Burma Riots
-
It seems that the monks have placed the military junta in Burma in a tight spot.
The world would condemn the military government should they shoot the protesters and perhaps even finally take the situation in Burma more seriously. What does it take to oust a military government? Kings of the past were able to put down dissenting feudal lords simply cause they had more resources for cannons. Open confrontation by unarmed monks is out of the question.
The military government would either have to take a step back, reverse their policies, or risk facing greater protests and even UN intervention.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7013638.stm -
this piece of news true?
'Burmese riot police use batons to try to break up crowds, including monks, at Rangoon's holiest site, used as a rally point for protests' -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7014570.stm
The crackdown by the regime is getting worse... actually, isnt this the best opportunity for a regional peacekeeping force to take charge? -
Check out the statements issued by the world on the situation in Burma.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7014704.stm
As usual, the "autocracies" like Russia and China are sticking with Burma.
Strong condemnation coming from the US and UK, but nothing more than just symbolic policies.
Neutral remarks from Singapore.
Looks like its not time for a regime change in Burma yet... -
Soon..one day we will see a respectable Burma.
-
Since this is a military topics I like to raise a what if question:
If the situation continue to get worst and blood continue to spill no end in sight.
would sg provide a evacuation for civilian?
How likely is and if at all the UN security council and Myanmar gov come to a compromise and Asean peace keeping force were to allow to police the street and keep the peace.
If that happen would SG provide SAF given that it is within Asean and sg gov seemed to have ties with Junta. -
reports are coming in with some killed already.
-
SAF peacekeepers on the streets of Rangoon?
-
I would rather donÂ’t see such tax payer supported peace keepers in Rangoon. For what purpose? False glory?
-
I have extended family who are from Rangoon, they are on lock down,they are allowed only to do shopping under their blocks,then staright back inside their flats. It is very scary. Australians have been told not to travel to Myanmar for the next 6 months,and the American Government has threatened to intervene if things get worse. Our Australian news also reports that 3 monks have been bashed and shot to death in the streets, with police and the army using tear gas, grenades and brute force during PEACEFUL marches. What is wrong with our world??? I am ashamed to be a part of the human race, look at us....we kill each other in the streets....killing religious people for standing up for what they believe in! It's not right!
-
I am ashamed to be a part of the human race, look at us....we kill each other in the streets....killing religious people for standing up for what they believe in! It's not right!
sooo...are you sugesting we join the Zentradi? -
they should release Aung Sung Suu Kyi n restore democracy instead of wasting tear gas..
-
What would you prefer PLA patrol the street of Rangoon or from members of SE Asia communities? personaly i would prefer SEA but there are so much PRC involvement in that country.Originally posted by LazerLordz:SAF peacekeepers on the streets of Rangoon? -
ozzy_gurl, sorry to hear that. It is a military regime after all.
This is a rather strange protest to begin with. Who are the monks rallying under? I find it strange that there's no leader behind the protests at all. With the protests reaching to Aung San Suu Kyi's "residence", it almost seems as though they are trying to get her to step up in defiance to the military government.
I doubt a UN resolution that would force the military government to step down would ever be passed. It is not that the democracies around the world doesn't care, but that there are 2 autocratic nations with veto powers that inhibit it. China has strategic interests in Burma, and would well veto any move to a "regime change" in that country.
The effectiveness of UN is being questioned when it can't even act against what is obviously wrong and immoral because of the above mentioned. If there is a time where a coalition of the willing is needed, its now.
On the other hand, I doubt whether Burma is ready for a full democracy after years of oppression. Democracies typically take off well when the country is doing well, and level of public education is high. While there have been many Burmese students that have fled overseas for their educations, there is little indication of many returning to their homelands.
Also, there have been many rumors and talks of Singapore's ties with the Military govt in Burma. Many suggest that the ties are deep and that Sg has aided them in their oppression against their people. Whether that is true, we don't really know. However, there are indications of strong ties given the rather "neutral" statement by us. I wonder, does that statement represent how the majority of Singaporeans feel about the situation there? -
Majority of Singaporeans are not caring about this because they are not inclined to care.
As far as I am concerned, at one point, we will have to reassess our relationship with Burma, although it has been always said to be "just business", the impression that the West has of ASEAN will dip further.
Singapore is quiet because of certain reasons. I am not sure if these reasons are worth keeping quiet about anyway.
