Does Asean know the meaning of 'emergency'?

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Does Asean know the meaning of 'emergency'?

WITH THOUSANDS OF MIGRANTS ADRIFT AT SEA, DEBATE MUST TAKE SECOND PLACE TO URGENT ACTION

BANGKOK: -- Malaysia, as current chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), has done the right thing in calling for an urgent meeting over the plight of thousands of migrants from Myanmar and Bangladesh left adrift in the Bay of Bengal and the Strait of Malacca.

Though that call should have come earlier - the mainly stateless Muslim migrants have been boarding boats in the thousands since October for the dangerous journey down the coasts of Myanmar and Thailand - at least Asean is now acting.

Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman said he would seek separate meetings with his Thai and Indonesian counterparts to discuss the problem, adding that Myanmar should summon a meeting of its own, an emergency one if necessary, to discuss and seek solutions.

But what is not yet clear is whether Malaysia has any clear proposals on how Asean can handle this humanitarian crisis.

Members of the regional bloc have long known about the plight of the stateless Rohingya in Myanmar and Bangladesh. However, those who continue arguing over the ethnic group's geographical origins and blaming two centuries of British colonialism for the refugees' "pariah" status miss the point.

The pressing issue is that the Rohingya are facing intolerable conditions where they live. Authorities in Myanmar and Bangladesh refuse them citizenship and regard them as illegal settlers. Buddhist-majority Myanmar even refuses to acknowledge their existence, misidentifying them as Bengalis.

At the end of the monsoon season every year, thousands of Rohingya board boats in the Bay of Bengal in search of a better life elsewhere. The desperate trek is managed by people-trafficking syndicates. Malaysia is the favoured destination, though not the only one.

Most Rohingya migrants are willing to go anywhere they might make a comfortable living. Muslim-majority countries like Malaysia and Indonesia are preferred, but neighbouring Thailand has also been a convenient haven, despite the risks of falling foul of traffickers. An estimated 100,000 Rohingya have settled elsewhere in Southeast Asia since they began fleeing Myanmar nearly half a century ago.

Asean member-countries have experience in dealing with crises resulting from this mass migration. Last week the Indonesian navy followed the example set six years ago when the Royal Thai Navy towed out to sea a boat containing 300 Rohingya seeking to land on our shores.

That action in 2009 made international headlines and became an embarrassment for Thailand. It was also the focus of Asean attention, since Thailand was at that time chairing the association.

Unfortunately the regional bloc has never properly addressed the issue of Rohingya migration, no matter which country has been at the helm.

When the Asean chair passed to Myanmar last year, the government in Nay Pyi Taw consistently barred the subject at regional meetings, resulting in media at home proudly announcing that the government had succeeded in keeping the Rohingya off Asean summit agendas. Last month saw that silence maintained at the latest summit, despite pressure for a debate from host Malaysia.

With Malaysia now pushing to bring the issue to the table again, member-countries should resist the temptation to play the blame game. Instead they must focus on forging the strategies and putting in place the measures that are urgently needed for both the short and the long term.

The priority is to save the lives of the Rohingya already on the move and find them safe havens. The United Nations and other international organisations that can render aid should be urged to join the effort.

With the safety of the migrants secured, Asean can then agree on their origin-identity and decide where they should live. Much of the current talk can be postponed. Right now only action will save the thousands of lives at risk.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Does-Asean-know-the-meaning-of-emergency-30260387.html


-- The Nation 2015-05-19

[SOTIRIOS]

....duh...they are still at the 'denial' stage...

...do you expect anyone to come forward and take responsibility...

...the sickest part of it is that there are some super scum that have made fortunes off of these people....in their most deperate hour.....

[Thaddeus]

Oh, oh, there's an emergency, quick, let's call an urgent meeting.

Twerps.

[Chao Lao Beach]

I wonder if the Phucketwan folks are still going to be sued by the Thai Navy, it looks factual to me ?

[robblok]

Lets not forget it was the Brits that set this all in motion, seems fair they help out a bit financially or even take up a few immigrants.

[trogers]

Does this problem have anything to do with economics and the business of money making? No?

Then it is not the business of ASEAN?

