Thai-US ties hinge on 'return of democracy'

[Colabamumbai]

The U.S. is holding back millions of dollars in aid that was promised, until elections are held.

[lostoday]

The U.S. is holding back millions of dollars in aid that was promised, until elections are held.

That is the US law. Except as provided in sections 2753 and 2799aa–1 of this title, the second section 620J [1] of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (as added by Public Law 110–161) [22 U.S.C. 2378d], and any provision of an Act making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs that restricts assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree, and except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, amounts authorized to be made available to carry out paragraph (2) for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 are authorized to be made available notwithstanding any other provision of law.

[halloween]

Do you really think the name of the last government was democracy? You are out in the cold with no clue. The USA does not care who governs Thailand. The last government may have been good or bad it has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is return to democracy not return to the last government. Democracy is a method of choosing leaders. One person one vote.

Now do you get why you are off topic? It is not about Yingluck or Thaksin it is about democracy which is a system of electing leaders.

My apologies if my broader concept of democracy conflicts you simplistic definition. Feel free to ignore.

Broad is covering a large number and wide scope of subjects as in any democratic government not just the previous governments. Narrow would be one government as in Thaksin's government.

In this case democracy as meant by the USA is in the broad sense of any government that is democratically elected.

Feel free to read and absorb because it is the truth and I don't have an ax to grind. I have said many times before I did not like the previous administration but that is not the topic of this thread.

You and a small group of posters try and take over every thread to turn it into an anti Thaksin bash and that is unfair to those of us who want to discuss the topic.

But the US is insisting on a "return to democracy". You tell me that only means that they want an elected government, and are unconcerned about the "quality" of that government. Which is fine for them, but the Thai people deserve better.

How exactly are we supposed to engage in a reform process if we can't discuss the failings of previous attempts? It seems you are uncomfortable with discussing the more recent "democratically elected governments", but why do you disagree with others doing so?

Edited June 14, 2015 by halloween

[Travelman868]

There are no US reservations on Thailan. The US is firmly committed to not restoring US/Thai relations until they have an elected government by the people for the people. That does not mean some appointed crony pm constitutes a freely elected democracy.

Democracy = Huge expense of election, partly paid for by people who want something for themselves or their companies.

Benign Dictator = Same outcome as above but without the expense of election and no bribery.

??????

[lostoday]

Do you really think the name of the last government was democracy? You are out in the cold with no clue. The USA does not care who governs Thailand. The last government may have been good or bad it has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is return to democracy not return to the last government. Democracy is a method of choosing leaders. One person one vote.

Now do you get why you are off topic? It is not about Yingluck or Thaksin it is about democracy which is a system of electing leaders.

My apologies if my broader concept of democracy conflicts you simplistic definition. Feel free to ignore.

Broad is covering a large number and wide scope of subjects as in any democratic government not just the previous governments. Narrow would be one government as in Thaksin's government.

In this case democracy as meant by the USA is in the broad sense of any government that is democratically elected.

Feel free to read and absorb because it is the truth and I don't have an ax to grind. I have said many times before I did not like the previous administration but that is not the topic of this thread.

You and a small group of posters try and take over every thread to turn it into an anti Thaksin bash and that is unfair to those of us who want to discuss the topic.

But the US is insisting on a "return to democracy". You tell me that only means that they want an elected government, and are unconcerned about the "quality" of that government. Which is fine for them, but the Thai people deserve better.

How exactly are we support to engage in a reform process if we can't discuss the failings of previous attempts? It seems you are uncomfortable with discussing the more recent "democratically elected governments", but why do you disagree with others doing so?

Not at all. Start your own thread on the failings of the previous governments.

This thread is on Thai-US ties hinge on 'return of democracy'

Or there is another thread running right now titled "

Call for 'reforms before elections'

Maybe you even know what the reforms are cause they aren't mentioned in the OP

Edited June 14, 2015 by lostoday

[Godders]

A bit rich, to say the least, coming from the representative of a country which has cynically used the so-called "war on terror" as a pretext to systematically undermine the democratic rights of its own citizens and attack other nations without just cause.

