms and how to handle procedures, structure, population of structure, the items for the reforms ? Isn't this reflected in the NRC committees on various subjects? Isn't a gentle reminder of what rather than how is appropriate? Is the NCPO not the right party to mention possible reforms in the political sector?

As for ignoring suggestions, well, it would seem seven or so NLA members have stepped down already even though they were selected / appointed. I may have missed the announcement from the NCPO about public execution, guillotine kindly donated by Robespierre, to be broadcasted on all channels of course.

But you're getting closer, away from 'NCPO will simply go ahead and implement the reforms they need'. Now that I call progress. There's hope yet, for posters that is, unfortunately I'm not so sure.about Thailand. Maybe those three aliens could take over for a while.

The NCPO will implement their reforms through an elaborate charade because, apparently, "you can still fool some of the people all of the time."

You state that with such confidence that I gather your Crystal Ball is still working. Of course you might also be part of the 'in-crowd', or even just a spy

[Robespiere]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

So they "took to the streets" because of the amnesty bill, as I said.

They continued the protests because of the incompetence and corruption, and also because they didn't accept that PTP "winning" an election would legitimise the things that PTP wanted to do.

Then, after a number of shootings and bombings and deaths, and no prospect of a solution, the army decided to step in.

I think the army were in the game a hell of a lot earlier than you seem to be suggesting.

[Fat Haggis]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

So they "took to the streets" because of the amnesty bill, as I said.

They continued the protests because of the incompetence and corruption, and also because they didn't accept that PTP "winning" an election would legitimise the things that PTP wanted to do.

Then, after a number of shootings and bombings and deaths, and no prospect of a solution, the army decided to step in.

And that's worked out so well in the south eh?

[rubl]

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

Welcome to the Muppet Lab where the past is rewritten today.

A storm in a teacup, "please go home, more to follow', House dissolved, elections to be forced through, Emergency Degree, etc., etc.

Months of disruption, with the nightly gunfire and grenade attacks. It's as if I hear some of Robespierre's speeches again. Sadly misunderstood hero of the revolution, that one.

Anyway even Robespierre had interesting ideas on how the wider public should vote. Maybe PM Prayut should postpone elections a bit to allow him to learn more on how Robespierre envisioned "Égalité"

[harryfrompattaya]

It wouldn't surprise me if an election is not held for three or four years. This was well planned out in advance.

I agree with you. The indications are that due to the health of the man behind the yellow curtain, he will stay in power for a long long time until well after the situation improves. I am sure that the General regret relinquishing power so soon after the 2006 coup and aren't about to reliquish power anytime soon. I predict that the Generals will only reliquish power around 2019 which is when the global economic crisis is due. Also most of the major infrastructure projects will be contracted out by then leaving only crumbs for the future civilian government.

That global economic crisis is going start July 18 2018 at 7:00 pm the Date was changed by Marcus Rothschild because he is going to open the First Bank on The Moon on November 15 2018 and will be away for 2 years

[whybother]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

So they "took to the streets" because of the amnesty bill, as I said.

They continued the protests because of the incompetence and corruption, and also because they didn't accept that PTP "winning" an election would legitimise the things that PTP wanted to do.

Then, after a number of shootings and bombings and deaths, and no prospect of a solution, the army decided to step in.

And that's worked out so well in the south eh?

You're really clutching at straws comparing 10 years of trouble in the south to the situation now.

[fab4]

Come on guys, corruption is a lame excuse for the coup, most know the reason and there will be no election until after everything is done and dusted.

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

As long as we accept that the coup needed an excuse in a vain attempt to make it appear legitimate, I'll agree with you on that point.

If, however, we are talking about a reason for the coup, as opposed to an excuse for it, none of the above suggestions apply - and I'll leave it at that.

[cdnvic]

Anymore personal attacks against each other will result in the loss of the ability to post.

[icare999]

until Taksin is totally defeated there will be no election you no understand yet redshirt Taksin followers but then you are totally brainwashed naive and rest IMO ill add in my humble opinion. If theirs election for 10 years i and my thai family are happy even though it is obvious new regime do not like or want forang or care about views of stupid forang governments. THnak goodness and thank you Suphet and our general keep it up to add long live our beloved king. EVen my children show respect to king and others and they are 100% non this educated. In UK when i was a kid we alway stood up at cinema for queen and now having lost respect we've lost our way.

