Bringing Thaksin To Account

[Old Man River]

Here in Bangkok you have countless soldiers who are by name soldiers, but in reality are working full time in their private businesses, both legal, and illegal ones as well. Many protection rackets are run by military, such as nightclubs, the van services, and hired thugs to destroy markets.

Yes, and then there is the police...

[ColPyat]

Yes, and then there is the police...

There is no part of the Thai formal system that is not from top to bottom undermined by the informal patronage networks.

[Plus]

I don't think destrying yaba labs in Wa territory would have become a humanitarian issue and I don't think they would have gone to war with Thailand over clearly illegal industry. Two-three destroyed factories and producers would lay low and stop production.

Have you taken the time and read my post on the situation of Wa state?

What you propose is simply outlandish.

Yes I have it's not different from how I see it.

What's your objection? Children of drug producers would starve to death?

Or do you think they will be brave enough to dodge helicopters in their movable labs day in and day out?

Labs are not military installations run by ready to die soldiers.

[ColPyat]

Or do you think they will be brave enough to dodge helicopters in their movable labs day in and day out?

Labs are not military installations run by ready to die soldiers.

Yes, they are military installations, protected by heavily armed forces.

[sriracha john]

It can take years to recover from all the years of under-funding. 11 months is not an adequate time-frame to expect an armed forces to be fully stocked with modern equipment and all necessary protective wear, medicines, etc.

The Thai Army is everything else than underfunded - much of the funding is traditionally wasted through corruption, and siphoning off budgets.

guess it's too late to go off-topic... but it certainly doesn't need to go even further.

I was simply making a brief off-topic explaination to your off-topic point and pointing out why the Thai armed forces would not have fared well with an ill-equipped armed forces.

A new topic along these lines would be appropriate.

Edited August 31, 2007 by sriracha john

[ColPyat]

It can take years to recover from all the years of under-funding. 11 months is not an adequate time-frame to expect an armed forces to be fully stocked with modern equipment and all necessary protective wear, medicines, etc.

The Thai Army is everything else than underfunded - much of the funding is traditionally wasted through corruption, and siphoning off budgets.

guess it's too late to go off-topic further... but it certainly doesn't need to go even further.

I was simply making a brief off-topic explaination to your off-topic point and pointing out why the Thai armed forces would not have fared well with an ill-equipped armed forces.

A new topic along these lines would be appropriate.

I would not view this as that off topic, given the massive involvement of the armed forces in the drug trade. To understand what happened in the drug war, and what led to it, we have to look at the contributing factors in Thai society as well. And conditions of Army and Police are an integral aspect of both the drug business and the drug war killings.

[sriracha john]

It can take years to recover from all the years of under-funding. 11 months is not an adequate time-frame to expect an armed forces to be fully stocked with modern equipment and all necessary protective wear, medicines, etc.

The Thai Army is everything else than underfunded - much of the funding is traditionally wasted through corruption, and siphoning off budgets.

guess it's too late to go off-topic further... but it certainly doesn't need to go even further.

I was simply making a brief off-topic explaination to your off-topic point and pointing out why the Thai armed forces would not have fared well with an ill-equipped armed forces.

A new topic along these lines would be appropriate.

I would not view this as that off topic, given the massive involvement of the armed forces in the drug trade. To understand what happened in the drug war, and what led to it, we have to look at the contributing factors in Thai society as well. And conditions of Army and Police are an integral aspect of both the drug business and the drug war killings.

That's not the issue going off-topic, but extending it out to the Armed Forces funding from the treasury, the staffing, the infantry soldiers in the deep south, and other areas removed from the topic at hand is certainly going too far off...

[Plus]

Or do you think they will be brave enough to dodge helicopters in their movable labs day in and day out?

Labs are not military installations run by ready to die soldiers.

Yes, they are military installations, protected by heavily armed forces.

Military installations are protected by governments. Those are stateless, hired jungle militias, not military.

Raising their status from underground businesses to military installations also raises their profile as legitimate targets.

Don't get bogged down in details - look at the bigger picture - are there any other components of the drug trade that could be targeted with maximum effect and minimum violence?

Would anti-dealer campaign be as effective if there were no death squads? One thing you can't deny - killings stopped dealings.

It appears they had 50,000 (suspected) dealers on the list, about five to seven thousand were killed. That's one in ten, but the results were obvious and people accepted the trade of.

