Bush's Freedom Agenda MUST be working, King takes over in Thailand.

[ck4829]

"The Thai military launched a coup against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra on Tuesday night, circling his offices with tanks, seizing control of TV stations and declaring a provisional authority pledging loyalty to the king.

An announcement on Thai television declared that a "Council of Administrative Reform" with King Bhumibol Adulyadej as head of state had seized power in Bangkok and nearby provinces without any resistance.

At least 14 tanks surrounded Government House, Thaksin's office. Thaksin was in New York at the U.N. General Assembly and declared a state of emergency via a government-owned TV station.

A senior military official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation, said army Commander-in-Chief Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin had used the military to take over power from the prime minister."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060919/ap_on_re_as/thailand

The Bush Doctrine MUST be working, right? Because we all know that a Monarchy is the pinnacle of Democracy, right?

[malaise]

1. Monarchies are back

Holy shite.

[bryant69]

2. Well he's not talking about a cheap low grade freedome

The kind of gaudy freedom that you might give to everybody - even bums. No he's trying to promote a very upscale kind of freedom, limited only to those at the top of the food chain.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[TahitiNut]

3. Just another example of an All-Volunteer Military

Cheer this at our peril. :puke:

[Scout1071]

9. You are wrong. Please read the article. nt

[ButterflyBlood]

17. False

Military service age and obligation: 21 years of age for compulsory military service; males are registered at 18 years of age; conscript service obligation - two years; 18 years of age for voluntary military service (2004)

[TahitiNut]

19. Do your damned homework. Thailand abolished conscription in 1997.

http://www.wri-irg.org/co/rtba/thailand.htm

So, before you arrogantly presume to condescendingly claim someone else is uninformed because it conflicts with your OPINION and bias, do the fucking research!

[ButterflyBlood]

20. Then the CIA Factbook needs to be updated

But there most certainly were military coups in Thailand pre-1997.

In fact they happened at a far larger rate than now. Here we have probably one coup since 1997. Prior to that there was 19 coups in 60 years. Do the math.

[TahitiNut]

21. Do the research. The coups were led by all-volunteer ELITE units.

Despite having conscription from WW1 to 1997, the proportion of personnel in all but the Army was almost all volunteer/"professional".

This is not at all unusual in societies with hereditary monarchs, even "constitutional" monarchs - particularly colonialized nations. Remember Iran under the Shah?

[mmonk]

4. Yes, monarchies are "moderate".

[Scout1071]

5. Sorry, but I think your title is misleading.

The King of Thailand is not trying to take control of Thailand. He is a seriously beloved figure. There are many, many charges of corruption against the Prime Minister and many have been calling for his resignation.

Hopefully this is being done with Democracy in mind. That is that the military will oust the illegal and corrupt prime minister so that new, free elections can be held.

It's not American style Democracy, but it may actually be more effectual!

More from Yahoo!:
, a 78-year-old constitutional monarch with limited powers, has used his high prestige to pressure opposing parties to compromise during political crises. He is credited with helping keep Thailand more stable than many of its Southeast Asian neighbors.

He is the world's longest-serving monarch, celebrated his 60th year on the throne with lavish festivities in mid-June that were attended by royalty from around the world.

Many Thais are counting on him to pull the country through its current political crisis, which has left it with no functioning legislature and only a caretaker government after a divisive, inconclusive election.

Bhumibol was born in Cambridge, Mass. He became the ninth king of Thailand's Chakri dynasty on June 9, 1946, succeeding his older brother, Ananda, killed by an unexplained shooting.

[Scout1071]

6. Dupe.

[OregonBlue]

7. Taksin is very corrupt. He's been selling off Thailand right and

left for personal gain. The King is bright, articulate, devoted. This may be good for the country.

[Scout1071]

8. Exactly. That is why the OP is misleading.

The Thai King is very smart and very well loved by the Thai people.

This move may save Thailand - one of my favorite countries on the planet.

[TahitiNut]

10. Your approval of a monarchy is noted.

:puke:

The Disney-fication of America is deep and widespread.

[Scout1071]

11. Oh please. I liked Princess Diana too, does that mean I wanted her to

rule England? Give me a break.

Know anything about Thailand?

Your approval of corrupt, illegal regimes has been duly noted.

[TahitiNut]

12. Some day your Prince will come.

:eyes:

After all, how else can a woman be a "success"?

:puke:

[Scout1071]

13. I really have no idea what you are talking about or why the hell

you seem to be puking all over yourself, but you really make no sense.

You obviously don't know a thing about Thailand. But, hey.....don't let facts and knowledge get in the way of a good argument.

[davidinalameda]

14. sounds like the king might not be too bad

Bhumibol, a 78-year-old constitutional monarch with limited powers, has used his high prestige to pressure opposing parties to compromise during political crises. He is credited with helping keep Thailand more stable than many of its Southeast Asian neighbors.

He is the world's longest-serving monarch, celebrated his 60th year on the throne with lavish festivities in mid-June that were attended by royalty from around the world.

Many Thais had been counting on him to pull the country through its current political crisis, which has left it with no functioning legislature and only a caretaker government after the inconclusive election.

