Burma/Myanmar uprising

[Robinho]

i'm surprised this isn't being discussed already, but for those of you who have not seen there have been a growing uprising in Burma led by the respected Buddhist Monks, protesting against the military junta in charge of the country.

this was widely publicised in the news last week with picture mainly coming through the internet of the peaceful demos, however since then, the militaryu government have shut down all external links with the world, inclduuing the internet, so no real news or pictures are getting out the reports that are coming out are of many hundreds (thousands? ;( ) of the monks being arrested, beaten and detained, other protetsers being dealt with brutally and a death toll of hundreds if not thousands, being reported by some.

over the weekend there were reports of a Japanese reporter being shot dead at pont blank range whilst trying to film clips to get out on the internet, his body identified by his family by photos of the event happening!

why as a supposed civilised world can we allow this to go on, with just threats of sanctions and little more, there are in excess of 50million people in Burma, many in abject poverty and displaced, whilst the country is rich in natural resources.

i hope that the reports that are avoiding the news blackout are exaggertaed, but i fear that we are in a repeat of the brutal putdown of the last uprising back in the 80's.

for more see here

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3018349.ece

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3013126.ece

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3008095.ece

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3007115.ece

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7024825.stm

there are many other links from the BBC page.

i wish there was something i could do, we spend far too much time, money and effort focusing on some ill advised campaigns and watch from afar whilst genuine human rights atrocities carry on, i'm really angry that this can be allowed to go on

[Hondo]

My off hand guess would be that none of the "rich natural resources" are of a strategic value, in short supply, or vital to the world economy.

[Storm]

And hence no pressure by any of the so-called guardians of democracy on the military rule or atrocities in Myanmar either.

Just like Musharraf can continue to be a dictator in a previously democratic (I use the word loosely) country just because he is deemed useful or the status quo is better than doing what you preach normally..(off topic!)

Only if there is a sighting of Maddy in Myanmar maybe other governments/media will look at that country? :)

[BDunnell]

Only if there is a sighting of Maddy in Myanmar maybe other governments/media will look at that country? :)

I maybe shouldn't laugh at that point, but I have...

Sadly, it's difficult to see what form any intervention would take. I agree with the views about the reasons why we haven't done anything. Neither does it help that there are no TV pictures of what's been going on there, for I suspect that a lot of people would care more if there were.

[Drew]

What exactly can you do from afar, anyway?

I'd like to know most what everyday life is like there at the moment. I mean, how do you live with so much fear?

[Schultz]

The example of Burma is an absolute disgrace. If the United States or any country were to be taken seriously about their so called promotion of democracy, this should be the first country they look at. I tell you what, a military intervention here would cause a whole lot less headaches than what post invasion Iraq has caused the USA. They already have widespread support of democracy and a woman who has already been elected leader in democratic elections. So whats the issue? All the international community seem to be able to organise are sanctions that haven't worked in 17 years since the Junta took power!

[Hondo]

Quite frankly, I hope the United States refrains from "liberating" any more countries without 1 - truly and fully understanding the culture of the country under consideration for liberation and 2 - a majority of popular support within the country under consideration for liberation and majority of support from the UN and 3 - once mr. evil and his henchmen have been tossed, get out. If the locals want to loot and destroy their own society, worship a block of wood, slip into 20 years of civil war, set up a dictator, set up a democracy, or go communist, fine. Let them. You wanted old so & so thrown out, fine, he's gone. The fact that you can't behave yourselves now that so & so is gone is your problem, not ours.

For some, the alternatives of "liberation" are just as bad, if not worse, than their previous "oppression'.

[rah]

There are a few conflicts going on that the west is ignoring, just have a look at the Congo. That conflict dwarfs any other conflict at the moment and you will never hear about it on the news. And the Congo conflict is all about resources.

[Daniel]

Am I missing something? A lot of world leaders have spoken out against the government in Burma. It's not being ignored like people seem to be suggesting......

