This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

Thailand sounds like a neurotic fixated ladyboy at the moment; all these press releases over a diplomat that in normal time’ wouldn't raise a sweat?

What has been failed to be mentioned here so far is that there is a breach of culture that the Americans and their western counterparts can't seem to fathom. Should I list a name of countries where they and their allies have got it wrong? It has been since the aftermath of WW2 ; the rebuilding of Western Germany and Japan which have both come to be and have long been major economic players on the stage of the world, that American foreign policy seems to have worked; however, that policy was all based upon the evil communist threat from the Russians and the Chinese: not on human rights or democracy. The American government simply doesn't give a rat's ass about anyone's other than its own. I am an American by the way and I have had nothing but disdain for their foreign policiy for about as long as I can remember.

I am not sure where you gained your knowledge concerning the rebuilding of Europe after WWII, but I would suggest that a revisit of the Marshall Plan might be in order.

I wasn't talking about rebuilding Europe in general. I was talking about the rebuilding of Germany and Japan specifically. I don't know where you studied history, but we could start a new conversation about the American policy of Containment that started in about 1945 and seems to continues to this day regardless of the opposition party involved. The Marshall plan was a success.. but you haven't explained the why of why it was implemented. It was "Containment".

Edited to say: America has sent a new ambassador to Thailand, because it still follows the same old rule of containment. Yep, it looks like the Thais are getting to close to the Chinese for American comfort.

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

I was making a pretty simple observation. Nice rant though.

What has been failed to be mentioned here so far is that there is a breach of culture that the Americans and their western counterparts can't seem to fathom. Should I list a name of countries where they and their allies have got it wrong? It has been since the aftermath of WW2 ; the rebuilding of Western Germany and Japan which have both come to be and have long been major economic players on the stage of the world, that American foreign policy seems to have worked; however, that policy was all based upon the evil communist threat from the Russians and the Chinese: not on human rights or democracy. The American government simply doesn't give a rat's ass about anyone's other than its own. I am an American by the way and I have had nothing but disdain for their foreign policiy for about as long as I can remember.

I am not sure where you gained your knowledge concerning the rebuilding of Europe after WWII, but I would suggest that a revisit of the Marshall Plan might be in order.

I wasn't talking about rebuilding Europe in general. I was talking about the rebuilding of Germany and Japan specifically. I don't know where you studied history, but we could start a new conversation about the American policy of Containment that started in about 1945 and seems to continues to this day regardless of the opposition party involved. The Marshall plan was a success.. but you haven't explained the why of why it was implemented. It was "Containment".

What's wrong with 'containment', Mr. Snowden?

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

The U.S. and other Western countries trade with Russia and China as well.

What will be interesting is to what extent the TPP has on Asian trade.

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

quote "Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West."

Do you have any proof about co-operation with North Korea? Links etc or anything like that?

Isn't Japan supposed to be building the east/west railway link in Thailand and China the north/south link? That hardly seems like going against the west especially where Japan is situated in the east and also being a member of Asean.

A poor rant but down to your usual standards though.

What has been failed to be mentioned here so far is that there is a breach of culture that the Americans and their western counterparts can't seem to fathom. Should I list a name of countries where they and their allies have got it wrong? It has been since the aftermath of WW2 ; the rebuilding of Western Germany and Japan which have both come to be and have long been major economic players on the stage of the world, that American foreign policy seems to have worked; however, that policy was all based upon the evil communist threat from the Russians and the Chinese: not on human rights or democracy. The American government simply doesn't give a rat's ass about anyone's other than its own. I am an American by the way and I have had nothing but disdain for their foreign policiy for about as long as I can remember.

I agree on US policy since WW2 - it's a mess and is in a very large part responsible for the dreadful place Thailand finds itself in mid 2015 (and the thoroughly broken Thai military who have been supported over and over in their often vicious rampages against the Thai people).

However, the elephant in the room this time, which you seem to miss, is that the disdain for the Thai junta beyond Thai borders this time seems to be almost universal - only Russia, China and North Korea are smiling. And that's a major whoops ...

