Don't Vote For 'Previous Politicians,' Prayuth Advises Nation

[thailandusauk]

Do not worry they are not going to vote for the self newly proclaimed politicians also..

[binjalin]

The PM is saying don't vote for previous politicians because Thailand must move on, the past must not be repeated or the political divisions that caused a cycle of violence, bringing Thailand close to civil unrest and close to a civil war could return. Peace and harmony is paramount to Thailands future, the past must be forgotten and a new democracy created to forge a stronger government that unites Thai people not divides them.

Nonetheless people must be free to vote for who ever they please. New or old faces, it's their choice.

but you KNOW it won't be like that don't you? they will rig it that's what this is all about - North Korea and China style - vote for who you want as long as it's one of 'ours'

[tbthailand]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

in those other countries, they were all elected, or not?

That military service in the usa is not typically a lifetime career, means that you have many, many politicians who served in the military. Example: Kerry served but no one viewed him as a military man when he ran for president. In your list, only Colin Powell went from a career military service into politics and that was to an appointed position.

History, yes, reading that is a good suggestion. I would guess that you have seen the level of competence of generals cum politicians in Thailand. Our current 'reluctant PM' is doing his best to play the part, but he's not a very good actor, is he?

Edited January 17, 2015 by tbthailand

[Eric Loh]

That's why generals should just stick to military matters and not involved with government matters. The PM simply do not understand democracy and free and fair election for all people to determined the political makeup and no restriction of candidates or political parties. Those comment should not be made by a junta PM and cast a poor light on him as trying to sell himself and prolonging his stay in power. Poor judgement.

[Homeropec]

"Although Thaksin was removed in a coup in 2006 and has lived in self-imposed exile since 2008, political parties backed by the former PM have won every national election since his ouster."

He wasn't removed in a coup.

He's not in self exile, he's a fugitive criminal evading justice.

Still keeps winning elections though, which is rather more than can be said about the present lot!

Still keeps winning buying elections though, and probably scheming on how he can buy the next one.

Buying votes is whatever political parties do in a democracy. They buy voters by proposing policies that benefits directly to the voters, by givin them hope for better and equal opportunities for everybody regardless Of their STATUS, by givin them thingks (food, clotes or money)...

However, what is CRIMINAL, and PUNISHABLE is to STEAL the power of an elected goverment. You guys can claim anything aboout this elected people.. you can as ALWAYS said they are corrupt... and so on. HOWEVER, Poeople belief in the ones they choose... and money cannot buy this. However, there is no justification to violate the own constitution. Violating your own constitution makes anyone criminal.

[Baerboxer]

And speaking of thaksin.

Pity he can't man up and come home to face the consequences of his criminality.

Oh yes convicted of a conflict of interest involving his mrs buying a bit of land and given 2 years, something you could probably stitch them all up with. Samak got similar for having a cookery program on TV. Leading a military coup and grabbing power unelected is obviously far less serious!

He was convicted and therefore should go to gaol.

Tell me where I said anything in favour of the things you go on about in your final 2 sentences.

Mind, if you hadn't edited my post you wouldn't need to, would you?

People get convicted of multiple murder here and never spend one night in jail. He was stitched up just like they did with Samak, there is no real justice here, it's more like animal farm than a democracy under the rule of law.

True enough, one law for the rich and one for the poor. Speaking of murders, Thaksin was never charged with those extrajudicial murders in his war on drugs, the massacres of innocent Southerners on his watch, or those who died from the violence he instigated and funded in 2010. No rule of law indeed.

[Baerboxer]

That's why generals should just stick to military matters and not involved with government matters. The PM simply do not understand democracy and free and fair election for all people to determined the political makeup and no restriction of candidates or political parties. Those comment should not be made by a junta PM and cast a poor light on him as trying to sell himself and prolonging his stay in power. Poor judgement.

Whereas Thaksin understood very well how wealth can be used to bribe and intimidate favorable results in an election so as democracy can be manipulated.