[Johnny S]

Here they only know emergency by "Rushing to the scene" ....

[Thaddeus]

Lets not forget it was the Brits that set this all in motion, seems fair they help out a bit financially or even take up a few immigrants.

And I suppose that the hands of the Dutch were completely clean at that time in history.

Your comment was probably a bad stone to cast.

[trogers]

Lets not forget it was the Brits that set this all in motion, seems fair they help out a bit financially or even take up a few immigrants.

And I suppose that the hands of the Dutch were completely clean at that time in history.

Your comment was probably a bad stone to cast.

EU has been extremely quiet of late...wondering why...

[robblok]

Lets not forget it was the Brits that set this all in motion, seems fair they help out a bit financially or even take up a few immigrants.

And I suppose that the hands of the Dutch were completely clean at that time in history.

Your comment was probably a bad stone to cast.

Where did i say we were clean.. recently did some payments for the atrocities in Indonesia

But I thought we were talking about the current problems here with the refugees ?

[robblok]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

Edited May 19, 2015 by robblok

[trogers]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

Careful there. Get paid in Thai Baht, and not the Pound.

Another QE and you get short paid.

[boomerangutang]

Here they only know emergency by "Rushing to the scene" ....

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

To blame it on the Brits is silly and small-minded. The Brits left a long time ago. Burmese and Asians in general have to sit up, take stock, and deal with the situation. The Brits brought postal service, better ship-building, educational system, medical supplies (quinine, penicillin, pain-killers, etc), and judicial system to Asia. Perhaps the Brits should send a bill for those services. Naw. What happened in the past, happened in the past. The migration issue is NOW.

If anything, China, Japan, Taiwan and S.Korea should find ways to assist. They're Asian aren't they. China is the Big Shot on Campus when it comes to land-grabs, train systems, aircraft carrier, a $10 trillion stock market and building dams, ....but is conspicuously silent on humanitarian issues.

[trogers]

Here they only know emergency by "Rushing to the scene" ....

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

To blame it on the Brits is silly and small-minded. The Brits left a long time ago. Burmese and Asians in general have to sit up, take stock, and deal with the situation. The Brits brought postal service, better ship-building, educational system, medical supplies (quinine, penicillin, pain-killers, etc), and judicial system to Asia. Perhaps the Brits should send a bill for those services. Naw. What happened in the past, happened in the past. The migration issue is NOW.

If anything, China, Japan, Taiwan and S.Korea should find ways to assist. They're Asian aren't they. China is the Big Shot on Campus when it comes to land-grabs, train systems, aircraft carrier, a $10 trillion stock market and building dams, ....but is conspicuously silent on humanitarian issues.

China has never raised the humanitarian flag. They are Communists with strong memories of the Opium wars.

[robblok]

Here they only know emergency by "Rushing to the scene" ....

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

To blame it on the Brits is silly and small-minded. The Brits left a long time ago. Burmese and Asians in general have to sit up, take stock, and deal with the situation. The Brits brought postal service, better ship-building, educational system, medical supplies (quinine, penicillin, pain-killers, etc), and judicial system to Asia. Perhaps the Brits should send a bill for those services. Naw. What happened in the past, happened in the past. The migration issue is NOW.

If anything, China, Japan, Taiwan and S.Korea should find ways to assist. They're Asian aren't they. China is the Big Shot on Campus when it comes to land-grabs, train systems, aircraft carrier, a $10 trillion stock market and building dams, ....but is conspicuously silent on humanitarian issues.

I don't think its small minded.. they relocated people.. just like the chinese did in Tibet (whole world does not like that) Why is it different for the Brits. I do agree that a long time has passed but its a hard problem to solve.

The Brits could send a bill for the good they did but in reality they profited from their empire so I doubt in balance it will be positive for them.

Dutch did similar things and as punishment we paid off countries (Suriname and others) and let people from the Dutch Antilles into our country and they are not the best behaving ppl in the world. Thing is we profited in the past from it and now we have to pay the bill. I don't see why it would be different for the Brits.

They caused it, they are at least partial responsible (according to the Thais i talked with totally responsible but I don't agree).

