Jump to content

heybruce

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    8,104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9,144 Excellent

About heybruce

  • Rank
    Titanium Member

Recent Profile Visitors

14,091 profile views
  1. Once again, it's not a law, it is part of the US Constitution. Any other parts of the Constitution you'd like to throw out?
  2. Fun fact--Mussolini also promised to "drain the swamp", both literally and figuratively in his case, and also pointed out reporters in his rallies so his mob could harass them. Apparently Trump was a fan, he tweeted a famous Mussolini quote early in his campaign--“It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” I'm not sure how Trump would know this, he's spent his entire life dodging threatening situations. Of course he is getting close to 100 years old... Another fun fact--Mussolini believed the crowd's role was to “submit to being shaped”. https://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21740389-dismissive-hyperbole-former-secretary-state-still-nervy-about-donald Obviously he wasn't a fan of democracy, free speech, or anything beyond obedience. But I'm sure there were many fine people on both sides in Mussolini's fascist Italy. Just like in Charlottesville Virginia.
  3. Actually, it's not "a strange law", it's the 14th amendment of the US Constitution. Do you want to stop that?
  4. " This case the recent coups did not last that long." There have been only two military coups since 2000; one in which the military appointed a PM to their liking, allowed elections, didn't like the results, worked with government allies to arrange judicial coups of two PM's and arranged for Abhisit to rule. After the second one they made it clear, in spite of their ongoing BS about "elections next year", that they were going to hold onto power until they could impose a system to their liking. You are displaying stubborn, willful ignorance regarding the history that makes coups so common in Thailand. Prayut belongs to the Eastern Tigers faction of the Thai army and, as a junior officer, was stationed near the border with Cambodia in the 1990's where they acquired considerable wealth illegally trading with the genocidal Khmer Rouge. This was a time when the military ran Thailand and found it very profitable, and the junior officers, including Prayut and his band of usurpers, accepted this as the natural order of things. The officers of the Eastern Tigers expected to use their illegally acquired wealth in Bangkok to acquire greater power and wealth (a Thai military tradition), however democracy was limiting their options. Then we get into the events after 2000, which you maintain are independent of everything that happened before. No matter how corrupt you think the Shinawatra's are, they don't compare to the Thia military. Do you think General Manas was a fluke, the only Thai military officer involved in human trafficking? Do you really believe that Prayut and the other senior officers did not shape their opinion of the military's proper role in Thai society during the above events? Do you not think that the attitudes of the corrupt military in the 1990's were not shaped by decades of the Thai military being above the law and taking charge whenever it wished? "I hope they get rid of the appointed senators, just like you I don't like them." Any attempts to get rid of appointed senators and create a more democratic constitution will lead to another coup. The military put this bogus constitution in place for a reason.
  5. What you read in the newspapers were the opinions of people supporting the protests and opposing elected government. You ignore the fact that the yellows were also killing people, and using violence and intimidation to prevent elections. Of course the biggest killer in these protests has always been the military. Going back decades does not serve a purpose? Really? The events in your life before 2000 have no impact on the person you are now? How old are you? If the answer is 20 or less, you can rest assured that your view on learning from the past will change in the decades to come. Elections are there to correct mistakes, and make new ones. They are a peaceful option for changing governments that don't serve the interests of the people. Courts exist to determine when illegal acts were committed and what the response should be. The courts remove Yingluck from office, showing that the laws worked. However the courts could not prevent a legally called election and a new government chosen by the majority of voters. That is what Suthep, the military, and the elite feared. That is what the coup was for. And that is what the next coup will be for, because I have not doubt that the majority of Thais will vote for politicians that promise to change this BS constitution, and the military will step in again.
  6. Noted, you don't think it's worthwhile to learn from the past. Are you sure the ball is moving now? Oh yeah, an election is promised next year. Just as one was promised "next year" every year since the coup.
  7. How has Prayut been at accepting criticism? Freedom of speech has always been restricted in Thailand. However the junta took it to new levels by making it illegal to criticize the military government.