[JAG]

Corruption wasn't the excuse for the coup. Political stalemate and protest deaths were.

But The Red Shirt shills like to forget that, as it doesn't fit with their agenda.

Political stalemate and protestor deaths were the reasons for the coup?

OK then,

Why did the system breakdown and why did protestors take to the streets?

Accusations (mostly false, exaggerated and unsubstantiated) of corruption against the incumbent government.

ipso facto,

Corruption was the excuse for the coup.

ABC, as simple as 1,2,3 (for most of us anyway).

Why did the protesters take to the streets? The amnesty bill. Where have you been?

The amnesty bill was a storm in a teacup.

Yes, it provoked the initial (widespread) outrage, but it was the corruption allegations that enabled the street protestors to maintain just enough (paid) support to put the nation through so many months of disruption.

So they "took to the streets" because of the amnesty bill, as I said.

They continued the protests because of the incompetence and corruption, and also because they didn't accept that PTP "winning" an election would legitimise the things that PTP wanted to do.

Then, after a number of shootings and bombings and deaths, and no prospect of a solution, the army decided to step in.

An alternative last sentence could read: " Then, after sufficient shootings and bombings and deaths, and having ensured there was no prospect of a solution, those behind the protests felt it was time for the army to step in."

[Robby nz]

Hypocritical post - you begin with consternation that I am attacking the poster, then you do the very same thing.

My point is that NRC / NLA were put there as a front. They are both staffed by party faithful, and are subordinate to the NCPO. Yet you believe that they will come up with some kind of independent reform process that benefits the citizenry as a whole. If that's the case, then why can't the citizenry have a say?

Apart from Prayuth's promises, as reported by an unabashedly censored press, why would you believe all this on face value? Why would you choose to completely ignore the historical precedence of military governments in Thailand?

You are either very gullible or very naive.

Even though you have addressed this to Rubi I would like to reply.

You start off by making an excuse as to why some should not take part in a reform process then ask "why can't the citizenry have a say?"

If the so called leaders did take part then the people would have a say.

Every sector has had a chance to take part and give input only there are some, one in particular, which refuse to give any input.

This is a sector which you and your fellow supporters claim has the support of the majority of the people yet they refuse to represent in a reform process those who they (and you) claim they represent.

If they truly had the interests of the people at heart and were willing to work for them then they would be in there with ideas to improve much needed things like education, health, justice, poverty, social problems and all the other things that need improving.

But no, the only focus they can see is on political reforms which will be designed to strengthen the laws under the previous constitution to keep criminals out of politics and make elections as free and fair as possible.

And why is this ? Because they know very well that and they and their patron have been the major transgressors, law breakers even, and are the most likely to be effected by any strengthened electoral law.

They are putting personal interest before the interest of the people they say they represent.

They keep up the same old bleat, the coup is illegal so we wont be part of it, that is beyond silly and into abject stupidity, we all know coup is against the law but it is a done deal and to sit there and squeal about it will get nowhere.

The only way to move forward to an election is to be part of a forward movement, refusing to take part or even working against will only slow the process and push elections even farther into the future.

But there are some who cant see that.

Robbie, could you explain how one can participate in the reform process when you not in the NRC? BTW, the Dem is not represented in the NRC for obvious reason that it will be a conflict of interest in debating reform proposal; similar to PT' s view. Yes,the people can see and clearly too that any attempts to speak on reform can be arrested and hauled for attitude adjustment and spend time with the military.

Yes Eric I can very easily, but you are not interested in listening are you.

Anyone can put forward reform proposals as some sectors have done already, including the Dems.

However PT and the UDD have chosen or been instructed to stay out of the process completely and indeed to obstruct.

It is understandable that politicians or would be politicians are not part the NRC as it has been stated that NRC members are not allowed to take part in politics in the future, however there was nothing stopping those who have no political aspirations from having their names put forward.

Farther to that, there are representatives from each province on the NRC which means that the provinces that voted PT do indeed have some representation although not as much as they lf have if they had not opted out.

