Thai army chief defends use of conscripts as domestic workers

[soalbundy]

It's hard to get good help these days...

Anek allegedly exposed himself to the rear admiral’s wife. Benjaporn claims the conscript stood under a tree and masturbated while watching his wife through a window.

.

Surely he's likely to be a discharged seaman after that episode.

or promoted to Master Bates from seaman stains

[soalbundy]

He would be well acquainted with the slave trade.

[Expat1]

Unbelievable the lack of historical knowledge from the people that come to this site or then it could also just be selective memory. Now the chaining up part ok, that is definitely Asian in response to whatever the service sailor did to upset the officer and is harsh however, the practice of using conscripts as domestics was most certainly used by the officer class in both the US and UK armed forces in the 1960's and 70's because I saw it used at the time. It was accepted common practice. No wall chainings I am aware of though then. Now if that has changed there, which I would be very skeptical that it has entirely, then so be it. Most militaries in the world use conscripts in such roles as domestics, cooks and office staff, etc. in officers houses. Perhaps the West has completely done away with that, if so then very noble. Most the rest still do. Personally though, I sure would have rather been a service domestic on some base with 3 hots and a cot everyday than humping a weapon around in the mud had I been given the choice. Pretty certain all things being equal these guys probably would as well.

[nahkit]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

Yes, I can read. I can also sort out the reality from the cute description. Do you know what coercion is? How about misappropriation?

The reality is that if a young man does not "volunteer" do be the slave labour of a military senior, that young man does not have a pleasant time. Repeated dangerous assignments or heavy duties are the fates of those who do not volunteer.

These young people are conscripted for national service. Their "care and pay" is provided by the people of Thailand. Where do these military "officers" get off taking these conscripts for their own personal use? Taking resources and assets that do not belong to you is termed misappropriation. Do you not understand that this practice is wrong? These kids have no say in the matter. They are forced into slavery and have zero rights.

Another sterling example of what the military is in Thailand. The great self appointed leader of the nation says that he is against corruption. Well then, General Prime Minister, please start with your own organization. Stop the misuse of labour and the misuse of Thai taxpayers money.

A high-ranking military officer and his wife recently moved in next door to our house. He has a "service soldier" who lives at his house permanently and does the laundry and general house cleaning. My wife asked him how he felt about it and he told her it was miles better than being in the barracks and he had no problems with doing it.

That's the reality that I've personally experienced.

[sammygood]

do you remember your military service ?

free maids for the army, paid next to nothing (200 baht per day)

felt worse than a prisoner, as those people did something to belong in jail

and if you deceided to do a runner, you would be cought and spent double time in jail

a few years later, they finally canceled, but like so many things in life, i was born to early or too late

[Sviss Geez]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

Does it matter? How is doing housework for ranking officers going to defend the nation? Why should men in uniform be used this way?

Yes, it does matter. No-one is claiming that this activity is designed to defend the nation and these soldiers are not being "used", they all volunteer.

[Sviss Geez]

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

And you obviously believe everything you read.

Why not, it's better than making things up and some of what I read is bound to be true as opposed to the imaginative nonsense spouted by so many here.

Now that's one of the most nonsensical posts I have read in a long time, and that's quite an achievement!

That you couldn't understand it isn't exactly a surprise.

[Muirton]

Unbelievable the lack of historical knowledge from the people that come to this site or then it could also just be selective memory. Now the chaining up part ok, that is definitely Asian in response to whatever the service sailor did to upset the officer and is harsh however, the practice of using conscripts as domestics was most certainly used by the officer class in both the US and UK armed forces in the 1960's and 70's because I saw it used at the time. It was accepted common practice. No wall chainings I am aware of though then. Now if that has changed there, which I would be very skeptical that it has entirely, then so be it. Most militaries in the world use conscripts in such roles as domestics, cooks and office staff, etc. in officers houses. Perhaps the West has completely done away with that, if so then very noble. Most the rest still do. Personally though, I sure would have rather been a service domestic on some base with 3 hots and a cot everyday than humping a weapon around in the mud had I been given the choice. Pretty certain all things being equal these guys probably would as well.

Sorry, but you have no right to speak for them.

[Sviss Geez]

If just one country, the Russian Federation was coloured blue, the map would look very different.

Being forced into servitude by the state or its representatives under penalty of law in a private home/farm/business bloody well is slavery!

Absolutely right, but that is not what is being bloody well reported in this thread.

[resimi]

Call them anything you like, but they are conscripts there against their will. Some would call that 'slavery'.

The more rational wouldn't though.