Were there any other ways to achieve same resutls without spilling blood? I think that's a legitimate question, raised by Thedude, of all people.

I proposed going after production sources but I'm open to other ideas. Are there any?

[ColPyat]

That's not the issue going off-topic, but extending it out to the Armed Forces funding from the treasury, the staffing, the infantry soldiers in the deep south, and other areas removed from the topic at hand is certainly going too far off...

Sorry to be anal, but illustrating the exact conditions of the armed forces in Thailand does help explaining the existence of the informal patronage networks that are responsible for the drug trade, the social conditions that allowed such large sectors of Thai society to fall into such mass addiction, and enabled the killings as well.

The present propaganda given to us regarding the Human Rights violations glances over, or even completely neglects integral factors of those issues, and solely aims attaching guilt to Thaksin, as the thread title also suggests.

The point i am trying to make here is, that Thaksin without doubt was very guilty, but could not have done so without an enabling system that existed before Thaksin appeared on the scene, and still exists unchanged (and in some ways was even re-enforced by the coup, IMHO). Get rid of Thaksin without touching the system, we will have another round of killings in the future as a solution to real or perceived problems in Thai society.

Thaksin was not ousted because of the Human Rights violations, the maybe most distasteful events under his premiership. During the Human Rights violations the armed forces (and almost all other sectors of society) have collaborated willingly, and have ousted him for very different reasons in the end. The Human Rights "investigations" now are a disgusting political game not even attempting to dismantle the whole system of patronage, and therefore a rather useless exercise that will not prevent a future occurrence of the exact same Human Rights violations.

[sriracha john]

It can take years to recover from all the years of under-funding. 11 months is not an adequate time-frame to expect an armed forces to be fully stocked with modern equipment and all necessary protective wear, medicines, etc.

The Thai Army is everything else than underfunded - much of the funding is traditionally wasted through corruption, and siphoning off budgets.

guess it's too late to go off-topic further... but it certainly doesn't need to go even further.

I was simply making a brief off-topic explaination to your off-topic point and pointing out why the Thai armed forces would not have fared well with an ill-equipped armed forces.

A new topic along these lines would be appropriate.

I would not view this as that off topic, given the massive involvement of the armed forces in the drug trade. To understand what happened in the drug war, and what led to it, we have to look at the contributing factors in Thai society as well. And conditions of Army and Police are an integral aspect of both the drug business and the drug war killings.

That's not the issue going off-topic, but extending it out to the Armed Forces funding from the treasury, the staffing, the infantry soldiers in the deep south, and other areas removed from the topic at hand is certainly going too far off...

That's not the issue going off-topic, but extending it out to the Armed Forces funding from the treasury, the staffing, the infantry soldiers in the deep south, and other areas removed from the topic at hand is certainly going too far off...

Sorry to be anal, but illustrating the exact conditions of the armed forces in Thailand does help explaining the existence of the informal patronage networks that are responsible for the drug trade, the social conditions that allowed such large sectors of Thai society to fall into such mass addiction, and enabled the killings as well.

The present propaganda given to us regarding the Human Rights violations glances over, or even completely neglects integral factors of those issues, and solely aims attaching guilt to Thaksin, as the thread title also suggests.

The point i am trying to make here is, that Thaksin without doubt was very guilty, but could not have done so without an enabling system that existed before Thaksin appeared on the scene, and still exists unchanged (and in some ways was even re-enforced by the coup, IMHO). Get rid of Thaksin without touching the system, we will have another round of killings in the future as a solution to real or perceived problems in Thai society.

Thaksin was not ousted because of the Human Rights violations, the maybe most distasteful events under his premiership. During the Human Rights violations the armed forces (and almost all other sectors of society) have collaborated willingly, and have ousted him for very different reasons in the end. The Human Rights "investigations" now are a disgusting political game not even attempting to dismantle the whole system of patronage, and therefore a rather useless exercise that will not prevent a future occurrence of the exact same Human Rights violations.

perhaps if the last quote included the first quotes detailing the off-topicness of the discussion, it would be clearer why the first quote was off-topic...

going off-topic of why the first quotes were off-topic doesn't help reduce the off-topicness of the first quotes....

[ColPyat]

Or do you think they will be brave enough to dodge helicopters in their movable labs day in and day out?

Labs are not military installations run by ready to die soldiers.

Yes, they are military installations, protected by heavily armed forces.

