3 ms·

According to the FT ("King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand, 1927-2016"): "Bhumibol Adulyadej ... chose not to condemn the 1976 massacre at Bangkok's Thammasat U

According to the FT ("King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand, 1927-2016"): "Bhumibol Adulyadej ... chose not to condemn the 1976 massacre at Bangkok's Thammasat University of dozens of pro-democracy protesters ..." Time Magazine: "Thailand Bids Farewell to Beloved King Bhumibol Adulyadej", regarding said events: In early October of that year, demonstrations convulsed Bangkok in response to the arrest of prominent student activists. The crowd swelled to around 400,000, including many members of the public, owing to the military’s heavy-handed response that resulted in at least 100 civilian deaths. Bhumibol intervened, ordering the doors of Chitrlada Palace opened to provide the students refuge, and persuaded Thanom and his cohorts to go into temporary exile. In September 1976, Bhumibol allowed Thanom to return to Thailand, even visiting him with Sirikit in Wat Bovornives — the Chakri dynasty’s personal temple — where he had ordained as a monk. Thousands of furious students gathered inside Thammasat University to oppose Thanom’s return. On Oct. 5, spurred on by radio broadcasts accusing the students of threatening the crown prince and communism, thousands of royalist paramilitaries massed outside the campus. The killing began the following dawn. First, a rocket-propelled bomb was fired into the throng of students, reportedly killing four and injuring dozens. Military weapons wreaked a heavy toll until around 9 a.m., and at least two students were dragged out, tortured and lynched. Three others were seen dumped on tires, drenched in petrol and burned alive. A junta headed by the Defense Minister, Admiral Sa-ngad Chaloryu, seized power immediately after the massacre. Another flirtation with democracy had been crushed. "New photos of 6 Oct 1976 massacre emerge" (NSFW, but apparently safe enough for the U.S. to consider Thailand among its staunchest asian allies for the past several decades): http://prachatai.com/english/node/2814 http://prachatai.com/english/node/2814

dageshi 10y ago
Thailand has cycled between elected government and military dictatorship something like 15 times while he was King, the miracle is he didn't have an outright civil war during his reign. If you've ever visited Thailand, you'd know that compared to surrounding countries (with the exception of Malysia perhaps) the level of infrastructure and standard of living is much higher in Thailand, things generally work there whereas in neighbouring countries like Cambodia/Laos/Burma they generally don't, or at least they haven't until very recently. To at least my outside perspective, The King seems to have been a stabilising force which prevented Thailand from descending into outright civil war. And I can't help but feel that somehow insinuating that America shouldn't consider Thailand an ally after the events you listed is a bit ridiculous considering the year before they occured the US was still in Vietnam fighting a war with allies who were torturing and killing a damned site more people than what was happening in Thailand around the same time.
- rodgerd 10y ago
  > things generally work there whereas in neighbouring countries like Cambodia/Laos/Burma they generally don't, Yeah, I can't imagine having B-52s unloading on Cambodia or Laos had anything to do with that. Clearly it's their lack of a monarchy.
  - pastProlog 10y ago
    Cambodia had a monarchy and stability (relative to its neighbors), but Sihanouk refused US requests to get involved in the Vietnam war, so the US began a campaign to destabilize the country, eventually replacing Sihanouk with a puppet government under Lon Nol when Sihanouk was out of the country.
vacri 10y ago
> apparently safe enough for the U.S. to consider Thailand among its staunchest asian allies for the past several decades Maybe the US found a friend, given that its military also killed college students in the same era; students using their democratic right to protest? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
- lobf 10y ago
  C'mon man, do you really think the Kent State shootings are at all comparable to the '76 massacre? Look at the photos...
  - vacri 10y ago
    I'm coming from a country where the military don't fire on the population at all, and are never called in to keep the peace... so the comparison is not so far different as you might think. Even if our military were called in to keep the peace, firing into the air to scare protesters (a college student protest at that!) into submission is something that would be abhorrent here. So yes, Kent State was a mistake born from confusion, but there's still similarities in using the military and live rounds to control the population. Or perhaps a different moral standpoint: in the same era, look at how the US military treated the very Vietnamese civilians that they were explicitly there to protect. I'm not saying the US is an autocratic junta, I'm just saying the glass houses/stones thing - how can the US be a staunch ally of such a place? Well, because the US is often A-OK with those kind of actions.

dageshi 10y ago

Thailand has cycled between elected government and military dictatorship something like 15 times while he was King, the miracle is he didn't have an outright civil war during his reign. If you've ever visited Thailand, you'd know that compared to surrounding countries (with the exception of Malysia perhaps) the level of infrastructure and standard of living is much higher in Thailand, things generally work there whereas in neighbouring countries like Cambodia/Laos/Burma they generally don't, or at least they haven't until very recently. To at least my outside perspective, The King seems to have been a stabilising force which prevented Thailand from descending into outright civil war. And I can't help but feel that somehow insinuating that America shouldn't consider Thailand an ally after the events you listed is a bit ridiculous considering the year before they occured the US was still in Vietnam fighting a war with allies who were torturing and killing a damned site more people than what was happening in Thailand around the same time.

rodgerd 10y ago
> things generally work there whereas in neighbouring countries like Cambodia/Laos/Burma they generally don't, Yeah, I can't imagine having B-52s unloading on Cambodia or Laos had anything to do with that. Clearly it's their lack of a monarchy.
- pastProlog 10y ago
  Cambodia had a monarchy and stability (relative to its neighbors), but Sihanouk refused US requests to get involved in the Vietnam war, so the US began a campaign to destabilize the country, eventually replacing Sihanouk with a puppet government under Lon Nol when Sihanouk was out of the country.

vacri 10y ago

> apparently safe enough for the U.S. to consider Thailand among its staunchest asian allies for the past several decades Maybe the US found a friend, given that its military also killed college students in the same era; students using their democratic right to protest? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

lobf 10y ago
C'mon man, do you really think the Kent State shootings are at all comparable to the '76 massacre? Look at the photos...
- vacri 10y ago
  I'm coming from a country where the military don't fire on the population at all, and are never called in to keep the peace... so the comparison is not so far different as you might think. Even if our military were called in to keep the peace, firing into the air to scare protesters (a college student protest at that!) into submission is something that would be abhorrent here. So yes, Kent State was a mistake born from confusion, but there's still similarities in using the military and live rounds to control the population. Or perhaps a different moral standpoint: in the same era, look at how the US military treated the very Vietnamese civilians that they were explicitly there to protect. I'm not saying the US is an autocratic junta, I'm just saying the glass houses/stones thing - how can the US be a staunch ally of such a place? Well, because the US is often A-OK with those kind of actions.