As for your last sentence that is just absolute bull as you and anyone else can clearly see by the critical editorials and comments in the press and by the repeated calls for input.

[Bob12345]

...

A lot of the things you say remind me of religious people who keep believing no matter the number of signs appearing that they are wrong. (But i guess you feel the same about people not agreeing with you)

So I wonder what thinkable thing could happen that would make you lose faith in the things this government is saying they are battling for.

No reform plan in 12 months from now? Or maybe 2 years from now? Or maybe 5 years?

What about no initiative to fight corruption at the top? What if no high ranking officer is indicted in 1 year, would you then believe they are not here for reforms? Or maybe in 3 years?

Or no elections in the coming 2 years? Or maybe 3 years?

It seems a silly question, but i seriously wonder what a signal would be for you that they are not walking the walk. Of course you can always expect excuses, but there should be a point where even you feel like you are being fooled by them.

In my case, i would believe the junta is here to make a serious change if any (any, not all) of the following things would happen:

1. Reforms that seriously limit the (political) power of the elite being implemented

2. The general to declare his wealth plus explaining where it came from (and inviting journalists to ask questions and dig deeper)

3. Reforms implemented to limit the power of the army (not allowed to run businesses on the side, serious limiting the coup options or decline of military budget by at least 25%)

4. Two or three "untouchables" (maffia who are operating for decades already, everybody knows who they are and what they do, but they will never be investigated or prosecuted) being convicted (5+ years plus taking away wealth) who are not directed linked to red-shirts or fell out of grace with the junta

5. A reform plan being proposed and implemented that will be applauded by a top publication like The Economist covering at least 3 areas (military, healthcare, education, taxes, corruption, law enforcement)

[whybother]

...

A lot of the things you say remind me of religious people who keep believing no matter the number of signs appearing that they are wrong. (But i guess you feel the same about people not agreeing with you)

So I wonder what thinkable thing could happen that would make you lose faith in the things this government is saying they are battling for.

No reform plan in 12 months from now? Or maybe 2 years from now? Or maybe 5 years?

What about no initiative to fight corruption at the top? What if no high ranking officer is indicted in 1 year, would you then believe they are not here for reforms? Or maybe in 3 years?

Or no elections in the coming 2 years? Or maybe 3 years?

It seems a silly question, but i seriously wonder what a signal would be for you that they are not walking the walk. Of course you can always expect excuses, but there should be a point where even you feel like you are being fooled by them.

In my case, i would believe the junta is here to make a serious change if any (any, not all) of the following things would happen:

1. Reforms that seriously limit the (political) power of the elite being implemented

2. The general to declare his wealth plus explaining where it came from (and inviting journalists to ask questions and dig deeper)

3. Reforms implemented to limit the power of the army (not allowed to run businesses on the side, serious limiting the coup options or decline of military budget by at least 25%)

4. Two or three "untouchables" (maffia who are operating for decades already, everybody knows who they are and what they do, but they will never be investigated or prosecuted) being convicted (5+ years plus taking away wealth) who are not directed linked to red-shirts or fell out of grace with the junta

5. A reform plan being proposed and implemented that will be applauded by a top publication like The Economist covering at least 3 areas (military, healthcare, education, taxes, corruption, law enforcement)

How do you even start to limit the political power of the elite? Is there any country where that has happened? (and I'm not talking about the French revolution)

How do you limit coup options of the army? Do you take their guns away from them?

Most of the things you're suggesting, even the red shirt leaders (including Thaksin) wouldn't touch with a barge pole. Can you imagine Thaksin declaring how he started with his business dealings while he was a policeman? Did Thaksin's parties do anything to improve education while they were in power? Or corruption and law enforcement?

I think you're dreaming.

[Bob12345]

...

A lot of the things you say remind me of religious people who keep believing no matter the number of signs appearing that they are wrong. (But i guess you feel the same about people not agreeing with you)

So I wonder what thinkable thing could happen that would make you lose faith in the things this government is saying they are battling for.

No reform plan in 12 months from now? Or maybe 2 years from now? Or maybe 5 years?

