1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

The article is wrong on the point I quoted.

 

That's why I quoted it.

And maybe the whole world is WRONG........... But Bluespunk Is Right? LOL....

2 minutes ago, sawadeeken said:

And maybe the whole world is WRONG........... But Bluespunk Is Right? LOL....

I was here.

 

She wasn't PM.

 

It's quite simple really.

 

Check out the timeline.

Edited February 13, 20179 yr by Bluespunk

16 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I'm sticking to the facts.

 

She wasn't pm at time of coup.

I didn't dispute your facts.

 

She wasn't the PM at the time of the "military coup". It might be argued that a coup d'état begins with the first action in the plot to depose the leader (which was administrative).

 

 

Edited February 13, 20179 yr by chickenslegs

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I was here.

 

She wasn't PM.

 

It's quite simple really.

 

Check out the timeline.

That's serious............ 

My advise is to talk to the Washington Post and fill them in on the 'real facts'

1 minute ago, chickenslegs said:

I didn't dispute your facts.

 

She wasn't the PM at the time of the "military coup". It might be argued that a coup d'état begins with the first action to depose the leader (which was administrative).

 

 

All I quoted was a misrepresentation of the truth in the article.

 

I have always condemned suthep's actions.

 

 

2 minutes ago, sawadeeken said:

That's serious............ 

My advise is to talk to the Washington Post and fill them in on the 'real facts'

Nope.

Edited February 13, 20179 yr by Bluespunk

Just now, Bluespunk said:

All I quoted was a misrepresentation of the truth in the article.

 

I have always condemned suthep's actions.

 

 

Yes, but I think you were being a bit mischievous in the way you replied to a couple of posters.

2 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

Yes, but I think you were being a bit mischievous in the way you replied to a couple of posters.

All I did was respond to those quoting me.

Edited February 13, 20179 yr by Bluespunk

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Not my fault if some posters are unaware of the truth.

 

Just now, chickenslegs said:

 

Not even close to the reality of what was going on, but I do enjoy MP.

25 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

She was not PM when the "military coup" took place

The Constitutional Court removed Yingluck as caretaker PM on May 6, 2014.

The Cabinet Ministers then selected Deputy Prime Minister and Minister Commerce Niwatthamrong Boonsongpaisan to act as caretaker prime minister in place of Yingluck. 

On May 20, 2014 the coup took place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013–2014_Thai_political_crisis#Government_dissolution

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Not my fault if some posters are unaware of the truth.

Nope.............. The whole world is wrong (at least a few TV posters) and it is your duty to enlighten them...

Yes we understand.....................

2 minutes ago, sawadeeken said:

Nope.............. The whole world is wrong (at least a few TV posters) and it is your duty to enlighten them...

Yes we understand.....................

So glad you do...

Edited February 13, 20179 yr by Bluespunk

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Not even close to the reality of what was going on, but I do enjoy MP.

Oh yes it is!

Just now, chickenslegs said:

Oh yes it is!

Nope.

Any country that has a democratically elected government should have had its relations strained due to a military coup takeover.

Mai bin rai khrup. (please correct the spelling.) We now live in the future, Blair, Bush, Obama are all gone. Prime minister Prayut is the current prime minister and will be there for a long time. Get over it, move on and accept that it is not even a paragraph in the history of Thailand. Adapt to the times and I hope you prosper.

I was told years ago when I was a low life soldier that many forums were inhabited by foreign agencies that promoted "disharmony" to many countries. Including my own country. The posts on this forum are not so rabid as before but I suggest that some "intelligence" drones still make posts even though Thailand is not a big player.  

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

trump's presidency (as the rest of his life) is largely based on his personal interests, business profit and otherwise. Such as the wall, which he hopes will be an eternal monument to his ego and Nordstrom department store pulling his daughter's products because they don't sell. 

 

I suspect trump's level of interest in Thailand is less than zero so going with the flow of whoever is in power here makes sense. Why get involved with something that doesn't interest you? 

 

Interestingly, Kissinger said he felt Trump could be a "very considerable president" based on foreign policy. 

 

In fact getting back in diplomatically now with Thailand is very much top of US interestes.  Contain China, grow US business, maintain relationships in Region. Who cares if the rulers are not nice guys. Very Kissingeresque. 

It's too early to tell.

To thank Mr. Prayut? To normalize and improve the damage done by previous groups and unnamed agitators? If soft means respectful, honest, well, ok then....

22 hours ago, webfact said:

replacing martial law with a constitution that gives it almost limitless and unaccountable power

Surely any new 'elected' government can replace this, so called, unapproved, new constitution made basically, illegally by an unelected team.

 

Then of course there is the risk of another coup.

22 hours ago, IMA_FARANG said:

I suspect that the Trump administration has far more important things to consider than the Thai junta.

This may be a hot topic in Thailand, but in the world-wide view it is small chips in the U.S.   for the followers of Donald Trump.

 

Given Trumps hatred of China, Thailand is an important strategic location for the US as it was during the Vietnamese war era.

3 hours ago, Syduan said:

Given Trumps hatred of China, Thailand is an important strategic location for the US as it was during the Vietnamese war era.

You're assuming the trumpist foreign policy is baked. It isn't even half baked. It's more like silly putty. trump comes into office with no foreign policy ideology  or experience whatsoever except for regressive white supremacist "America First" garbage and spouting anti free trade CAMPAIGN rhetoric (nothing to do with his party's ideology) which he may or may not personally believes.  He seems to mouth whatever adviser he's listened to today, contradicting what adviser he's mouthed about yesterday. He doesn't have a Thailand policy.

Edited February 14, 20179 yr by Jingthing

The USA was very quiet during the Thaksin coup takeover.  There was not much of a protest from the USA officials. 

 

"The United States said "There's no justification for a military coup in Thailand or in anyplace else, and we certainly are extremely disappointed by this action."[207] It later noted that it would like to see elections held earlier than the one-year timetable set by the coup leaders.[208] The United States later cut off US$24 million in military aid although funding for humanitarian purposes would continue.[209]

On 2/13/2017 at 8:29 AM, webfact said:

Is the Trump administration going soft on Thailand’s junta?

 

I think he doesn't even know that Thailand exists