Feigned American concern over political freedom and human rights in Thailand should fool no-one.

What the White House really wants is a return to the palmy, freewheeling days when their billionaire proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, presided over the Kingdom's affairs. The military-led caretaker administration, pledged to squeeze corruption and cronyism out of the system, is equally determined to keep the Oriental wolf of Wall Street from their door at any cost.

So, it's seconds out. . .

The longer a general election is delayed, the louder one can expect the howls of US-fostered international outrage to become. With an increasingly belligerent China actively seeking closer political and economic ties with Thailand, relations between the US and its diminutive but strategically important Asian allay could be about to enter a crucial new phase.

[baboon]

A bit rich, to say the least, coming from the representative of a country which has cynically used the so-called "war on terror" as a pretext to systematically undermine the democratic rights of its own citizens and attack other nations without just cause.

Feigned American concern over political freedom and human rights in Thailand should fool no-one.

What the White House really wants is a return to the palmy, freewheeling days when their billionaire proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, presided over the Kingdom's affairs. The military-led caretaker administration, pledged to squeeze corruption and cronyism out of the system, is equally determined to keep the Oriental wolf of Wall Street from their door at any cost.

So, it's seconds out. . .

The longer a general election is delayed, the louder one can expect the howls of US-fostered international outrage to become. With an increasingly belligerent China actively seeking closer political and economic ties with Thailand, relations between the US and its diminutive but strategically important Asian allay could be about to enter a crucial new phase.

Come on, admit it. You are that dreadful Pauline Whatshername who writes for The Nation...

[lostoday]

A bit rich, to say the least, coming from the representative of a country which has cynically used the so-called "war on terror" as a pretext to systematically undermine the democratic rights of its own citizens and attack other nations without just cause.

Feigned American concern over political freedom and human rights in Thailand should fool no-one.

What the White House really wants is a return to the palmy, freewheeling days when their billionaire proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, presided over the Kingdom's affairs. The military-led caretaker administration, pledged to squeeze corruption and cronyism out of the system, is equally determined to keep the Oriental wolf of Wall Street from their door at any cost.

So, it's seconds out. . .

The longer a general election is delayed, the louder one can expect the howls of US-fostered international outrage to become. With an increasingly belligerent China actively seeking closer political and economic ties with Thailand, relations between the US and its diminutive but strategically important Asian allay could be about to enter a crucial new phase.

Not hardly it is a US law passed in 1961 that is withholding money from Thailand among other things.

Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (as added by Public Law 110–161) [22 U.S.C. 2378d], and any provision of an Act making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs that restricts assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree.

Now don't you feel better knowing the truth. Nothing to do with the White House or Thaksin. But you baiters really go the extra mile trying to change every thread into a Thaksin bash. You hoping we will just give up and you win again by stifling rational on topic discussion.

This thread is about a return to democracy not the return of Thaksin. If you want to talk about Thaksin - open another thread.

[Bellacissa]

Incidentally, most Americans could care less who is in the White House. It has almost zero affect on anything in their day to day lives. Republican? Democrat? Alien from Mars? Doesn't matter. Congress will c-block the president at every turn regardless of which figurehead is currently sitting on the throne. The person on the throne will veto at will, money will change hands... but very, very little will change for the everyday American.


As far as Thailand goes, it's all about the money (for Thailand) and the position in SE Asia (for the US). With China's reclamation activities off the Philippines coast, I expect there will be a lot more pressure from the US for Thailand to get on with the elections sooner rather than later. I don't think the US cares who wins, quite frankly. They just can't be seen giving aid to a country under military rule. Get a vote done and then the US can counter the money coming in from China. The last thing the US needs is China having Thailand on its side (financially or militarily) right now.

[Robby nz]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Rich from someone who accuses others of trying to divert from the topic.

Nor do you seem to understand that any dams on the Maekong would affect Cambodia and Vietnam far more than Thailand, or Lao for that matter.

