bheard Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The subs will cause the surrounding countries to look at Thailand in awe. Of their stupidity in even thinking about purchasing subs, let alone actually buying the things. In terms of defence, subs are backward thinking, not forward thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawker9000 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 When they're good and ready it will simply be announced that the purchase is going ahead, end of. Yeap, I think that's the simple truth of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoli Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Public support?? With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away, etc. Sure the public will applaud the spending of 36 Billion Baht on some usless toys. Quote: With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away. I would hate to live in a country that cannot work on more than one problem at a time. Why would you make a comparison that the government should not deal with other issues when they have these 3 to deal with? Should the police department quit doing their jobs until these other problems are solve?. Should roads not be repaired until then? Should the farmers stop growing food? What is your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realenglish1 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The navy needs submarines like I need a migraine. They just want toys the higher the ranking the bigger the toys are . This is a stupid idea now and will be a stupid idea in 6 months or 6 years. Submarines are for fighting wars not for fight boat people coming from neighboring countries. The whole idea of a sub is to have stealth capability to creep up on the enemy and destroy them Now if they intend to destroy immigrates on boats or drug dealers with a toreador or ballistic missile then yes get them . Mind you they would be a benefit to keep the Indonesians from attacking the shores of a Thai Island Hey guess the public will never buy this idea of Subs for Thailand . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kannikapor88 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 How do they find these idiots - a contest in Navy, RTP and Army. The lowest IQ gets to be Admiral, Chief of Police or General ... No wonder this country is going down the toilet while the World is laughing ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdenner Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) Public support?? With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away, etc. Sure the public will applaud the spending of 36 Billion Baht on some usless toys. Quote: With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away. I would hate to live in a country that cannot work on more than one problem at a time. Why would you make a comparison that the government should not deal with other issues when they have these 3 to deal with? Should the police department quit doing their jobs until these other problems are solve?. Should roads not be repaired until then? Should the farmers stop growing food? What is your point? I think you need to heed your own avatar! The people of this country have numerious issues which are costing them dearly (a few examples stated, I could add health and aged care as well). How is the good Admiral going to get them to champion/support this folly when the money can be used more productively elsewhere? Edited July 17, 2015 by bdenner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smutcakes Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I don't really know enough about subs to comment on their viability of use in the Gulf of Thailand, but i would of thought the Andaman be far more suitable. Having said that, why the hell did they not build their multi million dollar sub base on the Andaman Coast, from Sattahip to Phuket its a 2600 nautical mile 7 day round trip, before carrying out any operations, and thats presuming that the sub is allowed to or can pass through Malaysian, Singaporean and possibly Indonesian waters to get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgordo38 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 "It's the best worth [Thailand would get] for the money," he said, adding that the submarines would serve as the country's maritime "fences" for the next 30 years. Thailand has a maritime area of over 300,000 square miles covering the Gulf of Thailand and the Andaman Sea. He also disputed a claim that the Gulf of Thailand is too shallow for a submarine. "That's not true. The Navy has carefully studied the geographical environment," he said. I'm going to save this quote for when the first one runs aground. Easily solved in true Thai manner just dredge the gulf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djjamie Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 "The Navy is trying to persuade the public to support its plan to purchase three submarines" So much for the big bad junta not listening to the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FangFerang Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Very strange, since every country with a border on the Andoman sea has a competing claim....hard to find map, but it's on the internet. The ASEAN family is not quite ready for reconciliation yet..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoli Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Public support?? With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away, etc. Sure the public will applaud the spending of 36 Billion Baht on some usless toys. Quote: With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away. I would hate to live in a country that cannot work on more than one problem at a time. Why would you make a comparison that the government should not deal with other issues when they have these 3 to deal with? Should the police department quit doing their jobs until these other problems are solve?. Should roads not be repaired until then? Should the farmers stop growing food? What is your point? I think you need to heed your own avatar! The people of this country have numerious issues which are costing them dearly (a few examples stated, I could add health and aged care as well). How is the good Admiral going to get them to champion/support this folly when the money can be used more productively elsewhere? I do not understand. Where in the Admiral jobs description does it tell him to focus on health and aged care? A person should focus on the job he is hired to do, and let those hired to take care of the health and aging of society as a whole. I realize that there are many on ThaiVisa that are experts on every subject. What a wonderful gift to have...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smutcakes Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I do not understand. Where in the Admiral jobs description does it tell him to focus on health and aged care? A person should focus on the job he is hired to do, and let those hired to take care of the health and aging of society as a whole. I realize that there are many on ThaiVisa that are experts on every subject. What a wonderful gift to have...... Stoli, i kind of agree with you, and i think most people are anti the purchase more out of scepticism of the necessity for the purchase of submarines, rather than what the money can be used for elsewhere in the country. If they were proposing to buy vessels which could be used effectively in the slave trade (apprehending them not assisting them), then i think there would be far less criticism. However when you have people claiming the country is wracked in debt etc, and then things like this suddenly crop up, where even without budgetary issues people would question the necessity, it is easy to see how all the issues get mishmashes together. I think coming shortly after the announcements on the lack of funding of the health care scheme, it was possibly badly timed, and perhaps the funding with the health care etc issues were poorly explained. I would be surprised to see if it does not come up again, but such is the public outcry over it, the NCPO might simply thing its suicidal to go ahead even if behind the scenes it has been agreed. How they appease the Admirals is something they will need to work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabothai Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Out of 65 mill how many do even know what a sub is, let alone what they are there for. I thought the plans