Talk:Prem Tinsulanonda

Untitled

The link to "Sufficiency Economy" goes to the article on "Localism". This isn't at all the same thing, so I'm removing the reference. SE is more about not incurring debt and acting according to one's economic station as opposed to the stuff on localism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Huanohk (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Since it's a year old undisputed I removed

. Hope that's OK--125.24.150.231 (talk) 17:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Now the disputed section seems balanced. Why not remove the NPOV.--125.24.150.231 (talk) 11:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

It is important to maintain NPOV. Any statements against this person should be balanced with statements expressing the opposite POV to remain neutral.--User:125.24.223.206 12:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

{{POV|date=December 2007}} is placed here because it is one sided - and contridicts publshed reported facts. Example is the bloody photo, there was a caption stating the police attacked the anti-Prem demonstrators. In fact, as reported by all media, it was paid goons, a mob, who attacked the unarmed police. When this fact is corrected, then it is changed back to a lie by someone who is NOT neutral, who has an anti-Monarchy political agenda. Wikipedia is not a playground for politics. It's a neutral encyclopedia, based on published 3rd party references. Please lock this page.--125.24.70.191 05:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Someone is trying to make out that Prem was behind the 2006 coup. Here is a published reference to the contrary:

Government spokesman Yongyuth Mayalap said Gen Prem has categorically denied the UDD's allegations that he was behind the Sept 19 military coup which toppled then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The accusations, Gen Prem said, were repetitive, baseless and provocative, according to the government spokesman.

This was added, but removed by non-neutral persons. So it has been readded. If it gets removed again I suggest you ban the person who removed it for being against NPOV and using Wikipedia to promote political agendy which is not neutral. Editors please take note. Thanks--125.24.70.191 05:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

You need to practice what you preach... the majority of your edits are in no way NPOV. E.g., this edit, where you insert unsubstantiated claims that the protesters were paid, and were anti-monarchy. Or where you refer to a demonstration as a mob riot. Or where you claim that this "mob" attacked unarmed police, etc. 74.192.150.94 02:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it had been reported widely that the protestors were paid. It was also published that the protestors turned into a mob riot attacking Prem's home and forcing the police to act in self-defense. And even the PM was quoted as saying the protest was anti monarchy, aim at "bringing down the Highest Institution". These were reported in 3rd party published newspapers like The Nation and Bangkok Post, what to speak of Thai News Papers. So the edits you cite were accurate to say the least.--125.24.84.159 21:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone in Thailand writing or saying it was anti monarchy means i lie with political intend. It becomes absurd to trust any newspaper or public announcement in this propaganda state.

This article needs an addition to mention the July 2013 announcement from Prem that he has an adoptive son who is a high ranking general in the burmese military. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.245.51.5 (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Family Background

Is there any more information about Prem's life as a child or family background available? What did his parents do for a living? What is his ancestry? Are his ancestors Thai or Chinese? Please add more details about his personal life if possible.180.180.162.93 (talk) 23:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Prem Tinsulanonda/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Of course, most of protesters who believe that Prem was accually behind the coup were pro-ousted premier. In fact, there's no concrete or any clear evidence showing that he was the mastermind of the coup. Truly, those believers argued that he launched campaign among soldiers to overthrow the ex-premier. But in fact, he did not say anything about him. Actually there was apparently known that the ex-premier had attempted to put his circle of friends who were police and soldiers to the higher rank, which led to be strongly criticized. Prem apparently concerned this, (as usual, he is 'traditionally' respected among army personals for years.) This could make the supporters of the ex-premier to believe that Prem was 'behind the 2006 coup'. However this should be proved the more concrete evidence.

Last edited at 16:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 03:21, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Lack of independent sources

Considering how notable this person is, it strikes me as very odd that only one scholarly source has been used in writing this article. It is problematic that a great deal of this article relies on Thai newspaper articles. In Thai law, criticizing people from the Privy Council is known to lead to persecution under the lèse majesté laws, thus any Thai media located in Thailand will normally be very careful in reporting any negative news that is not quoting another person's opinion. Analyses of more independent scholars should be included.--213.251.116.12 (talk) 15:27, 3 September 2016 (UTC)