[Robinho]

but speaking out is acheiving nothing, sanctions ave acheived nothing, aprt from depriving the population.

the population themselves have clearly reached the end of their tether and are attempting to change things, and by getting some recognition on the internet, hoped the world would notice and help them, however the links have been cut, people are being killed and now the protesters are fleeing or being detained. those living there clearly are in fear of their lives and don't have any ort of power against the military so can do little without some assitance other than standing up and making themselves heard - which they so far have only acheived being quashed again.

i don't know what the solution is, but certainly not enough is being done to help

[Daniel]

So they should invade now with no diplomacy I take it? :rolleyes:

[BDunnell]

Quite frankly, I hope the United States refrains from "liberating" any more countries without 1 - truly and fully understanding the culture of the country under consideration for liberation and 2 - a majority of popular support within the country under consideration for liberation and majority of support from the UN and 3 - once mr. evil and his henchmen have been tossed, get out. If the locals want to loot and destroy their own society, worship a block of wood, slip into 20 years of civil war, set up a dictator, set up a democracy, or go communist, fine. Let them. You wanted old so & so thrown out, fine, he's gone. The fact that you can't behave yourselves now that so & so is gone is your problem, not ours.

For some, the alternatives of "liberation" are just as bad, if not worse, than their previous "oppression'.

I very much agree with this.

[Robinho]

So they should invade now with no diplomacy I take it? :rolleyes:


yes thats what i said, thank you for making my point so succinctly for me! :rolleyes:

i said i don't have a solution, but we have been attempting some half hearted diplomacy for nearly 20 years, (since the last uprising was brutally put down in 1988), and i've not heard any countries pledging support to the military in Burma, it seems a slightly more hardline approach might be in order. there is an elected opposition leader under house arrest, any political opposition is rountinely detained, and reportedly totured or killed, seemingly against the wishes of the general populous, something should be done. i don't know what, and i'd certainly rather military action was avoided, but the people who are eductaed and paid to make these decisions surely should be able to get together on a world stage and effect a change.

making disappointed noises in the press acheives nothing, it should be brought onto the agenda of the major powers and i'd hope they can agree on how to tackle the issue.

idealistic? maybe, but i see no reason why this can not be acheived

[rah]

yes thats what i said, thank you for making my point so succinctly for me! :rolleyes:

i said i don't have a solution, but we have been attempting some half hearted diplomacy for nearly 20 years, (since the last uprising was brutally put down in 1988), and i've not heard any countries pledging support to the military in Burma, it seems a slightly more hardline approach might be in order. there is an elected opposition leader under house arrest, any political opposition is rountinely detained, and reportedly totured or killed, seemingly against the wishes of the general populous, something should be done. i don't know what, and i'd certainly rather military action was avoided, but the people who are eductaed and paid to make these decisions surely should be able to get together on a world stage and effect a change.

making disappointed noises in the press acheives nothing, it should be brought onto the agenda of the major powers and i'd hope they can agree on how to tackle the issue.

idealistic? maybe, but i see no reason why this can not be acheived

The problem is that they are getting support from China. There is talk of sanctions, but these are vetoed at the UN by China.
The opposition leader was recently transfered to the insane gaol (the most feared in the country).

[Daniel]

yes thats what i said, thank you for making my point so succinctly for me! :rolleyes:

i said i don't have a solution, but we have been attempting some half hearted diplomacy for nearly 20 years, (since the last uprising was brutally put down in 1988), and i've not heard any countries pledging support to the military in Burma, it seems a slightly more hardline approach might be in order. there is an elected opposition leader under house arrest, any political opposition is rountinely detained, and reportedly totured or killed, seemingly against the wishes of the general populous, something should be done. i don't know what, and i'd certainly rather military action was avoided, but the people who are eductaed and paid to make these decisions surely should be able to get together on a world stage and effect a change.

making disappointed noises in the press acheives nothing, it should be brought onto the agenda of the major powers and i'd hope they can agree on how to tackle the issue.

idealistic? maybe, but i see no reason why this can not be acheived
So if the US invades you're against it and if they don't the problem continues and it's not good enough. Either way it's win/win for the Burmese junta.

[Schultz]

If they we invaded Myanmar/Burma, whether it succeeds or not, it would restore my faith in the idea that us Western countries can do good for goods sake. That maybe we would put ourselves out even when it offers no real benefit to us.

[Hondo]

Invasion without having a workable solution all ready to be put into place immediately is folly.

At one time or another many of these countries were colonies of the western powers. They demanded and in some cases fought for their independence.