Military installations are protected by governments. Those are stateless, hired jungle militias, not military.

Raising their status from underground businesses to military installations also raises their profile as legitimate targets.

Don't get bogged down in details - look at the bigger picture - are there any other components of the drug trade that could be targeted with maximum effect and minimum violence?

Would anti-dealer campaign be as effective if there were no death squads? One thing you can't deny - killings stopped dealings.

It appears they had 50,000 (suspected) dealers on the list, about five to seven thousand were killed. That's one in ten, but the results were obvious and people accepted the trade of.

Were there any other ways to achieve same resutls without spilling blood? I think that's a legitimate question, raised by Thedude, of all people.

I proposed going after production sources but I'm open to other ideas. Are there any?

Basically - you confirm here with this post my previous assumption of your position that the extrajudical killings were in your opinion a minor issue.

Yes, i believe that without the killings the drugwar would have been as efficient, and more so because there would not have been the stink of such murders. And yes, i believe that long term solutions such as dismantling the patronage system in Thailand, and drawing the people into politics and development is the only solution to fight the drug problem. Fight the drug networks with the law, put dealers on trial and imprison them, and at the same time decrease demand.

I agree in general with most policies of the drug war (other than that i believe that ultimately drugs have to be legalized in a controlled fashion), only the murders were absolutely unnecessary, and in the long term counter productive.

And like it or not - the armies in the Wa State and Shan states are not just hired jungle militias, especially the Wa are a most formidable force with several 10 000 highly trained, disciplined and very experienced soldiers. They are the only sort of government that exists there. Nobody can win against them with force. It has been attempted and resulted in decades of brutal wars that ended in ceasefires.

[ColPyat]

perhaps if the last quote included the first quotes detailing the off-topicness of the discussion, it would be clearer why the first quote was off-topic...

going off-topic of why the first quotes were off-topic doesn't help reduce the off-topicness of the first quotes....

There is nothing more off topic than endless arguments why some posts are perceived to be off topic without any other positive contribution to the thread.

[Plus]

Thaksin without doubt was very guilty, but could not have done so without an enabling system that existed before Thaksin appeared on the scene, and still exists unchanged (and in some ways was even re-enforced by the coup, IMHO). Get rid of Thaksin without touching the system, we will have another round of killings in the future as a solution to real or perceived problems in Thai society.

That shouldn't be an excuse to let Thaksin off the hook, and Human Rights investigators shouldn't expand the scope of their investigations beyond what is humanly possible.

And another important point - the system existed for decades, but only under Thaksin it was used to kill so many fellow coutnrymen. He was the finger that pulled the trigger. The society must think if the overall system had an effect on his behaviour, but he is alone responsible for his own crimes.

[sriracha john]

perhaps if the last quote included the first quotes detailing the off-topicness of the discussion, it would be clearer why the first quote was off-topic...

going off-topic of why the first quotes were off-topic doesn't help reduce the off-topicness of the first quotes....

There is nothing more off topic than endless arguments why some posts are perceived to be off topic without any other positive contribution to the thread.

I agree... and it's disheartening that it took all that off-topic discussion for you to see it.

Looking forward now to the on-topic discussion to resume.

[ColPyat]

Thaksin without doubt was very guilty, but could not have done so without an enabling system that existed before Thaksin appeared on the scene, and still exists unchanged (and in some ways was even re-enforced by the coup, IMHO). Get rid of Thaksin without touching the system, we will have another round of killings in the future as a solution to real or perceived problems in Thai society.

That shouldn't be an excuse to let Thaksin off the hook, and Human Rights investigators shouldn't expand the scope of their investigations beyond what is humanly possible.

And another important point - the system existed for decades, but only under Thaksin it was used to kill so many fellow coutnrymen. He was the finger that pulled the trigger. The society must think if the overall system had an effect on his behaviour, but he is alone responsible for his own crimes.

Really?

And what happened in '73, and much worse - in '76 and the years that followed? '92?

Please read up on Thai history.

Who has suggested that Thaksin should be let off the hook regarding the drug war murders? I think in your previous post you have excused Thaksin for the murders as having reached the aim, very much along popular opinion in Thailand.

The murders should be fully investigated, and not just by a small selected committee which will go the way all such committees are going. It has been nearly a year since the coup, and so far not one single case has been investigated by the law. One wonders about the commitment of the government if after one year it just finished selecting the members of the committee and defining their jobs, and only a few months before the next semi civilian government is to be elected.

