The picture Burmese generals didn't manage to censor

[Ryokan]

Information out of Burma has been tight. There are rumors about hundreds of dead monks, and other rumors about massacres at Buddhist temples. But nothing is certain.

This image, however, was part of a video that was taken by the Pazondaung-river in the outskirts of Rangoon yesterday and smuggled out of Burma. This is an image the authorities of Burma does not want you to see.

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n135/Ryokan76/DeadMonk.jpg

I think the image speaks for itself.

[Mooseman]

Says it all

[slingblade]

It doesn't speak.

It weeps aloud.

:(

[kerikiwi]

I wonder if I could ever be as brave as those people.
I'm just glad I have never had to be.

[Dancing David]

More sadness, now I government will blame others. Our (US) government probably supported them to to fight communism. Their current stances is "It's the fault of the chinese."

[Rob Lister]

Yea, it's our fault

[Miss Anthrope]

I wonder if I could ever be as brave as those people.
I'm just glad I have never had to be.

Yes, that sums much of it up for me, too. What a horrible waste of human life. Butchers!!!

[Safe-Keeper]

Sadness.

[Skepticybe]

There is no need to censor these pictures, except as a precaution against war-crimes prosecution in the distant future. The burmese could call a news conference and publicly release video documentation of the murders as they were being committed without fear of any meaningful action from the world, especially from the US!

Has anyone seen the video of the Japanese reporter being shot by a Burmese soldier, intentionally, from nearly point-blank range, then being left to die? That was a blatant murder, caught on tape, and nobody seems to even be talking about it.

I think we're going to see a lot of this, probably until some thug commits an atrocity so egregious that the world forgets about Iraq. And that means a lot more than just killing "his own people", which now earns the thug(s) little more than a press release from the State Department.

I don't want to derail this thread, but I think this is one of the unintentional consequences (in part at least) of the war in Iraq. There is no longer a government that can be expected to intervene on behalf of an oppressed foreign population no matter how severe the situation. If it happened today, I think Hitler would get a free run at the Jews and all of Europe, at least until someone does something really foolish like attacking our base in Hawaii.

[Minadin]

That photographer was Kenji Nagai, and there are a lot of people talking about him, actually.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2550369.ece

Other News Results for Kenji Nagai (http://news.google.com/news?q=Kenji+Nagai&gbv=2&hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=news_result&resnum=1&ct=title)

It's a sad story all around, for Mr. Nagai, and for the Burmese people. Unfortunately, the U.S. seems to be "damed if we do, damned if we don't" when it comes to the affairs of other countries around the world. We're told to mind our own business when we do try to help or change things, we're considered cold-hearted and selfish if we do nothing. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to continue to give aid and support to the people there, however we can, but in a non-military action.

Things we might be able to do without causing too much rancor internationally include:

-Food, medical, communications supplies to the people as humanitarian aid, perhaps as an air drop operation?
-Lend our support in word, deed and dollars to the neighboring countries there should they choose to intervene - including China.
-Keep this issue on the forefront of the international community, keep the pressure on the government of Myanmar while stirring others to justifiable action.

I'm not really sure what else we can, or really should, do at the present. The people there really do deserve our support and the support of the international community. But I'm not sure that the US is the right country to take the lead role in this situation.

[WildCat]

But I'm not sure that the US is the right country to take the lead role in this situation.
Which country do you think should take the lead role in this?

Our (US) government probably supported them to to fight communism.
No.

[Radwaste]

Unfortunately, the U.S. seems to be "damed if we do, damned if we don't" when it comes to the affairs of other countries around the world. We're told to mind our own business when we do try to help or change things, we're considered cold-hearted and selfish if we do nothing. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to continue to give aid and support to the people there, however we can, but in a non-military action.

Things we might be able to do without causing too much rancor internationally include:

-Food, medical, communications supplies to the people as humanitarian aid, perhaps as an air drop operation?
-Lend our support in word, deed and dollars to the neighboring countries there should they choose to intervene - including China.
-Keep this issue on the forefront of the international community, keep the pressure on the government of Myanmar while stirring others to justifiable action.

I'm not really sure what else we can, or really should, do at the present. The people there really do deserve our support and the support of the international community. But I'm not sure that the US is the right country to take the lead role in this situation.

The US has done the "hands-off, send food" thing before. Without troops to see it distributed fairly, local thugs take everything.

We forget that most of the nations in the UN are "kleptocracies". There is no moral background suggesting to them that their peasants are actually worth something.