So they should man up and pay up and take some refugees in. Thailand had absolutely no part in this and is expected to pay that seems unfair if the ones that caused it don't pay.

[boomerangutang]

The mind-set of 'blame' can go on and on. We could blame the Iraqis for polluting the air by torching the Kuwaiti oil fields. We could blame the Papuans for being the first to export sugar cane (contributing to slavery and causing half the people in developed countries to be fat). We could blame the guy guarding the bees in Brazil for letting some escape - leading to killer bee infestations over thousands of sq.Km. in the Americas.

Blame is old-school. Now is the time for finding solutions.

I think down-deep, SE Asian countries are hoping for US and European money to establish refugee camps. They're already likely to get UN money for that.

Most countries in the world want solutions and money to emanate from N.America, Europe and other farang countries. That's the main reason N.Korea is always saber rattling. It wants farang countries to give it lots of money - to ensure it doesn't develop N weapons.

As for refugee camps: most are in Africa and the Middle east. All are funded, at least in part, but the UN. Does SE Asia need another (besides the one it has on the Thai-Burmese border?). Probably yes. It just may be the least painful of the ugly options available now.

It will boil down to money. If western countries promise big money to Thailand, purportedly for refugee camp(s), then Thailand will reluctantly agree. Though there will be a stipulation limiting the # of migrants allowed - and, of course, that stipulation won't mean anything realistic.

[Thaddeus]

Here they only know emergency by "Rushing to the scene" ....

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

To blame it on the Brits is silly and small-minded. The Brits left a long time ago. Burmese and Asians in general have to sit up, take stock, and deal with the situation. The Brits brought postal service, better ship-building, educational system, medical supplies (quinine, penicillin, pain-killers, etc), and judicial system to Asia. Perhaps the Brits should send a bill for those services. Naw. What happened in the past, happened in the past. The migration issue is NOW.

If anything, China, Japan, Taiwan and S.Korea should find ways to assist. They're Asian aren't they. China is the Big Shot on Campus when it comes to land-grabs, train systems, aircraft carrier, a $10 trillion stock market and building dams, ....but is conspicuously silent on humanitarian issues.

I don't think its small minded.. they relocated people.. just like the chinese did in Tibet (whole world does not like that) Why is it different for the Brits. I do agree that a long time has passed but its a hard problem to solve.

The Brits could send a bill for the good they did but in reality they profited from their empire so I doubt in balance it will be positive for them.

Dutch did similar things and as punishment we paid off countries (Suriname and others) and let people from the Dutch Antilles into our country and they are not the best behaving ppl in the world. Thing is we profited in the past from it and now we have to pay the bill. I don't see why it would be different for the Brits.

They caused it, they are at least partial responsible (according to the Thais i talked with totally responsible but I don't agree).

So they should man up and pay up and take some refugees in. Thailand had absolutely no part in this and is expected to pay that seems unfair if the ones that caused it don't pay.

Inapplicable use of causality there I'm afraid.

Because B is happening now, it must have been caused by A which happened earlier, completely missing the introduction of C.

[robblok]

The mind-set of 'blame' can go on and on. We could blame the Iraqis for polluting the air by torching the Kuwaiti oil fields. We could blame the Papuans for being the first to export sugar cane (contributing to slavery and causing half the people in developed countries to be fat). We could blame the guy guarding the bees in Brazil for letting some escape - leading to killer bee infestations over thousands of sq.Km. in the Americas.

Blame is old-school. Now is the time for finding solutions.

I think down-deep, SE Asian countries are hoping for US and European money to establish refugee camps. They're already likely to get UN money for that.

Most countries in the world want solutions and money to emanate from N.America, Europe and other farang countries. That's the main reason N.Korea is always saber rattling. It wants farang countries to give it lots of money - to ensure it doesn't develop N weapons.

As for refugee camps: most are in Africa and the Middle east. All are funded, at least in part, but the UN. Does SE Asia need another (besides the one it has on the Thai-Burmese border?). Probably yes. It just may be the least painful of the ugly options available now.

It will boil down to money. If western countries promise big money to Thailand, purportedly for refugee camp(s), then Thailand will reluctantly agree. Though there will be a stipulation limiting the # of migrants allowed - and, of course, that stipulation won't mean anything realistic.