The hyperbolic few would call it slavery.

As said....

...slave labour...

...forced into slavery...

[Sviss Geez]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

Yes, I can read. I can also sort out the reality from the cute description. Do you know what coercion is? How about misappropriation?

The reality is that if a young man does not "volunteer" do be the slave labour of a military senior, that young man does not have a pleasant time. Repeated dangerous assignments or heavy duties are the fates of those who do not volunteer.

These young people are conscripted for national service. Their "care and pay" is provided by the people of Thailand. Where do these military "officers" get off taking these conscripts for their own personal use? Taking resources and assets that do not belong to you is termed misappropriation. Do you not understand that this practice is wrong? These kids have no say in the matter. They are forced into slavery and have zero rights.

Whether you could read or not was never an issue. The rest of your comment that I quoted is pure conjecture on your part.

[resimi]

If a US navy officer tried to force a conscript into acting as an indentured servant, that officer would be facing serious charges.

Hmmm... someone doesn't know much or have first hand experience about U.S. et al military.

As a naval officer in the 1960's in the U.K military I had a personal assistant who attended to my needs.My counterparts in the army had their ''batmen'' to assist them.

I see nothing wrong in the matter.

[casualbiker]

Unbelievable the lack of historical knowledge from the people that come to this site or then it could also just be selective memory. Now the chaining up part ok, that is definitely Asian in response to whatever the service sailor did to upset the officer and is harsh however, the practice of using conscripts as domestics was most certainly used by the officer class in both the US and UK armed forces in the 1960's and 70's because I saw it used at the time. It was accepted common practice. No wall chainings I am aware of though then. Now if that has changed there, which I would be very skeptical that it has entirely, then so be it. Most militaries in the world use conscripts in such roles as domestics, cooks and office staff, etc. in officers houses. Perhaps the West has completely done away with that, if so then very noble. Most the rest still do. Personally though, I sure would have rather been a service domestic on some base with 3 hots and a cot everyday than humping a weapon around in the mud had I been given the choice. Pretty certain all things being equal these guys probably would as well.

Sorry, but you have no right to speak for them.

But you do? What tripe!

[MZurf]

If just one country, the Russian Federation was coloured blue, the map would look very different.

Being forced into servitude by the state or its representatives under penalty of law in a private home/farm/business bloody well is slavery!

Absolutely right, but that is not what is being bloody well reported in this thread.

It bloody well is if you only remove these:

[resimi]

Unbelievable the lack of historical knowledge from the people that come to this site or then it could also just be selective memory.

the practice of using conscripts as domestics was most certainly used by the officer class in both the US and UK armed forces in the 1960's and 70's because I saw it used at the time. It was accepted common practice. Now if that has changed there, which I would be very skeptical that it has entirely, then so be it. Most militaries in the world use conscripts in such roles as domestics, cooks and office staff, etc. in officers houses. Perhaps the West has completely done away with that, if so then very noble. Most the rest still do. Personally though, I sure would have rather been a service domestic on some base with 3 hots and a cot everyday than humping a weapon around in the mud had I been given the choice. Pretty certain all things being equal these guys probably would as well.

Good to hear from someone that does know some things and does have first hand experience about U.S. et al military.

[arfurcrown]

I am amused at the responses of people here.

You came to Thailand to live as you liked that which you saw compared to your home country.

Now you want to change it to that which you want and left behind in your old home country.

Service life is a different world.I can assure you having two nephews currently serving in the military here they delight in the so called slavery occupations they are involved with.

The same applied to two now ex military conscript nephews who were in the same boat some years back. All four agreed and currently agree that their lives were and are a breeze.

In fact one of currently serving nephews is going to stay on as a full time soldier, decent pay, decent accommodation and a host of other perks that far outweigh those he would get in the Thai civvy street setting.

[resimi]

A high-ranking military officer and his wife recently moved in next door to our house. He has a "service soldier" who lives at his house permanently and does the laundry and general house cleaning. My wife asked him how he felt about it and he told her it was miles better than being in the barracks and he had no problems with doing it.

That's the reality that I've personally experienced.

First hand reality without hyperbole.

How refreshing.

[pauleddy]

A colonel or navy captain lives in my soi. He used to have 2 boy slaves in khaki, but they reduced it to one.

These kids were generally country boys and didn't like farangs. One kid used to get the colonel's miniature pug dog to do its business in front of my gates, until a nice Thai lady opposite shouted and bawled at him.

But of course, it is still the draft. Any nation needing a real professional army abandons the draft and has real soldiers, and a list of experienced reservists.