Firstly, given that the junta visit Singapore regularly for medical treatment, shows that we may have a certain degree of ties with them and this is where we should send a strong signal to them to back off.
I am ashamed that ASEAN took so long to get their act together and finally hold a foreign ministers' meeting. -
we did sell those bloodhound to them?
-
u know it is so easy to take out those general....Oops wrong injection.....Sorry folks....we didn't mean it.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Majority of Singaporeans are not caring about this because they are not inclined to care.
As far as I am concerned, at one point, we will have to reassess our relationship with Burma, although it has been always said to be "just business", the impression that the West has of ASEAN will dip further.
Singapore is quiet because of certain reasons. I am not sure if these reasons are worth keeping quiet about anyway.
Firstly, given that the junta visit Singapore regularly for medical treatment, shows that we may have a certain degree of ties with them and this is where we should send a strong signal to them to back off.
I am ashamed that ASEAN took so long to get their act together and finally hold a foreign ministers' meeting. -
Singapore is rumoured to have secret relations with the Burmese military junta. I wonder what will happen to our relationship after this crisis have blown over? And will we provide secret aid to them?
-
Honestly, why does everyone say that China is crucial in the resolution of this Crisis?
Would China tell Burma to stop use of force against the protesting monks? Would the Burmese Military Government listen to a country that once crushed university students with main battle tanks in TianAnMen?
China statement to the UN was that its Burma's internal affairs, and that it does not affect the peace and stability of the region. It seems that human rights, civil rights are not part of China's concern.
What does it take to overthrow a veto? It is ridiculous that a single country can impede actions that would save human lives. Even the US President's veto can be overruled if enough people agree that it should. -
Burma's trade links etc...are linked with China, infact China is their biggest trader...hence if China post sanctions on them, they will die soon.Originally posted by Shotgun:Honestly, why does everyone say that China is crucial in the resolution of this Crisis?
Would China tell Burma to stop use of force against the protesting monks? Would the Burmese Military Government listen to a country that once crushed university students with main battle tanks in TianAnMen?
China statement to the UN was that its Burma's internal affairs, and that it does not affect the peace and stability of the region. It seems that human rights, civil rights are not part of China's concern.
What does it take to overthrow a veto? It is ridiculous that a single country can impede actions that would save human lives. Even the US President's veto can be overruled if enough people agree that it should.
But, too bad, China is not giving a damn in this thing. Russia is helping them to build nuclear reactor? wth. lol -
It is something that we know weren't right but it still happenedOriginally posted by ozzy_gurl:I have extended family who are from Rangoon, they are on lock down,they are allowed only to do shopping under their blocks,then staright back inside their flats. It is very scary. Australians have been told not to travel to Myanmar for the next 6 months,and the American Government has threatened to intervene if things get worse. Our Australian news also reports that 3 monks have been bashed and shot to death in the streets, with police and the army using tear gas, grenades and brute force during PEACEFUL marches. What is wrong with our world??? I am ashamed to be a part of the human race, look at us....we kill each other in the streets....killing religious people for standing up for what they believe in! It's not right!
Like all the other Fcuking wars...
And it is saddening.... -
China has already called on the Burmese to show restraint.
However, when you have pet dogs, they are still dogs, and do not necessarily listen to their masters 100% of the time. -
Actually, I find it strange too...Originally posted by Shotgun:ozzy_gurl, sorry to hear that. It is a military regime after all.
This is a rather strange protest to begin with. Who are the monks rallying under? I find it strange that there's no leader behind the protests at all. With the protests reaching to Aung San Suu Kyi's "residence", it almost seems as though they are trying to get her to step up in defiance to the military government.
The whole affair was started by the Fuel increase, which is the direct result of the Iraq war. Even though the Myanmar govt was rash in implimenting the raise, without notice and in huge extreme. They can't be faulted by what they can't control.. fuel subsidy cannot be substain, since Myamar isn't all that rich. Some Burmese exile in bangkok.. blame the expensive move of the Administrative capital from Yangon as the reason.. but those money saved will not last forever.. It was only stall the problem. In any case, the moving of the capital is the direct result of US war posturing, indicating Regime change.. during those times.