In this case its quite clear who is at least partially to blame and who should pay. Britain, not the Thais not the UN. I would feel it was justified if the Brits shouldered a lot and the rest came from the UN. I understand that the Brits don't want that and will deny it but they are of course bias as it will cost them money.

Do tell me why the Thais should have to pay and the Brits would not.. and please tell me who are more to blame ?

[robblok]

Inapplicable use of causality there I'm afraid.

Because B is happening now, it must have been caused by A which happened earlier, completely missing the introduction of C.

I don't see it that way the Brits did the same thing the Chinese did in Nepal.. bringing in outsiders in a land causing trouble this way. China has been condemned for it and so should the Brits. The cases are quite similar.

Do try to excuse it with facts not some vague statements.

[Thaddeus]

Inapplicable use of causality there I'm afraid.

Because B is happening now, it must have been caused by A which happened earlier, completely missing the introduction of C.

I don't see it that way the Brits did the same thing the Chinese did in Nepal.. bringing in outsiders in a land causing trouble this way. China has been condemned for it and so should the Brits. The cases are quite similar.

Do try to excuse it with facts not some vague statements.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2014/09/22/the-rohingya-and-national-identities-in-burma/

http://www.kaladanpress.org/index.php/report/rohingya/1509-rohingyas-are-not-british-era-settlers.html

https://www.soas.ac.uk/sbbr/editions/file64388.pdf

[robblok]

As of 1826, the British took control of Arakan after the First Anglo-Burmese War (1824-26). They encouraged farmers from Bengal to move to the depopulated area of Arakan, both Rohingyas originally from the area and native Bengalis. The sudden influx of immigrants from British India sparked a strong reaction from the mostly-Buddhist Rakhine people living in Arakan at the time, sowing the seeds of ethnic tension that remain to this day.

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/Asian_History_Terms_N_Q/g/Who-Are-The-Rohingya.htm

Sounds an awfully lot like what China has done in Tibet and the actions of the Chinese have been condemned.

[i claudius]

Lets not forget it was the Brits that set this all in motion, seems fair they help out a bit financially or even take up a few immigrants.

We have enough problems with immigrants ,just send them back home,my days of thinking we should help have gone

[i claudius]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

I BLAME THE Vikings for all the blonde people in Britain when they invaded us and stole our farmland,I say send all those Danes back home,or can't we go backThat far?

[trogers]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

I BLAME THE Vikings for all the blonde people in Britain when they invaded us and stole our farmland,I say send all those Danes back home,or can't we go backThat far?

And the Vikings blame the Peking man?

[robblok]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

I BLAME THE Vikings for all the blonde people in Britain when they invaded us and stole our farmland,I say send all those Danes back home,or can't we go backThat far?

Fair point.. but if what i posted is correct (the resettling part) as I just got it from a website and am not 100% sure. Then the Brits are responsible. Its quite a while back but still not as far back as your example. As I said they should take at least part of the responsibility as its quite clear then who created this mess for a large part.

But I get your point about going back.. but in this case its quite clear. But because its so long ago.. its shared responsibility where the Brits IMHO are far more responsible as that Thais who had nothing to do with it. So its clear who should pay at least part of it and it is not the Thais.

This was the point my Thai friends made and I can't argue with it, Thais are blameless, the Brits are not. They are at least partially responsible and should man up.

[Thongkorn]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

Maybe The Brits should have let France colonize them in the late 1900, when Thailand's King ask for help from the Brits , short memory's these Thais have.

[Srikcir]

One thing Prayut might remember is that he has DESIGNATED Malaysia as the "One" to bring Malay-Thai insuregnts to the peace tables.

So he might consider Thailand being part of the Rohingya solution before Malaysia designates Thailand as the One to facilitate the flight of Rohingyas to Malaysia.

Prayut is all about avoiding responsibility for civil problems. That's why he is so quick to use Article 44 on the Thai public. That won't resolve the Rohingya problem.

[ggold]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

I BLAME THE Vikings for all the blonde people in Britain when they invaded us and stole our farmland,I say send all those Danes back home,or can't we go backThat far?