[BirdsandBooze]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

Have to disagree with you about Grocer Heath . He was the worst modern day Conservative Prime Minister until 'Call Me Dave' 'Hug A Hoody' Cameron squeezed into office. Heath will always be remembered as the man who handed over the United Kingdom's fishing grounds to the Common Market in exchange for membership, and thereby decimated a thriving fishing industry and the thousands of jobs that went with it. For that treacherous act alone he deserves no praise for his time in office.

[iReason]

Whether or not he was 'stitched up' is not the point. He is a corrupt politician and was brought to task rightfully by the courts. There is no doubt many other politicians should also be convicted of their corruption but that is not the point either.

There will be no reconciliation until the elite accept a reduced power base and the red shirts accept the rule of law. Of course the uneducated lunatics will keep electing Thaksin because the Democrats have no voice in the north and offer little in the way of policies and Thaksins lot are very good at presenting their schemes of corruption to make the poor think they are for their benefit which of course they are not.

Both sides are continuing with their standpoints and there are no new leaders to drive in a different direction, a direction of national benefit.

With all the huge stashes of wealth these politicians and generals seem to amass the corruption is very clear and one day society will bring them to task. With the ignorant thinking of most Thais through lack of education, whether this will happen in our lifetime is questionable but eventually the trip will be broken. It's a shame if takes generations to educate a society and Thailand hasn't even started. It is 50 years behind the West and its richer neighbors because of the suppression of education as a national policy for so lmg. Keep the people sheep gas worked very well. For a long time and there is still no will to change it because intelligent people do not match with corruption and lies so well.

Well the self proclaimed more educated Bangkok intellectuals seemed fairly easily duped into believing the coup was about 'reform'.

Until they start prosecuting people of all political persuasion including those in the military, the police etc the prosecution of TS, YS and their cronies will always be seen as being politically motivated and they will lose little sleep about waning popularity and sympathy they get.

In fact when these clearly politically motivated cases happen, it is probably increasing their popularity. (I do not mean they are innocent, but they are clearly political)

The ball is in the junta's court, but they are in such a tangled web of back room deals, personal relationships, professional relationships, favors, patronage issues etc etc etc, they simply cannot do much. That is not to mention that they themselves would probably not want people sniffing around in their affairs...... or the judges etc would not want anyone sniffing in their affairs.....

http://thediplomat.com/2014/10/thai-junta-beset-by-corruption-scandals/

"Prayuth appeared angry when Thais demanded the government increase transparency."

"He reportedly said, “I beg you not to dig up anything. There is no benefit in so doing."

"I must say that you cannot do that for the time being.”

[2fishin2]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

All of them had higher education....

[Muirton]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

It is astonishing to read the patronizing comment: 'Try reading some history". George Bush spent the Vietnam War in the Texas National Guard and the Alabama National Guard helping defend US airspace during the Vietnam war ---- blind drunk, a raging alcoholic. He was suspended from flying because he didn't show up for a required physical. As to the second part, that this Bush "did a good job", it's too soon to tell but he may go down as the most incompetent President since Van Buren.

Your historical knowledge is a joke.

[rickirs]

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

"Although Thaksin was removed in a coup in 2006 and has lived in self-imposed exile since 2008, political parties backed by the former PM have won every national election since his ouster."

He wasn't removed in a coup.

He's not in self exile, he's a fugitive criminal evading justice.

Still keeps winning elections though, which is rather more than can be said about the present lot!

No problems here with people voting for whoever they choose.

However wish those elected could grasp the fact that victory does not mean they are above the law.

Wish they realised they are elected to rule for the benefit of the country, not their criminal overlord.

And speaking of thaksin.

Pity he can't man up and come home to face the consequences of his criminality.

Pity the Junta can't face justice for its coup. Tit for Tat.

[Wilsonandson]

I think the current PM should run for the next election. At the moment he is doing a great job, cleaning up the mess made by previous PMs and their cronies.

[brucec64]

The people choose the politicians. They can suggest who in their area of Thailand is most suitable to represent them in the new government. This process is now taking place as the reform council recieves these suggestions from all walks of life in each area or province of Thailand. Patience is needed so all suggestions can be pooled and the right leaders choosen to take Thailand to the next step. Democracy is returning but this time it will be a true expression of what Thai people want that will truelly represent them in a transparent way.

