A sad day / time for this democracy: abcnews.go.com/International/wi … d-75602314
This is what happens in a weaker and more fragile democracy when the same kind of rhetoric Trump attempted is successful.
Remember, there were even folks on here advocating for Trump to enact martial law to prevent the democratic process moving forward.
Trump jealous af rn.
Yet another story you have been scammed into believing the opposite about.
The Myanmar constitution is a bit similar to that of the former USA. It allowed for the Commander in Chief to suspend the constitutional process in the case of a significant internal threat (what the US dem-socialists want to do now). And that threat is the same in both countries.
In the US when overwhelming fraud was committed, Mr Trump had the option to declare Marsh Law until the issue could be resolved (even if there was no fraud to be found - they could at least reveal that for certain). But Mr Trump, not being the military fascist type, attempted to let things play out by the subverted constitutional process. He was too timid concerning military action (unlike the US socialist dems now militarily occupying your capital).
But Myanmar’s commander in chief, being an Asian country, is fully aware and alert to Chinese treachery. The entire Asian world is very aware of Chinese aggression through subtle means (unlike the naive Westerners). So when he saw the exact same kind of fraud being used in his country, unlike Mr Trump, he stepped in and said - “STOP right here - not on MY watch”.
Now he has no more than a year to fully investigate, without impediment, the fraud issues. Until then none of the voting is going to be certified. Their government is on pause.
Mr Trump did not use his Marshal Law authority to protect the US Constitution so now the US is a single party socialist, non-democratic, voter irrelevant, unconstitutional regime - the former constitutional USA overthrown and being dismantled. The current effort to impeach Mr Trump - clearly unconstitutional is obvious proof if you hadn’t seen the numerous prior unconstitutional crimes over the USA’s last 20 years.
That is the thing about overwhelming hypocrisy - it is difficult to tell which side you are actually supporting. You have to watch for the details, take the time to investigate what really happened. And since 99% of the population doesn’t do that, the liars have a serious advantage and can easily persuade the casual observing population that the other bloke is the liar and deceiver - the devil accuses the other bloke of being the devil. Only a sharp eye can see the truth of it - and that clearly isn’t either of you.
The Myanmar population doesn’t want to be just another Chinese subsidiary syndicate (as the US has now become). So they have a year to try to keep the CCP at bay and restore their former democracy (too late for the Ugly Swamp in America).
That is an interesting take, but it doesn’t line up with my understanding of the issue.
I believe the fact is, for several decades in the 1970’s - 2000’s, Myanmar was ruled by a military dicatorship, which had come to power via a coup d’état in the 1970’s and had overthrown the democratically elected government.
When the military dictatorship finally began to loosen controls due to international pressure and allow another democratic election, the ruling party lost control. Another round of democratic elections further reinforced the population’s desire to maintain democracy as opposed to being ruled once more by the military dictatorship.
But the military’s ruling party had a few tricks up its sleeve within the new Constitution instituted in 2011. First, it ensured the military maintained a 25% control in government. Secondly, it included a contingency that stated at any time, the military could once again step in and take control of the country, given a national emergency.
Coincidentally, under the same guise of voter fraud (without proof) that just a few months before plagued the U.S. news cycles, the former military ruling party maintained the most recent round of elections could not be trusted, and they would once more have to step in and take control (is it possible the narrative from the U.S. had any role to play?).
I can’t yet take that as a fact, but it is irrelevant.
But note two things -
So without deeper detailed investigation, it cannot be determined which scenario is active.
In the US it was easier to determine. When the fraud allegations were prevalent rather then accepting what could have been a quick investigation into the matter and thus resolved in a civil manner, the accused did everything they could to prevent any investigation - a very clear sign of guilt on the part of the accused. It is like an accused shoplifter refusing in court to allow an investigation of her purse then claiming “there is no evidence of my guilt” despite witnesses seeing her slip something into her purse.
Add to the very obvious criminality of the new regime in the case of the US, it is easy to see what happens when there is no investigation allowed.
In the case of Myanmar, investigation is underway. That investigation might be completely corrupted by their military. But we cannot see that yet.
People who can be trusted are the ones who do not jump to conclusions based on rumors. So which do you prefer to be?
Hate to break it to you, but it’s kind of obvious from your comments that you haven’t really read up on this at all…
I was thinking the same of you except with you it is - “haven’t really thought much on this at all.”
Thank you for admitting you haven’t really read much on this.
Sadly, you haven’t read up on much of anything. Just trying to shove the “Communist China” theory anywhere it can fit. I guess when you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Sorry obsrvr, you don’t have very much to add to conversations with just your own confused “thoughts.” They would be better served if they were paired with facts. On that note, gotta hit ya with the block.
For those who either cannot or will not think - I can see how you would get that impression. And of course when thinking is revealed against your narrative - what else can you do but to try to block it out of sight - hide all evidence of guilt.