[Skepticybe]

OK I overstated/exaggerated a bit. Yeah a few people are talking about it, but I'm upset at US media who haven't given this story, especially the videotaped murder of a reporter, the attention it deserves. Even the picture in the OP above should be top story at all of the major news outlets. Instead it's on the back pages, if at all.

I agree with you minadin. We should do more, but there is not much we can do at this point. Sadly we've lost our bite and our bark. Regimes like this are free to do as they please as long as they keep it within their own borders.

Wildcat: Who should take the lead role? Ideally I think it should be the US because we should stand against oppression to the extent we can, even if it means enduring the criticism of the world. I'm embarrassed that we have such a history of looking the other way as long as our "interests" weren't threatened. IMO, brutal oppressions such as this do eventually threaten our interests. I think most of our major wars can be attributed, in part, to us shrugging off early oppression as "none of our business" or "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

[Minadin]

Which country do you think should take the lead role in this?

I'm not entirely sure, to be honest. Perhaps Japan, as their largest trading partner, or India, as the most populous democracy in the area (or anywhere else, for that matter). It might be good for several of the neighboring countries, members of ASEAN, for instance, to get together and show their unilateral opposition to the situation in Burma. Whoever takes the lead ought to have our support, though. And I'm not sure that the response necessarily has to be military / violent in nature. The Burmese people seem fairly united in their thought that the protests and civil disobedience remain peaceful, at least on their part.

If that is their desire we might do well to respect it, and if that is the case, perhaps Japan would be the best choice, as they are a peace-loving people who have a real greivance here, in addition to the disgust that everyone else shares at the actions of the military junta in Rangoon. Also, they're in a good position to enact effective non-military responses such as economic measures.

[LostAngeles]

From what I've read, the pressure is being put on China (at least by the U.K.) in order for China to put pressure on the Burmese government to stop this ********.

I've never quite understood why the world, in the face of such things can't stand up and demand a stop. Seriously, Saudi Arabia, the U.S., Belgium, Argentina, Paupa New Guinea and everyone else who isn't Burma can't all stand up and demand a stop?

How applying pressure and insisting that killings cease is not practical escapes me.

[fuelair]

Listening to Public radio/noticing the reaction of Burmese"leaders" to major UN rep's visit I think I am safe in saying they do not give a flying fornication about the attitude of the outside world as no one is stepping up to crush their butts like they were nothing more than roaches crawling under the world's feet. Which they are.

In all fairness, I have not given a flying fornication over the desires of a UN rep for a long time either - what with them being pointless and all - but I do not kill large groups of people either.

[geni]

I'm impressed. A lesser dictatorship would have lost it's nerve and started shooting the public protests. But no the Burmese generals wait for the monks to play their hand then moves in at night and neutralises them.

Obviously there were a couple of mistake a little info leaks out a japanese photographer shot dead.

[Carnivore]

Which country do you think should take the lead role in this?


Why does it have to be a country?

I know a bloke named John, who is a mercenary. Among many other things in his career he has been employed in Burma to do things that the Burmese Government does not approve of.

We are living in something of a golden age of private armies. What about an international fundraising appeal to hire military contractors to take direct action against the Burmese military regime?

Bono and Sir Bob Geldof could have a big concert called Merc Aid.

[geni]

I've never quite understood why the world, in the face of such things can't stand up and demand a stop. Seriously, Saudi Arabia,

Saudi Arabia is hardly going to support a pro democracy movement. More likely to be takeing notes.


the U.S.,


Has done so


Belgium,


Will likely want to act through the EU. France will be less than happy about that.


Argentina


May have done (can't find out one way or another) but who would care?


Paupa New Guinea

May have done (can't find out one way or another) but who would care?


see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2007_Burmese_anti-government_protests

[geni]

Why does it have to be a country?

I know a bloke named John, who is a mercenary. Among many other things in his career he has been employed in Burma to do things that the Burmese Government does not approve of.

We are living in something of a golden age of private armies. What about an international fundraising appeal to hire military contractors to take direct action against the Burmese military regime?

Bono and Sir Bob Geldof could have a big concert called Merc Aid.

Burma has a standing army of over 400K and a budget in the billions (sources differ as to the exact figure).

[Ryokan]

Burma is a country that is close to my heart, and I have Burmese friends and ties to the Burmese rebels.

I was a NATO-soldier in Bosnia, and saw and heard about terrible things, but nothing close to what my Burmese friends tell me about what's going on their country. Although the picture I posted in the OP is absolutely heart wrenching on so many levels, that's not the first picture I've seen of dead monks. My closest Burmese friend who's a refugee here in Norway, was a freedom fighter in the jungles of Burma, and he took lots of pictures. Although the monks have been very careful to stay out of politics (until now), some monks did support the rebels, staid with their camps in the jungle and paid the price with their lives.

There is no need to censor these pictures, except as a precaution against war-crimes prosecution in the distant future. The burmese could call a news conference and publicly release video documentation of the murders as they were being committed without fear of any meaningful action from the world, especially from the US!

Sad but very true, brother. The situation in Burma has been bad, very bad, for decades, but no one seems to care. It's a forgotten tragedy.

In that way, the Buddhist monk uprising has been extremely succesful - it has gotten the Burmese situation on the front pages at least for a few days. Although the sitation right now is horrible for the monks and the Burmese people, there's also hope. Will the world finally notice what's going on and do something about it?

Things we might be able to do without causing too much rancor internationally include:

-Food, medical, communications supplies to the people as humanitarian aid, perhaps as an air drop operation?
-Lend our support in word, deed and dollars to the neighboring countries there should they choose to intervene - including China.
-Keep this issue on the forefront of the international community, keep the pressure on the government of Myanmar while stirring others to justifiable action.

I'm not really sure what else we can, or really should, do at the present. The people there really do deserve our support and the support of the international community. But I'm not sure that the US is the right country to take the lead role in this situation.

There are things you personally can do as well. Support the Red Cross and Amnesty International. They're doing an absolutely terrific job, and most of my Burmese friends would either be dead or in jail if it hadn't been for them. Communication with friends and family is also possible through the Red Cross, as they have (although limited) access to Burmese prisons.

Wildcat: Who should take the lead role? Ideally I think it should be the US because we should stand against oppression to the extent we can, even if it means enduring the criticism of the world.

Ideally, the US is the country with the most resources to do something about it. However, the US forces do seem to be a bit overextended at the moment.

The US used to support the rebels quite heavily, but that support has dwindled in the last years. Some because they're fighting a costly war, and some because they're trying to get good relations with China.

I'm not entirely sure, to be honest. Perhaps Japan, as their largest trading partner, or India, as the most populous democracy in the area (or anywhere else, for that matter).

Japan is heavily involved with the rebels, both with finance and with material aid. They also receive refugees from Burma, even though Japan isn't big on immigration. With the rebels, Japan is seen as the good guys. This is not a view shared by the general population, however - the authorities are pretty anti-Japan, and use Japan in propoganda, similar to what North Korea does.

India is also a big possibility, and the rebels are hoping they will get more involved. But will India risk damaging their relationship with China further?

I've never quite understood why the world, in the face of such things can't stand up and demand a stop. Seriously, Saudi Arabia, the U.S., Belgium, Argentina, Paupa New Guinea and everyone else who isn't Burma can't all stand up and demand a stop?

How applying pressure and insisting that killings cease is not practical escapes me.

I'm with you there, sister. It's quite unfathomable.

[Carnivore]

Burma has a standing army of over 400K and a budget in the billions (sources differ as to the exact figure).

But how many Generals?

[geni]

oh and for the skeptics in the audence the clip comes from a video which can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_wVOdemFgg&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eko%2Dhtike%2Eblogspot%2Eco m%2F

Fakeing that would be impressive.

further screenshots at

http://bp1.blogger.com/_63uOqYlI5Kk/RwCQdzU0SmI/AAAAAAAAAk4/wB2fRufUafE/s1600-h/monk+3.jpg
http://bp3.blogger.com/_63uOqYlI5Kk/RwCQKTU0SlI/AAAAAAAAAkw/8tdJ4oEMsRI/s1600-h/monk+2.jpg
http://bp1.blogger.com/_63uOqYlI5Kk/RwCQFzU0SkI/AAAAAAAAAko/wr1M6qMEl4E/s1600-h/monk+1.jpg

I'm not sure it is posible to confirm the date or context of the pics though.

[fuelair]

Burma has a standing army of over 400K and a budget in the billions (sources differ as to the exact figure).How's their air force, large explosives, missles count?:D

[geni]

But how many Generals?

No idea. Doesn't really matter. Mercenies can only really overthrow goverments when the centeral goverment is fundimentaly weak. Does not appear to be the case in burma.

[geni]

How's their air force, large explosives, missles count?:D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myanmar_Air_Force#Fighters.2FInterceptors

[Ryokan]

I'm impressed. A lesser dictatorship would have lost it's nerve and started shooting the public protests. But no the Burmese generals wait for the monks to play their hand then moves in at night and neutralises them.

Obviously there were a couple of mistake a little info leaks out a japanese photographer shot dead.

The monk uprising was a very bold move, because that was one of the power bases of the authorities, religion. They have used religion as an excuse to stay in power, 'protecting tradition and traditional values'. Burma is very much a Buddhist dictatorship, and the minorities, like the Christian Chins, are harassed and treated like second rate citizens.

So the Burmese authorites had a huge dilemma when the monks started their protests. They couldn't ignore them, because they were challenging their power, and they couldn't kill them like they've done with protestors before. So they compromised, they took them when as few a people as possible could see their direct actions, they took monks at night, drove them out of the city and killed them. They raided monasteries and killed them. They didn't kill many, just enough to send a message to the rest of the monks; stay out of politics or face the consequences.

But will it work? I don't think so, and I think the minute the monk uprising began, the authorities had a huge problem. For every monk they kill, a dozen soldiers lay down their arms and two civillians join the rebels. The monks are paying with their lives, but it was a win-win gamble, although a very costly one.

[Ryokan]

No idea. Doesn't really matter. Mercenies can only really overthrow goverments when the centeral goverment is fundimentaly weak. Does not appear to be the case in burma.

Luckily, John Rambo (http://imdb.com/title/tt0462499/) is on his way!

[Carnivore]

No idea. Doesn't really matter. Mercenies can only really overthrow goverments when the centeral goverment is fundimentaly weak. Does not appear to be the case in burma.

Central governments can be weakened by killing the people that make them up.

The military junta of Myanmar has accepted that force is a legitimate tool of politics. They choose to wear the uniform of their country and give orders for the forced labour, torture or death of their fellow citizens. My feeling is that if you use violence against others, you implicitly accept the risk of violence against yourself.

There are times when it may be inappropriate for a nation state to take action against a dictatorship and yet individuals within that country and elsewhere can have a moral right to rebel or intervene.

I'm sure it would never happen (and if it did would fall foul of anti terrorism laws,) but suppose I ran into someone collecting for charity at a supermarket entrance. The charity they are collecting for is a fund to send a sniper team after Senior General Than Shwe. I'd put in a fiver and consider it more likely to some good for the people of Burma than donating the same amount to the Red Cross or writing to my MP.

I would much rather see a hundred dead Burmese Generals than thousands of dead Burmese conscripts and/or rebels.

[Normal Dude]

It is heart-wrenching that things like this are going on everyday, in many places, and people/governments hardly bat an eye. :(

[geni]

Central governments can be weakened by killing the people that make them up.

Only when there are a very small number of key people


The military junta of Myanmar has accepted that force is a legitimate tool of politics. They choose to wear the uniform of their country and give orders for the forced labour, torture or death of their fellow citizens. My feeling is that if you use violence against others, you implicitly accept the risk of violence against yourself.

There are times when it may be inappropriate for a nation state to take action against a dictatorship and yet individuals within that country and elsewhere can have a moral right to rebel or intervene.

I'm sure it would never happen (and if it did would fall foul of anti terrorism laws,) but suppose I ran into someone collecting for charity at a supermarket entrance. The charity they are collecting for is a fund to send a sniper team after Senior General Than Shwe. I'd put in a fiver and consider it more likely to some good for the people of Burma than donating the same amount to the Red Cross or writing to my MP.


It is hard to assinate a leader at the best of times otherwise Pervez Musharraf would be very dead. As a foreigner in a police state?

[geni]

But will it work? I don't think so, and I think the minute the monk uprising began, the authorities had a huge problem. For every monk they kill, a dozen soldiers lay down their arms and two civillians join the rebels. The monks are paying with their lives, but it was a win-win gamble, although a very costly one.

The monks have stoped marching without the monks is is 1988 again and everyone in burma knows how that went. As a result the wider protests have stoped. The authorities have won. In the short and perhaps medium term.

[geni]

India is also a big possibility, and the rebels are hoping they will get more involved. But will India risk damaging their relationship with China further?

India views china as a rivial not as a potential friend.

[a_unique_person]

I don't want to derail this thread, but I think this is one of the unintentional consequences (in part at least) of the war in Iraq. There is no longer a government that can be expected to intervene on behalf of an oppressed foreign population no matter how severe the situation.

Was that ever the case?

[Carnivore]

It is hard to assinate a leader at the best of times otherwise Pervez Musharraf would be very dead. As a foreigner in a police state?

You are quite right. Certainly there would be many practical problems if anyone tried to arrange a publicly funded mass assassination of the the top tier of government of a foreign military dictatorship in the real world. ;)

[Ryokan]

The monks have stoped marching without the monks is is 1988 again and everyone in burma knows how that went. As a result the wider protests have stoped. The authorities have won. In the short and perhaps medium term.