Read back what you wrote and see if you can keep a straight face. If you truly beleive this, I have a great deal on a jet ski rental for you.

It will be a true expression of what the top 0.1% of the population wants.

[Eric Loh]

I think the current PM should run for the next election. At the moment he is doing a great job, cleaning up the mess made by previous PMs and their cronies.

Love your optimism but 18 coups and resultant 18 constitutions do rub off all the shine from this current junta. You expect this to be different?

[JAG]

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

"Although Thaksin was removed in a coup in 2006 and has lived in self-imposed exile since 2008, political parties backed by the former PM have won every national election since his ouster."

He wasn't removed in a coup.

He's not in self exile, he's a fugitive criminal evading justice.

Still keeps winning elections though, which is rather more than can be said about the present lot!

No problems here with people voting for whoever they choose.

However wish those elected could grasp the fact that victory does not mean they are above the law.

Wish they realised they are elected to rule for the benefit of the country, not their criminal overlord.

And speaking of thaksin.

Pity he can't man up and come home to face the consequences of his criminality.

Pity the Junta can't face justice for its coup. Tit for Tat.

Umm, they won't. Ironically they have given themselves an amnesty!

[Fatty123]

So what about vote buying, it's not like the oppositions don't know it happens, stop whining about it and have better policies and deeper pockets!!

For the farangs who cry foul, what's the big problem, it's got nothing to do with you, and if your loved ones want to make 300-500 baht for an X on a paper, that's down to them, it's THEIR country!!!

usually the same who defend vote buying call for democracy. Vote buying is not democracy.

The same who defend the vote buying are against the coup. What is different if the man with the bigger pocket plays dictator or the man with the bigger guns? Politicians who got in power with vote buying must rip off the country for more vote buying and therefor the poor people suffer.

Basic Lesson number for simpletons/village idiots 463:

From the pretty right wing Finanacial Times:

''...Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker, two respected scholars, dismissed the claim (vote buying) as “dangerous nonsense”. They made the widely echoed point that, while all parties spray money around during Thai elections, most voters are savvy enough to have “learned they could take money from every candidate, and still vote however they liked”

Also, check out transparancy international's studies on this 'theory'.

Rather than choose independent studies or articles, you could of course continue listen to former Democratic Party leader Suthep, who obviously had no vested interest in getting the Democrats (or their backers) in power. If you ever bothreed asking those that voted, you will find that the Democrats also offered money to voters. The Thais vote for who they want in the end, but who can blame them for taking the money? Wouldn't you if all the local candidates were offering to just give it to you, no strings attached? And at voting time, you would simply vote for the party you liked the most, yes?

Am i condoning it? No. It's wrong. But the simple fact is that it had no effect on the election outcome(s). PT won and kept winning. That is a fact.

Hard to believe, with all the information available, that some are still turing out the crap excuse of vote buying. I would like to see the reds disappear along with the yellows. Thailand does actually need new faces in politics that are not tempted by corruption.

But who are we to argue with the Thai electorate? If they want Yingluck, Thaksin or Bonzo the soi dog to run Thailand, then they shoud have just that.

[Wilsonandson]

Eric and Bruce your doubts are valid but let us wait and see what the future brings, I personally think 2015 is going to be very interesting and that your doubts will go away and you to will see that the Thai people want a new Thailand with a true transparent governing body.

[Eric Loh]

Eric and Bruce your doubts are valid but let us wait and see what the future brings, I personally think 2015 is going to be very interesting and that your doubts will go away and you to will see that the Thai people want a new Thailand with a true transparent governing body.

Wilson points noted. I am all for the reforms and charter changes that is equitable to all Thai people. Somehow I have less confident than you considering the circumstances that leads to the coup and the appointees that filled up the NLA, NRC and the NRC. The martial law and the tight leash on freedom of speech and expression are really not conducive to a transparent governing body. As a businessman, I take comfort to know that the PM has been business friendly but I worry about the large budget deficit, loans and the warming up to China. The odds are large that a better Thailand will emerge. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

[2fishin2]

The PM is saying don't vote for previous politicians because Thailand must move on, the past must not be repeated or the political divisions that caused a cycle of violence, bringing Thailand close to civil unrest and close to a civil war could return. Peace and harmony is paramount to Thailands future, the past must be forgotten and a new democracy created to forge a stronger government that unites Thai people not divides them.

