Popular Post Fat Haggis Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 3, 2015 Sorry! Thailand's so called 'bad reputation' is not as a result of coups/generals/non-democracy. It is a as a result of the shared and recorded experience of greed, corruption, racism in Thailand by people who have come here and won't come back! In the wilds of Issan life goes on. We are more worried about rain than dictators/soldiers/farangs/democrats/tourists....etc. It is the same over on this side of the country in rural Khampaeng Phet. Rural people are more interested in their jobs, a roof over their heads, food on the table than all the so called "intellectuals" and foreign governments. They have to live here and they know not much will change whoever is in charge so they get on with their lives and leave the talking heads to chatter on incessantly about the realities of life that they don't have to live with every day. Farmers are far more interested in when it will rain next and what prices they will get for their crops, rather then how some farang in a country far away who deosn't even live in Thailand seems to care about the rights of Thai people. And it was like this all over the country during the protests of 2014, which most farangs tend to have forgotten, live goes on all over rural Thailand but typically it's always about Bangkok ? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweatalot Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Thai opinion: The emperor has few clothes Are they aware that the earlier emperors were naked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louse1953 Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Elections are the only legitimate way to change governments? No democratic country follows this alleged consensus. All of them have impeachment proceedings and criminal courts that can remove government leaders. Maybe the OP should take a brush up course in political science. , Which countries are you referring to and when do they use extraordinary methods to remove their democratically elected governments? Ausralia,11/11/1975. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonmarleesco Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 'Of course, many democratic countries also have laws to protect their heads of state ...' Not really. The majority, by far, expect - rightly - their (usually elected) heads of state to be subject to criticism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post iReason Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 3, 2015 "The international community remains sceptical of the Thai government's claims of democratic reform""Falsehoods won't help Thailand salvage an international reputation badly tarnished by undemocratic rule and rights violations." "In fact, the propaganda and denials being pumped out by the Foreign Ministry and its envoys abroad are making the Kingdom look worse." Well Done. Right out of the gate with the facts. "Thus, as long as the Thai government remains non-elected and military-backed, countries will call Thailand an authoritarian state." A concept the simple minded autocrats can't wrap their head around. "The world knows what is going on in Thailand." "Denials and obfuscation will not help us regain our place on the international stage." This article is very encouraging. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Elections are the only legitimate way to change governments? No democratic country follows this alleged consensus. All of them have impeachment proceedings and criminal courts that can remove government leaders. Maybe the OP should take a brush up course in political science. ,Which countries are you referring to and when do they use extraordinary methods to remove their democratically elected governments? Ausralia,11/11/1975.CIA through out Whitlam as he bucked the U.S line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 No doubts Prayut is the head of a very Thai coup.....or a very Thai "dictatorship". I never heard of a military "dictator" explaining its acts every week on TV...even a Democratic president doing that. And...no doubts... that many countries leaders, many foreigners, and many expats, cannot understand how things are done in Thailand....and will be better for them just shot up and leave Thailand alone with its Thainess... Huh? Prayuth commandeers television time and that means he's not a dictator? That's the most desperate rationale I've read yet! My apologies if you were being sarcastic. Didn't Yingluck, Abhisit, Somchai, Samak and Thaksin do exactly the same thing when they were in power? Yes, both elected and unelected leaders love to use television to get their message and/or misinformation across. My point was that regular television broadcasts does not mean Prayuth is not an unelected, authoritarian, rule-by-decree self-appointed PM (there's a D-word for this kind of person, but we're not allowed to use it). What is your point? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Elections are the only legitimate way to change governments? No democratic country follows this alleged consensus. All of them have impeachment proceedings and criminal courts that can remove government leaders. Maybe the OP should take a brush up course in political science. ,Which countries are you referring to and when do they use extraordinary methods to remove their democratically elected governments? Ausralia,11/11/1975.CIA through out Whitlam as he bucked the U.S line. Really? I was told at the time that it was the Governor General (ie the representative of the Queen) who had him thrown out because he wasn't "sound" (ie not a gentleman; see the tv programme "Yes, Minister" for a definition of "sound"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackted Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Sorry! Thailand's so called 'bad reputation' is not as a result of coups/generals/non-democracy. It is a as a result of the shared and recorded experience of greed, corruption, racism in Thailand by people who have come here and won't come back! In the wilds of Issan life goes on. We are more worried about rain than dictators/soldiers/farangs/democrats/tourists....etc. I think you`re right that Thailands` diminishing reputation abroad is partly as a result of people that have visited the Kingdom and had the sort of bad experiences you mention. But people are influenced by the media whether they have been to Thailand or not and "Coups/generals/non-democracy" surely don`t improve that reputation. My Thai family are from Issan and as you say for them "Life goes on" with the daily concerns over the weather. But looking into the future and the bigger picture didn`t the people of Issan start to get an interest in politics and how their lives could be improved when Taksin first came to power? (And I know the pluses and minuses of his era). Unlikely though it is to happen in the foreseeable future but perhaps some of the good people of Issan one day would improve their lives if they could genuineley participate in politics or have a party / leader that put their real interests first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenophon Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 It appears that some news editors have finally grown a pair. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Sorry! Thailand's so called 'bad reputation' is not as a result of coups/generals/non-democracy. It is a as a result of the shared and recorded experience of greed, corruption, racism in Thailand by people who have come here and won't come back! In the wilds of Issan life goes on. We are more worried about rain than dictators/soldiers/farangs/democrats/tourists....etc. I think you`re right that Thailands` diminishing reputation abroad is partly as a result of people that have visited the Kingdom and had the sort of bad experiences you mention. But people are influenced by the media whether they have been to Thailand or not and "Coups/generals/non-democracy" surely don`t improve that reputation. My Thai family are from Issan and as you say for them "Life goes on" with the daily concerns over the weather. But looking into the future and the bigger picture didn`t the people of Issan start to get an interest in politics and how their lives could be improved when Taksin first came to power? (And I know the pluses and minuses of his era). Unlikely though it is to happen in the foreseeable future but perhaps some of the good people of Issan one day would improve their lives if they could genuineley participate in politics or have a party / leader that put their real interests first. Good points. With the huge population in Isaan, one wonders just why they have had to rely on the Chiang Mai wealthy elite to lead them to freedom. Have they no leaders among their own? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somo Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Sorry! Thailand's so called 'bad reputation' is not as a result of coups/generals/non-democracy. It is a as a result of the shared and recorded experience of greed, corruption, racism in Thailand by people who have come here and won't come back! In the wilds of Issan life goes on. We are more worried about rain than dictators/soldiers/farangs/democrats/tourists....etc. It is the same over on this side of the country in rural Khampaeng Phet. Rural people are more interested in their jobs, a roof over their heads, food on the table than all the so called "intellectuals" and foreign governments. They have to live here and they know not much will change whoever is in charge so they get on with their lives and leave the talking heads to chatter on incessantly about the realities of life that they don't have to live with every day. Farmers are far more interested in when it will rain next and what prices they will get for their crops, rather then how some farang in a country far away who deosn't even live in Thailand seems to care about the rights of Thai people. You are right but the people of Isaan will never forget who gave them free health care and made agriculture politically important. The junta will stifle democracy as much as it can but will not dare to meddle too much with those two very important developements for fear of reawakening the anger of the poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyinNE Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 When will the rest of the world listen to what they are told? There is democracy and Thai democracy. Same same but different and we know whose version the Thai Junta will say is best. Where do you come from? How long have you been a general officer in the Thai military? About time to get real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iReason Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 And the usual sycophants licking at the boots of the autocrats