OPINION

Coup champions

Re: "3 generals had little say in shuffle", (BP, Sept 12).

Any military's role is to defend the natives against "external" enemies -- they are our fence. As such, they should be stationed at our borders -- not inland. Thus, to defend Bangkok, the fighting should be as far from Bangkok as possible, so our best troops shouldn't be in or around the capital.

The exception would be in cases of occupied territory, where troops are stationed everywhere to keep the local hostile population in check. Hopefully, if our defenders were where they should be, we wouldn't be the coup d'etat champion of the world. Let's move them out.

Re: "Road safety tackled wrong", (Editorial, Sept 9).

The editorial lead covers all aspects of the proposed laws but also looked at other issues which are a much greater concern. The biggest issues for Thai road safety are (1) public awareness/concern for this issue and (2) the major cause of accidents/deaths on our roads; motorcyclists. These law changes do nothing to address either of these issues, which makes me think there will be little if any change in the road toll stats.

Can I suggest you do a follow piece 12 months after these law changes have been made, to see whether they've been effective or not? As is the case with any law, there's no point having it, if it's not going to benefit society. If these laws aren't making a material difference, then it would be incumbent on the government to identify other solutions.

Re: "End the vape ban", (PostBag, Sept 10) and "Ban on e-cigarettes to remain", (BP, Aug 30).

Suddenly there is trauma in the air over the Land of Smiles. Vaping is a new concern. Might that habit of ingesting nicotine be harmful and must it be banned? Well yeah. Let's ban it because of the clouds it forms at ground level, in our faces, on our sidewalks and about our neighbourhoods. Let's ban vaping just because it looks harmful. While we are there why don't we ban the unhealthy fast-food franchises flown in from "Ah-Merry-ka". Their food just pure ain't healthy. No smoke but unhealthy just the same.

Where do we draw the line?

Re: "Afghan humanitarian crisis widens", (Opinion, Sept 12).

My lifelong experience is that it is wrong to give in to bullies. It may cause you quite some damage but the only way to get rid of them is to give them a very bloody nose. I am afraid this is also true in international politics. The US was such a global bully for a long time (before that the European colonists) but they got quite some bloody noses in the last decades. Now we have new aspiring bullies in the shape of Putin and Xi (behind them is a network of nationalists -- it seems nationalism is always the narrative for being a bully -- power grabbers -- the old KGB network and parts of the CDC). One of them threatens even with nuclear bombs. Still, it would be wrong to give in to him. It would only invite more bullying.

Re: "Opinions differ", (PostBag, Sept 10).

According to Eric Bahrt's letter, "the very purpose of an opinion page is to read many different opinions". Then why oh why are we subjected week after week to the same Bahrt and Setter views that Covid vaccines are an international conspiracy and we should all be vegans?