Blah blah blah this is the real world aint no Nirvana anywhere....who are you trying to suck up to?

[Jackson86]

the general wants people to vote for strangers instead of familiar people? weird logic.

[Wilsonandson]

Previous politicians have had their chance and failed to reconcile the divide between certain groups and political parties. Thai people are fed up with this divide and political chaos. Thai people will choose a new government to lead them with representatives of the people chosen by the people through reform commitees who receive suggestions on who the people want to lead them. A true democracy.

[smutcakes]

Previous politicians have had their chance and failed to reconcile the divide between certain groups and political parties. Thai people are fed up with this divide and political chaos. Thai people will choose a new government to lead them with representatives of the people chosen by the people through reform commitees who receive suggestions on who the people want to lead them. A true democracy.

The military have also had their chance 18 times or more, in fact the military has probably been in power more than combined civilian Govts since 1932, so why you would have any confidence in them to do anything for reform this time is farcical. They are one of the main causes of the issues in Thailand, they are not going to make the changes that need to be made, which would see their gravy train come off the rails.

They have had 18 times to make it a better place and make the 'reforms', the last time just 7 years ago. The same problems were apparent then that are here now. Did they do anything to address them all then? Why is this time going to be any different?

I have highlighted one sentence in bold. Can you explain what you mean? The Thai people will choose a new Govt, but the reform committees will select them?? It makes no sense.

[rubl]

Previous politicians have had their chance and failed to reconcile the divide between certain groups and political parties. Thai people are fed up with this divide and political chaos. Thai people will choose a new government to lead them with representatives of the people chosen by the people through reform commitees who receive suggestions on who the people want to lead them. A true democracy.

The military have also had their chance 18 times or more, in fact the military has probably been in power more than combined civilian Govts since 1932, so why you would have any confidence in them to do anything for reform this time is farcical. They are one of the main causes of the issues in Thailand, they are not going to make the changes that need to be made, which would see their gravy train come off the rails.

They have had 18 times to make it a better place and make the 'reforms', the last time just 7 years ago. The same problems were apparent then that are here now. Did they do anything to address them all then? Why is this time going to be any different?

I have highlighted one sentence in bold. Can you explain what you mean? The Thai people will choose a new Govt, but the reform committees will select them?? It makes no sense.

To put 'in fact' and 'probably' in the same sentence seems strange. Maybe you didn't feel like counting, just like stating based on a 'probably'.

Elected governments in Thailand covered quiet a few more years than those started by coups. Here a pointer, have fun

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Thailand

[billd766]

The PM is saying don't vote for previous politicians because Thailand must move on, the past must not be repeated or the political divisions that caused a cycle of violence, bringing Thailand close to civil unrest and close to a civil war could return. Peace and harmony is paramount to Thailands future, the past must be forgotten and a new democracy created to forge a stronger government that unites Thai people not divides them.

Nonetheless people must be free to vote for who ever they please. New or old faces, it's their choice.

but you KNOW it won't be like that don't you? they will rig it that's what this is all about - North Korea and China style - vote for who you want as long as it's one of 'ours'

Specifically how do YOU KNOW that they will rig the elections?

Do you have a secret source close to the current PM, or are you only spouting out what you think may happen?

Spreading rumours once again with no facts to stand them on.

[billd766]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

in those other countries, they were all elected, or not?

That military service in the usa is not typically a lifetime career, means that you have many, many politicians who served in the military. Example: Kerry served but no one viewed him as a military man when he ran for president. In your list, only Colin Powell went from a career military service into politics and that was to an appointed position.

History, yes, reading that is a good suggestion. I would guess that you have seen the level of competence of generals cum politicians in Thailand. Our current 'reluctant PM' is doing his best to play the part, but he's not a very good actor, is he?