Protesting in the streets may be over with, but the monk uprising continues. It's just not as apparent as it was.

"We cannot turn back now. Whether it takes a month, a year or more, we will not stop." With his russet-red robes pulled around his knees, rocking back and forth on a low, wooden stool, the senior monk spoke quietly but determinedly.

http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=51,5058,0,0,1,0

India views china as a rivial not as a potential friend.

Indeed, which is the reason why they don't want the relationship with China deteriorating. Still, we'll see. India seems to be the best bet, alongside economical aid from Japan.

[geni]

Protesting in the streets may be over with, but the monk uprising continues. It's just not as apparent as it was.



http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=51,5058,0,0,1,0


Words are not a problem in the short term. the monks are in effect under house arrest. They can say what they like they have been neutralised for the time being.

[geni]

You are quite right. Certainly there would be many practical problems if anyone tried to arrange a publicly funded mass assassination of the the top tier of government of a foreign military dictatorship in the real world. ;)

Eh just buy enough drugs. Drug lords do not like a strong centeral goverment.

[Ryokan]

Words are not a problem in the short term. the monks are in effect under house arrest. They can say what they like they have been neutralised for the time being.

Yes, but you need to understand how important the monks are to Burmese society. It's one of the most important institutions in the country, and the authorities have used them in their political agenda. It may sound unbelievable, but the current regime actually has quite a lot of support in the Burmese population, among conservative ethnic Burmese who have gained a lot from those in power.

But one of the things that makes them conservative is the huge amount of respect they have for Buddhist monks and the monasteries. Now the authorities have attacked that institution and killed monks! The monks knew it would probably come to this, and that was their gamble. It's like George Bush rounding up evangelical priests and killing them! The authorities have effectively attacked their own power base, and thus have weakened their support among the Burmese population considerably, gaining support for the rebels and increasing the possibility of a popular uprising or even a revolution.

[WildCat]

But how many Generals?
The army has a $7 billion budget, and lots of new hardware from China. They also have 60 years experience in counter-insurgency, and are considered one of the best armies in the region. This won't be like unseating a 2-bit African warlord.

[Skepticybe]

Burma is a country that is close to my heart, and I have Burmese friends and ties to the Burmese rebels.
Sorry for the glibness of my original post... this situation is terrible. IMO, this is exactly the kind of situation where the president of the US should be able to pull some clout, with the unspoken threat of military force to back it up if needed. And the US media is just as bad; this should be the big story, not Britney's latest divorce drama. More and more, life reminds me of Idiocracy. :(

I wish your friends and their people the best.

Was that ever the case?
Prior to the downing of the choppers in Mogadishu, I think the US had the ability to intervene if necessary. This persisted, though weakened, until we bungled things beyond recognition in Iraq. Now not only do we not "dare" to use the military, we don't even have the courage to stand up to murderous thugs anymore.

What I think people don't understand is that people suffering at the hands of their rulers is our interest. Besides being fellow humans, deserving of the same rights as you and me, our wartime foes have often started as another government doing things that "are none of our business". Remember we ignored the Taliban in Afganistan to our own peril, and now we're ignoring Sudan, Burma, China and others. I fear that the true disaster of Iraq won't be realized until the next war.

[Wolfman]

As posted elsewhere, I've visited Myanmar, and have two very close friends there (both of whom were involved in the protests). Myanmar is one of the most beautiful and fascinating countries I've ever been to, with a rich historical/cultural legacy.

It is hard for me to see any real short-term solution or resolution to this situation; and perhaps that is part of the problem with much of the analysis that we see going on. We come from cultures where we expect immediate results.

My two friends phoned me again a few hours ago; they are back at home, waiting to see what happens. When I asked them if they expect to see any big changes coming from this (either positive or negative), they said no. They said they believe the main protests are pretty much over, and that they don't think the gov't will crack down much more than it already has (ie. it may imprison some key figures, but not kill many more people).

But they also said that the rest of the world seems to be missing the point; that for the first time, support of the gov't (by military troops, and by some members of the populace) has always been based on the gov't's close ties to Buddhism. It is a dictatorship based very much on religion.

By seeing the monks protesting against the gov't, and by seeing the gov't attacking the monks, that claim to religion-based legitimacy has been hopelessly destroyed. And slowly, as this realization permeates through the country, it will result in undermining the support for the government. There are already rumors of soldiers who are deserting, or planning to desert, or expressing anger against their leaders. Among the civilian populace, there is almost nobody at all speaking up for the gov't.

