Pheu Thai suggests mutual pardons, apologies necessary

[tomta]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Agreed

 

If a coup is real bad there will be an uprising.. (has happened here before) if its generally accepted there is not.. In this case there is not enough resentment as a large part agreed with the coup and many did not feel strong enough against it. (though i am quite sure the PM is now a lot less popular as when he started and I feel the same)

What you are endorsing here, Robblok, is a state in which those who are most prepared to use violence will win and control power. I decide to hold a coup and everything is fine if I win, until such a time as other people are so fed up that they are prepared to overthrow me. What can they do to overthrow me?  There are no electoral mechanisms... they must use violence. And so it will go. The society we will have is a society where those who are most prepared to use violence  are in power. Those silly old and imperfect democratic mechanisms called elections were designed to circumvent this situation. What happened to them in 2014? People prevented them by using violence - this is quite clear. We have pictures of ordinary citizens trying to cast their votes. One or two climbed over the walls to cast it. One is pictured being strangled by PDRC supporters (perhaps he did cast it, I'm not sure - but if it was me, I might have said let me go home, I will not vote,  in which case it would not just have been the implicit threat of violence that was important but the implicit threat of more severe violence that might have influenced me)..

 

Yes, I admit that there was violence happening already. (I'm not quite sure as you are about the sources of it )

 

Then what happened? To the idea of an election, to the idea that people have choices, to the idea that violence is not the best way to resolve problems? To the idea that people must be accountable for their criminal actions?

[wakeupplease]

Propaganda can prove a lot and in most cases its just that, you have a right to your beliefs and I respect that but do not believe a word you say, but like you I also have a right to my beliefs and for 30 years I have seen what I have seen so lets leave it there.

 

I wonder how we would get on in a football conversion, I can tell you if you like You would Win, as I cannot stand the game, but you will not win my mind on this subject

keep well

[tomta]

I would like to ask you this question, Robblok. Many people have talked about the coup being justified by the need for prevention of a civil war and continuing bloodshed. I'm not sure if that's one of your reasons . I want to say that to be fair to you.

 

But if , and I think you must admit it was at least in the range of possibilities and some redshirts were saying similar things, the redshirts had said "We are going to fight violently against the overthrowers of the legitimate government. We will arm the peasants and workers. We will kill and imprison the Bangkok yellow bourgeosie". Sort of Spain 1936. 

 

In such a case, whoever won, there would have been violence on a massive scale. Lots of people dead. Families torn asunder. Civil war.

 

That of course did not happen. Maybe, if Prayuth's amulets can tell him the future perfectly, he could be forgiven.

 

But if he could have foretold the future perfectly on the day when he held the coup, he would not have needed to close off communications, impose himself and his junta all over the TV, send tanks into Bangkok, arrest possible ringleaders in the provinces, impose martial law [ you should check out what martial law means, Robblok. My definition is "we can be really violent"]. It could have been really bloody. But it wasn't. Francisco Franco's coup in Spain in 1936 could have been peaceful. BUt it wasn't.

 

You credit Gen. Prayuth with greater prescience and wisdom than I do, Robblok. Or maybe, he has a lucky amulet.,

 

[scorecard]

25 minutes ago, tomta said:

I would like to ask you this question, Robblok. Many people have talked about the coup being justified by the need for prevention of a civil war and continuing bloodshed. I'm not sure if that's one of your reasons . I want to say that to be fair to you.

 

But if , and I think you must admit it was at least in the range of possibilities and some redshirts were saying similar things, the redshirts had said "We are going to fight violently against the overthrowers of the legitimate government. We will arm the peasants and workers. We will kill and imprison the Bangkok yellow bourgeosie". Sort of Spain 1936. 

 

In such a case, whoever won, there would have been violence on a massive scale. Lots of people dead. Families torn asunder. Civil war.

 

That of course did not happen. Maybe, if Prayuth's amulets can tell him the future perfectly, he could be forgiven.

 

But if he could have foretold the future perfectly on the day when he held the coup, he would not have needed to close off communications, impose himself and his junta all over the TV, send tanks into Bangkok, arrest possible ringleaders in the provinces, impose martial law [ you should check out what martial law means, Robblok. My definition is "we can be really violent"]. It could have been really bloody. But it wasn't. Francisco Franco's coup in Spain in 1936 could have been peaceful. BUt it wasn't.

