Jump to content



Prayut must stay on as PM until problems solved: survey


Lite Beer

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jesus Ginjag you're acting like a petulant child asking to be put on their ignore list!!

Your fervent support for the General is scary to be honest, and leaping to his defence with "but PTP this and PTP that " is almost as boring as PM bashing in another thread you claimed that by reading All the red apologists posts destresses you, bullshit it does mate, it winds you up no need when your hero of year gets stick!!!

Why is he held in such reverence to you? By your own accounts since the 30 years you've been here, not one single Government has delivered and yet you put all your faith in a man you don't even know ?

Talk about a leap of faith ?? Good fair you you'll give him a year to sort it all out too, how very big of you to give him that time, I guess you're actually quite an important Thai National that you can give him 12 months to set things right, and not some Farang with zero say on how any Thai in authority performs?

I'm wondering just what exactly gives the General a much better chance to turn around Thai politics that no other politician has been able to do in 30 years ????

Instead of asking people to put you on their ignore list, why don't you simply stop coming to the defence of a man who by definition seized control of the country at gunpoint, and let people rant and rave all they want, I'm sure the General doesn't need you to stick up for him and he should be tough enough to accept criticism no matter how big or small, he's a 60 year old career soldier a multi millionaire to boot, he's not a defences less 10 years old you need to come to his aid all the time.

?

Propaganda one sided post again. ignore list please, pigged off with this clap trap.

He used to state proudly that he supported the DEMS, but his words deceived that notion as he only ever denounced them.

With comments like this I wonder if he is a Junta fan as well!

I love the "gun point" argument too. The reason the most popular PM in 10 years seized control was because the country WAS held at gun point by the red shirts. Unless the 28 deaths and 780 odd injured mean nothing.

Imagine if the army killed 28 people in 7 months and injured 780 and then the red shirts came in and stopped that massacre in it's tracks stating that they could not consciously let it continue. Even a special needs child in a wheel chair with no imagination and an attention deficit disorder would know how the red apologists would view the army and the red shirts in that scenario.

PTP logic right there folks.

The most popular PM in 10 years is terrified of elections.

The most popular PM in 10 years is terrified of free speech.

The most popular PM in 10 years is terrified of free assembly.

It's almost as if he's not actually that popular at all and must use brute force and fear to cling to power.

This must be why he's so popular. He's terrified of the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the situation is a bit more complicated. Military has to be in total control but also it can then be used as a scapegoat to run the country into the ground so it can be rescued or "turned around". We could be playing a game of comparatives with the winning hand going to the oarsman who returns the boat to the right course again.

Take the kiddies candy away for a year or so and see how popular you will be if you are the one to hand it back.

"Military has to be in total control..."

Huh? Why? When has that ever ended well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

Not very intelligent are you?

Did most for the poorer than any other government?

Everything they did was for themselves, and did you forget the farmers killing themselves? The country would have went bankrupt if they had stayed and who suffers the most in a bankrupt country?

Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'.

Well they used the amnesty bill as an excuse and you claim 99.9% of reds supported it? Did you just arrive in Thailand last week or what?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incobart there's over 40 different political parties registered in Thailand not just 2, and this is what makes it so difficult for the Democrats to win outright.

Demographically the PTP has more perceived support as they are by and far the largest single group of people.

Any win by democrats would have to be from a coalition of all the other parties to stand against the PTP, but hey, by all accounts only 7% of the population would vote against the Democrats or the PM if the current set of polls are anything to go by, so what's the problem with holding an election as promised in late 2015?

The General And the dems would win an election by a landslide if this were really true ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heybruce - Do you really think this whole thing is in preparation for that? An honest question, not a challenge.

Ginjag - why don't you share with us what you feel will happen politically over the next 2,3,4 years?

Do not want to play your games anymore. Unless you reply to a post of mine DO NOT bring me into conversations. Not interested. Argue with the PM personally, report what you don't like there are lines open for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

As opposed to a guarantee that this coup will be different?

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

As opposed to a guarantee that this coup will be different?

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

I can think of 11 other reasons. Why do you think the result of this coup will be different from all those others?