are predictably silent. How they should be. Until they actually start thinking with their heads. Bravo again, to the Nation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Sorry! Thailand's so called 'bad reputation' is not as a result of coups/generals/non-democracy. It is a as a result of the shared and recorded experience of greed, corruption, racism in Thailand by people who have come here and won't come back! In the wilds of Issan life goes on. We are more worried about rain than dictators/soldiers/farangs/democrats/tourists....etc. I think you`re right that Thailands` diminishing reputation abroad is partly as a result of people that have visited the Kingdom and had the sort of bad experiences you mention. But people are influenced by the media whether they have been to Thailand or not and "Coups/generals/non-democracy" surely don`t improve that reputation. My Thai family are from Issan and as you say for them "Life goes on" with the daily concerns over the weather. But looking into the future and the bigger picture didn`t the people of Issan start to get an interest in politics and how their lives could be improved when Taksin first came to power? (And I know the pluses and minuses of his era). Unlikely though it is to happen in the foreseeable future but perhaps some of the good people of Issan one day would improve their lives if they could genuineley participate in politics or have a party / leader that put their real interests first. Could I please ask you to get the name right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taksin "Taksin" was actually King Taksin of Siam Reign December 28, 1767 – April 6, 1782 Coronation December 28, 1767 Predecessor Ekkathat (prior to fall of Ayutthaya) Born April 17, 1734 Ayutthaya, Ayutthaya Kingdom Died April 7, 1782 (aged 47) Wang Derm Palace, Thon Buri, Thonburi Kingdom The "Taksin" you are referring to is actually Thaksin Shinawatra who is a commoner like the majority of Thai people and has NO connection to the Thai royalty at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 No doubts Prayut is the head of a very Thai coup.....or a very Thai "dictatorship". I never heard of a military "dictator" explaining its acts every week on TV...even a Democratic president doing that. And...no doubts... that many countries leaders, many foreigners, and many expats, cannot understand how things are done in Thailand....and will be better for them just shot up and leave Thailand alone with its Thainess... Huh? Prayuth commandeers television time and that means he's not a dictator? That's the most desperate rationale I've read yet! My apologies if you were being sarcastic. Didn't Yingluck, Abhisit, Somchai, Samak and Thaksin do exactly the same thing when they were in power? Yes, both elected and unelected leaders love to use television to get their message and/or misinformation across. My point was that regular television broadcasts does not mean Prayuth is not an unelected, authoritarian, rule-by-decree self-appointed PM (there's a D-word for this kind of person, but we're not allowed to use it). What is your point? Can I assume that your point was that all those leaders were legal and the current leader is not? Would you like to explain that to him. especially as he was legally endorsed by the King which actually makes him legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxLee Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Not what the powers that be want to hear. Today's modern communications make it impossible to hide what is going on. If the current regime in power wants to shut down Thailand's entire network,....... They will, one day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
city Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 You can see that this coup isn't like others and that there is a very specific long term goal in place, no discussion allowed of this however so I won't elaborate. Agreed its a joke. The trump card has been held back to unify the masses when these military types are backs to the wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 (edited) Huh? Prayuth commandeers television time and that means he's not a dictator? That's the most desperate rationale I've read yet! My apologies if you were being sarcastic. Didn't Yingluck, Abhisit, Somchai, Samak and Thaksin do exactly the same thing when they were in power? Yes, both elected and unelected leaders love to use television to get their message and/or misinformation across. My point was that regular television broadcasts does not mean Prayuth is not an unelected, authoritarian, rule-by-decree self-appointed PM (there's a D-word for this kind of person, but we're not allowed to use it). What is your point? Can I assume that your point was that all those leaders were legal and the current leader is not? Would you like to explain that to him. especially as he was legally endorsed by the King which actually makes him legal. Well, the coup was made legal after the fact, as was the coup before it, and the one before it, etc., so no, I'm not arguing the government is illegal. Is your point that a man who came to power through coup, suspended the constitution, dissolved all democratic bodies, imposed martial law and censorship, and rules by decree is not a D-word? Obviously I can't actually post the word--censorship and all that. Edited March 4, 2015 by heybruce 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now