What about no initiative to fight corruption at the top? What if no high ranking officer is indicted in 1 year, would you then believe they are not here for reforms? Or maybe in 3 years?

Or no elections in the coming 2 years? Or maybe 3 years?

It seems a silly question, but i seriously wonder what a signal would be for you that they are not walking the walk. Of course you can always expect excuses, but there should be a point where even you feel like you are being fooled by them.

In my case, i would believe the junta is here to make a serious change if any (any, not all) of the following things would happen:

1. Reforms that seriously limit the (political) power of the elite being implemented

2. The general to declare his wealth plus explaining where it came from (and inviting journalists to ask questions and dig deeper)

3. Reforms implemented to limit the power of the army (not allowed to run businesses on the side, serious limiting the coup options or decline of military budget by at least 25%)

4. Two or three "untouchables" (maffia who are operating for decades already, everybody knows who they are and what they do, but they will never be investigated or prosecuted) being convicted (5+ years plus taking away wealth) who are not directed linked to red-shirts or fell out of grace with the junta

5. A reform plan being proposed and implemented that will be applauded by a top publication like The Economist covering at least 3 areas (military, healthcare, education, taxes, corruption, law enforcement)

How do you even start to limit the political power of the elite? Is there any country where that has happened? (and I'm not talking about the French revolution)

How do you limit coup options of the army? Do you take their guns away from them?

Most of the things you're suggesting, even the red shirt leaders (including Thaksin) wouldn't touch with a barge pole. Can you imagine Thaksin declaring how he started with his business dealings while he was a policeman? Did Thaksin's parties do anything to improve education while they were in power? Or corruption and law enforcement?

I think you're dreaming.

I cannot imagine Taksin approaching these things, and we all have seen that Taksin did not stand for change, fairness, rule of law, or a genuine democracy. He did say he stood for improving Thailand, but with hindsight he mostly stood for improving himself and his own pockets.

So your point seems to be that Taksin (and previous politicians) were mostly self-serving and therefore we can expect the same of the junta? Guess we agree in that case. We should then only stop the charade here where some people keep repeating the "this junta is different and wants the best for Thailand". And the "real reforms will come" nonsense.

Btw: limit political power elite can be reached by letting the thai population elect their own government instead of a large % of the seats going to the elite (unelected representatives). Countries where that has happened: about every developed country started doing this decades ago. Most developed countries are now also ruled by (directly and indirectly) elected governments where your business ties, family capital, and last name account for nearly nothing.

Limit coup options army: generals who activily work on getting an elected government to fall will be brought to court for treason (if what suthep said is true, the current PM should be in jail already), like it would be the case in every developed country (read up on thai history and compare the number of coups, successful and failed, to the number of convicted coup instigators). No pardons anymore after a coup. The army can of course still jump in when a government violates human rights or worse, but a "political stalemate" is no excuse for a coup.

And these ideas on how Thailand can improve just came to mind. Imagine how well written out they could have been had i been given a few months and thousands of government officials and academics to help me. Or the total thai population to support me and bring me ideas.

[Bob12345]

I think you're dreaming.

Agree with you there, people who are expecting "real reforms", of which most people here would agree are absolutely necessary for Thailand, coming from this junta are dreaming.

What we will see are many promises and some window dressing with temporary crackdowns. But it wont take long till everything will be back to where it started. The only big difference this time can be that the "poor" will not accept it anymore after having tasted power.

I actually don't expect any of the things i mentioned to happen in real life, hence my conviction that this junta is the same as all previous governments. I guess that makes me "wide awake".

[whybother]

I cannot imagine Taksin approaching these things, and we all have seen that Taksin did not stand for change, fairness, rule of law, or a genuine democracy. He did say he stood for improving Thailand, but with hindsight he mostly stood for improving himself and his own pockets.

So your point seems to be that Taksin (and previous politicians) were mostly self-serving and therefore we can expect the same of the junta? Guess we agree in that case. We should then only stop the charade here where some people keep repeating the "this junta is different and wants the best for Thailand". And the "real reforms will come" nonsense.

Btw: limit political power elite can be reached by letting the thai population elect their own government instead of a large % of the seats going to the elite (unelected representatives). Countries where that has happened: about every developed country started doing this decades ago. Most developed countries are now also ruled by (directly and indirectly) elected governments where your business ties, family capital, and last name account for nearly nothing.