My friends said that it will take time -- perhaps a long time -- but that far from feeling that the protests failed, they feel that they were very successful. Not only in showing all the people of Myanmar (particularly the soldiers, who are for the most part very devout Buddhists) the truth of their gov't's "respect" for Buddhism, but in doing so with relatively little loss of life. It is the first step towards what they hope will eventually be the defeat of this military dictatorship.

[Ryokan]

Was that ever the case?

Bosnia and Kosovo?

[Pardalis]

My friends said that it will take time -- perhaps a long time -- but that far from feeling that the protests failed, they feel that they were very successful. Not only in showing all the people of Myanmar (particularly the soldiers, who are for the most part very devout Buddhists) the truth of their gov't's "respect" for Buddhism, but in doing so with relatively little loss of life. It is the first step towards what they hope will eventually be the defeat of this military dictatorship.

And they got the world's attention.

[Ryokan]

By seeing the monks protesting against the gov't, and by seeing the gov't attacking the monks, that claim to religion-based legitimacy has been hopelessly destroyed. And slowly, as this realization permeates through the country, it will result in undermining the support for the government. There are already rumors of soldiers who are deserting, or planning to desert, or expressing anger against their leaders. Among the civilian populace, there is almost nobody at all speaking up for the gov't.

My friends said that it will take time -- perhaps a long time -- but that far from feeling that the protests failed, they feel that they were very successful. Not only in showing all the people of Myanmar (particularly the soldiers, who are for the most part very devout Buddhists) the truth of their gov't's "respect" for Buddhism, but in doing so with relatively little loss of life. It is the first step towards what they hope will eventually be the defeat of this military dictatorship.

Exactly!

ETA: Buddhistchannel.tv reporting on mutiny among Burmese soldiers. (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=51,5031,0,0,1,0)

[LostAngeles]

Saudi Arabia is hardly going to support a pro democracy movement. ...snip...

I was just arbitrarily listing off countries. It bothers me how callous we as a species can be towards the suffering of others.

Until, of course, I get distracted by a shiny, new, electronic device...

[a_unique_person]

Bosnia and Kosovo?

A UN action, that was supported by the US. I was talking about the involvement of the US directly. Even in WWII, it stayed right out of the conflict until Japan attacked.

[lolurigeller]

The army has a $7 billion budget, and lots of new hardware from China. They also have 60 years experience in counter-insurgency, and are considered one of the best armies in the region. This won't be like unseating a 2-bit African warlord.

I know this is going sound pretty bad but the situation is more complicated than people think, the paradox is without that strong military. The country will fall into instability especially with ethnic insurgents, Burma would fall apart much like Iraq did after the U.S invaded.

And while the burmese government aren't exactly great people, neither are the insurgents which managed to nearly take over the entire country a couple decades ago, the same kind of raping pillaging and evil nasty stuff would be perpetrated but by a different uniform. This is a real problem that even Aung Suu Kyi were to face if she were to be the head of a democratic burmese government, they'd still need a strong army that would be able to to preform those tasks.

[Foolmewunz]

This is an Asian problem, and I wish Asia would fix it. The US counter-measures are totally ineffective with Japan, China, and India all competing to buy as much as they can from Myanmar. At the last two ASEAN conferences, they even made public statements telling the EU and North America to keep their noses out of Myanmar!

As someone remarked on CNN yesterday, Myanmar is like Southeast Asia's dirty boorish neighbor at the end of the cul-de-sac that no one wants to talk to about cleaning up the garbage in the yard, keeping the music down, and or asking their kids to stop tormenting other families' pets. Now, maybe, someone will do something about it. And that means CHINA. Thailand, Bangladesh, Laos? Nothing to say, really. Nothing that the generals would listen to, at any rate. India might have some say, but again, India's a democracy and would rather argue politics than actually do anything. The southern ASEAN countries (Malaysia and Indonesia) enjoy the Myanmar conundrum facing the west. They are the authors of most of the statements telling the west to stay out of Myanmar.

No, the 900 pound gorilla over here, and particularly as they share a border, is China. (Not that they're going to do anything from a military side - the shared border is far too distant from the centers of power. Besides, since when has China been against crushing popular uprisings or religious factions?)

In the interim, though.... the people are hungry, and the head creep marries off his youngest creepette last year at a gold trimmed and champagne catered ceremony, where she flaunted the estimated fifty million USD (that's $50,000,000) worth of diamonds and other jewelry that they received as wedding presents.

This past few months, the monks, who beg from house to house for food, were noting that while they used to be able to get enough food to live off of for a day in a single visit to a single household, it was now 'costing' them 20/25 visits. No one has enough to eat!

