Bangkok & Bombay: November 2008

[August1991]

The sad thing is that in both cases (Bombay and Bangkok), the problem is not Europeans, Buddhists or rich white guys.

Thailand was never a colony, so 19th century colonialism is not the problem in Bangkok.

Whether Bombay or Bangkok (or even Somali pirates), we're not discussing "victims".

----

I fear that we in the Western world will soon face what Israel faced 30 years ago. Random suicide bombers who want to kill as many of us as they can. Among some six billion, there are several who utterly hate America. Maybe they are envious.

[Shakeyhands]

yes, they hate their "freedoms"...

[margrace]

There have been no countries more arrogant in this world than the British and the Americans, except Hitler and the Holy Roman Empire, they have worked hard to sow the seeds for this

No one can treat another group of people with such distain and get away with it. They are reaping what they have sown.

[Guest American Woman]

There have been no countries more arrogant in this world than the British and the Americans, except Hitler and the Holy Roman Empire, they have worked hard to sow the seeds for this

No one can treat another group of people with such distain and get away with it. They are reaping what they have sown.

Sown the seeds for what, exactly? I'm not sure what what's happening in Bangkok has to do with Americans. As for Bombay, the targets have been Americans, Brits, and Jews. You don't think maybe it's a religious hatred?

But being an American, I'd like to know how, in your opinion, Americans have treated the people of India and Thailand with disdain.

As a side note, there are/have been other countries as "arrogant" as Britain and the United States. They may not have/had as much power, but they have/had the arrogance, and would likely act/have acted on it if they could. But going through history, there have been plenty of nations that have treated others badly.

[Oleg Bach]

Strange how some of the crazed freaks involved in the assault were British born and fully westernized...looks like the freedom found in the west grants the luxury that is terrorism. These guys should have gotten less extreme hobbies..as far as American intrusion in the subcontinent...Just don't think they are interested in the place. They had better go and have a look at the Pakistani leadership and his backers - and check out to see if the Saudis are behaving themselves...always follow the money and not the religion. This attack is not religious.

[August1991]

I'm not sure what what's happening in Bangkok has to do with Americans.

To advance a domestic political dispute, one side occupied the international airport. (You'll note that they didn't occupy the local bus station.)

IOW, they wanted to disrupt the lives of rich Westerners (ie. Americans).

There have been no countries more arrogant in this world than the British and the Americans, except Hitler and the Holy Roman Empire, they have worked hard to sow the seeds for this

No one can treat another group of people with such distain and get away with it. They are reaping what they have sown.

And Margrace, you as a Canadian living in Ontario are innocent because you are neither British nor American.

Margrace, why do you hate your own civilization so much? Forget the reference to "your own". Margrace, why do you hate such a good civilization so much?

IMHO, western civilization is good and I happen to think that some people are simply envious of its success.

Edited November 29, 2008 by August1991

[WIP]

Whether Bombay or Bangkok (or even Somali pirates), we're not discussing "victims".

I know they're blockading the airport in Bangkok, and there has been fighting between the protesters and supporters of the government, but has anyone died as a result of that political standoff? If not, you may be mixing apples and oranges.

I tried reading some of the stories a couple of day ago about the political turmoil in Thailand, and I was finding it a little frustrating trying to find stories about what the actual issues are over there that are being disputed. What I did get was that the protesters are trying to bring down a government that won a recent election because they are claiming the new Prime Minister is a front for one that was forced into exile, and was a multimillionaire media tycoon. But, incidentally, the protest movement is being financed and coordinated by a business rival who owns a number of TV and radio stations himself. Do the protesters have legitimate grievances, or is this just the beginning of a fascist movement that intends to seize control whether or not they are elected to office?

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE=American Woman: I'm not sure what what's happening in Bangkok has to do with Americans.

To advance a domestic political dispute, one side occupied the international airport. (You'll note that they didn't occupy the local bus station.)

IOW, they wanted to disrupt the lives of rich Westerners (ie. Americans).

"Rich Westerners/Americans" don't make up the major percentage of travelers in Bangkok's airport. The majority of visitors to Thailand aren't even westerners, much less Americans, and of course there's domestic travel within Thailand, too. Having been at the Bangkok airport a few times, for both domestic and international flights, I can personally attest to that fact. So I doubt whether "disrupting the lives of Americans" was the driving force behind the decision to occupy the airport. Just about anyone with business or political ties to Thailand would be using the airport, so likely that's the reason, to disrupt the goings-on in Thailand, not the lives of Americans.