I am still confident about what i have said at the beginning of the thread months ago: that nothing is going to happen, that the whole thing is only smokes and mirrors, and will disappear the same way all previous Human Rights violations went in Thailand - into the dustbin of history.

[Plus]

Yes, i believe that without the killings the drugwar would have been as efficient, and more so because there would not have been the stink of such murders.

What stink? Do you seriously think that dealers would have quit faster if their assossiates were not shot dead everyday?

I tend to think that fear of death was the most powerful deterrent, not the phony papers they were made to sign at police stations.

Judicial system failed miserably in controlling drug epidemic.

Prevention is only one part of the equation, it works only long term and does nothing to stop immediate explosion in drug usage. Why do you think they call them drug pushers? Thaksin was right that targetting the dealers would disrupt the trade, but I'm not convinced that it would have worked without killings.

That's why no other country that criminalises drug use can solve their problem through similar methods. Jail sentences achieve nothing in the US, for example.

Empowering people in Thailand??? That is only if Democrats come to power and stay for ten years or so (ready to go off-topic branch).

[ColPyat]

Yes, i believe that without the killings the drugwar would have been as efficient, and more so because there would not have been the stink of such murders.

What stink? Do you seriously think that dealers would have quit faster if their assossiates were not shot dead everyday?

I tend to think that fear of death was the most powerful deterrent, not the phony papers they were made to sign at police stations.

Judicial system failed miserably in controlling drug epidemic.

Prevention is only one part of the equation, it works only long term and does nothing to stop immediate explosion in drug usage. Why do you think they call them drug pushers? Thaksin was right that targetting the dealers would disrupt the trade, but I'm not convinced that it would have worked without killings.

That's why no other country that criminalises drug use can solve their problem through similar methods. Jail sentences achieve nothing in the US, for example.

Empowering people in Thailand??? That is only if Democrats come to power and stay for ten years or so (ready to go off-topic branch).

You really confuse me. Would you mind not contradicting yourself in every other post?

In one post you propose to prosecute Thaksin, and in the next you agree with the view that the killings were integral to stop the drug trade. Maybe, before posting, you should agree with yourself about the position you take here.

The Democrats have done nothing whatsoever about the drug problem, and have formed already two weak governments which have not empowered people in the problem zones at all. They are all hot air and nothing behind when it comes down to solving social problems. Their strength is to support the status quo, to appear doing something while doing very little other than juggling around their coalition partners and satisfying them with the right positions, and big business.

They will never receive any popular support and form a stable elected government as long as they are not able to formulate and communicate a policy platform to the majority of the people designed for those people.

The Democrats have made a few speeches against the killings while they happened, have though contributed to the dire situation by doing nothing against the rising drug problem while they formed the government.

[marshbags]

Thaksin was involved in the drug trade.

By " ASSOCIATION "

What disturbs me most about this is that he was well aware of OR SUSPECTED certain PUYAI who are actively involved and he let them OFF the hook to continue their evil dealings instead of bringing them to JUSTICE.

If i am wrong, perhaps someone can name me one of the above who became an EJK statistic or has been apprehended to face

"DUE PROCESS OF THE LAW."

How many police of Thaksins infamous calibre would not know, when you consider the numbers.

Because of this observation...........IMHO

We now have the restart ( if it ever stopped ) of drug abuse activities, possibly on a level that will eventually shade the old ones by comparison, unless some genuine and constructive actions are taken.

I do not mean similar to the EKJ,s either.

Arrest, Interrogate / interview, Educate and rehabilitate, and Support the poor so they have something positive to look forward to and get them out of the existing cultures that breed active involvement in this blight / curse on not only Thailand, but global humanity.

EFFECTIVELY policing of all the borders 24 / 7 were the drugs are imported from with trusted officials of proven integrity, will cut many of the supplies off.

Forget all the phoney postures that constantly appear in the media and on the T.V. channels, these are not a deterrant as has been proved, as indeed the tragical EKJ,s for want of such an extreme case, e.g.

They need to start again with completely new and meaningful initiatives.

These can be gleaned from internationally proven success stories and co-operation, not forgetting H.R.W, of course.

This is a global issue and it needs to be addressed by utilising valuable shared experiences.

marshbags

Edited August 31, 2007 by marshbags

[Plus]

Thaksin was right that targetting the dealers would disrupt the trade, but I'm not convinced that it would have worked without killings.

