Is it a good example of the wisdom of having civilian control of a nation's military? Or is it unwise to have civilian control?
2006-09-19 09:07:50 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
if you refer to civilians as those in power in govt then the answer should be yes. the govt should be in control of the military. the military should always be politically neutral. it is the only force of defence for any nation. the ruling govt should use this force as they deem fit. it is the same with the judicial and police force. therefore, in the case of thailand, it has turned out different because the generals of the army has political affiliations and hence can call up a coup. traditionally most military leaders who eventually end up heads of state tend to govern the country with their experience in the armed forces. so the military will end up a very strong authority in the country. take examples of indonesia, currently headed by an ex-general, saddam, cuba, the list goes on.
there are positives and negatives to it. the positive, i think, is it does have certain degrees of discipline that permeates into society in general. so you will have some calm and peace in the country. the negative, will likely be that the lines of democracy will blur eventually, as power hungry leaders start to use their military to perform civilian duties.
2006-09-19 09:56:35 · answer #1 · answered by EL 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In this instance, it is a good idea to have a civilian controlled military because they are ousting a corrupt Prime Minister. Ever country, even democracies, hold the possibility of a military takeover, if the right military leader is in a position to gain the support of his troops. Think about it, our military is civilian controlled because the head of all the branches of military is the President, who is a civilian. This is why our president was able to send troops to Iraq even against the desires of the majority of the American public.
2006-09-20 09:33:24 · answer #2 · answered by DaveUt1878 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Civilians must control the military as they serve civilians. As soon as the military is separated it opens the doors for a coup.
2006-09-19 09:15:43 · answer #3 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Civilians must have REAL control over the military or this happens everytime, it has throughout history.
2006-09-19 09:10:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its a great example of what should happen in America.
Sometimes a government becomes so powerful, and so corrupt, as in the case of USA, that normal procedures do not function. Then the only answer is to wipe the slate clean, and start again.
2006-09-19 14:02:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well they had a democracy and now they do not. Does that answer your question?
It sounds like these people actually liked having a democracy unlike Iraq which was used to being ruled in a tribal way.
2006-09-20 00:07:02 · answer #6 · answered by adobeprincess 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