This points up the continuing existence of the Anglo-American-Australian Axis of Aggression. These three nations have made aggression the mainstay of their foreign policies over the Bush-Blair-Howard term, and Cheney seems now to be ready to destroy two countries - Iran and the US itself - in one final, brutally aggressive act.

I truly hope that the American political class will finally conclude that it is not in their own interest, for they clearly care nothing for the interests of the American or any other people, to allow Cheney's final solution to the Iran "problem" to go forward.

In any case I expect, finally, to see all these war criminals in the dock at the Anglo-American-Australian War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague.

If they are allowed to walk free, we will be doomed to a repetition of this sort of aggression in another forty years, when the economies of these countries recover sufficiently to allow it.

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

-------------------------------------

Govt right to urge economic caution and sufficiency

Re: "The sufficiency-economy philosophy: some takes on what it means", Business, February 26.

Your analysis was excellent in showing the favourable effects in adopting this philosophy. Thrifty awareness has now become the norm and wasteful spending is shameful. Credit-card spending and cash advances with hefty interest rates charged by the card companies should slow down.

However, the philosophy is not only limited to ways of living but also covers the conduct of business operations, which should be run wisely within one's means and ability to sustain longevity. Under this philosophy, the likelihood of bankruptcy is less when compared with the pre-1997 carefree economy. Thais should always remember the erroneous belief in incessant expansion.

This philosophy is a wake-up call in maintaining that there should be limitations to profit-maximisation. Greed is good but should be subject to limitations of good governance, social responsibility and sustainability. The Machiavellian belief of the ends justifying the means is not reconcilable to our society.

In sum, Thailand is not a closed economy as believed by a few foreign journalists, but a market economy. The caution that this government is pursuing is aims to sustain our economic respectability and avoid a repeat of the 1997 fiasco.

Songdej Praditsmanont

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

Airport arrivals shocker for tourists from Europe

Two hours in an immigration queue is not acceptable and an insult to visitors coming to this country.

I arrived in Phuket on February 24 at 10am to find the queue at immigration filling the arrival hall back to the entry doors. The crowd, by a conservative estimate, was between 900 and 1,000 people. To compound the problem there were only six officers on duty.

Even though they seem to have improved their throughput the progress was very slow and I finally got through in two hours.

The comments from the international travellers who had arrived from Europe, to find they had two hours added to their very long flight times were not at all complimentary.

The following comments were heard: "Don't they care about visitors? It is an insult to treat people like this."

"We will advise our tour agent and recommend taking Phuket off their holiday destination list."

The most telling comment was: "No wonder they had a coup, if this is the best they can organise things in Thailand."

This problem has been evident for at least two years and there have been numerous promises of improvements but nothing has been done. It is a disgrace and puts the country in the bottom of the Third-World category. Nobody cares enough to do anything.

John B

Bangkok

---------------------------------------

Time to stand up to the southern insurgents

The Minister of Defence has said it. Following a spate of attacks over the Chinese New Year in all three deep-South provinces and a close call on the life of Her Majesty the Queen's confidante when her convoy was ambushed by a group of militants, who did not have the courage to announce themselves responsible, the mayhem, indeed, could come to Bangkok.

If and when it does, both the Surayud government and the Council for National Security should know that their days are numbered. Up to now, even with the change of guard at the National Police Bureau, not a single culprit has so far been captured for the heinous acts on New Year's Eve.

I would like to look at the positive side of this effort, and believe that things can, and will, change for the better. While it is safe to say that there is plenty of funding to go round and it will take a long time to solve all the issues in the South, I will also say that there is now a more urgent and greater cause.

No "sparrow bandits", to use Thaksin's terminology, or common thieves could have thrived for three long years with ever-increasing firepower without outside support.

Our Malaysian neighbours have offered to mediate. The Thai Foreign Ministry at first said there was no such agreement, only for this to be reversed by the prime minister shortly afterwards.

What the Foreign Ministry has been trying to deny is that the movement is now not a domestic one. Common sense tells us that it has gone international. The Defence Minister has said that the strength of the militants is now about 10,000 or more. If not checked soon, they could swell to equal the number of security personnel stationed in the South.

Our intelligence agencies said they knew in advance that there would be attacks, and yet they were unable to stop them. If it is true, as the Defence Minister said, about the growing strength of the militants, then it could be surmised that more are about to infiltrate Thailand and their goals are to destroy. Are we going to sit back and relax?

I would like to suggest that Thailand join the global "War on Terror" and make our effort a concerted, international one.

This is going to take resources and effort but we can accomplish the task. The Foreign Ministry must be the focal point for this.

The Surayud government and the CNS must show the people that they can make a difference and will do so in the near future. No more "national reconciliation" for the time being, I say. That can come afterwards. Both the government and the CNS must be committed.

We will take the fight to the enemy both in the field and in the halls of the Foreign Ministry, Defence Ministry, the Royal Thai Army Headquarters, Parliament, and "around town". Let us, for once, stand tall.

And at my age, which is 59, I am ready to be counted upon. Let us make a difference, whoever we are, and make it a positive one for all of us.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

-------------------------------------------

No excuse for this example of poor English usage

There seems to be a never-ending stream of examples of poorly written English in Thailand, some of which make you cringe and some of which make you despair. Here's one I saw today that made me do both; it was a security notice inside the gate of an important building in Bangkok. Within its few short lines it managed to spell "bag" with a capital "B", despite the fact that it was in the middle of the sentence and it "apolozized" for the security measures, and for any "in convenience" that they might cause.

The name of the august institution that allowed these lamentable errors to go on public display? The British Embassy on Wireless Road. 

It's something to ponder the next time you hear Embassy staff banging the drum for British educational standards and urging well-heeled Thais to send their children to expensive schools and universities in the UK.

JGJ Harmer

Bangkok

---------------------------------------

No harm in foreigners investing in property

Khunying Pojaman wants to buy an UK cottage - and nobody there is raising a big stink about allowing other nationalities to own land. Their land area is less than half ours although our populations are about equal. With their large middle class, their demand for land for their citizens should be much greater than ours. Why aren't they running about berserk?

If we allowed non-Thais to own land, prices should rise significantly. The current owners, who are Thai, could sell their plots for more than now. They would consume more, and local recipients would do likewise, giving a much greater stimulus to our economy than otherwise. They might send their children to better quality, more costly schools, improving the kids' ability to contribute to our economy and their parents' welfare when old.

If we're concerned that letting aliens own land might mean that prices would soar out of the reach of Thais, we could have specific measures precisely targeted against this danger.

For example, we could give housing coupons to low-income Thais, useable at any participating housing developer, for the home of their choice.

Or we could give tax breaks that could reduce not only mortgage interest but also principal if we so wished.

I suggest that rather than following the dictum, "When you have a weak platform, wrap yourself in the flag", we - for once - base policy on research. Have a neutral body, eg, the TDRI or the economic faculties of Chulalongkorn or Thammasat, study the matter - including learning from others.

Let's not make much ado about nothing.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok