Irrespective of all the corrupt deals at Suvarnabhumi this decision was inevitable. However, let's hope for once that the long-term view will be adopted.

With passenger traffic set to expand over the next 25 to 30 years to 110 million - a figure that has been suggested that Suvarnabhumi will reach once fully developed - then I would suggest the following. First, market Don Muang as a Southeast Asia hub for all domestic and short-haul international flights, ie, 2,000 miles radius or thereabouts. Complete a Skytrain link between both airports, together with a luxury coach shuttle service every 20 minutes. Really, there are many options to create workable solutions - the individual airlines are all capable of sorting-out their own logistics.

Suvarnabhumi, once sorted out, deserves to become the proud gateway for all long-haul intercontinental flights. One last thought though, when Don Muang comes back online - god forbid there being any sign that King Power is controlling the duty-free and shopping areas again!

Frequent Flyer

Bangkok

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

Transit links between facilities needed for smooth operations

With the large amount of international and domestic traffic that Thailand faces now and will face in the future, having two airports isn't such a bad idea. Obviously much organisation is needed between domestic, connecting and international flights before things will run smoothly but, all in all, looking at cities such as New York, Berlin and London as examples, it can be done.

A lack of transport links between the airports is not such a big problem - London Gatwick and London Heathrow are hardly next door to each other. As long as the organisation is there, it can only be a good thing.

Jeff Upward

Bangkok

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

Use Don Muang for all flights until Suvarnabhumi is ready

Reopening Don Muang is a good idea, however they should move all passenger flights there and leave only cargo at Suvarnabhumi. The dual airport concept is always worse than having one single airport.

Bangkok has nowhere near the amount of air traffic that New York and London do. I'm all for reopening Don Muang, but it must receive all passenger traffic because transferring between those two airports would be a major problem. Anyone who's ever been to Bangkok knows the traffic issues involved. While Don Muang operates all passenger flights, Suvarnabhumi must be repaired and expanded. The final goal must be, as planned, to have all traffic at the same airport.

Amazing Thailand

Bangkok

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

Passenger safety must be planners' top priority

As a foreign tourist who travels in and out of Bangkok several times each year, I have been following closely the sad saga of Suvarnabhumi. Some people suggest that two airports would be inconvenient but many large cities, such as London, New York, operate several airports successfully. Why not Bangkok?

I notice that domestic flights serving mainly Thai people soon may be using Don Muang. On the other hand, international flights carrying foreign travellers still may be using the new but ever-more-dangerous Suvarnabhumi. This has given me pause to think: would I rather be inconvenienced, or be put in danger?

Nervous Flyer

Pathum Thani

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

Ex-PM stoking the fires at home in hopes of a return

Re: "Thaksin bringing his message home", Editorial, February 6.

May I commend you for quite the best editorial I have read in the press of late. One of the many good things to come of Thaksin's demise is that the English language press has truly found its head. You focus on a very apposite point, Thaksin's desire to communicate with his grassroots support in the hope of an eventual return to power and the dictatorial throne he so misses.

You address this with vigour and purpose sending clear messages to many involved parties concerning Thaksin and the many instruments that dance to his bidding. I fear that the vernacular Thai press you refer to will not cooperate and the government lacks the sophistication to deal with the spin and circus unlimited money can buy. So quite where this will end is anyone's guess. I fear that the job of "de-Thaksination" will be by no means complete by September. So we are left with a stark choice: more of the generals or an inexorable slide back to a much worse form of absolute government.

Dr John Symons

Bangkok

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

'Time' interview provided a lesson in softball journalism

Re: "What Thaksin told his compatriots through 'Time'", Opinion, February 7.

Tulsathit Taptim's quotes from Time's interview with the ex-premier demonstrates the "soft ball" questioning technique the mass media in the United States has devolved to. The mass media is in the infotainment business, and so plays hand in glove with the political class to protect its media monopolies, which are clearly not in the public interest.

Time: "The junta also accuses you and your government of corruption."

As though this were just a matter of opinion. Even if the Time reporter had never heard of Thailand before, a distinct possibility, in preparation for an interview with the ex-premier a little research would be in order, and the most cursory research would reveal the extent of corruption under Thaksin.

Time: "You have criticised the junta for muzzling the media, but you were accused of doing the same."

Again, asked as though there were room to argue about Thaksin's intimidation of the media. The most cursory preparation for the interview would have demonstrated the same.

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

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

Police chief dismissal unlikely to result in meaningful change

Re: "Besieged police chief ousted", News, February 6. As usual, everything that the Thai government does is superficial, no matter who is in charge. News reports say that Police General Kowit Watana has been "dismissed" by Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont and has been transferred to the Prime Minister's Office. His replacement is Police General Seripisut Temiyavej.

First of all, if Kowit did something wrong he should be dismissed - as in fired - and not "transferred" to an inactive post at the Prime Minister's Office. Is the Prime Minister's Office some kind of refugee camp where many dismissed government officials get to "retire?" Why is it that Thai government officials are almost never really punished, as in prosecuted, fined and jailed for their crimes? Why are they always "transferred" to inactive posts and still able to draw their salaries and enjoy their benefits without having any responsibilities and for doing nothing? Kowit and Seripisut are two of the same. By replacing one with the other, Surayud is merely changing the gravy without changing the meat or how it is cooked. We call this practice changing the soup or drink that is used to help swallow the medicine but not the medicine itself. Does anyone believe that this kind of superficial action will be able to treat a sick person? How about a sick country?

Bangkokian

Bangkok

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

Constitution only as strong as the citizens supporting it

I haven't read the earlier Thai constitution, but methinks it wasn't its wording, but rather its dismissal that caused problems. Sentences can be rewritten, but how can you rewrite human nature that lusts for money and power? When the military took over in the most recent coup, they immediately called for rewriting the constitution - seemingly because that's what coup leaders traditionally do.

Was the earlier constitution so riddled with faults as to require a complete overhaul? I doubt it. More likely, the power-lusting and self-enriching leaders of the Thaksin era simply walked around it when convenient. If there were faults in the previous constitution, let popularly voted-in legislators fix it. We can rewrite the constitution a hundred times in as many years, but as long as the Thai people get duped in to voting for a shyster, nothing much is going to change.

Ken Albertsen

Chiang Rai

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

Benefits to be had by skewing research to disprove warming

Re: Why get hot and bothered about global warming? Opinion, February 5.

Ron Goodden from Atlanta, Georgia, has with astonishing originality and uncanny timing, enlightened the readers with another letter regarding "hot button" issues.

On the other hand, I read in the Guardian on line news today that if one happens to be a scientist or an economist they are in line for a US$10,000 (Bt342,481) payment for their views on global warming. For those who may have missed it: "The American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an Exxon Mobil-funded think tank with close links to the Bush administration, has offered payments of $10,000 to scientists and economists for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC0) or debunking the 'myth' of global warming."

Entertaining reading Goodden, keep those opinion pieces coming.

Mr Bill

Bangkok