What do you think the US would do, bomb China like they have bombed others ?

[lostoday]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Rich from someone who accuses others of trying to divert from the topic.

Nor do you seem to understand that any dams on the Maekong would affect Cambodia and Vietnam far more than Thailand, or Lao for that matter.

What do you think the US would do, bomb China like they have bombed others ?

I was responding to gandalf12 statement about the USA's self interest. I don't believe the USA wants Thailand to return to democracy out of self interest. Frankly the military has always been easier for the USA to deal with (1965 - 1975). What could they do to prevent China from damning the Mekong? What did they do to Russia recently? How is the ruble doing?

[rijb]

The US is so quick to lecture other nations about democracy. As an American this tendency makes me cringe. How about a quick status report on the latest adventures in forced democracy in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya and Algeria? Here is the American version of democracy. Sounds a bit closer to fascism to me, but what do I know? And this was five years ago. Obama has been accelerating this dramatically.

The Washington Post reported in 2010 that there were 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies in 10,000 locations in the United States that are working on counterterrorism, homeland security, and intelligence, and that the intelligence community as a whole includes 854,000 people holding top-secret positions.

and you're still unemployed.

[lostoday]

Incidentally, most Americans could care less who is in the White House. It has almost zero affect on anything in their day to day lives. Republican? Democrat? Alien from Mars? Doesn't matter. Congress will c-block the president at every turn regardless of which figurehead is currently sitting on the throne. The person on the throne will veto at will, money will change hands... but very, very little will change for the everyday American.

As far as Thailand goes, it's all about the money (for Thailand) and the position in SE Asia (for the US). With China's reclamation activities off the Philippines coast, I expect there will be a lot more pressure from the US for Thailand to get on with the elections sooner rather than later. I don't think the US cares who wins, quite frankly. They just can't be seen giving aid to a country under military rule. Get a vote done and then the US can counter the money coming in from China. The last thing the US needs is China having Thailand on its side (financially or militarily) right now.

As to what Obama can do to the average American and Asian you may want to check out the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the lack of cooperation from his own party and support from the Republicans . But maybe not because it contradicts your argument.

What can the President do to the average American? He can kill you. An American President killed 50,000 of my friends. His veto can be overridden.

Why does America want Thailand to have elections? It's the law. Foreign Assistance Act.

[halloween]

Not at all. Start your own thread on the failings of the previous governments.

This thread is on Thai-US ties hinge on 'return of democracy'

Or there is another thread running right now titled "

Call for 'reforms before elections'

Maybe you even know what the reforms are cause they aren't mentioned in the OP

This topic is about the US calls for a return to democracy. You think that mentioning that the last attempts at democracy have been abject failures has nothing to do with it. Thankfully, I don't need your permission to continue to discuss what I feel is relevant.

If you have a problem, seek moderators help.

[Balance]

Looking back over the past 60 years or so, there have been many military heads of government who came to power with the the same promises of restoring Democracy only to do the opposite. I believe it was Khun Thanon who even published a new constitution and then in three months changed his mind and mounted a coup on his own government and instituted a quite repressive regime. The Cold War and later the travesty of Vietnam brought lots and lots of dollars into the country and a blind eye concerning human rights. You kind of get the idea that promised made were not kept. What's the old saying, "Burn me once, it's on you, burn me 4-5 times and it all on me."

It is also curious that there seems to be a pre-occupation with creating what has been termed, "National Solidarity" before elections are allowed to go forward. Reading between the lines it seems to mean that all Thais have to be in agreement on just about everything. I hope this is an incorrect interpretation as there would never be an election, if true. But this need for all Thais to be doing things in unison goes back to Khun Pribun in 1934 telling the folks in the southern provinces that they had to give up their language, religion, and culture. A reading of Wyatt's "Short History of Thailand", leaves one with the impression that there was much more acceptance of diversity of many favors during the Reign of Rama 5.

I guess the point is that History has meaning and paying a little attention sometimes helps with the present.

[spidermike007]

The US is so quick to lecture other nations about democracy. As an American this tendency makes me cringe. How about a quick status report on the latest adventures in forced democracy in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya and Algeria? Here is the American version of democracy. Sounds a bit closer to fascism to me, but what do I know? And this was five years ago. Obama has been accelerating this dramatically.

The Washington Post reported in 2010 that there were 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies in 10,000 locations in the United States that are working on counterterrorism, homeland security, and intelligence, and that the intelligence community as a whole includes 854,000 people holding top-secret positions.

and you're still unemployed.

Always appreciate the benefit of the doubt from a kind-hearted fellow expat. Thanks.

[Bellacissa]

Incidentally, most Americans could care less who is in the White House. It has almost zero affect on anything in their day to day lives. Republican? Democrat? Alien from Mars? Doesn't matter. Congress will c-block the president at every turn regardless of which figurehead is currently sitting on the throne. The person on the throne will veto at will, money will change hands... but very, very little will change for the everyday American.

As far as Thailand goes, it's all about the money (for Thailand) and the position in SE Asia (for the US). With China's reclamation activities off the Philippines coast, I expect there will be a lot more pressure from the US for Thailand to get on with the elections sooner rather than later. I don't think the US cares who wins, quite frankly. They just can't be seen giving aid to a country under military rule. Get a vote done and then the US can counter the money coming in from China. The last thing the US needs is China having Thailand on its side (financially or militarily) right now.

As to what Obama can do to the average American and Asian you may want to check out the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the lack of cooperation from his own party and support from the Republicans . But maybe not because it contradicts your argument.

What can the President do to the average American? He can kill you. An American President killed 50,000 of my friends. His veto can be overridden.

Why does America want Thailand to have elections? It's the law. Foreign Assistance Act.

Oh, I'm not saying the sitting President can't affect the average American. Obamacare is a good example. Just that the person in the chair does not normally have an effect on the vast majority of the population. It's Congress that people should be up in arms about.

And yes, the Foreign Assistance Act is what I was referring to. As soon as elections are held and a new government is in place, the US can go right back to funding whatever they choose to fund here in Thailand. Until then, the US legally has to take the "election or less money for you" stance.

[gandalf12]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Asking for help is one thing. The munt of help they would receive would depend on the benefits to the USA. Please dont try and tell us the USA has every bodies interests at heart, it doesnt. It has USA interests at heart.

[lostoday]

Not at all. Start your own thread on the failings of the previous governments.

This thread is on Thai-US ties hinge on 'return of democracy'

Or there is another thread running right now titled "

Call for 'reforms before elections'

Maybe you even know what the reforms are cause they aren't mentioned in the OP

This topic is about the US calls for a return to democracy. You think that mentioning that the last attempts at democracy have been abject failures has nothing to do with it. Thankfully, I don't need your permission to continue to discuss what I feel is relevant.

If you have a problem, seek moderators help.

When you elect a government by popular vote that is democracy working. When you appoint a government that not democracy. What happens after is a whole different topic.

You can't seem to grasp that. It is two different things. Democracy means elections. Not good or bad elections just elections.

Democracy is not inherently good or bad. If you elect a bad government that is a bad democracy. If you elect a good government that is a good democracy. The essence of democracy or history of democracy or sufficiency of democracy is not the topic of this thread.

The simplified Thai version of the topic of this thread is "if Thailand wants any money from the USA it has to have elections." If the same government that is in place today gets elected that is fine and everybody will jump up and down and celebrate.

Edited June 14, 2015 by lostoday

[lostoday]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Asking for help is one thing. The munt of help they would receive would depend on the benefits to the USA. Please dont try and tell us the USA has every bodies interests at heart, it doesnt. It has USA interests at heart.

I'm an American and I have helped Thailand since the 1960's. I'm not alone. Many Americans have helped Thailand asking for nothing in return. America helped Thailand after WWII and Vietnam that I know of. I think on many things America's and Thailand's interest complimented one another. I don't think America today is planning on making a land grab in Asia or in the waters nearby. I'm not so sure about China. Are you? America has the Foreign Assistance Law to promote the spread of democracy since 1961. I don't think that is always in America's interest but it has the law nevertheless.

[halloween]

Not at all. Start your own thread on the failings of the previous governments.

This thread is on Thai-US ties hinge on 'return of democracy'

Or there is another thread running right now titled "

Call for 'reforms before elections'

Maybe you even know what the reforms are cause they aren't mentioned in the OP

This topic is about the US calls for a return to democracy. You think that mentioning that the last attempts at democracy have been abject failures has nothing to do with it. Thankfully, I don't need your permission to continue to discuss what I feel is relevant.

If you have a problem, seek moderators help.

When you elect a government by popular vote that is democracy working. When you appoint a government that not democracy. What happens after is a whole different topic.

You can't seem to grasp that. It is two different things. Democracy means elections. Not good or bad elections just elections.

Democracy is not inherently good or bad. If you elect a bad government that is a bad democracy. If you elect a good government that is a good democracy. The essence of democracy or history of democracy or sufficiency of democracy is not the topic of this thread.

The simplified Thai version of the topic of this thread is "if Thailand wants any money from the USA it has to have elections." If the same government that is in place today gets elected that is fine and everybody will jump up and down and celebrate.

"We are concerned that without a timely, transparent and inclusive reform process, the Thai government will never enjoy the public buy-in necessary to build lasting institutions." Marciel

[eggers]

I believe in this case the USA is not meddling in Thai affairs but it is Thailand wanting USA money.

If the currency represents a strong economy vs weak economies I think it is hard to classify the US economy as sluggish - they don't have Greece to worry about do they?

I don't know of any country that has mixed races that does not have racial issues and the USA's illegal immigrant issues are looking small now compared to other parts of the world.

I think really the only reason the USA meddles in other peoples affairs is because they are asked to. WWII ask. Vietnam ask. Korea ask. Kuwait (Iraq invasion) ask. Syria ask.

I think you should realize that the USA has allies that can't really do much themselves. They don't have carriers and troops and the will to defend themselves but they ask a lot.

If the USA is Americans, and I think it is, rarely do they want to attack anyone. Most Americans even in WWI and WWII were very isolationist and didn't want to interfere.

Not meddling...come, come, it has used "carrot & stick" approach, to say, relations will not return to normal till Thailand returns to democracy & elected Gov't.

Sure, some countries have sought US assistance, but many others where, US sees opportunity & offers "assistance" for it's own ends.

Your comments seem to focus on military aid, which is not always the case, certainly not Thailand or the other ASEAN countries.

US entered WWII after attack on PH & declared war on Japan.

Iraq invasion was "folly" of then President supposedly to shore up political support.

The US is today far from isolationist, rather gone too far other way, wants to be in everybody's backyard, mind you, so do other major players, Russia & China!!

You missed my post I guess. I said it was a matter of Thailand wanting money. The Allies were asking the US to enter WWII long before they did and were in it defacto anyway by supplying the Allies. The invasion of Iraq I mentioned Kuwait which you missed. The USA entered the war to counter the Iraq invasion of Kuwait and were asked to do it.

The other thing you missed about my post is that I was writing about the American people not the government. The American people have always been very isolationist. Presidents are commonly elected on the basis of getting America out of this war or that one.

Did you think the Revolutionary or Civil wars were popular? Far from it. Americans don't like war. They have everything they need.

America has the same problem as many countries. The people they elect are not the same people after they are elected. Americans have gotten one long list of broken promises from elected officials.

I wish they had the brains to reform the system to forbid any corporate political donations and the electoral college and the primary system. Many feel the same way I do. But I gave up and came to Thailand.

No, I read your post several times. When did Thailand seek funds from US? Seen no such evidence; simply your stilted American view that the world revolves around US. Not so!! The US did not start to contribute to war effort till long after Poland, France & Netherlands had been invaded, only to offer airplanes to UK to assist in repelling air attacks by Germany. Didn't declare war till PH, if you care to read an independent account,"Second World War" by Beevor, you may be amazed at what you discover! Suggest take a look at You say America is about people, so who decided to send troops & support to Vietnam, Iraq, Kuwait & currently,naval aircraft to attack IS in Iraq & Syria....not the people, but Gov't. Sure people don't like wars, US people don't have that on their own.

Agree, on politicians they are full of empty promises & excuses when in power, plus use as much spin as possible to cloud the real events..

Whether we agree or not is of little consequence, as events will still occur over which we have no input or control.... agree to disagree!

[gandalf12]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Asking for help is one thing. The munt of help they would receive would depend on the benefits to the USA. Please dont try and tell us the USA has every bodies interests at heart, it doesnt. It has USA interests at heart.

I'm an American and I have helped Thailand since the 1960's. I'm not alone. Many Americans have helped Thailand asking for nothing in return. America helped Thailand after WWII and Vietnam that I know of. I think on many things America's and Thailand's interest complimented one another. I don't think America today is planning on making a land grab in Asia or in the waters nearby. I'm not so sure about China. Are you? America has the Foreign Assistance Law to promote the spread of democracy since 1961. I don't think that is always in America's interest but it has the law nevertheless.

I have no idea if it would be in Americas interest. I know many Americans are happy to help Thailand and other countries in any way they can but that is not the issue. The issue is the US Governments policy which is different. Most of the time the USA will go to free people from dictators and the like when they have a vested interest in the country. Take Kuwait when Iraq invaded. The USA said it had no knowledge that Iraq would invade Kuwait and the 200,000 soldiers and battlefield equipment led them to believe Iraq was just going to have a BBQ, yeh right.

The USA has, in theory helped numerous countries including Iraq, Vietnam etc but has left them all in chaos. Can anyone say that Iraq today is better than before the war in 1992? I dont think so.

Governments the world over are the same. They adopt a "what's in it for us" policy. This is nothing gainst America per say just that the governments of the world dont give a damn about others (or in most cases their own people) unless they want something from it

[tonbridgebrit]

The US are hypocrits. How about appling that same principle to the Saudis and every other non democratic despote they are friends with and have funded down the years and still do today. At least Thailand doesnt publicly behead its own citizens.

The US will support what is in their best interest to support. In fact this is the policy of every reasonable country , Hypocrisy and diplomacy go hand in hand

So, Saudi Arabia has oil, and this means that America does not want to fall out with Saudi Arabia. After all, putting up sanctions and boycotting Saudi oil will hurt America. And invading Saudi Arabia is not a good idea, I mean, the invasion of Iraq back in 2003 shows us that these things don't always go smoothly.

But what about Thailand ? What has Thailand got that makes America interested ? Is there anything ?

Is it because Thailand is near China, and America wants to have an ally (military bases) in another country near China ? Or maybe because America knows that Thailand is becoming more and more like a Chinese colony ? All those infra-structure projects being given to China ?

[phoenixdoglover]

These threads that involve American diplomatic statements always explode into overheated rhetoric. It's entertaining, but disillusioning at the same time. Some of you guys are extremely bitter.

Some members have mentioned US support for Saudi Arabia as an example of hypocrisy. The US does not provide foreign aid to Saudi Arabia. They do allow US companies to sell arms to the Saudis, and they do maintain a diplomatic relationship, for obvious reasons. There is no reasonable alternative, anyway. Almost every other country agrees and acts in a similar way.

The US invasion of Iraq is one of the great "foreign policy" mistakes of the past 50 years. But the Iraq invasion was not about imposing democracy, no matter what justifications the war hawks offered after the fact.

With respect to Egypt, and the coup by Sisi, the US used almost identical language to criticize that coup. The statements are all nicely chronicled in newspapers available online.

The current US-Thai diplomatic dialogue is mundane to say the least. The US does not maintain diplomatic relationships to only serve US interests, nor are they altruistic. It is a hallmark of effective diplomacy to look for the needs which intersect, and then build a relationship from that common ground. The US and Thailand have common ground of this sort (economic and geopolitical), so the outlook for the relationship is positive, unless Thailand heads further down the path toward a permanent autocratic form of government.

