Many years back, a people's victory was proclaimed when General Suchinda Kraprayoon lost his premiership. Many members of today's incumbent ruling party, including Cabinet members, participated in his downfall.

If what is happening right now is mob activity, so it was then. For you see, Suchinda was chosen by the majority of elected representatives in Parliament. It was something allowed by the Constitution in those days and therefore quite legitimate, if not ethical. Ah, that word again.

At the time, the Democrat Party under the leadership of Chuan Leekpai insisted that the new Constitution disallowed a non-elected House representative from assuming the premiership. How this was regarded as being more democratic, I don't know.

I suspect that the Democrats now see they have a good chance of eventually becoming the government one day without having to rely on a non-partisan prime minister, someone like Prem Tinsulanonda. Ah, that name again.

Anyhow, the members of Parliament have, through successive sessions, already managed to change, corrupt and adulterate much of Anand Panyarachun's original intentions for the Constitution. Now they want to sit down and change the Constitution officially.

Is it just me or are the majority of Thais also fed up with both sides? If Thaksin is accused of not being able to distinguish between right and wrong, I am afraid that Abhisit Vejjajiva thinks subconsciously he is the only one who does.

I do not apologise for upsetting both the government and the opposition with this letter. I hope it does. But don't shoot me; I'm only the waiter.

Phi Lek

Bangkok

-------------------

Here are five dangerous points for voters to ponder

Thaksin's snap election on April 2 has opened up several cans of worms.

First, it would not allow his MPs the 90 days required by the Constitution to decide whether to stay with Thai Rak Thai. Thaksin's aims are clearly to keep Thai Rak Thai's numerical superiority in Parliament and his own post as prime minister by preventing defections by disgruntled MPs.

Second, should he return even with a diminished majority, he would then be able to claim that the electorate had confirmed his mandate. However, by denying his MPs the democratic right to leave Thai Rak Thai, he may further deepen the unrest within his party. The Shin Corp sale scandal would stink more and more to heaven and the mega-tax-avoidance (sorry, minimisation) cases proliferate under his government's blind eye.

Third, if the election were still held notwithstanding the opposition's boycott, another democratic decision unpalatable to Thaksin, it would give him a 100-per-cent majority in Parliament. The new government would thus become a dictatorship in all but name.

Fourth, the anti-Thaksin movement might then expand into an open popular resistance, resulting in violent suppression, given Thaksin's record of intolerance of opposition and critics. Further, it would exacerbate the situation in the South, a Democrat stronghold, given his unsympathetic, heavy-handed handling of the conflict down there.

Fifth, General Panlop Pinmanee's speculation that there might be an Army coup is doubly frightening, because it would require a coup within the Army itself to eliminate the pro-Thaksin upper ranks, and it would raise the spectre of 1992 among civilians.

The only solution for the Kingdom now is a caretaker government whose mandate is to establish a clean, strong system of checks and balances to eliminate systemic corruption and safeguard true democracy and the country.

Krabong Kuverakorn

Bangkok

-------------------

Loss of job security might lead to some disgruntled TRT MPs

Re: "'Me or them'," News, February 25.

Thaksin's decision to ask His Majesty the King to dissolve Parliament is a common one used whenever a government finds itself facing serious opposition from its critics, but without a formidable alternative party that could assume the government.

Yet the problem of unpopularity is more the making of the incumbent than of his party. There will be many angry Thai Rak Thai MPs who were elected for a complete term, but now face being ousted from their positions, as the party may be re-elected with perhaps a substantially reduced majority, while their leader will keep his job. If Thai Rak Thai is to have any credible future, these MPs may well feel it is now time for an alternative leader to step forward.

Moreover, the prime minister has this nail-biting worry: even if he wins, the nation may be so badly divided that the result may not be acceptable to a large proportion of society. Such a situation could really bring about the sum of all fears.

David Prescott

UK

-------------------

Kingdom serves as an example of democracy in action

While reading the online coverage that The Nation has provided and looking at the photographs of Sunday's rally, I saw that the old cliche - "This is what democracy looks like" - take on new meaning. This truly is what democracy looks like, and Thailand is providing an example of what democracy can and should be for the United States to study and emulate. We should all be humbled and inspired by what is happening in Thailand right now.

Janet Brown

Seattle, Washington

-------------------

Students wonder why corruption goes unpunished

At Tuesday's student-group meeting, we discussed the problem of the unceasing corruption present in our nation. Ousting our prime minister on the grounds of mismanagement, corruption and other factors would not stop corrupt practices.

Maybe we are very naive, but if he has been corrupt (which is the same as stealing), should he not be taken to court and forced to return the proceeds of his corruption? Wouldn't this set a precedent to warn others?

If I stole, I would go to jail after being found guilty by a court, so what is the difference?

Why are our police not pursuing all the other corrupt parties within our political system?

We understand that today's corruption is sophisticated, but it is still stealing, even if they are public servants, and it must be addressed to the fullest extent of the law. Maybe international law enforcement should be called in to assist. If they were to get away with their respective billions, than ousting them would have no meaning.

Maybe this is just a student's naive point of view.

Raweewan

Bangkok

-------------------

Premier and Hitler could actually have been best mates

Thaksin is extremely narcissistic - he loves himself more than anything. It is impossible for him to accept any criticism (he has sidelined executives who questioned him at Shin, attacked commentators in the media and made sure to disable all potential rivals within Thai Rak Thai). So he had to dissolve Parliament to avoid losing face in the planned debate on his government and ethics that was supposed to have happened this week. In one of The Nation's reports, it said Thaksin loves praise more than the truth. Exactly!

Pictures of Thaksin with an Adolf Hitler moustache are appropriate. Go back and read your biographies/histories of Hitler. To men like these, people are objects or pawns in a game, moved and removed at will. No compassion at all. Examples? Drug war? We had to meet those goals. Human rights? What human rights? Extrajudicial killings? The PM said he had nothing to do with it.

When the four soldiers guarding the armoury in the South were killed during the raid to steal armaments from the Army camp, how could Thaksin possibly have said, "They weren't doing their job. They deserved to die." Or the recent plane crash "jokes" made at At Samat after hearing about the death of an Air Force pilot? When Hitler's world caved in, he couldn't face the reality of being defeated, so he committed suicide. Thaksin said he "wouldn't resign in this lifetime", so can someone please give him a weapon? He might want it soon.

Disgusted

USA

-------------------

Public needs to lower its healthcare expectations

Re: "Ministry throws doctors legal lifeline", News, February 27.

Thank you for your news update in regard to legal counsel for Thai doctors serving in public charity hospitals. A recent US study encompassing 22 years of malpractice suits concluded that the major cause of lawsuits was not actual medical negligence, but patients' expectations. Consequently, it behooves Thai public hospitals to hire staff to educate the masses sweltering in their waiting-room lobbies. Modern medicine can be miraculous, but a good outcome can never, ever be guaranteed. People's illnesses can and do get worse, loss of function can and does occur. People will die regardless of medical intervention. Operations can and do have untoward results.

Having followed some of the so-called malpractice cases published in The Nation over the last couple of years, high expectations appear to be a common thread in these suits. Educated Thais such as the one's who read your paper get the message, but the poor who use the Bt30 hospitals apparently do not understand. They need education along with their Bt30 care as to what can and, more importantly, cannot be accomplished.

How do the Thai media reach these masses? This responsibility should not fall on the shoulders of the Thai doctors. They did not invent, nor ask for, Bt30 care, and most don't want it. Politicians thrust this on the doctors. Politicians should provide funds for educating the masses to be realistic in their expectations.

W Knight

Orange, California