For example you forgot Eisenhower to mention that was a career military man who turned to politics as was De Gaulle. JFK was from a political family who went to was then back to politics.

Given therefore generals should not go into politics according to you, how about a Thai lady who had no political experience whatsoever of politics being appointed as Prime Minister?

Do you think that was a proper decision to make, especially as she never stood for a constituency seat but was appointed as PM on her criminal fugitive brothers say so?

[billd766]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

Have to disagree with you about Grocer Heath . He was the worst modern day Conservative Prime Minister until 'Call Me Dave' 'Hug A Hoody' Cameron squeezed into office. Heath will always be remembered as the man who handed over the United Kingdom's fishing grounds to the Common Market in exchange for membership, and thereby decimated a thriving fishing industry and the thousands of jobs that went with it. For that treacherous act alone he deserves no praise for his time in office.

I didn't say that he was any good just that he was an exmilitary man.

On the other hand IMHO he was a far better politician than Tony B'Liar but that takes us off the topic.

Sorry.

[billd766]

Politicians are people in government, their job is to run countries and organizations. They normally go to school for higher education. Military people in uniform defend countries from "outside" sources, not inside. Military people are not schooled/trained to run countries, they are trained to perform military tasks.

Votes are "bought" in every country on the face of the earth. Money, jobs, influence,etc is the form of payment. Its the peoples choice who's voice they purchase. The argument of red shirt vote buying is lost in the way of the world. Its a kindergarden playground argument.

Even the coup was bought by the richest people in Thailand. Problem with coups is they have he guns and military. They get more "bang for the buck"

Have you ever heard of Dwight Eisenhower, John F Kennedy, George Bush or Colin Powell in the USA where many ex servicemen become senators, Edward Heath in the UK and many other MPs, Charles DeGaulle in France. The list is endless.

ALL of them ex military. All of them did a good job.

Try reading some history, you may learn something.

It is astonishing to read the patronizing comment: 'Try reading some history". George Bush spent the Vietnam War in the Texas National Guard and the Alabama National Guard helping defend US airspace during the Vietnam war ---- blind drunk, a raging alcoholic. He was suspended from flying because he didn't show up for a required physical. As to the second part, that this Bush "did a good job", it's too soon to tell but he may go down as the most incompetent President since Van Buren.

Your historical knowledge is a joke.

Really. My apologies as I was referring to his father, also George Bush but my apologies for not making that clear enough.

[Dah fahrang]

So what is he gonna do if people do vote for previous politicians? Send the tanks in?

Nope. Nullify the election, calling it rigged, flawed, or any other adjective he cares to use, remove the candidates (impeachment seems the buzzword of the day) and then call another election until people understand they must vote for candidates created in his own likeness.

[smutcakes]

Previous politicians have had their chance and failed to reconcile the divide between certain groups and political parties. Thai people are fed up with this divide and political chaos. Thai people will choose a new government to lead them with representatives of the people chosen by the people through reform commitees who receive suggestions on who the people want to lead them. A true democracy.

The military have also had their chance 18 times or more, in fact the military has probably been in power more than combined civilian Govts since 1932, so why you would have any confidence in them to do anything for reform this time is farcical. They are one of the main causes of the issues in Thailand, they are not going to make the changes that need to be made, which would see their gravy train come off the rails.

They have had 18 times to make it a better place and make the 'reforms', the last time just 7 years ago. The same problems were apparent then that are here now. Did they do anything to address them all then? Why is this time going to be any different?

I have highlighted one sentence in bold. Can you explain what you mean? The Thai people will choose a new Govt, but the reform committees will select them?? It makes no sense.

To put 'in fact' and 'probably' in the same sentence seems strange. Maybe you didn't feel like counting, just like stating based on a 'probably'.

Elected governments in Thailand covered quiet a few more years than those started by coups. Here a pointer, have fun

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Thailand

Well without getting my calculator out, and excluding any of the less than 1 year reins, i can easily count 45 years plus of military control, so i don't see my statement being without merit.

I know English is not your first language, but there is nothing strange about the use of 'in fact; and 'probably' in the same sentence.