You really confuse me. Would you mind not contradicting yourself in every other post?

In one post you propose to prosecute Thaksin, and in the next you agree with the view that the killings were integral to stop the drug trade. Maybe, before posting, you should agree with yourself about the position you take here.

If Thaksin chose to stop the drug trade by targeting the dealers, then it was necessary to kill them as they have no other deterrents, certainly not the Thai court system.

It's a simple idea that I have been arguing from the beginning - drug war chose wrong targets to go after. That decision was with Thaksin alone and he should bear full responsibility. He knew how it would end, his strategists layed down all the options and all the tools and all possible scenarios, including damage control, both domestically and internationally. He made a choice.

I also proposed alternative drug war targets. In my opinion targetting production facilities would have been a lot less violent.

Stopping drugs at the border is another idea, but I doubt Thais are capable of effectively closing and monitoring borders.

Relying on police to catch all the dealers is a naive dream, preaching to addicts about empowerment is a nightmare.

No single method would have worked by itself, only in combination with all the others. The goal is to bring the drug system trading down, so you need systematic approach. Target critical areas first to break it down and then make sure it doesn't spring back by doing the soft work - rehabilitation, education, empowerment, legalising drugs etc. etc.

[ColPyat]

Thaksin was right that targetting the dealers would disrupt the trade, but I'm not convinced that it would have worked without killings.

You really confuse me. Would you mind not contradicting yourself in every other post?

In one post you propose to prosecute Thaksin, and in the next you agree with the view that the killings were integral to stop the drug trade. Maybe, before posting, you should agree with yourself about the position you take here.

If Thaksin chose to stop the drug trade by targeting the dealers, then it was necessary to kill them as they have no other deterrents, certainly not the Thai court system.

It's a simple idea that I have been arguing from the beginning - drug war chose wrong targets to go after. That decision was with Thaksin alone and he should bear full responsibility. He knew how it would end, his strategists layed down all the options and all the tools and all possible scenarios, including damage control, both domestically and internationally. He made a choice.

I also proposed alternative drug war targets. In my opinion targetting production facilities would have been a lot less violent.

Stopping drugs at the border is another idea, but I doubt Thais are capable of effectively closing and monitoring borders.

Relying on police to catch all the dealers is a naive dream, preaching to addicts about empowerment is a nightmare.

No single method would have worked by itself, only in combination with all the others. The goal is to bring the drug system trading down, so you need systematic approach. Target critical areas first to break it down and then make sure it doesn't spring back by doing the soft work - rehabilitation, education, empowerment, legalising drugs etc. etc.

Duh - exactly that has happened during and after the drugwar.

As i have said - the only problem i have is the killings.

There were little though no less lethal battles at the borders against drug caravans, and even clandestine operations inside the Wa areas. Larger scale was not possible because of the reasons regarding the sensitive nature of the areas. You may "believe" that it would have been risk free, though you don't elaborate why other than making unsuitable comparisons with the US and Sudan.

I have spent more than a little time trying to outline for you why larger operations were too risky and most possibly would have ended in defeat or a at least a large scale war, which was a reasoning based on fact that you have preferred to ignore.

Basically - it appears that the only problem you have with the drug war is that you don't know what really happened.

[Plus]

Yes, there was drug rehabilitation and border control, but the only battle that cut down the system was elimination of drug dealers.

I don't have any facts to prove it, but killing 2,500 people didn't have a lasting effect on dealers. Another 5,000 were killed later that year without any publicity. That's when they finally got the message, that's what stopped the trade.

Drugs became unavailable, and that's what kept people off yaba and brought life back to normal, not rehabilitation programs.

I don't know what would have been the outcome of putting political pressure on Burma, Thais never tried. But if it came down to actually destroying the labs, 10,000 armed men can do absolutely nothing against modern weapons. Hitting a shack in the middle of nowhere - what could be easier?

[Old Man River]

Drugs became unavailable, and that's what kept people off yaba and brought life back to normal, not rehabilitation programs.

At the risk of becoming involved in this disagreement, for the record, drugs weren't unavailable. They were, however , not affordable. Same difference, at the end of the day.

[ColPyat]

Yes, there was drug rehabilitation and border control, but the only battle that cut down the system was elimination of drug dealers.