Coming back to the the monks protest. The general media is quick to equate the fuel protest to Democracy. The monks and nuns in no way indicating it so. Look at CNA way of reporting the situation.. it is totally unbalanced and bias journalism .. they even dedicated 15 mins of their 1/2hrs news slot for it.. even invited Burmese Exile (likely C!A supported) for interview.
If one were to take note of CNA/Channel 5 reporting.. they are actually quite unbalance... when the myanmar police is shooting tear gas to disperse the protesters.. they using words like "no Qualm".. tactically equating tear gas to shooting live rounds. What are they suppose to use then ? Then, they were hundreds, then there were thousands, now there were tens of thousands. The general media is forcing the Juntas restrain.. but when the crowd reached a million... then what ? The media is setting up the junta for a TianAnMen Sq situation. In order to survive, the Junta will be forced to react... just like any other govt.
The media is propaganding that "should not use crackdown with violence".. then crackdown using what means ? The Junta should surrender ? Effectively, would that mean a regime change ? Again.. what has protesting against fuel height, to do with Democracy ? Of course, democracy groups will take advantage of the situation to join in, but are the monks saying that ? OR the media ?
Very unprofessional way of reporting. The general media is setting up the Myanmar for an TianAnmen situation. And not surprisingly, taking advantage of this protests, the US is urging for sanction. This is ridiculous, already the burmese suffering the fuel increase, and here, US is calling for sanction. .. Adding fuel to fire... aim to topple the Junta. Even better, install a pro-US democratically elected dictator. If you search US history... it is very familiar. Just like Iran is getting the Iraq treatment.
I am not a fan of the Junta.. but Myanmar must tread their own progress carefully.. and not along a civil war path. Also, I'm disappointed with CNA journalism.. I hope they are not part of the American propaganda news network.. but it seemed so. -
To some extent, it is true that the junta can't be faulted for the fuel price doubling, but according to CNN today, Burma is at the bottom in per capita spending on health care (even less than the poorest African countries) and yet the elites are creating a new capital city with condos for their personal use, and there's a video showing the Burmese dictator's (Than Shwe's) daughter getting married wearing lots of diamond jewellery. These point to the glaring discrepency between rich and poor from over 40 years of mismanagement by a string of military dictators. I think the protests is a pressure-cooker phenomenon of this discrepency. The dictatorship may have to use increasingly bloodier force with each subsequent protest.Originally posted by MobyDog:Actually, I find it strange too...
The whole affair was started by the Fuel increase, which is the direct result of the Iraq war. Even though the Myanmar govt was rash in implimenting the raise, without notice and in huge extreme. They can't be faulted by what they can't control.. fuel subsidy cannot be substain, since Myamar isn't all that rich. Some Burmese exile in bangkok.. blame the expensive move of the Administrative capital from Yangon as the reason.. but those money saved will not last forever....
I see your point, but foreign journalists and reporters are not allowed into Burma and the regime has blatantly lied or refused to give accurate info in the past. Hence reporting has to be based on whatever info journalists can gather from abroad, which can be biased since there is no official channel for more accurate news. In the past (like the bloody clamp down in 1988 ) this has worked for them, but nowadays so many people can take photos/videos and send them worldwide by just a click, so the news restriction may work against them now.
Coming back to the the monks protest. The general media is quick to equate the fuel protest to Democracy. The monks and nuns in no way indicating it so. Look at CNA way of reporting the situation.. it is totally unbalanced and bias journalism .. they even dedicated 15 mins of their 1/2hrs news slot for it.. even invited Burmese Exile (likely C!A supported) for interview.
The last time Burma had a budget surplus was the year before the military took over (in 1962). Burma has abundant natural resources, hardworking people, and there's potential for tourism, mining and other industries. There is no reason for it to lag so far behind other ASEAN nations.
The US and UK can't do much because they don't have much direct trade with Burma so the US is restricting travel visas of the Burmese elite, which is not going to hurt much (frankly, if Burma supplies 20% of the world's fuel, we might see carrier battle groups in the Andaman Sea right now). As I see it, China and India, Burma's biggest trading partners, should say something to the dictators. Even though China has been brutal in handling demonstrators, I believe the economic conditions in Burma are much worse than in China, with wages at under S$1 a day. China wants its immediate neighbours to be stable, this situation could lead to a bloody suppression and then foreign intervention of some sort, which is not good for China's interests as well. -
Sometimes, let's not dick around.
The Burmese people have suffered enough under decades of military rule that have not prospered them at all.