As Paul Chambers, a professor at Chiang Mai University’s Institute for South-East Asian Affairs stated in an email to the Washington Post;

"What sets this event off from previous coups is an attempt to make it appear much more under the law," Chambers wrote in an e-mail to The Post.

"But this is only a superficial bit of semantics."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/20/thailands-army-says-this-definitely-isnt-a-coup-heres-11-times-it-definitely-was/

.............................coffee1.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heybruce - Do you really think this whole thing is in preparation for that? An honest question, not a challenge.

Ginjag - why don't you share with us what you feel will happen politically over the next 2,3,4 years?

Do not want to play your games anymore. Unless you reply to a post of mine DO NOT bring me into conversations. Not interested. Argue with the PM personally, report what you don't like there are lines open for it.

Fair enough. Anyone who disagrees with you or invites you to join in and speculate on what the future may hold is "playing games". With a mentality like that, you have clearly backed the right horse politically. Good day to you.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

As opposed to a guarantee that this coup will be different?

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

"Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer."

I liked all of your post, but the above was my favorite part. However, in order to be fair, we should invite all supporters of the most recent coup to provide examples of past coups that led to a better government.

So you have a guarantee that the result of this coup will be exactly the same as other coups?

How so?

As opposed to a guarantee that this coup will be different?

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

626 community leaders were asked in the poll. Yeah, all from in and around the BKK area. Ask them up here in the North and NE, and he'd get a big fat Zero. Nought. Nada.He aint popular up here i can guarantee them pollsters that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, it almost seems like the junta is killing time, keeping a tight lid on the country with martial law, and seriously damaging the tourist industry in the process, and creating ongoing political uncertainty which deters much needed investment.

Why would the junta deliberately stall a transition to a more stable government, and do great damage to the Thai economy in the process? What big, traumatic event in Thailand will happen in the near future? Why would the military believe that it, and not an elected government, must be in charge when that happens? I wonder...

This is also the idea that I have gotten after following a former Reuters journalist for a while who spread this theory around a lot (and just published a book based on that theory). I must admit that while I think it all sounds very plausible and there is no way i can refute the points he makes, I still cannot totally answer the question you ask at the end: "why they have to be in charge when that happens?".

It sounds too far fetched to me that a big surprise would take place at that moment, especially not when the military is in charge. They either control the situation, and therefore have no reason for "a big change", or they lose control and thereby put themselves out of the game. It would be easier to have someone else in charge (especially a red government) so you can send "terrorists" through the country to give you an excuse for a coup at that moment. And then you have carte blanche to do what you want in the name of "saving the country". People would cheer for the coup in the first weeks as it will stop the violence, and in those weeks you can make the amendments you planned to make all along. Once the honeymoon weeks are over you might be booted out by the people, but the changes you made cannot be reversed anymore.

Interested if someone can enlighten me a bit more.

From what I understand, the people in charge at the time have some influence in who's next. It's not like the UK where there is a defined line.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, it almost seems like the junta is killing time, keeping a tight lid on the country with martial law, and seriously damaging the tourist industry in the process, and creating ongoing political uncertainty which deters much needed investment.

Why would the junta deliberately stall a transition to a more stable government, and do great damage to the Thai economy in the process? What big, traumatic event in Thailand will happen in the near future? Why would the military believe that it, and not an elected government, must be in charge when that happens? I wonder...

This is also the idea that I have gotten after following a former Reuters journalist for a while who spread this theory around a lot (and just published a book based on that theory). I must admit that while I think it all sounds very plausible and there is no way i can refute the points he makes, I still cannot totally answer the question you ask at the end: "why they have to be in charge when that happens?".

It sounds too far fetched to me that a big surprise would take place at that moment, especially not when the military is in charge. They either control the situation, and therefore have no reason for "a big change", or they lose control and thereby put themselves out of the game. It would be easier to have someone else in charge (especially a red government) so you can send "terrorists" through the country to give you an excuse for a coup at that moment. And then you have carte blanche to do what you want in the name of "saving the country". People would cheer for the coup in the first weeks as it will stop the violence, and in those weeks you can make the amendments you planned to make all along. Once the honeymoon weeks are over you might be booted out by the people, but the changes you made cannot be reversed anymore.