Eddy

[bamnutsak]

Every year at the annual conscript drawing they have a bevvy of M2F/TG's, many of whom are pressed into serving duty at the event, and most get removed, unless they catch the eye of a "superior".

Maybe these "positions" would be well suited for them? French maid's outfits in camo of course.

"In the Navy..."

[Eric Loh]

A high-ranking military officer and his wife recently moved in next door to our house. He has a "service soldier" who lives at his house permanently and does the laundry and general house cleaning. My wife asked him how he felt about it and he told her it was miles better than being in the barracks and he had no problems with doing it.

That's the reality that I've personally experienced.

First hand reality without hyperbole.

How refreshing.

Refreshing but still doesn't made this right. Every conscript will try to find ways to escape barrack and soldier life. It is tough, no doubt about that but so wrong for the army to allow them soft option to be a servant when the resource can be harnessed to be a soldier serving the country. Problem is that this servant soldiers have been institutionalized over the years and become a regular selection in Thailand. Time to change this practice. They can serve in the army offices in regular time but not in the residence of senior officers. That's what I experience in my army life.

[IAMHERE]

As a naval officer in the 1960's in the U.K military I had a personal assistant who attended to my needs.My counterparts in the army had their ''batmen'' to assist them.

I see nothing wrong inthe matter.

As a taxpayer here I am not concerned, I wonder though just how many of the critics actually pay income and business taxes tax here thus of course they would be justified in voicing their opinions concerning the way their tax contributions are used.

Yes we know you pay V.A.T. like all of us here so that argument is not really valid.

This go for the Thai's that don't pay taxes too ? I'd be willing to bet most conscripts have never paid taxes and their parents haven't either. Only the poor get pressed into service.

[tuanku]

As of 2013, the Royal Thai Armed Forces had 306,000 active duty personnel.^[5] The Thai military has more than 1,750 flag officers (generals and admirals), a bloated number for a military of its size.^[6] By comparison, the US military as of April 2011 had 964 flag officers for a force several times the size of Thailand's.^[7] On 2 May 2015 1,043 new flag officers of all three services promoted in 2014-2015 took the oath of allegiance.^[8] It is not clear how many retired during the same period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Thai_Armed_Forces

Clearly they let almost anyone with the required assets (average declared assets of retired admirals serving on the NLA is around 100 million Baht!) become an Admiral so it is not surprising that some of them are a little less in touch with the 21st century than others.

On another note, seems that there is enough here for the conscript to mount a pretty convincing criminal defamation case - if he only had the money to do so.

[tuanku]

Unbelievable the lack of historical knowledge from the people that come to this site or then it could also just be selective memory.

the practice of using conscripts as domestics was most certainly used by the officer class in both the US and UK armed forces in the 1960's and 70's because I saw it used at the time. It was accepted common practice. Now if that has changed there, which I would be very skeptical that it has entirely, then so be it. Most militaries in the world use conscripts in such roles as domestics, cooks and office staff, etc. in officers houses. Perhaps the West has completely done away with that, if so then very noble. Most the rest still do. Personally though, I sure would have rather been a service domestic on some base with 3 hots and a cot everyday than humping a weapon around in the mud had I been given the choice. Pretty certain all things being equal these guys probably would as well.

Good to hear from someone that does know some things and does have first hand experience about U.S. et al military.

Quite a lot has changed in the last 40 to 50 years!!!!

[jerojero]

Another example of engrained stratification of Thai society, generals and elite dominating lower classes.

[casualbiker]

Another example of engrained stratification of Thai society, generals and elite dominating lower classes.

Big words!!! Well done.

[oldsailor35]

As a naval officer in the 1960's in the U.K military I had a personal assistant who attended to my needs.My counterparts in the army had their ''batmen'' to assist them.

I see nothing wrong inthe matter.

As a taxpayer here I am not concerned, I wonder though just how many of the critics actually pay income and business taxes tax here thus of course they would be justified in voicing their opinions concerning the way their tax contributions are used.

Yes we know you pay V.A.T. like all of us here so that argument is not really valid.

Think that you might have got it wrong here "old ships".

Yes the Batman etc., are reasonably accepted positions as the officer concerned will certainly have an overload of duties without having to polish his own boots. But when the batman etc., is used to do the gardening or help with the wife's household duties, that is definately 'not on'. This apparently seems to be the norm with Thai junior personnel.

[baboon]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

Yes, I can read. I can also sort out the reality from the cute description. Do you know what coercion is? How about misappropriation?