 

You credit Gen. Prayuth with greater prescience and wisdom than I do, Robblok. Or maybe, he has a lucky amulet.,

 

 

So is this another recruit trying to step by step re-invent history?

 

Did he actually say ',,,, prevention of a civil war....'

 

Further, would you agree or disagree that there was way too much bloodshed, meaning even one injury is too much?

 

To be honest our raise many opportunistic points which make me wonder what your real intent is. 

 

Edited March 9, 2017 by scorecard

[robblok]

1 hour ago, wakeupplease said:

Propaganda can prove a lot and in most cases its just that, you have a right to your beliefs and I respect that but do not believe a word you say, but like you I also have a right to my beliefs and for 30 years I have seen what I have seen so lets leave it there.

 

I wonder how we would get on in a football conversion, I can tell you if you like You would Win, as I cannot stand the game, but you will not win my mind on this subject

keep well

I think we would not discuss it because this is one thing I 100% agree with you.. I cannot stand the game.

 

I don't believe you.. and you don't believe me.. good.. leave it at that.. at least I am not trying to kill you or blow you up and your not trying to do that to me. Seems fairly civil too me. 

[robblok]

1 hour ago, tomta said:

What you are endorsing here, Robblok, is a state in which those who are most prepared to use violence will win and control power. I decide to hold a coup and everything is fine if I win, until such a time as other people are so fed up that they are prepared to overthrow me. What can they do to overthrow me?  There are no electoral mechanisms... they must use violence. And so it will go. The society we will have is a society where those who are most prepared to use violence  are in power. Those silly old and imperfect democratic mechanisms called elections were designed to circumvent this situation. What happened to them in 2014? People prevented them by using violence - this is quite clear. We have pictures of ordinary citizens trying to cast their votes. One or two climbed over the walls to cast it. One is pictured being strangled by PDRC supporters (perhaps he did cast it, I'm not sure - but if it was me, I might have said let me go home, I will not vote,  in which case it would not just have been the implicit threat of violence that was important but the implicit threat of more severe violence that might have influenced me)..

 

Yes, I admit that there was violence happening already. (I'm not quite sure as you are about the sources of it )

 

Then what happened? To the idea of an election, to the idea that people have choices, to the idea that violence is not the best way to resolve problems? To the idea that people must be accountable for their criminal actions?

No what I am endorsing is this coup.. that was fairly bloodless and was justified IMHO because of the killings done on innocent protesters. (might not be the reason behind it.. but it justified it). Also without the coup many of the crimes of the PTP would never have been investigated and would have been buried, so I find that good too. So there are many things I like about the junta mainly about punishing the corruption of the PTP and going after the red shirts that killed people (CAPO certainly was not doing that), going after the rice scam and fake G2G deals. Many of these things would have been buried if the PTP stayed in power.

 

There are plenty of things I find bad too.. PM an his nephew and brother.. (how that was handled), some of the restrictions on the media. I am certainly not endorsing everything the PM says and I will be happy to see him go. (probably still missed a few things I disagree with)

[wakeupplease]

6 hours ago, robblok said:

I think we would not discuss it because this is one thing I 100% agree with you.. I cannot stand the game.

 

I don't believe you.. and you don't believe me.. good.. leave it at that.. at least I am not trying to kill you or blow you up and your not trying to do that to me. Seems fairly civil too me. 

(1)we agree on something

(2) My Mum was right then

(3) nice chatting with you

[wakeupplease]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

I think we would not discuss it because this is one thing I 100% agree with you.. I cannot stand the game.

 

I don't believe you.. and you don't believe me.. good.. leave it at that.. at least I am not trying to kill you or blow you up and your not trying to do that to me. Seems fairly civil too me. 

Sorry Robblok forgot to add, see not perfect

 

If the trade minster is your local MP and a constituent requests a meeting with his MP can you tell me what happens? or do you want me to tell you? I will to save you time, he has to arrange a meeting  which took place on the 24th of February at 16.20pm its the law. Now do you believe me?  Just apologize and all is forgiven mate, we all make mistakes.