Combine all of this, and in the near term it could be possible that either the Generals accede and start plans to hand over the country, properly, to democratic rule, or face growing pressure. The desertions and possible army uprising are real, but the factions supporting the leading generals can easily co-opt those sentiments into internecine disputes. One report out of a friend who has strong ties there is that they anticipate a minor bloodbath in the military this week (likely behind the scenes but similar to what they did to the monks... "disappear" a few trouble-makers and hope that everyone gets the message).

There's purportedly at least one General who is seen as a direct threat to Than Shwe who will probably be squeezed out or even put under house arrest. (Generals tend not to kill off other generals. It gives the others ones ideas!) But let's not expect some leading liberal light to come out of the competing Generals. The one who's head is on the block is being criticized by the conservates (read: supporters of current gov't) as not taking action against the monks sooner (in a move to consolidate his own power and show decisiveness)! So there ain't a whole bunch of sweethearts at the top of the military pecking order.

The important thing, IMHO, is not just getting word out of Myanmar, but getting word back in. I don't know what's going on in the west, but there are numerous (some even a little violent) demonstrations going on in other Asian cities. If the staunch buddhists in Myanmar get word that they are getting an audience, they will likely continue. And if they continue, they will mobilize more people. These are buddhists. They take a very fatalistic view of life, and while it's a common misconception that they don't fear death because of a belief in reincarnation, there is still a strong belief that there are some things worth dying for.

[lolurigeller]

In the interim, though.... the people are hungry, and the head creep marries off his youngest creepette last year at a gold trimmed and champagne catered ceremony, where she flaunted the estimated fifty million USD (that's $50,000,000) worth of diamonds and other jewelry that they received as wedding presents.


i'm usually not suprised, but this bit of news really caught me off guard. Jesus that's alot of money.

[geni]

This past few months, the monks, who beg from house to house for food, were noting that while they used to be able to get enough food to live off of for a day in a single visit to a single household, it was now 'costing' them 20/25 visits. No one has enough to eat!


And as north Korea and a Zimbabwe show that doesn't have much effect on those in power as long as they can feed the army and burma has enough oil to be reasonably sure they can.

[timhau]

I find it strange that there are numerous mentions of the US in this thread, but France is mentioned only once. Yet it's not an American corporation but the French Total Oil that is developing the off-shore gas field in co-operation with the junta.

[WildCat]

Now, maybe, someone will do something about it. And that means CHINA.
well China certainly has experience in these matters, is this the solution you want?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/4/newsid_2496000/2496277.stm

[WildCat]

A UN action, that was supported by the US.
Kosovo was a NATO effort (not UN at all), and IIRC the US had to drag the rest of NATO kicking and screamimg to the place. Europe, quite frankly, didn't give a damn about the genocide taking place within it.

[Ryokan]

These are buddhists. They take a very fatalistic view of life, and while it's a common misconception that they don't fear death because of a belief in reincarnation, there is still a strong belief that there are some things worth dying for.

Excuse me, fatalistic?

These are Theravada Buddhists, they don't believe in reincarnation.

[Darth Rotor]

A UN action, that was supported by the US. I was talking about the involvement of the US directly. Even in WWII, it stayed right out of the conflict until Japan attacked.

Nope.

Tell that to the sailors and merchant seamen in the North Atlantic, 1940-1941.

Care to try again?

DR

[Undesired Walrus]

I have no doubt this picture will go down in photographic history in the same way the Gun-To-The-Temple and the Naked-Children-Running-From-Napalm pictures did from its neighbour, Vietnam.

It sums up so much about this world, and is the epitome of a terrible beauty.

[geni]

I find it strange that there are numerous mentions of the US in this thread, but France is mentioned only once. Yet it's not an American corporation but the French Total Oil that is developing the off-shore gas field in co-operation with the junta.

France has been known to take action in the case of it's former colonies but that is about it.

[Foolmewunz]

well China certainly has experience in these matters, is this the solution you want?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/4/newsid_2496000/2496277.stm

Why would you even question that? I alluded to China's crappy track record in this area in my post...
Besides, since when has China been against crushing popular uprisings or religious factions?

[Foolmewunz]

Excuse me, fatalistic?

These are Theravada Buddhists, they don't believe in reincarnation.

I guess I'm having trouble communicating... I'm being misinterpreted in two separate posts.

I live with a Theravada Buddhist, and I know that they do not believe in reincarnation. I did say "common misconception", didn't I?

Fatalistic and "belief in reincarnation" do not mean the same thing. And the local Lao/Northern Thai/Burmese do have a lot of traditional beliefs in an afterlife, ghosts, spirits, etc...

