Top brass deny giving up military posts for Cabinet

[tbthailand]

Holding 2 or more major positions is not unusual here. I remember a PM who was also MoD and Chair of the Rice Policy Committee, and didn't let that interfere with her First Class World Tour.

OTOH if you want to actually achieve something..........

The old but she did it argument so it is perfectly acceptable for the new top dogs. The Junta through out the government because of what they were doing and promised change. To come and do the same is extremely hypocritical and makes them look worse than the last. They should be doing the opposite of the last government and not feeding at the trough also.

the generals never left the trough.

[surangw]

better chance for enrichment

[JAG]

Military officer 1st and cabinet minister 2nd or vice versa ?

Maybe so capable they handle multi-tasking with ease.

How much work is there as a high ranking military officer? It's an honest question.

I suppose the answer lies in how much real soldiering they did to merit being promoted to general rank.

And how much soldiering their rank now entails.

Not a lot I suspect.

[billd766]

If their supreme leader is anything to go by they are full of BS.

No coup I don't want to be PM yet all the ploting with suthep.

Power that's what it's all about and stuff the people.

Much like the bullshit from Yingluck that she was the de facto PM and not her brother, or that there was no promlems with the rice programs, or we PROMISE to pay the rice farmers next Monday.

That sort of thing do you mean?

Ahh... So two wrongs make one right.

So how is this administration any better than the previous one. Wasn't that the point of the coup anyway, to replace a corrupt government with a less one?

Your whole argument is moot as usual.

If you believe that two wrongs make a right who am I to argue with you?

However I was responding to the stuttering parrot who can see no right in the current government and no wrong in the PTP government. I merely pointed out some of the shortcomings of the previous PTP government in the same way TSP pointed out the shortcomings in his opinion about the current government.

I made no comment on the current government as he made no comment on the previous PTP government.

Can you explain to me in which way the current government is corrupt?

Therefore if I am wrong then so is he.

[billd766]

They cannot have a great deal to do in their day to day job in the military if they are able to take on cabinet positions as well without it having an adverse affect on their military role.

Either that or more than likely they have next to nothing to do in their day to day military jobs which allows them time do fulfill cabinet roles.

The question must be then what is the point in retaining them in the military at all, with the salary and all the perks if there is nothing for them to do.

Does that also mean therefore that when Yingluck was the PM she didn't have enough to do in her first job that she could spare the time to be the head of the rice committee (though its seems as though she attended no meetings) and also had enough spare time to be the Minister of Defence?

Did she get a salary for all 3 jobs as well?

[billd766]

Whether they have the uniform on or not makes no matter, they are always the carekeepers and always in charge. That is why there is a clause in each constitution that "allows" a coup.

The Thai/Chinese rich elite have always been the owners of this country. Allowed so by some clever wording about things and always protected by the military. The PMs have been allowed to be "care takers", the facilitators of "democracy" and the face of Thailand but, never truly in charge. They have always been under threat of coups if their government or the Thai people get too educated and strong. This is the truth. These people the rich elite and military and xxxxxxx are very much intertwined. Marriages, business, families are all mixed together. They rule. They also began this red shirt-yellow shirt fighting because brother Tak and his clan was/is too strong. They did it as a means to bolster the "clever wording" and to pit good vs evil. Its there plan and it is working.

Everything that is happening now is a reset because of impending doom in order to keep the power.

Why do you think there was problems with police and corruption? Because the government had no control over them. The military would not allow the government to reign in a very obvious corrupt organization because then it would send thai people the message that the government is good and for the people's well being. That would make the government and people strong and the rich elite weak. If the strong government could reign in that corruption then, they know they are next.

This type of governmental system has oppressed Thailand for many years. It will continue down the same path until the people wake up and decide what so many other countries have been doing these past few years. Look what happened in the Philippines in 1986 led by Corozan Aquino. A peoples revolution took place and outed the corrupt Marcos and military regime. The people did that and in fact through the military out along with one of the most corrupt dictators of all time Marcos.

How interesting about the clause in each constitution "allowing" a military take over.

Could you please point it out to me?

Here is a helpful guide for you.

con2007.pdf

CONSTITUTION OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND 2540.pdf

[halloween]

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

Holding 2 or more major positions is not unusual here. I remember a PM who was also MoD and Chair of the Rice Policy Committee, and didn't let that interfere with her First Class World Tour.

OTOH if you want to actually achieve something..........

Those positions fell under the Head of State. The PM is Head of State so there is no conflict of interest. And the PM did not receive separate salaries for each position. Theoretically, the PM could take on the duties of all the cabinet positions, albeit only receive the PM salary. But that would be almost impossible for one person to meet all the administrative requirements.

A bloke who died a couple of months ago in Australia did that back in the 1970's. Well him and one mate.

They got elected democratically, assumed all cabinet responsibilities and dictated laws that changed Australia forever.

Some for the good, most for the bad and which Oz is still paying for now and will continue to pay for unless something changes drastically.

Isn't the President of the US also the head of the military?Commander in Chief or some such term?.

I hope you are not comparing Yingluk to Gough. 2 minor differences of note, one served 20 years as an MP before attaining office, and changed his nation for the the better - despite your disparagement.

[rickirs]

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

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

Holding 2 or more major positions is not unusual here. I remember a PM who was also MoD and Chair of the Rice Policy Committee, and didn't let that interfere with her First Class World Tour.

OTOH if you want to actually achieve something..........

Those positions fell under the Head of State. The PM is Head of State so there is no conflict of interest. And the PM did not receive separate salaries for each position. Theoretically, the PM could take on the duties of all the cabinet positions, albeit only receive the PM salary. But that would be almost impossible for one person to meet all the administrative requirements.