Fair point.. but if what i posted is correct (the resettling part) as I just got it from a website and am not 100% sure. Then the Brits are responsible. Its quite a while back but still not as far back as your example. As I said they should take at least part of the responsibility as its quite clear then who created this mess for a large part.

But I get your point about going back.. but in this case its quite clear. But because its so long ago.. its shared responsibility where the Brits IMHO are far more responsible as that Thais who had nothing to do with it. So its clear who should pay at least part of it and it is not the Thais.

This was the point my Thai friends made and I can't argue with it, Thais are blameless, the Brits are not. They are at least partially responsible and should man up.

I question whether Thai's are really that up on history that they could make the connection! Dare I say a Thai is far more likely to be against Helping the refugees because of their faith. Not many Thais are happy with what is happening in the south. That would be an easy connection for them to make.

But you carry on bashing the UK for it's past deeds.

[phuket43]

I wonder if the Phucketwan folks are still going to be sued by the Thai Navy, it looks factual to me ?

Sure, the court date has been announced.

[robblok]

I recently had a talk with some Thais on this subject and they pointed out to me they blamed the British for this and did not feel they should take them up. They said we did not create the problem the British did in the past why should be pay for it.

That was why I made the comment, I argued that I am for settlement of refugees in the region.. The Thais I spoke with were adamant not our problem created by the British let them solve it too.

Now thinking about it I can understand their points, this was created by an other foreign power who made good money from stuff like this and now they want others to pay for it.

I would say take them in and let the Brits pay for it (partly) and other countries too if you don't want them on your own doorstep. Settlement in the region is a good thing but should be financed not only by those in the region.

To add.. by attacking in the middle east we also created refugees.. and we are partly responsible for them (WE is EU and US) Create a war torn country. Then one should help the ones you hurt too not just bomb countries take their oil and screw them over.

I BLAME THE Vikings for all the blonde people in Britain when they invaded us and stole our farmland,I say send all those Danes back home,or can't we go backThat far?

Fair point.. but if what i posted is correct (the resettling part) as I just got it from a website and am not 100% sure. Then the Brits are responsible. Its quite a while back but still not as far back as your example. As I said they should take at least part of the responsibility as its quite clear then who created this mess for a large part.

But I get your point about going back.. but in this case its quite clear. But because its so long ago.. its shared responsibility where the Brits IMHO are far more responsible as that Thais who had nothing to do with it. So its clear who should pay at least part of it and it is not the Thais.

This was the point my Thai friends made and I can't argue with it, Thais are blameless, the Brits are not. They are at least partially responsible and should man up.

I question whether Thai's are really that up on history that they could make the connection! Dare I say a Thai is far more likely to be against Helping the refugees because of their faith. Not many Thais are happy with what is happening in the south. That would be an easy connection for them to make.

But you carry on bashing the UK for it's past deeds.

I only tell you what I have heard.. they were discussing this. I had no clue what the history was until it was pointed out to me that the Brits made this mess. I don't really care that you believe me or not. But if this is fact then its a Brit made mess. If you call stating the facts bashing then you got a strange idea of it. Its the factual.

These were educated Thais.. its hard to discuss this in Thai. My Thai is not that good. I doubt I would have understood it in The Thai language. I was giving them a hard time on settling immigrants in the local area they pointed out the British connection.

Seems you guys are to proud to admit to mistakes in the past. What do you care about that YOU did not make those mistakes. Do you think I feel responsible for what the Dutch did in Indonesia.. I don't but I do understand why we maid payments to them and I do understand we were the bad guys. Did you think you got your empire by being nice to people and that they were all waiting to be conquered by you ?

Strange ideas you have. Accepting where the blame lies is not the same as feeling personal responsible. In this case (if that version of history is correct) the Brits are for a large part to blame and they should man up.

And your remark about the faith.. i think that is part of it.. bigger part is these things cost money. Money that should come from those responsible for it.. not Thailand.

*edit just asked how they knew.. it was mentioned in the Thai news so that is how they know seems that answers the history question. So ask your Thai family about it if you dont believe me*

Edited May 19, 2015 by robblok