[robblok]

3 hours ago, wakeupplease said:

Sorry Robblok forgot to add, see not perfect

 

If the trade minster is your local MP and a constituent requests a meeting with his MP can you tell me what happens? or do you want me to tell you? I will to save you time, he has to arrange a meeting  which took place on the 24th of February at 16.20pm its the law. Now do you believe me?  Just apologize and all is forgiven mate, we all make mistakes.

Why should I believe you when you don't believe me, you still seem to have trouble that people have totally different points of view, I don't have a problem I can accept that people see things different based on the same facts. 

 

Now that a trade ministers says that there might be a new coup.. who knows.. it might be right its not like they have a good track record here. I only know coups can be avoided if the other party does not give them an excuse. So no killings of opponents and keeping to the laws. Then even if the army wants a coup there won't be any support. A coup only is possible when there is a large support base and large problems. I have yet to see a coup here when everyone was against the army. 

 

Lets just leave it at this because you will never change and neither will I. 

[mtls2005]

I don't think the PTP understands what the junta means by "reconciliation"?

 

Nor do I think the junta understands what "reconciliation" really means?

 

 

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

I don't think the PTP understands what the junta means by "reconciliation"?

 

Nor do I think the junta understands what "reconciliation" really means?

 

 

I do know what the PTP means with reconciliation.. something like.. forgive us all our crimes let our puppet master come back and let us keep the proceeds from our corrupt deals. Forget about the fake G2G deals that cost the country loads of money and enriched us and please forgive us all so we can do it all again because we know we will never held accountable. 

 

Now there will never be any reconciliation, too much money to be made in politics and they will all do their best to get at that money so they will keep using their foot-soldiers to stir trouble.  (both sides)

[Becker]

16 hours ago, robblok said:

Agreed

 

If a coup is real bad there will be an uprising.. (has happened here before) if its generally accepted there is not.. In this case there is not enough resentment as a large part agreed with the coup and many did not feel strong enough against it. (though i am quite sure the PM is now a lot less popular as when he started and I feel the same)

Oh, come on! There are countless examples of bad coups in the history of the world where there has been no uprising. Or do you think (just to name a few better known ones) Pinochet and the the Greek colonels were right? Besides, for a population that has been brainwashed from birth into obedience and has seen again and again how their chosen leaders have been removed from power by the elite you would have to forgive them if they felt powerless to do anything.

Funny also that you think it's the will of the majority of the people that should decide whether a coup is righteous or not when you do not accept the will of the people in electing their leaders. But I can clearly see why you have such problems justifying your support of a junta.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Becker said:

Oh, come on! There are countless examples of bad coups in the history of the world where there has been no uprising. Or do you think (just to name a few better known ones) Pinochet and the the Greek colonels were right? Besides, for a population that has been brainwashed from birth into obedience and has seen again and again how their chosen leaders have been removed from power by the elite you would have to forgive them if they felt powerless to do anything.

Funny also that you think it's the will of the majority of the people that should decide whether a coup is righteous or not when you do not accept the will of the people in electing their leaders. But I can clearly see why you have such problems justifying your support of a junta.

I am talking here about Thailand, the people don't care enough or think its not too bad. Otherwise they would have revolted. 

 

No need to justify the junta.. they are an evil to combat an other evil. The PTP would have gotten away with so many crimes and acts of corruption without this. Your kind seems to say like.. oh PTP can do what they want they were elected. People can vote them out when they do something wrong. That is not how a democracy works. So I just don't consider Thailand a real democracy otherwise I would be firmly on your side against the generals. But as long as the PTP can get away with all the crap they did I prefer that they are put on their place by the junta.

 

I have said it countless times.. i just dislike the junta less then the PTP, but there are plenty of things I hate about the junta.. (Nephew and brother of PM how their cases are handled... media restrictions and a few more things but this just comes to mind). But without the junta cases like the fake G2G deals that members of YL her own government had faked would not have been brought to justice.. the whole rice scam would not have been investigated.. many of the deaths of the protesters would have never been investigated. Remember how the CAPO with its leader Charlem made no effort to go after the killers of the protesters only said go home i cant protect you (of course not they led the armed wing loose themselves why go after them). These kind of things would all have gone without punishment. Surapong giving out passports that were confiscated by a court. At the time of a great flooding and many people in need he decided to give the criminal leader passports.. such blatant misuses of power is all ok ?

