YimSiam Posted May 21, 2007 Report Share Posted May 21, 2007 And yet if it's the, say, fifteenth time that the same trick has been pulled, you might have to think that the people who did it were fully aware of what they were up to, and liked the expected outcome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardy641 Posted May 21, 2007 Report Share Posted May 21, 2007 In a democracy, when you get most votes, you run the country. quote] That's BS! Thaksin dissolved the parliament despite without any need. TRT held a 60+ % majority that time and there has been no national crisis. It has been him who was under pressure due to the tax free sales of his business. So he should have retreated but not dissolve the whole parliament. He was liable for creating the whole political chaos. He then set a new election date that didnâ??t give other parties a fair preparation time and they decided not to compete in the election. TRT then couldnâ??t win the election (20% clause) and bribed small parties to take part in the after elections. Thaksin has been a tyran not a democratically elected leader. If you still think Thaksin has been democratically elected leader, I really recommend you to visit a seminar about the meaning of democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 21, 2007 Report Share Posted May 21, 2007 << In a democracy, when you get most votes, you run the country. >> Tell that to Al Gore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayRay Posted May 21, 2007 Report Share Posted May 21, 2007 << In a democracy, when you get most votes, you run the country. >> Tell that to Al Gore. The USA is not a democracy. It is a representative republic, and yes there is a difference. I'm not backing the other guy that currently resides in the White House, but thems the rules and have been for quite some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Look at the history of Thailand for the past 100 years or so...they have produced more constitutions then "Carter has pills"....meaning a lot! Thailand is a theo-democratic monarchy, based on religion, the monarchy and love of the country. This idea has been very strongly promoted for the past 60 some years. The military has always played a very strong part in the workings of the government. Read the book, "with no name" that provides an excellent history and background of Thailand for the past 100 years. (note, this book banned in T'land and I do not agree with all of the authors conclusions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristianTroy Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 << In a democracy, when you get most votes, you run the country. >> Tell that to Al Gore. Lol!!! Democracy is that you can choose who is going to dictate your country! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gadfly Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Gee...I thought we weren't supposed to discuss politics here. This is sort of a choose your poison choice. Or, as I think they used to do in certain states in the US, asking: "how do you want to be executed: hanging or lethal injection?" Whitelotuslane is right - this has set the Thailand back years. And the current government's clumsy intervention in economic policy has made things far worse. Unbelievable. On the other hand, although elected, Thaksin was extremely corrupt and nationalistic (at least when it suited his interests). Thailand's own Huey Long. Many of the more nationalistic measures we are seeing now - the more restrictive changes to the Foreign Business Act are only one example - started under Thaksin. Indeed, if you go back far enought on this site, you will see that I said these measures were coming down the pike and, more important, when I said it, Mr. T was still in power. Instead of picking on personalities, I prefer to discuss policies (well, actually, I enjoy throwing a few barbs thrown at some of the dinosaurs here). The track record of the current group is dismal, but lately (in the last few weeks) they seem to have improved. This isn't because of anything they have done, but rather because they haven't done anything stependously stupid in the last two weeks. Let's hope this continues - it's the best we can hope for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitelotuslane Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 That's BS! Thaksin dissolved the parliament despite without any need. TRT held a 60+ % majority that time and there has been no national crisis. FACT: When you're PM you CAN dissolve parliament and call new elections for any reason; if you don't like that then your issue is with the 1997 People's Constitution, not with Thaksin. FACT: Thaksin dissolved parliament BECAUSE he wanted to show to Sonthi L. and all his critics that he commanded a democratic majority, i.e. go to the voters to get a new mandate, which, in his reasoning, would show Sonthi's mob that they don't have a leg to stand on. This of course proved the gravest mistake of his career: The "Democrat" party exploited a loophole in the constitution whereby parliament couldn't be confirmed when they boycotted the election. Read again: BOYCOTT AN ELECTION. They are not worthy of the name 'Democrat' and they FULLY deserve the current military junta that resulted from their actions; I hope they're happy. If this results in another Black May then the blood will be partly on their hands. But even without a tragedy on that scale, the damage they did to Thailand's standing (banana-monarchy run by military junta) will take another 15 years to repair; and guess what: I fear Thailand doesn't HAVE another 15 years under the same Head of State to establish a stable and mature democracy. A totally irresponsible gamble by the "Democrat" party. Again, I hope they're happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitelotuslane Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 Election may not take place if political disturbance breaks out next month: 1st army area chief The first army area commander warned Tuesday that the next election might not be held as scheduled if political disturbance breaks out early next month. Lt Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, commander of the First Army Area, was speaking to a group of local administration officials in Samut Sakhon. He said he would like to call on local administration officials to ensure that the grassroots people would not cause political disturbance. "If you all do not contribute to keeping peace and order early next month, we may not see an election again. Because we don't know what will happen next," Paryuth said. The Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardy641 Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 FACT: When you're PM you CAN dissolve parliament and call new elections for any reason; if you don't like that then your issue is with the 1997 People's Constitution, not with Thaksin. You are right that Thaksin has been entitled to dissolve the parliament by the constitution. Nevertheless, it has absolutely unnecessary, as it is hasnâ??t been a crisis of his government but a problem solely caused by Thaksin himself. Dissolving the parliament at that time has been definitely against the spirit of 1997 constitution. Even worse it triggered the whole political chaos Thailand is into now. Just another irresponsible action of Thaksin committed purely to keep him in power and save his own skin. FACT: Thaksin dissolved parliament BECAUSE he wanted to show to Sonthi L. and all his critics that he commanded a democratic majority, i.e. go to the voters to get a new mandate, which, in his reasoning, would show Sonthi's mob that they don't have a leg to stand on. You must be kidding! Thaksin never cared about democracy; actually I doubt that he even understands the meaning of democracy. Only when he has been ousted he started crying for it â?? for his own interests again. Fair new elections? Absolutely pathetic! He had the biggest majority in Thai history. Why did he need new elections? He only wanted his bribed Isaan farmers to whitewash his criminal actions. The election date he set did not give any party a fair chance to compete. When he couldnâ??t be reelected iline with the regulations of 1997 constitution, he ordered numerous by-elections and his party bribed small parties to participate. Not to mention the actions of the infamous Election commission, which has been completely under his control. In a few days TRT will have finally to face the consequences for these actions and most likely will be dissolved. This of course proved the gravest mistake of his career: The "Democrat" party exploited a loophole in the constitution whereby parliament couldn't be confirmed when they boycotted the election. Read again: BOYCOTT AN ELECTION. They are not worthy of the name 'Democrat' and they FULLY deserve the current military junta that resulted from their actions; I hope they're happy. A totally irresponsible gamble by the "Democrat" party. Again, I hope they're happy. Not only the Democrat party boycotted this farce of an election but ALL other major parties. Even for his friend Baharn this has been too much and they boycotted too. They did the only right thing they could do at that time. Otherwise the tyran Thaksin would still be in power.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.