And like I said, Americans have never treated the people of Thailand with "disdain;" there would be no reason for them to hate Americans, and I didn't see any evidence that the people of Thailand do dislike Americans. Quite the opposite.

I find it incredible that the turmoil in Thailand/occupation of the airport is being attributed by some to Americans. The turmoil is domestic; it's against their own government.

[Oleg Bach]

STUPIDITY = EVIL.

[kimmy]

"Rich Westerners/Americans" don't make up the major percentage of travelers in Bangkok's airport. The majority of visitors to Thailand aren't even westerners, much less Americans, and of course there's domestic travel within Thailand, too. Having been at the Bangkok airport a few times, for both domestic and international flights, I can personally attest to that fact. So I doubt whether "disrupting the lives of Americans" was the driving force behind the decision to occupy the airport. Just about anyone with business or political ties to Thailand would be using the airport, so likely that's the reason, to disrupt the goings-on in Thailand, not the lives of Americans.

And like I said, Americans have never treated the people of Thailand with "disdain;" there would be no reason for them to hate Americans, and I didn't see any evidence that the people of Thailand do dislike Americans. Quite the opposite.

I find it incredible that the turmoil in Thailand/occupation of the airport is being attributed by some to Americans. The turmoil is domestic; it's against their own government.

I think August's point is not that Americans are "to blame", but rather that the people blockading the airport are doing so because they know that doing so would make the situation an extreme priority for the government.

The idea is not that a majority of passengers are Westerners; just that many Westerners do pass through the airport.

Why attack the airport instead of the train station? Because attacking the airport makes your cause an international issue.

-k

[Guest American Woman]

I think August's point is not that Americans are "to blame", but rather that the people blockading the airport are doing so because they know that doing so would make the situation an extreme priority for the government.

The idea is not that a majority of passengers are Westerners; just that many Westerners do pass through the airport.

Why attack the airport instead of the train station? Because attacking the airport makes your cause an international issue.

-k

I didn't say August "blamed" Americans; I said he attributed the occupation of the airport to Americans, which is a different thing entirely.

To quote him:

"...they wanted to disrupt the lives of rich Westerners (ie. Americans)"

I agree occupying the airport instead of the train station would make it an "extreme priority for the government"-- which is what I said. The anger is with the government, not westerners. In other words, they wanted to disrupt the government, not the lives of rich westerners/Americans.

[bush_cheney2004]

And like I said, Americans have never treated the people of Thailand with "disdain;" there would be no reason for them to hate Americans, and I didn't see any evidence that the people of Thailand do dislike Americans. Quite the opposite.

I find it incredible that the turmoil in Thailand/occupation of the airport is being attributed by some to Americans. The turmoil is domestic; it's against their own government.

True, but America has a very long history with the government in Thailand (i.e. military, political, economic), which could invite such attacks by domestic extremists or affiliated "terrorists".

Thailand is/was one of America's favorite military bases. Liberty in Bangkok is excellent!

[kimmy]

I didn't say August "blamed" Americans; I said he attributed the occupation of the airport to Americans, which is a different thing entirely.

To quote him:

"...they wanted to disrupt the lives of rich Westerners (ie. Americans)"

I agree occupying the airport instead of the train station would make it an "extreme priority for the government"-- which is what I said. The anger is with the government, not westerners. In other words, they wanted to disrupt the government, not the lives of rich westerners/Americans.

He didn't attribute the occupation of the airport to Americans. He pointed out that these knuckleheads have figured out that the fastest way to escalate the situation is to drag Americans into it.

They wanted to disrupt their government, but recognized that inconveniencing Westerners is the most obvious way to do so.

-k

[Guest American Woman]

He didn't attribute the occupation of the airport to Americans. He pointed out that these knuckleheads have figured out that the fastest way to escalate the situation is to drag Americans into it.

They wanted to disrupt their government, but recognized that inconveniencing Westerners is the most obvious way to do so.

-k

Again. It's not about "dragging Americans into it." Americans are not the only ones who use that airport-- not even close. As I pointed out, the majority of tourists to Thailand are not westerners, and of the westerners who do visit, the majority aren't Americans. And then there are the domestic flights-- the Thai people traveling within Thailand themselves. It's not about dragging Americans into it; it's about closing down the airport to disrupt the government-- not to "disrupt the lives of rich Westerners (ie: Americans)." It's not about Americans any more than it's about any other nationalities in the world.