PeterRS Posted 9 hours ago Author Posted 9 hours ago 3 hours ago, vinapu said: is not matter of believing, rather than remembering what happened to Malaysian aircraft over Ukraine There is no similarity. The Russian-Ukrainians who brought down MH17 were using high range surface-to-air missiles. No such missles are used in the Thai-Cambodian conflict. MH17 was at 33,000 ft when the missile reached it and exploded beside it. Cambodia does indeed have missiles that can reach that height but they require ground equipment in place to fire them. No such equipment exists nor do they have the need to use them in what is an ultra low level Thai border regional conflict. Further, checks on Flight Radar make it clear no aircraft flies anywhere near that border dispute region. The Russian-Ukrainians had imported the delivery system from Russia the day of the crash and returned it immediately after the crash. Those who fired the missile also believed they were shooting down a Ukrainian Air Force transport plane. ICAO in April had already issued a warning to commercial carriers about flying over south-eastern Ukraine. Minutes after the accident, Ukraine closed all its air space to commercial carriers. Quote
khaolakguy Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago An interesting if rather dry article on the potential impact of this conflict and who has most to lose if it continues or expands. Quote The conflict between Thailand and Cambodia exposes the limits of ASEAN mediation and directly threatens Southeast Asia’s stability and the security of the Strait of Malacca, a strategic hub for both the PRC and the United States. Any escalation could disrupt regional and global supply chains, damage land and sea logistics networks, slow BRI-related economic corridors, and increase the vulnerability of ports, critical infrastructure, and transit hubs, with potential repercussions on international trade. https://www.specialeurasia.com/2025/12/13/cambodia-thailand-china-clashes/ Quote
PeterRS Posted 7 hours ago Author Posted 7 hours ago 46 minutes ago, khaolakguy said: An interesting if rather dry article on the potential impact of this conflict and who has most to lose if it continues or expands. I really do believe that is a load of nonsense. The dispute has been going on since the 1950s and never expanded outside the two countries. Neither country has been particularly affected in that time - apart from occasional flare-ups of violence and sadly some casualties - and so nothing is likely to change in terms of other countries in future. This is nothing like the 1969 border dispute between China and the Soviet Union in 1969 which seriously threatened to go nuclear. Quote
khaolakguy Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 1 hour ago, PeterRS said: An interesting if rather dry article on the potential impact of this conflict and who has most to lose if it continues or expands. That then points to the Chinese as both having the most to lose and the most influence. Although in the geo-political context they may not be disappointed to see another Trump headline shot down in flames! From afar, it seems to me that the Thai Government is whipping this up unnecessarily for some purpose. Possibly internal political benefit, perhaps creating "the enemy" without when there are far more enemies of democracy within. This is usually useful in the run up to an election giving Anutin the opportunity to appear as a "strong man" leader. Possibly a private commercial dispute with vested and powerful Thai interests relating to the casinos and scamming centres that seem to be much targeted. Possibly revenge against the Cambodians for leaking an embarrassing phone call......... Perhaps a confluence of factors. As to the risks of expansion of the conflict it does seem that on this occasion the extent of the bombing is more extensive compared to the normal and historic token retaliations. The Thai navy, such as it is, has also unusually been involved in launching attacks from the Gulf of Thailand. Quote Thais bomb three Cambodian border casinos deemed military threats Thailand and Cambodia have also been digging trenches, unspooling barbed wire and engaging in gritty foxhole-to-foxhole clashes Details of the conflict are interesting. https://asiatimes.com/2025/12/thais-bomb-three-cambodian-border-casinos-deemed-military-threats/ Quote
khaolakguy Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 1 hour ago, PeterRS said: This is nothing like the 1969 border dispute between China and the Soviet Union in 1969 which seriously threatened to go nuclear. Not sure why you are dragging this in, particularly as you state it is nothing like the current conflict. Nor could it be as neither of the parties have nuclear weapons! Quote
Members Suckrates Posted 3 hours ago Members Posted 3 hours ago Trump and "solved" in the same headline is just WRONG ! jimmie50 and unicorn 2 Quote
Members unicorn Posted 47 minutes ago Members Posted 47 minutes ago 14 hours ago, PeterRS said: And that is never going to happen. A tiny border skirmish that has been going on since the 1950s? I can just see the reaction of Iceland's people after its PM declares, "We have to get involved to stop this"! Obviously, international involvement doesn't mean that every single country from Eswatini to Bahrain must be involved. However, the absence of ICJ involvement has obviously not worked. The international community can and should be involved. If not the ICJ, what would be another suggestion for a fair and effective resolution? Quote