Interested if someone can enlighten me a bit more.

From what I understand, the people in charge at the time have some influence in who's next. It's not like the UK where there is a defined line.

True, thats also how i understand it.

But how likely will it be that they will actually use that influence? To me that sounds like the biggest risk possible in Thailand where you jeopardize the complete system that has made you and your buddies rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, thats also how i understand it.

But how likely will it be that they will actually use that influence? To me that sounds like the biggest risk possible in Thailand where you jeopardize the complete system that has made you and your buddies rich.

I'm quite sure they will use that influence. (Both sides.) That's why they want to be in power when it happens. Getting the "right" person there (or not having the "wrong" person there) is what this is all about.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, it almost seems like the junta is killing time, keeping a tight lid on the country with martial law, and seriously damaging the tourist industry in the process, and creating ongoing political uncertainty which deters much needed investment.

Why would the junta deliberately stall a transition to a more stable government, and do great damage to the Thai economy in the process? What big, traumatic event in Thailand will happen in the near future? Why would the military believe that it, and not an elected government, must be in charge when that happens? I wonder...

This is also the idea that I have gotten after following a former Reuters journalist for a while who spread this theory around a lot (and just published a book based on that theory). I must admit that while I think it all sounds very plausible and there is no way i can refute the points he makes, I still cannot totally answer the question you ask at the end: "why they have to be in charge when that happens?".

It sounds too far fetched to me that a big surprise would take place at that moment, especially not when the military is in charge. They either control the situation, and therefore have no reason for "a big change", or they lose control and thereby put themselves out of the game. It would be easier to have someone else in charge (especially a red government) so you can send "terrorists" through the country to give you an excuse for a coup at that moment. And then you have carte blanche to do what you want in the name of "saving the country". People would cheer for the coup in the first weeks as it will stop the violence, and in those weeks you can make the amendments you planned to make all along. Once the honeymoon weeks are over you might be booted out by the people, but the changes you made cannot be reversed anymore.

Interested if someone can enlighten me a bit more.

From what I understand, the people in charge at the time have some influence in who's next. It's not like the UK where there is a defined line.

True, thats also how i understand it.

But how likely will it be that they will actually use that influence? To me that sounds like the biggest risk possible in Thailand where you jeopardize the complete system that has made you and your buddies rich.

While the question of who is important, I think the biggest fear of those invested in the current system is that a change at the top may prompt calls for a change to the system. That is why the junta and martial law will stay in place; they want the country firmly under control to ensure that a change at the top won't result in calls for other changes, such as a more democratic system, or a military that serves the civilian government instead of...well, you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps ginjag's deranged, hateful and profoundly stupid posts can be merged with the what-Thais-hate-about-foreigners thread. That would seem to be their natural home.

There were a lot more like him baying for a coup earlier in the year. The more sensible ones realised that most would change their minds soon enough. Anyone with a brain realises that coups are never the answer. No matter bad the government may be. It's up to the electorate to vote them out. Not to be ousted at gunpoint with weapons paid for by them to protect their democratic rights.

It's like paying a security guard to protect your home and family. He then takes the gun, holds you and your family at gunpoint and takes your house. He then orders you about and punishes you if you don't agree with his every word/command. Make sure you smile, too. He wants you to be realy p..ed off, but wants you to force a smile for him.

This ginjag chap needs a good lie down. And yes. PT were self serving rubbish on the whole (although they did more for poorer Thais than any other party in Thai history), but a coup is never the answer. The foamers answer to that are the rants about civil war and red terrorists. Forgetting the fact that is was the PDRC that started the kerfuffle with their rabble rousing speakers. Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'. Mouthing off in speeches about them being uneducated simpletons and that their votes shouldn't count. Stopping elections. Closing down gov buildings. Why? To give the military a reason to move in. If Suthep and co could cause a mild stink, the army could simply ignore government demands for help and move in claiming they 'stopped a civil war etc'

Truth hurts, but it needs pointing out to the easily led. If the army (or police for that matter) actually did its job and protected the electorate they would've steamed in, arrested Suthep and co (not for protesting but for closing down buildings/cutting power/stopping people from voting etc) and nipped the nonsense in the bud early.

