The latest briefing by one leading global think tank, the International Crisis Group (ICG), said the election would be “the best opportunity in a generation to influence the future direction of the country.”
The ICG should ask the voters—including military personnel and their family members who voted overwhelmingly for the opposition National League for Democracy in the 1990 election—whether they will be free to cast their votes as they wish this time around.
Sai Thein Win has made his own position clear. The DVB Web site says that he went public with the information he had on Burma's nuclear ambitions because he wanted to help stop what he sees as “a dangerous, badly organized and expensive waste.”
"There goes your great intent Sai Thein Win. Give any news and Irrawaddy will whip up its half-witted poster into a frenzy. No proof, just pure innuendos."
PlanB demonstrates his own point about half-wits very well.
As usual, how many hundreds, thousands, and hundreds of thousands have to die to convince planB that the SPDC is evil?
Why does he defend thieving mass murderers?
The SPDC ARE evil, they ARE greedy, they ARE vengeful & they love getting away with it all.
I doubt that planB gets any sadistic pleasure out of defending murderers, so it must be ignorance that drives him to constantly infer that the SPDC is not as bad as everyone says, & to blame their misunderstood actions on sanctions by the West.
The only sanctions they care about are their own sanctions for rape, murder, forced labour, extortion, starvation, religious persecution,& the destruction of homes, churches,& schools to be used by the soldiers of the Burma army against Burmese ethnic minority citizens.
Garrett Wrote:
11/06/2010
Soe Thane wrote:
"What does military spending in a country like Burma really mean? We don't know what the GDP is, what the budget is, so how do we know the percentage of defense spending?
I point to this because there's a lot of very sloppy reporting that's become endemic. Lots of numbers just thrown around from poor sources or with no sourcing. If Irrawaddy doesn't do better, why should we believe it and more than NLM?"
I can't see your point here. It's not the fault of those who must guesstimate that the SPDC hides so much of their doings.
If better information was available, it would be used.
Your comments seem aimed to protect the SPDC & to punish those who can't provide statistics on SPDC military budget that are up to your standards.
Even the United Nations has to rely on estimates as regards forced labour, crimes against humanity, systematic rape & destruction of food as weapons, non-judicial killings, torture, & other crimes against humanity of the SPDC.
plan B Wrote:
10/06/2010
Sai Thein Win: “a dangerous, badly organized and expensive waste.”
There goes your great intent Sai Thein Win. Give any news and Irrawaddy will whip up its half-witted poster into a frenzy. No proof, just pure innuendos.
Let's see
SPDC is guilty of every possible evil deed until proven otherwise.
Irrawaddy just deliver news and hearsay, absolutely irreproachably truthful until proven otherwise of course.
That prove the poster that take everything against SPDC as facts until proven otherwise, of course.
O Maung Gyi Wrote:
10/06/2010
This nuclear development matter was not new issue to America. She knows it since last many years that Burmese had intention to develop. But previous Burmese leaders are real politicians, wise and honest persons, that is why although Burma has a right to develop nuclear power, but none of Burmese past leaders encourage to develop such an expensive and unnecessary dangerous human killer war materials for Burma, because they were farsighted people.
At present situation inside Burmese leaders
are selfish, only thing they know how to grip power and make corruption. That is why to keep bargaining power among the ASEAN and international communities, they want to develop this dangerous item for their egos.
US has to think very deeply and should have to take some severe action on this issue.
A.M.O Wrote:
08/06/2010
So, what are we going to do, Mr Surin Pitsuwan?
Do we throw the queries across the board in the upcoming ASEAN meeting? Or just keep quiet?
What is ASEAN's agreement amongst member states on non-proliferation of nuclear arms?
What are the Burmese up to? You guys can shoot each other with nuclear-tipped missiles? Do you?
You guys have to do some brainstorming in one of your gatherings(ASEAN); and make sure you guys live up to your commitments & no fooling around etc.
No explanation is required of the imminent dangers of a nuclear war in the group, I suppose.
Maung Maung Wrote:
08/06/2010
The evidence of the nuclear bomb programme, whether successful or not, shows the folly of the SPDC in spending the much needed foreign exchange from the sale of national resources like oil, gas, minerals and timber.
The SPDC has been spending more than 50% of its income to maintain a largely inefficient and unnecessary 450,000 army while people's health care, education and social welfare are neglected.
This nuclear programme is just one instance of the megalomania of Senior General Than Shwe. He has also built a palace in Pagan and a new capital at Naypyidaw. The people must get rid of them and establish a democratic state in order to live in peace, prosperity and harmony.
Tom Tun Wrote:
08/06/2010
The best way to treat a disease is prevention. World society always thinks that Burma, Iran and North Korea nuclear ambitions are hopeless and a waste of money. However, before Dr, Oppenheimer invented the atomic bomb technology, the nuclear bomb seemed hopeless.
If some human being from a part of the world can built nukes, I believe Burma will one day, too. When Burma achieves that step, it will be too late to reverse it.
Just like I said, Prevention is the best way to protecting from disease. Global society must do everything to stop the Burmese regime from having suclear weapons.
Thailand should regret the proposal to bring Burmese regime into ASEAN. Thailand must withdraw their investment from Burma for the future sake of their country.
Snoopy Wrote:
08/06/2010
The nuclear ambition is just a waste of time, energy and state money. Remember the saying: He who holds a sword will die by the sword.
I am sick of the Burmese generals; they are heading for the worst. Don't they know that they won't live to see 100 years? While alive, why not do something useful and fruitful for the nation?
There are better works to do: build good roads, good communication systems, schools and hospitals for the poor, provide enough electricity, and save the forests.
Forget about nuclear ambition.
Zam Mang Wrote:
07/06/2010
Wow! People from Burma and N Korea do not even receive basic human needs like water and electricity but their heartless rulers are trying to live inside bunkers with nukes for their own security.
It shows that these regimes have insecurity very much. Stolen money and hundreds of thousands of soldiers cannot provide them security. When will they understand that the rule of law is the best way to have real security?
Soe Thane Wrote:
07/06/2010
Never understood where this figure of 40-60% defense spending comes from. There is no open budget. How can you even guess what it is and what percentage is military spending? What does military spending in a country like Burma really mean? We don't know what the GDP is, what the budget is, so how do we know the percentage of defense spending?
I point to this because there's a lot of very sloppy reporting that's become endemic. Lots of numbers just thrown around from poor sources or with no sourcing. If Irrawaddy doesn't do better, why should we believe it and more than NLM?
COMMENTS (10)
E-MAIL
PRINT