The reality is that if a young man does not "volunteer" do be the slave labour of a military senior, that young man does not have a pleasant time. Repeated dangerous assignments or heavy duties are the fates of those who do not volunteer.

These young people are conscripted for national service. Their "care and pay" is provided by the people of Thailand. Where do these military "officers" get off taking these conscripts for their own personal use? Taking resources and assets that do not belong to you is termed misappropriation. Do you not understand that this practice is wrong? These kids have no say in the matter. They are forced into slavery and have zero rights.

Another sterling example of what the military is in Thailand. The great self appointed leader of the nation says that he is against corruption. Well then, General Prime Minister, please start with your own organization. Stop the misuse of labour and the misuse of Thai taxpayers money.

A high-ranking military officer and his wife recently moved in next door to our house. He has a "service soldier" who lives at his house permanently and does the laundry and general house cleaning. My wife asked him how he felt about it and he told her it was miles better than being in the barracks and he had no problems with doing it.

That's the reality that I've personally experienced.

And if the soldier was given a choice to sign here, pack his bags and go home or continue skivvying, I wonder what his response would have been then?

[Baerboxer]

As a naval officer in the 1960's in the U.K military I had a personal assistant who attended to my needs.My counterparts in the army had their ''batmen'' to assist them.

I see nothing wrong inthe matter.

As a taxpayer here I am not concerned, I wonder though just how many of the critics actually pay income and business taxes tax here thus of course they would be justified in voicing their opinions concerning the way their tax contributions are used.

Yes we know you pay V.A.T. like all of us here so that argument is not really valid.

Was that before or after National Service ended? Did your PA also nip round to do the garden, clean the house (assuming you weren't at sea on in mess), wash the car, run errands, act as general lackey 24/7?

My son currently a senior NCO in a main battle tank cavalry regiment. When younger he was proud to become "the colonel's driver". He drove the colonel's tank, acted as chauffeur and personal bodyguard. He did not do household chores, or act as an in service servant out of some 19th century TV series.

But the surplus of labor that National Service conscription provides isn't available there anymore, and numbers have been cut.

Military officers here still regard those serving under them as theirs to command how they want, for their own personal use.

[casualbiker]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

Yes, I can read. I can also sort out the reality from the cute description. Do you know what coercion is? How about misappropriation?

The reality is that if a young man does not "volunteer" do be the slave labour of a military senior, that young man does not have a pleasant time. Repeated dangerous assignments or heavy duties are the fates of those who do not volunteer.

These young people are conscripted for national service. Their "care and pay" is provided by the people of Thailand. Where do these military "officers" get off taking these conscripts for their own personal use? Taking resources and assets that do not belong to you is termed misappropriation. Do you not understand that this practice is wrong? These kids have no say in the matter. They are forced into slavery and have zero rights.

Another sterling example of what the military is in Thailand. The great self appointed leader of the nation says that he is against corruption. Well then, General Prime Minister, please start with your own organization. Stop the misuse of labour and the misuse of Thai taxpayers money.

A high-ranking military officer and his wife recently moved in next door to our house. He has a "service soldier" who lives at his house permanently and does the laundry and general house cleaning. My wife asked him how he felt about it and he told her it was miles better than being in the barracks and he had no problems with doing it.

That's the reality that I've personally experienced.

And if the soldier was given a choice to sign here, pack his bags and go home or continue skivvying, I wonder what his response would have been then?

But that's not the choice. The choices are 1) skivvying 2) barracks skivvying 3) posting South...

[EnglishJohn]

Whether they call them servant soldiers or service soldiers doesn't matter. There is nothing "military" in what these kids are asked to do do. This is a carry-over from the corvee labor mentality of old and should be stopped. If these officers need servants, gardeners, etc, they should hire and pay them as employees like everyone else (should).

The soldiers volunteer for the positions, can't you read?

And you obviously believe everything you read.

LOL, how typical. I do enjoy seeing hypocrisy when the culprit is unaware they just bared their @rse.

I'll tell you what : next time let us know which selective parts of the stories you personally choose to believe and which you choose not to.

That should give the rest of us a good laugh if nothing else. I think we could predict what they are before you even tell us.

I've met one of these 'servants' and he was fiercely loyal to his 'master'. He looked at him as a father and if any of the 'servants' family got sick or he was in trouble, the 'master' would help them through it by his position. He was a real thug though - if anyone upset his master in a bar or whatever, the slave would beat them up. He even said he shot someone when he was younger (before he joined the Army). I didn't venture into his shirt colour, but I think a career in the UDD would fit him fine after he left.