I don't have any facts to prove it, but killing 2,500 people didn't have a lasting effect on dealers. Another 5,000 were killed later that year without any publicity. That's when they finally got the message, that's what stopped the trade.

Drugs became unavailable, and that's what kept people off yaba and brought life back to normal, not rehabilitation programs.

I don't know what would have been the outcome of putting political pressure on Burma, Thais never tried. But if it came down to actually destroying the labs, 10,000 armed men can do absolutely nothing against modern weapons. Hitting a shack in the middle of nowhere - what could be easier?

You do show your ignorance if you believe that the Wa do not have modern weapons. They do have them. Burma has never managed to defeat them in decades of warfare. That should tell you what the UWSA is capable off.

There were many clandestine border battles and operations. Not much is known about them, but i would advise you to speak with region 3 combat veterans about those battles.

Drugs were still available, in the villages prices soared to about 1000 Baht a pill from previously 80 to 100 Baht, and in Bangkok the price went from 80 to 100 Baht up to 500 Baht, and in Klong Toey Slum from 35 to 40 Baht it went to 300 to 400 Baht.

The additional alleged 5000 shot dealers came from one Nation reporter. I do not believe this, as i have not seen the corpses while out with the rescue services. I would have seen them if they would have been there. Nevertheless - i do believe the number during the initial 3 months of the war was somewhere around 4000 to 5000 victims, and not 2500. But there is no proof of the final number.

[marshbags]

Thaksin was right that targetting the dealers would disrupt the trade, but I'm not convinced that it would have worked without killings.

You really confuse me. Would you mind not contradicting yourself in every other post?

In one post you propose to prosecute Thaksin, and in the next you agree with the view that the killings were integral to stop the drug trade. Maybe, before posting, you should agree with yourself about the position you take here.

If Thaksin chose to stop the drug trade by targeting the dealers, then it was necessary to kill them as they have no other deterrents, certainly not the Thai court system.

It's a simple idea that I have been arguing from the beginning - drug war chose wrong targets to go after. That decision was with Thaksin alone and he should bear full responsibility. He knew how it would end, his strategists layed down all the options and all the tools and all possible scenarios, including damage control, both domestically and internationally. He made a choice.

I also proposed alternative drug war targets. In my opinion targetting production facilities would have been a lot less violent.

Stopping drugs at the border is another idea, but I doubt Thais are capable of effectively closing and monitoring borders.

Relying on police to catch all the dealers is a naive dream, preaching to addicts about empowerment is a nightmare.

Policing doesn,t have to be done by poice, full stop.

It can be done by a dedicated group of people / officers, ( who,s integrity is proved to be compatable with such a task. )

Rehabilitation is not the same as preaching to someone

The first is about assisting recovery from the dependancy of drugs and onto a normally recognised way life and re educating ect. in a non hostile enviroment.

Preaching is about telling in a threatening fashion and comes across as hostile and can have the opposite effect.

Which one would you prefer, find acceptable and encouraging, under any the control of support / supervisionary groups.

If someone starts preaching to me they,ve lost my interest immediately, talk to me in an acceptable friendly tone and i,ll give it hearing time.

No single method would have worked by itself, only in combination with all the others. The goal is to bring the drug system trading down, so you need systematic approach. Target critical areas first to break it down and then make sure it doesn't spring back by doing the soft work - rehabilitation, education, empowerment, legalising drugs etc. etc.

Talking to the various authorities ( Globally ) will in my humble opinion produce a combination of effective ways to tackle, what is after all a very difficult and seemingly impossible task, that is unless you think positive on what it may produce.

It doesn,t have to be 100% successful to be a success, some will always fail.

marshbags

[Plus]

Rehabilitation is not the same as preaching to someone

Preaching is not rehabilitation, preaching is the empty talk about empowering people politically in order to reduce their dependency on drugs.

>>>>

There's nothing in Wa's arsenal that could stop missiles hitting labs.

You don't need to engage a single Wa soldier to hit a lab. There presense is irrelevant.

Policing doesn,t have to be done by poice, full stop. It can be done by a dedicated group of people / officers, ( who,s integrity is proved to be compatable with such a task. )

These people do not exist in Thailand.

drugs weren't unavailable. They were, however , not affordable. Same difference, at the end of the day.

Exactly. Drugs were still there, but the dealers were not ready to risk their lives for a hundred baht. If the drugs were destroyed at the source, situation would have been the same, minus several thousand dead.