were shelved by big daddy anyhow a few days back. And mr holy admiral does not take no for an answer, keeps on wining and asking the public now. Thainess? no I don't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike324 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 They are better off at buying patrol boats with some big gun capabilities. Subs are just useless, not to mention the maintenance and operating costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdenner Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Public support?? With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away, etc. Sure the public will applaud the spending of 36 Billion Baht on some usless toys. Quote: With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away. I would hate to live in a country that cannot work on more than one problem at a time. Why would you make a comparison that the government should not deal with other issues when they have these 3 to deal with? Should the police department quit doing their jobs until these other problems are solve?. Should roads not be repaired until then? Should the farmers stop growing food? What is your point? I think you need to heed your own avatar! The people of this country have numerious issues which are costing them dearly (a few examples stated, I could add health and aged care as well). How is the good Admiral going to get them to champion/support this folly when the money can be used more productively elsewhere? I do not understand. Where in the Admiral jobs description does it tell him to focus on health and aged care? A person should focus on the job he is hired to do, and let those hired to take care of the health and aging of society as a whole. I realize that there are many on ThaiVisa that are experts on every subject. What a wonderful gift to have...... Spare me days, you obviously do not get the gist of the OP. He is asking for public support to this folly. Where is he going to get it from????? That is the issue! Or can't you figure that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramrod711 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I don't really know enough about subs to comment on their viability of use in the Gulf of Thailand, but i would of thought the Andaman be far more suitable. Having said that, why the hell did they not build their multi million dollar sub base on the Andaman Coast, from Sattahip to Phuket its a 2600 nautical mile 7 day round trip, before carrying out any operations, and thats presuming that the sub is allowed to or can pass through Malaysian, Singaporean and possibly Indonesian waters to get there. For Centuries, Thailand Has Dug the Idea of a Canal Not a spade has been turned, but the notion won’t die; squabbling, cobras and tigers By JAMES HOOKWAY CHUMPHON, Thailand—People here have been dreaming for more than 300 years of digging a canal linking the Indian and Pacific oceans. King Narai the Great of what was then Siam hired French engineers to have a look at cutting a channel through the 30-mile-wide Isthmus of Kra in the 17th century. The British East India Company explored the option 200 years later. A plan in the 1970s suggested using nuclear bombs to blast a channel through miles of thick jungle and rock. “Dig, dig, dig,” former army chief Chavalit Yongchaiyudh grumbled at his home recently after a group of Chinese businessmen lobbied for his support for yet another proposal. “It’s all anyone wants to talk about.” ....But, the canal..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim walker Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Once poverty in Thailand is totally eradicated and free good education for all children then think about spending 36 Billion on a generals toys definitely not before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawker9000 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Public support?? With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away, etc. Sure the public will applaud the spending of 36 Billion Baht on some usless toys. Quote: With the country gripped by drought, disruptions in the fishing industry, millions to tons of rice missing or rotting away. I would hate to live in a country that cannot work on more than one problem at a time. Why would you make a comparison that the government should not deal with other issues when they have these 3 to deal with? Should the police department quit doing their jobs until these other problems are solve?. Should roads not be repaired until then? Should the farmers stop growing food? What is your point? I think you need to heed your own avatar! The people of this country have numerious issues which are costing them dearly (a few examples stated, I could add health and aged care as well). How is the good Admiral going to get them to champion/support this folly when the money can be used more productively elsewhere? I do not understand. Where in the Admiral jobs description does it tell him to focus on health and aged care? A person should focus on the job he is hired to do, and let those hired to take care of the health and aging of society as a whole. I realize that there are many on ThaiVisa that are experts on every subject. What a wonderful gift to have...... Actually, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief have become a significant part of the naval forces job description pretty much globally, and submarines don't really contribute much to it. It's difficult to imagine a practical, real-world RTN mission load or OPTEMPO that calls for submarine assets more than it calls for coastal-patrol or other surface assets that can render meaningful assistance in a time of emergency, whether in coastal areas or on the high seas. It most certainly IS within the Admiral's job description to focus on real-world, Thai, actual forecast mission needs and priorities rather than simply prestige-building ones. What in the world does the Admiral hope to be able to accomplish with 3 submarines that he probably won't be able to successfully man & operate (for very long, if at all, unless it's Chinese crews that are actually going to man them...), let alone maintain? What's been said so far is too vague and abstract to even begin to answer this question. In fact, I'd say the question is being evaded. What's going on here, in part, is the junta wanting to put a stick in the U.S. eye for shunning it after the military takeover. China OTOH has no problem with the junta. (In the past, Thailand has investigated other - western - sourcing for possible submarine acquisition, but has now suddenly moved their focus to China.) Another piece of the puzzle is growing submarine deployments by other nations in the region. Ex., Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia. Thailand wants to appear to be keeping up with the Joneses, although those other countries mentioned have more proximate concerns related to policing of the Malaccan Straits, a place where China might be said to have, emm, "competing" ... interests... Another reason frequently mentioned here on TV is some supposed linkage with the Chinese rail deal, which I wouldn't rule out but can't really find anything to substantiate. NONE of these are good reasons for an expensive, non-practical, posturing, apparently sinocentric, submarine acquisition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawadee1947 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 That's a real good bargain..................but probably no warranty on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliotness Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 If there was a real war situation then the 3 Thai subs would be easily spotted leaving their base and travelling in the shallow Gulf of Thailand by satellites or drones. They wouldn't even reach the open sea before they were taken out. Anti submarine warfare is now so advanced that buying subs is just a shocking waste of money. If the government really wanted to impress their neighbours then the navy should upgrade its anti-sub capability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snig27 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 "The Navy is trying to persuade the public to support its plan to purchase three submarines" So much for the big bad junta not listening to the people. And if you believe this you were born yesterday. Oh wait, It's Jamie ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.png.76be522b3b43e7458166b9dac9e422ed.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now