Limit coup options army: generals who activily work on getting an elected government to fall will be brought to court for treason (if what suthep said is true, the current PM should be in jail already), like it would be the case in every developed country (read up on thai history and compare the number of coups, successful and failed, to the number of convicted coup instigators). No pardons anymore after a coup. The army can of course still jump in when a government violates human rights or worse, but a "political stalemate" is no excuse for a coup.

And these ideas on how Thailand can improve just came to mind. Imagine how well written out they could have been had i been given a few months and thousands of government officials and academics to help me. Or the total thai population to support me and bring me ideas.

Which country has limited the power of the elite through elections? Even in Thailand, the elections have been elite vs elite.

I continue to be amazed by the number of people that don't understand how a coup works. Successful coup juntas don't submit themselves to courts voluntarily after they have committed a coup. Seriously, what have some people been drinking if they expect that to happen.

I'm not suggesting that improvements don't need to be made, but putting the coup junta above all other Thai politicians is a bit much to expect. The NRC will change the system enough to stop a single government running roughshod with the country's money. Don't expect them to suddenly convert Thailand into your idea of Utopia.

Edited October 21, 2014 by whybother

[Bob12345]

I cannot imagine Taksin approaching these things, and we all have seen that Taksin did not stand for change, fairness, rule of law, or a genuine democracy. He did say he stood for improving Thailand, but with hindsight he mostly stood for improving himself and his own pockets.

So your point seems to be that Taksin (and previous politicians) were mostly self-serving and therefore we can expect the same of the junta? Guess we agree in that case. We should then only stop the charade here where some people keep repeating the "this junta is different and wants the best for Thailand". And the "real reforms will come" nonsense.

Btw: limit political power elite can be reached by letting the thai population elect their own government instead of a large % of the seats going to the elite (unelected representatives). Countries where that has happened: about every developed country started doing this decades ago. Most developed countries are now also ruled by (directly and indirectly) elected governments where your business ties, family capital, and last name account for nearly nothing.

Limit coup options army: generals who activily work on getting an elected government to fall will be brought to court for treason (if what suthep said is true, the current PM should be in jail already), like it would be the case in every developed country (read up on thai history and compare the number of coups, successful and failed, to the number of convicted coup instigators). No pardons anymore after a coup. The army can of course still jump in when a government violates human rights or worse, but a "political stalemate" is no excuse for a coup.

And these ideas on how Thailand can improve just came to mind. Imagine how well written out they could have been had i been given a few months and thousands of government officials and academics to help me. Or the total thai population to support me and bring me ideas.

Which country has limited the power of the elite through elections? Even in Thailand, the elections have been elite vs elite.

I continue to be amazed by the number of people that don't understand how a coup works. Successful coup juntas don't submit themselves to courts voluntarily after they have committed a coup. Seriously, what have some people been drinking if they expect that to happen.

I'm not suggesting that improvements don't need to be made, but putting the coup junta above all other Thai politicians is a bit much to expect. The NRC will change the system enough to stop a single government running roughshod with the country's money. Don't expect them to suddenly convert Thailand into your idea of Utopia.

Politicians are normally elected by the people, giving power to everyone who can vote. That power came from the elite who were used to giving these jobs to each other. So basically every election in which everybody is free to participate (vote or stand elected) takes away power from the elite. In Thailand the poorer farmers in the north had even so much power that Taksin was elected. Twice. Or even more often counting his proxy governments.

And i fully understand how a coup works. What i dont understand is how failed coup juntas are never punished in Thailand (no trail or a royal pardon after a year).

And i am not putting the junta above other political parties, but friend Rubl is and therefore i originally asked him in my post to answer. But you took over for him.

It seems we agree though, this junta is very similar to almost every previous government. They are self-serving, will get disgustingly rich while in office, will implement reforms only to make them and their own group richer and more powerful, and only if it serves them they might help the country or its people.

You only seem to still think the NRC wants to avoid 1 party to run roughshot with the country's money; if we change that into "avoid parties they do not control to run roughshot with the country's money" then we can completely agree.