Great Avatar, by the way!

How strong is the coverage in the news in Europe and North America? It is still prime news on CNN and BBC, here.

[pipelineaudio]

Amazing, nothing bad can happen, anywhere in the world without America getting the blame for it...Conversely, nothing GOOD can happen, anywhere in the world, even in America, without making sure Americans don't get credit for it

rah rah rah

[quixotecoyote]

Amazing, nothing bad can happen, anywhere in the world without America getting the blame for it...Conversely, nothing GOOD can happen, anywhere in the world, even in America, without making sure Americans don't get credit for it

rah rah rah

I weep for the poor Americans. So put upon in comparison.

[Dancing David]

Which country do you think should take the lead role in this?


No.

tricky question:

Did we support the heroin trade of the Nationalist Chinese in the area (to fight 'Red Chine') now known as Myanmar and did our government provide support to the forces that later became the ruling junta. One is fairly well documented, the other is not. So there is a possibility.

[Dancing David]

Kosovo was a NATO effort (not UN at all), and IIRC the US had to drag the rest of NATO kicking and screamimg to the place. Europe, quite frankly, didn't give a damn about the genocide taking place within it.
Quite true, they stalled and then they dragged, I guess they still hold the Ottomans in low regard.

[WildCat]

tricky question:

Did we support the heroin trade of the Nationalist Chinese in the area (to fight 'Red Chine') now known as Myanmar and did our government provide support to the forces that later became the ruling junta. One is fairly well documented, the other is not. So there is a possibility.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Please provide evidence for your claims. I'm looking forward to your tortured attempt to link the US to the current military junta, I usually don't get to see that outside of the Conspiracy Theories section.

[dudalb]

I just read about Burma's Ambassador to the UN saying that the criticism of the Burmese Government is a form of "neo Colonalism". I think we have the most outrageous statement of the week,folks.
But nothing will be done,sadly.
And the attempts to blame the US for this is incredibly silly. I can see why some non Americans would want to do this,but the Joy some Americans have in blaming the US for everything astounds me.

[geni]

I just read about Burma's Ambassador to the UN saying that the criticism of the Burmese Government is a form of "neo Colonalism". I think we have the most outrageous statement of the week,folks.
But nothing will be done,sadly.
And the attempts to blame the US for this is incredibly silly. I can see why some non Americans would want to do this,but the Joy some Americans have in blaming the US for everything astounds me.

Neo Colonalism? So how hard do we have to critise a country to bring it back under the rule of the crown?

[Dancing David]

I have no idea what you're talking about. Please provide evidence for your claims. I'm looking forward to your tortured attempt to link the US to the current military junta, I usually don't get to see that outside of the Conspiracy Theories section.

I said that the second one was a strech, did you think the first one was a strech too?

Did the US government support the growing of poppies and sale of heroin in the area of Burma to fight Red China? (Nationalist Chinese forces post 1949)

[Dancing David]

http://www.drugtext.org/library/books/McCoy/book/50.htm

U.S. military and political activities had played a significant role in shaping these developments. Although opium production continued to increase in Burma and Thailand, there were no major changes in the structure of the traffic during the 1960s. Still enjoying tacit CIA support for their counterinsurgency work, Nationalist Chinese (KMT) military caravans continued to move almost all of Burma's opium exports into northern Thailand, where they were purchased by a Chinese syndicate for domestic distribution and export to Hong Kong or Malaysia. The Shan national revolutionary movement offered a brief challenge to KMT hegemony over the opium trade, but after their most powerful leader was defeated in the 1967 Opium War, the Shan threat evaporated.
After the 1967 Opium War, the KMT solidified its control over the BurmaThailand opium trade. Almost none of the seven hundred tons of raw opium harvested annually in Burma's Shan and Kachin states reaches world markets through any of Burma's ports: instead, it is packed across the rugged Shan hills by mule caravan to the tri-border junction of Burma, Thailand, and Laos. This area is the beginning of two pipelines into the illicit international markets: one shoots across Laos to Saigon, the other heads due south through central Thailand to Bangkok." (18)(For smuggling routes, see Map)
Although Shan rebel bands and Burmese self-defense forces collect a heavy tax from tribal opium farmers and itinerant small merchants who transport raw opium to major Shan States market towns, they control very few of the caravans carrying raw opium south to refineries in the tri-border area, In 1967 one CIA operative reported that 90 percent of Burma's opium harvest was carried by Nationalist Chinese army mule caravans based in northern Thailand, 7 percent by Shan armed bands, and about 3 percent by Kachin rebels.(19)