Add to that pretty much offshore every media outlet - left, right and centrist - that has written about ThaI politics in the past year has agreed with the distain. Hell, they poke fun at the intellectual capacity of dear leader almost every week - and increasingly much of the Thai media seems to be doing the same now, although it seems to slip past, somewhat over his head.

Still, maybe the rest of the world - excepting China, Russia and North Korea - have got it wrong, and you and the man The Guardian calls a "twerp" have got it right. Anything is possible.

I didn't miss the Thai Juntas at all. It's just that Americans seem to think they are the only right solution for ever problem in the world. I'll give the the current problems in the Middle East as an example of America foreign policy getting it right.

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

I was making a pretty simple observation. Nice rant though.

Sorry. Of course, you're correct. Your observation was simple.

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

quote "Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West."

Do you have any proof about co-operation with North Korea? Links etc or anything like that?

Isn't Japan supposed to be building the east/west railway link in Thailand and China the north/south link? That hardly seems like going against the west especially where Japan is situated in the east and also being a member of Asean.

A poor rant but down to your usual standards though.

Standards, eh? Japan is NOT a member of ASEAN. Why don't you try one of your links for that one, genius.

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

I was making a pretty simple observation. Nice rant though.

Sorry. Of course, you're correct. Your observation was simple.

Yes, I'm surprised you didn't get it.

Well isn't that swell of them! Lord knows the U.S. would be so devastated if not! Lol

This word "willing" seems to have been cherry picked and dropped into the headline to get our attention, and perpetuate the characterization of an aloof Junta, seemingly giving its approval of this nomination from their self-appointed seat of ill-gotten power.

When I read the source article, however, the only full, direct quote from the Minster using the word willing is: "I insist that our government is willing to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich.

So, this word "willing" was extracted and appears to have been used (twice) in a dishonest way, in order to create or perpetuate another meaning. Why would Khaosod English do this?

And that is the problem. It is not possible to "cooperate with everyone." Doing so means you are cooperating with some at the expense of others. Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West. They have chosen. So be it.

quote "Thailand has chosen Russia, China, and North Korea over the US, Europe, and Japan simply because to further Russia and China's interest, they are going against the West."

Do you have any proof about co-operation with North Korea? Links etc or anything like that?

Isn't Japan supposed to be building the east/west railway link in Thailand and China the north/south link? That hardly seems like going against the west especially where Japan is situated in the east and also being a member of Asean.

A poor rant but down to your usual standards though.

Standards, eh? Japan is NOT a member of ASEAN. Why don't you try one of your links for that one, genius.

You are correct and I am wrong. Please accept my apologies.

Junta 'Willing' to Work With New U.S. Ambassador

By Khaosod English

Glyn Davies (photo from website of the US Department of State)

BANGKOK - The Thai government is looking forward to cooperation with the newly-nominated American ambassador, a spokesperson says.

United States President Barack Obama nominated Glyn Davies, the former US special representative for North Korea, as the new ambassador to Thailand over the weekend. His formal appointment is pending an approval by the US Congress.

Davies' nomination follows a six-month vacancy in the post of US ambassador to the Kingdom. The former ambassador, Kristie Kenney, left the position in November, and the US diplomatic mission in Bangkok has been led by charge d'affaires W. Patrick Murphy.

Speaking at a press conference yesterday, Maj.Gen. Kongcheep Tantrawanich, a spokesperson of the Ministry of Defense, said he has been informed about Davies' nomination and told reporters that, if Davies is formally appointed, Thailand is willing to work with the new ambassador "for the sake of peace in the country and stability in the region."

"I insist that our government has a willingness to cooperate with every nation. We do not have bias against anyone," said Maj.Gen. Kongcheep, "Thailand is currently going through an important transition. The Ministry of Defense is working under the policy of the government and upholding interest of the nation as our basis."

Thailand has long been a major ally of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, though the US government has scaled back diplomatic ties with Thailand following the military coup d'etat that toppled an elected government on 22 May 2014.

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1429080377

-- Khaosod English 2015-04-15

The post should have remained vacant until an elected government is in place.