Can you imagine the reaction in the UK or USA if the elected party was booted out after the army refused to help the government after it took sides choosing the opposition? Us Brits are pretty reserved on the whole, but we'd burn London to the ground if that happened. I'm sure the USA would do similar. It's sad innocents had to die in the riots, including children. That is terrible, of course. But so was the gunning down of 90 or so protesters from the 'terrorist' side. They were agrieved voters. Fed up of being ridden roughshod over. So no, they aren't terrorists in my eyes.

Not very intelligent are you?

Did most for the poorer than any other government?

Everything they did was for themselves, and did you forget the farmers killing themselves? The country would have went bankrupt if they had stayed and who suffers the most in a bankrupt country?

Using 'you know what' as an excuse, when 99.9% of reds support 'you know what'.

Well they used the amnesty bill as an excuse and you claim 99.9% of reds supported it? Did you just arrive in Thailand last week or what?

Since you are intelligent and been here for ages- pleases explain to the previous poster exactly why the gov't of the time could not simply borrow the money from banks (as this current regime has) to pay the farmers their due.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would give him a maximum of one year. If by Nov 1 2015, he has not made some serious inroads into reforming the RTP (disbanding, and starting over from scratch, would probably be better) and tackling the corruption of the last government (that means arrests and prosecutions, preferably followed by a few Chinese style executions), then I would toss him out on his ear.

So far the prospects of him doing anything substantial seem very dim indeed.

you would toss him out huh?

How?

Christ you people so blinded by hatred of the Weimar-- sorry Taksin- regime that you will give any corporal -sorry, I meant General- with a hard on for your enemy carte blanche-- and now you say- you will give him a year?

You will not give him SHIT- he will take as much time as he wants.

and you will do NOTHING.

Yeah-- Thais need more education before they are turned loose on the polls. Right!!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the question of who is important, I think the biggest fear of those invested in the current system is that a change at the top may prompt calls for a change to the system. That is why the junta and martial law will stay in place; they want the country firmly under control to ensure that a change at the top won't result in calls for other changes, such as a more democratic system, or a military that serves the civilian government instead of...well, you know.

I doubt very much that a change of system is on the cards. There are a lot of people that don't take sides in this fight who I believe would take a side if that suggestion was brought up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the question of who is important, I think the biggest fear of those invested in the current system is that a change at the top may prompt calls for a change to the system. That is why the junta and martial law will stay in place; they want the country firmly under control to ensure that a change at the top won't result in calls for other changes, such as a more democratic system, or a military that serves the civilian government instead of...well, you know.

I doubt very much that a change of system is on the cards. There are a lot of people that don't take sides in this fight who I believe would take a side if that suggestion was brought up.

There are also a lot of people who will not accept the traditional choice, which raises concerns with the traditionalists.

Regardless of who the new person will be, that person will not be nearly as popular as the old one, which will weaken a system which depends on public support. Military government and martial law are intended to prop up the system until the new guy is accepted. If this takes years of martial law, delaying the new constitution and deferring elections to accomplish this, that is what they'll do, regardless of the impact on the economy.

Edited by heybruce
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are also a lot of people who will not accept the traditional choice, which raises concerns with the traditionalists.

Regardless of who the new person will be, that person will not be nearly as popular as the old one, which will weaken a system which depends on public support. Military government and martial law are intended to prop up the system until the new guy is accepted. If it takes years of martial law to accomplish this, and devastates the economy in the process, that is what they'll do.

Given that there hasn't been a change for quite a few years, I'm not sure what you mean by "the traditional choice". What tradition?

Besides that, there are a lot of people who wont be happy with one or other of the choices, but they will accept it. I believe that there would be more people that wouldn't accept no choice.

I think you're wrong about the "prop up the system until the new "guy" is accepted". I think the economy will take a hit when 'it' happens, but the next choice won't have any further effect. That is until whoever is in charge at the time starts to be seen to be taking advantage of the choice. If the choice becomes more involved than what is currently (generally) happening, there will probably be an outcry similar to the last few years. That applies to both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.