[Becker]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

I am talking here about Thailand, the people don't care enough or think its not too bad. Otherwise they would have revolted. 

 

No need to justify the junta.. they are an evil to combat an other evil. The PTP would have gotten away with so many crimes and acts of corruption without this. Your kind seems to say like.. oh PTP can do what they want they were elected. People can vote them out when they do something wrong. That is not how a democracy works. So I just don't consider Thailand a real democracy otherwise I would be firmly on your side against the generals. But as long as the PTP can get away with all the crap they did I prefer that they are put on their place by the junta.

 

I have said it countless times.. i just dislike the junta less then the PTP, but there are plenty of things I hate about the junta.. (Nephew and brother of PM how their cases are handled... media restrictions and a few more things but this just comes to mind). But without the junta cases like the fake G2G deals that members of YL her own government had faked would not have been brought to justice.. the whole rice scam would not have been investigated.. many of the deaths of the protesters would have never been investigated. Remember how the CAPO with its leader Charlem made no effort to go after the killers of the protesters only said go home i cant protect you (of course not they led the armed wing loose themselves why go after them). These kind of things would all have gone without punishment. Surapong giving out passports that were confiscated by a court. At the time of a great flooding and many people in need he decided to give the criminal leader passports.. such blatant misuses of power is all ok ?

Such misuse of power is certainly not OK, but the coup, and what followed it, is worse. Again, you say that since there was no revolt the coup was "OK". Again I say that that's an inadequate measuring stick to use when judging whether a coup is "OK" or not for the reasons I listed in the previous post.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Becker said:

Such misuse of power is certainly not OK, but the coup, and what followed it, is worse. Again, you say that since there was no revolt the coup was "OK". Again I say that that's an inadequate measuring stick to use when judging whether a coup is "OK" or not for the reasons I listed in the previous post.

So we agree the misuse of power is not OK, only you want to let it slide and I feel the coup was justified as medicine. 

 

The whole revolt thing is not about judging if a coup was OK, if you saw the first post on it I only said it was a good coup because it was bloodless. Then it went from there and you jumped in the conversation. There is no real yardstick for when a coup is ok, its a case by case thing. I feel it was justified others feel it was not. I feel the general has done good things in going after the PTP its crimes, but i feel the general is guilty of bad things too in how he protects his brother and nephew in cases that are clearly nepotism. I also feel he wants too much control over the media and is far too thin skinned. 

 

Its more a two evils thing and I find the junta (for now) the lesser evil. The problem is in Thailand people in power get away with crimes and corruption all the time. I am just happy when they get held accountable so maybe next time they don't commit them. That is why I am against amnesties because then they are not accountable. I have no problem with the amnesty for doing the coup, but I do have a problem if they have an amnesty for corruption and mismanagement (junta)

[Becker]

55 minutes ago, robblok said:

So we agree the misuse of power is not OK, only you want to let it slide and I feel the coup was justified as medicine. 

We definitively agree that misuse of power is not OK, but you misunderstand me if you think I want to let it slide. We do however disagree on the medicine. You believe a coup was the correct medicine. I say that is clearly not the case as the junta has shown almost on a daily basis. There have been a lot of coups in Thailand and things didn't change a bit so why should it now?

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Becker said:

We definitively agree that misuse of power is not OK, but you misunderstand me if you think I want to let it slide. We do however disagree on the medicine. You believe a coup was the correct medicine. I say that is clearly not the case as the junta has shown almost on a daily basis. There have been a lot of coups in Thailand and things didn't change a bit so why should it now?

The junta was the medicine .. you see that the PTP is punished for their transgressions. So the medicine worked.. there were side effects too (negative). 

 

The misuse of power would not have been persecuted it would have been hidden and every attempt to do something about it would have been hard with a PTP government hell bent on protecting their own.

 

You know as well as I do that the only time people get prosecuted here is once they are no longer in power and their political rivals are in power. That is now how a system should work. 

 

So I take my justice this way by way of the junta even with all those nasty side effects I dont like.