  8. "The amnesty bill could have easily been revived" assumes the PTP government learned nothing from the failure of the first attempt and the people no longer watched for such things. It also assumes a Thaksin influenced government would have remained in power after an election in which the voters were outraged by the amnesty bill and the failures of the rice program. In other words, you make some very questionably assumptions, which add up to the assumption that democratic government can't work. Yes, protests against an unelected government and calling for elections were more violent than the protests against democracy and against elections. The protests against democracy could count on the military to support them, those who wanted democracy could not. Thailand's many coups since 1932 supports those who think drastic action is necessary to defend democracy. Trying to understand Thailand's culture of military rule and coups without considering anything that happened before 2000 is foolish. Point remains that elected governments make mistakes, and those mistakes should be dealt with by elections, not military coups.
  9. One can also wonder if the protest leaders considered the proposal and its qualifications in detail and decided that, without protesters on the streets, Abhisit and his allies would find reasons to delay elections. Perhaps I'm a bit jaded by the promise of elections "next year" every year since 2014, including this year. However we may never know the real reason why the offer was rejected. I find it informative the the military has been highly accommodating towards protesters rejecting elections, and brutal with protesters calling for elections.
  10. "I only accept I was wrong to think the junta would stay short.. this was unlike any other coup before they always left around a year later." Really? From 1958 to 1991 all Prime Ministers were military men who came to power by coups, were replacement Prime Ministers appointed by the military, or were "government" appointed Prime Ministers with the consent of the military. The military appointed a Prime Minister to its liking after the 2006 coup, but when the 2008 elections resulted in a Prime Minister it didn't like, it engineered two years of Abhisit rule and kept him in power with a bloody crackdown on protesters calling for elections. Funny how some people defend a military that stages coups to accommodate protesters opposing elections, and fires bullets into protesters calling for elections. The amnesty bill you cite as the prompt for the 2013-2014 protests was quickly dropped. After that the protest were all about toppling an elected government and preventing new elections. Fun fact; the only elected Prime Minister in Thailand's history who was allowed to finish his term in elected office was Thaksin Shinawatra. The current military government wrote a constitution and had it "approved" in a sham referendum that it hopes will leave it in control behind a veneer of powerless elected government. However if it feels it is losing control it will stage another coup, with the help of the privileged elite and Bangkok middle class that fear losing political and economic power in a democratic government.
  11. Bring on the rain. I'm still coughing out the dust from Songkran.
  12. Although in Trump's case his combination of incompetence, laziness, and clueless impulsiveness does present a strong case for dereliction of duty. However I have faith Mueller will find much better grounds for impeachment.
  13. Before Trump our candidates for President went to great lengths to open up their financial affairs to prove they were not involved in anything illegal or that would present a conflict of interest. Before Trump the press could and would enthusiastically investigate the past of anyone who was a serious contender for President, and these candidates did not object; they bent over backwards to show they had nothing to hide. Trump dodged these conventions. He presented loud sales pitches with simple sound bites, vague promises to do the right thing about his finances, and few specifics. I still find it profoundly disturbing that a large minority of voters fell for his BS. So no, we wouldn't go through ten presidents a week. We were doing fine with conventions that, unfortunately, were not give the weight of law. That is one of many lessons learned from Trump's election, we can not trust conventions to keep out the riff-raff. Financial disclosures and mandatory divestment of business interests need to be required by law for future Presidents. This will have to wait until the Republicans no longer control Congress, Republicans who are currently there and hoping to stay are too afraid of Trump's base to put the ethics and national interest ahead of their own re-election. Regarding this all being sour grapes; the Mueller investigation has already shown that the "best people" Trump surrounds himself with include criminals with shady international connections. Mueller is running a tight ship, we won't know what he has on Trump until he's ready to release it, but people who happily deal with criminals are rarely clean themselves. I have no doubt the investigation results will be very interesting.
  14. Rule of law means getting voted in does not put you above the law. If the investigation shows criminal activity, get him out.
  15. Raining in Chiang Mai

    A short rain in the Nimmanhamin area, but enough to get the ground wet. We haven't seen that for a while. The entire area (northern Thailand and surrounding countries) needs much more.
×