Bhumibol was born in Cambridge, Mass. He became the ninth king of Thailand's Chakri dynasty on June 9, 1946, succeeding his older brother, Ananda, killed by an unexplained shooting.

Since then, the beloved king has reigned through a score of governments, democratic and dictatorial. He has taken an especially active role in rural development.

[TahitiNut]

18. A monarchy is inherently bad.

The common acceptance of enormous hereditary wealth and power solely accumulated from the labors of others deemed "subjects" (and property) is appalling. The Bolsheviks had the right idea, imho.

Such a notion is as appalling as accepting those whose wealth was accumulated by the Nazis ... detestable.

We've been so brainwashed by royalist myths and Disney fables that few are even conscious of how detestable such continuation of privilege is.

[rockymountaindem]

22. Monarchy is not the best, nor is it the worst of systems

While I prefer republicanism as a matter of course as an American, if the PM was as bad as many in this thread claim, having the king as a figurehead of a new government might not be the worst idea. I think the idea of, say, the monarchies of Sweden and Britain are outdated, but I don't think Queen Elizabeth impinges on the freedom of the British. The Bolsheviks, who you cite, were scant better for the people over the long term than their Tsarist predecessors, if at all.

Given the choice between Hitler, King George VI and FDR as my head of state, I'd pick FDR. But, given the choice between Hitler and King George VI, I'd pick Georgie in a heartbeat. Your comparison isn't a very good one.

[TahitiNut]

23. The lesser of evils is still evil.

Unless and until The People take control of their own governance, they get the kind of government they deserve. History is littered with the corpses of those who subordinated themselves and their neighbors to the "lesser evil."

[ButterflyBlood]

24. And it'd help without a corrupt asshole stealing elections

I'd certainly take the People controling their destiny under free elections with a figurehead monarch than some corrupt asshole stealing elections and selling the country down the river with no monarch.

[Scout1071]

26. There is no reasoning with this one.

Facts be damned.

[TahitiNut]

29. Two words: Archduke Ferdinand

If there were no Archduke Franz Ferdinand, there would have been no Adolph Hitler.

FWIW, George VI was a relative of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The intermarriages in the 'royal' families of Europe and their "Family Feuds" (in which MILLIONS were killed) and their centuries-long unholy codependency with militant (power-obsessed) religionism are part and parcel of the same horrors we see today, including the arbitrary division of the Middle East and the partition of Palestine.

The notion that there's anything whatsoever good about the myth of 'royalty' and the enormous wealth stolen from the labors of 'peasants' is appalling. The acceptance and continued enforcement of any entitlement to inherited wealth that was allegedly the property of the State (l'etat c'est moi?) is a gross injustice. Once upon a time we had the good sense to abolish inherited debt - what my father owed stops with him; I don't inherit his debts. Why then should I inherit his wealth? The same accident of birth that we call a "crack baby" is responsible for Junior and Charles and Akihito. The continuation of this myth is, imho, an abomination of any kind of democratic justice.

To a large degree, we have Disney to thank that this is incomprehensible to the "Some Day My Prince Will Come" children of America.


Like I say, the Bolsheviks had the right idea, imho. :shrug: They got rid of the corrupt fiction of 'royalty' in the only way that's yet been shown to work.

Now the feces-flingers can call me a "pinko" I guess. :puke:

[davidinalameda]

25. as a figurehead they're very beneficial

they're good symbols for the country to rally around while the politicians get their act together

[ButterflyBlood]

15. That's not what's happening

The King isn't taking over, he's just a symbol. He is beloved by the country and has worked against the PM, a very corrupt asshole who has sold his country out to foreign interests and sucked up to Bush. he's known to be good at stealing elections too. The King has largely opposed him over this. Since he's so good at stealing elections, outsting him by force might be the only way.

There have been many coups in Thailand in the past where the King was left Head of State but still only a figurehead. And he frequently in the passed helped RESTORE democracy and bring down military regimes. He even once opened up the grounds of the royal palace to provide refuge to protestors being slaughtered by the military.

[Scout1071]

16. Shhh......some people don't want to hear this kind of reasonable talk.

All monarchies are bad, didn't you get the memo?

[Nikki Stone 1]

27. Maybe the king of Thailand can remove Chucklenuts too.

:)

[TahitiNut]

28. Anyone who doesn't know this should go live in Saudi Arabia.

The effectiveness of the Disneyland brain-washing is astounding. That anyone who'd claim to be a liberal or a (small-d) democrat would need it spelled out is testimony to the strength of mythology.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. It's very democratic to have the military overthrow the democracy.

Oh, wait, the government the people voted for isn't what we like so it's ok to have the generals throw it out. Worked well in Argentina, Chile, Iran, and numberlous other places.

[TahitiNut]

31. Don't forget that close friend of the Bush family, ...

... and role model for Junior, General Fulgencio Batista y Zaldívar ... another lesser weevil. Then there's Junior's collaborator and fellow fascist, Pervez Musharraf, Chief of Army Staff and President of Pakistan.

:puke:

[ButterflyBlood]

32. The difference is they aren't overthrowing a democratic leftist govt.

But a corrupt Bush crony, election stealing, civil liberties abusing asshole.