The additional alleged 5000 shot dealers came from one Nation reporter.

I don't remember exactly, but Thai delegation in Geneva was prepared to answer questions about 5,000 killed in the second phase of the war. Maybe there answer was that there were no deaths, I don't know.

Either way - killing people is what stopped the drug trade. Price Thaksin and majority of Thais were ready to accept.

I still don't see any other alternative strategies that would have been just as effective, apart from my idea of targeting production facilities.

Maybe Thailand didn't need such degree of success at all. That would have spared many many lives. You can't have both, I'm afraid.

[hammered]

From what I saw of the effect of the drug war in the northern villages I know of, patterns changed. Suddenly it was hard to get the drugs in the villages and to sell at that not very influential level was dangerous. Second the users learned to be a lot more discreet about their habit and tended to go off deep into the farmland or jungle when taking. This still exists until today in the villages I know. Although drugs were not available in the villages they were still fairly readily available in the towns especially the provinial capitals. How easy it was to get the drugs depended more on how close you were to a town and how easily you or your friends could get there. The price went up but from what I heard at the worst it was only ever a three times increase, which could be covered by pooling money or by a bit of crime - usually petty theft although around this time in certain Northern areas motorcycle gangs became more prevelant.

How effective was the drug war in reducing drug problems remains moot. When the drug taking is raised to the height of anti-social beviour it drives it more underground which may mean that it appears to be largely gone but hasnt. Certainly the more outrageous ya-baa inspired crazy attacks reduced but was that because drug use dropped or because drug use started to be done away from population centers? Probably a bit of both, and the much televised ya-baa crazy cases were a bit of a media exaggeration when considering the number of actual drug users - how many drunk crazies do the same every day on a totally legal drug?

However, when all is said and done it is still true that the death squad action was illegal and morally reprehensible and should be punished. It is equally true that if anyone wants to even make an impact on the level of drug abuse that was around then and still exsists today one has to address the core causes, and most of these remain economic. I can honestly say I hardly know a young rural person who has not at least experimented with ya-baa and most are at least regular casual users of it. To be young and poor with a long life of toil for little reward in front of you increases the attraction of something that can give you a different perspective for a while. Lets not forget before ya-baa there was glue, and after ya-baa will come something else.

[Plus]

No other drug created as many problems as yaba.

Personally I think Thais should be left smoking kratom if they want to. That would keep drug use on a very low, "self-sufficient" level. Modern drugs are much more difficult to keep under control and modern trade is driven by greed rather than actual demand.

[ColPyat]

No other drug created as many problems as yaba.

Personally I think Thais should be left smoking kratom if they want to. That would keep drug use on a very low, "self-sufficient" level. Modern drugs are much more difficult to keep under control and modern trade is driven by greed rather than actual demand.

Thais do rarely smoke Bai Kratom. It is generally chewed, or, in the south mostly, the leaves are boiled and the extract is mixed with other ingredients, such as cough syrup and mosquito coils, and drunk.

To hit labs with missiles you need hard intelligence about their location. That is not that easy as labs are very well protected in for outsiders nearly inaccessible areas.

As amphetamine labs are not exactly rocket science, it is rather useless to destroy them when they can be built up again in a few days, only a minor disturbance of operations. Amphetamine labs are not like the Herion labs in which No. 4 is procuded, which need highly trained imported Taiwanese Chemists - everybody can manufacture amphetamines without much difficulties.

Edited September 1, 2007 by ColPyat

[Tony Clifton]

Mosquito coils? <deleted>?

What's so special about the mosquito coils that makes them part of the recipe?

I remember reading fake magic mushroom milkshakes were sold down south, they contained powdered mosquito coils and ,apparently, a few backpackers and full moon party goers have died from them...

Edited September 1, 2007 by Tony Clifton

[ColPyat]

Mosquito coils? <deleted>?

What's so special about the mosquito coils that makes them part of the recipe?

I remember reading fake magic mushroom milkshakes were sold down south, they contained powdered mosquito coils and ,apparently, a few backpackers and full moon party goers have died from them...

As far as i know it's only in the three southernmost provinces where this specific recipe is used. I have tried a lot, but don't expect me to experiment with that sort of crap. Mozzi coils...

The three civil war provinces have a serious drug problem right now, and given the impossible security situation, there is very little the authorities can do presently about it.