You may continue now with your bashing.

[ggt]

Thai leaders should inform the US that they will return to democracy...soon after the US returns to democracy...

[tonbridgebrit]

It is all about what is best for the USA. Thailands interests are of no concern to the US

What would you have Thailand do if China damns the Mekong and stops flow of water and fish to Thailand? Who would you suggest Thailand ask for help?

Asking for help is one thing. The munt of help they would receive would depend on the benefits to the USA. Please dont try and tell us the USA has every bodies interests at heart, it doesnt. It has USA interests at heart.

I'm an American and I have helped Thailand since the 1960's. I'm not alone. Many Americans have helped Thailand asking for nothing in return. America helped Thailand after WWII and Vietnam that I know of. I think on many things America's and Thailand's interest complimented one another. I don't think America today is planning on making a land grab in Asia or in the waters nearby. I'm not so sure about China. Are you? America has the Foreign Assistance Law to promote the spread of democracy since 1961. I don't think that is always in America's interest but it has the law nevertheless.

Hello lostoday. Okay, you are American, and you are an individual person. Yes, I know many Americans who have helped Thailand and other countries, and have asked for nothing in return. Yes. But you are not the same thing as the US government. The American individuals that we see, and the American government, the two things are not the same, we know that.

[lostoday]

No, I read your post several times. When did Thailand seek funds from US? Seen no such evidence; simply your stilted American view that the world revolves around US. Not so!! The US did not start to contribute to war effort till long after Poland, France & Netherlands had been invaded, only to offer airplanes to UK to assist in repelling air attacks by Germany. Didn't declare war till PH, if you care to read an independent account,"Second World War" by Beevor, you may be amazed at what you discover! Suggest take a look at You say America is about people, so who decided to send troops & support to Vietnam, Iraq, Kuwait & currently,naval aircraft to attack IS in Iraq & Syria....not the people, but Gov't. Sure people don't like wars, US people don't have that on their own.

Agree, on politicians they are full of empty promises & excuses when in power, plus use as much spin as possible to cloud the real events..

Whether we agree or not is of little consequence, as events will still occur over which we have no input or control.... agree to disagree!

Convert to today's dollars and find out how much money the USA has spent on and in Thailand since the end of WWII. Find out how much of Thailand's infrastructure was built by US firms and construction companies. Find out how much military equipment parts and training has and is being provided by the USA. The dollar amount is staggering.

What did WWII cost? Britain 120 billion. USA 341 Billion. Japan 56 billion. Follow the money and you will find the real story about WWII. Follow the money and you will find out the real story about anything. Thailand and the USA and democracy.

[lostoday]

Thai leaders should inform the US that they will return to democracy...soon after the US returns to democracy...

Democracy a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. The key word is elected. The US has had elected representatives since they threw off the yolk of their colonial masters in 1776. The US does not have to return to electing representatives as it has never left.

If you want to invent other definitions of democracy we don't have the English language in common and I'm afraid we will not be able to communicate.

[lostoday]

I have no idea if it would be in Americas interest. I know many Americans are happy to help Thailand and other countries in any way they can but that is not the issue. The issue is the US Governments policy which is different. Most of the time the USA will go to free people from dictators and the like when they have a vested interest in the country. Take Kuwait when Iraq invaded. The USA said it had no knowledge that Iraq would invade Kuwait and the 200,000 soldiers and battlefield equipment led them to believe Iraq was just going to have a BBQ, yeh right.

The USA has, in theory helped numerous countries including Iraq, Vietnam etc but has left them all in chaos. Can anyone say that Iraq today is better than before the war in 1992? I dont think so.

Governments the world over are the same. They adopt a "what's in it for us" policy. This is nothing gainst America per say just that the governments of the world dont give a damn about others (or in most cases their own people) unless they want something from it

USA kicked out the Iraq invaders from Kuwait; first Gulf war 1990. Good idea. Iraq war; bad idea 2003. Can't expect to be right all the time eh?