A bloke who died a couple of months ago in Australia did that back in the 1970's. Well him and one mate.

They got elected democratically, assumed all cabinet responsibilities and dictated laws that changed Australia forever.

Some for the good, most for the bad and which Oz is still paying for now and will continue to pay for unless something changes drastically.

Isn't the President of the US also the head of the military?Commander in Chief or some such term?.

US military command is organized through the cabinet position for Secretary of Defense and in turn to the US president as Commander-in-Chief. The US president is both the Head of State and Head of Government, but gets only one salary as President. There have been some US military commanders who were elected president but they had to leave from military service to run for election.

[2fishin2]

Whether they have the uniform on or not makes no matter, they are always the carekeepers and always in charge. That is why there is a clause in each constitution that "allows" a coup.

The Thai/Chinese rich elite have always been the owners of this country. Allowed so by some clever wording about things and always protected by the military. The PMs have been allowed to be "care takers", the facilitators of "democracy" and the face of Thailand but, never truly in charge. They have always been under threat of coups if their government or the Thai people get too educated and strong. This is the truth. These people the rich elite and military and xxxxxxx are very much intertwined. Marriages, business, families are all mixed together. They rule. They also began this red shirt-yellow shirt fighting because brother Tak and his clan was/is too strong. They did it as a means to bolster the "clever wording" and to pit good vs evil. Its there plan and it is working.

Everything that is happening now is a reset because of impending doom in order to keep the power.

Why do you think there was problems with police and corruption? Because the government had no control over them. The military would not allow the government to reign in a very obvious corrupt organization because then it would send thai people the message that the government is good and for the people's well being. That would make the government and people strong and the rich elite weak. If the strong government could reign in that corruption then, they know they are next.

This type of governmental system has oppressed Thailand for many years. It will continue down the same path until the people wake up and decide what so many other countries have been doing these past few years. Look what happened in the Philippines in 1986 led by Corozan Aquino. A peoples revolution took place and outed the corrupt Marcos and military regime. The people did that and in fact through the military out along with one of the most corrupt dictators of all time Marcos.

How interesting about the clause in each constitution "allowing" a military take over.

Could you please point it out to me?

Here is a helpful guide for you.

con2007.pdf

CONSTITUTION OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND 2540.pdf

Sorry its not "legal" per the constitution (which by the way is utterly worthless) but it is actually illegal according to the Thai Criminal Code Section 2. Insurrection (the correct wording for a coup) is by the way, subject to the death penalty or imprisonment for life.

Which goes on to facilitate my point that the PM and government is never really in charge. The "others" are.

[halloween]

Sorry its not "legal" per the constitution (which by the way is utterly worthless) but it is actually illegal according to the Thai Criminal Code Section 2. Insurrection (the correct wording for a coup) is by the way, subject to the death penalty or imprisonment for life.

Which goes on to facilitate my point that the PM and government is never really in charge. The "others" are.

An insurrection is not the same as a coup, an insurrection was what we had in BKK in 2010, and the penalty is death, life imprisonment or being put on the PTP party list (with the criminals of a different ilk).

[billd766]

Whether they have the uniform on or not makes no matter, they are always the carekeepers and always in charge. That is why there is a clause in each constitution that "allows" a coup.

The Thai/Chinese rich elite have always been the owners of this country. Allowed so by some clever wording about things and always protected by the military. The PMs have been allowed to be "care takers", the facilitators of "democracy" and the face of Thailand but, never truly in charge. They have always been under threat of coups if their government or the Thai people get too educated and strong. This is the truth. These people the rich elite and military and xxxxxxx are very much intertwined. Marriages, business, families are all mixed together. They rule. They also began this red shirt-yellow shirt fighting because brother Tak and his clan was/is too strong. They did it as a means to bolster the "clever wording" and to pit good vs evil. Its there plan and it is working.

Everything that is happening now is a reset because of impending doom in order to keep the power.

Why do you think there was problems with police and corruption? Because the government had no control over them. The military would not allow the government to reign in a very obvious corrupt organization because then it would send thai people the message that the government is good and for the people's well being. That would make the government and people strong and the rich elite weak. If the strong government could reign in that corruption then, they know they are next.

This type of governmental system has oppressed Thailand for many years. It will continue down the same path until the people wake up and decide what so many other countries have been doing these past few years. Look what happened in the Philippines in 1986 led by Corozan Aquino. A peoples revolution took place and outed the corrupt Marcos and military regime. The people did that and in fact through the military out along with one of the most corrupt dictators of all time Marcos.

How interesting about the clause in each constitution "allowing" a military take over.

Could you please point it out to me?

Here is a helpful guide for you.

con2007.pdf

CONSTITUTION OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND 2540.pdf

Sorry its not "legal" per the constitution (which by the way is utterly worthless) but it is actually illegal according to the Thai Criminal Code Section 2. Insurrection (the correct wording for a coup) is by the way, subject to the death penalty or imprisonment for life.

Which goes on to facilitate my point that the PM and government is never really in charge. The "others" are.

So basically what you said was NOT correct and was in fact an untruth whichever way you said it.

[2fishin2]

Semantics my friend. Twist it whichever way you would like. Thailand is the king (pardon my pun) of coups. I guess the military thinks that its perfectly acceptable to overthrow a government elected by the people anytime they see fit. Its the history of Thailand not, something I have made up.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurgency

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coup

I think you need these definitions.

Suthep did state on many occasions he wanted to remove the government. I believe he did have some armed thugs also. Meets the definition of either word you want to use. And where is he now? In a monk village under full immunity from any prosecution. Why? Because he was nothing more than a pawn in a big game of chess.