Welcome to being independant. Whats going on is a part of being independant and most independant countries have had their civil wars of one sort or another. It's your culture, your people, your religion. Settle it yourselves. Just because every tribe and ethnic group wants to be their own nation doesn't mean it's smart, practical, or even going to happen but if they insist on pushing the issue, this kind of thing is going to happen.

Personally, I get tired of hearing the West needs to get out, the West needs to come back and rescue us from ourselves, thank you the West needs to get out again, but stay by the phone...ok?

[Schultz]

Invasion without having a workable solution all ready to be put into place immediately is folly.

At one time or another many of these countries were colonies of the western powers. They demanded and in some cases fought for their independence.

Welcome to being independant. Whats going on is a part of being independant and most independant countries have had their civil wars of one sort or another. It's your culture, your people, your religion. Settle it yourselves. Just because every tribe and ethnic group wants to be their own nation doesn't mean it's smart, practical, or even going to happen but if they insist on pushing the issue, this kind of thing is going to happen.

Personally, I get tired of hearing the West needs to get out, the West needs to come back and rescue us from ourselves, thank you the West needs to get out again, but stay by the phone...ok?

Sadly, I agree with you. My view is a bit idealistic and maybe there is nothing we can do. The sad thing is that in alot of these developing countries the military seems to be above politics. Or atleast sees it self as the true guardian on the national interest. When the leaders of that military abuse that position there just doesn't appear to be any real obvious sollution.

[Mark in Oshawa]

For all of you wringing your hands on why the West doesn't do anything, the answer is simple. China. Nothing in this part of the world will happen or not happen without China giving the final say. Why? No one wants to war with them, and if Myanmar's butchers want to do what they are doing, they do it with the tacit knowledge that the US or UK will not be able to stop it.

If there was oil there, the Chinese would have invaded long ago by the way, either by economics or outright force.

This little nation is a tragedy but it just points out to the weakness of the UN and the system such as it is to deal with this sort of thing. WHen a nation goes against the UN and tries on humantarian grounds to stop the oppression, it usually is castigated for having ulterior motives.

All of you who think the international community and the UN is the way to solve all problems, well here is a perfect example of how feckless it is. Power is gained by the mouth of a well aimed gun, and winning wars. Some nations do so with somewhat tainted motives, but a few try to do the right thing, but at some point, the war you create can be bigger than the problem you are trying to solve. Such is Myanamar.

These thugs deserve to be tossed in jail for life or shot, but no one will do it because to do it would entail either the Chinese actually giving a rat's behind and giving their blessing, or a war with the Chinese to go into their sphere of influence......

Most nations care, but not enough that they can do a damned thing. Hey, I have an idea, lets get the US to do it.... of course, that is the answer to most of the problems of the world since they seem to be the only ones to actually be willing on occasion go in, but everyone doesn't trust them for doing it. Maybe in Iraq, the point could be made, but it still doesn't change the fact that American is blamed for whatever happens no matter whether they do it or not....

[Robinho]

So if the US invades you're against it and if they don't the problem continues and it's not good enough. Either way it's win/win for the Burmese junta.

is invasion the only option. can no-one use a more effective form of diplomatic pressure. did I mention the US? i certainly would be against a single nations act in this case, and i do belive we (as in the "west") have made some mistakes in the recent past, whether the motives/results have been correct, but i am no entering that discussion. this is a completley separate issue and should be dealt with as such.

i agree the UN is powerless due to China's veto, in which case we should be working harder with China on this and a number of other issues to reach a compromise, the last thing i am suggesting is all out war, or individual invasions.

if the root of the problem is China, then why are they vetoing things, what is their beef, can we not work closer with them as a nation, will they compromise in some of their approaches.

if the answer is no, then maybe another aproach is required, as this surely not be the last event to see the Un powerless again. i can appreciate that China sees a free Burma as further erdoing their own position of power, but surely China is beginning to realise that to further itself the answer does not lie in cutting itself off from the rest of the world, but by further integrating itself in the world economy and exertig its power through business if it wants, as a more free state. this is unlikely to happen for many years, if at all, in the mean time Burma crumbles and the populous are forgotten again.

its a catch 22, i still have no answer, but i'm not a head of state or a UN ambassador, these arethe guys who IMO should be doing everything in their power to effect a change in heart somewhere aong the line

[Daniel]

Now we're getting somewhere! But will people lose their jobs if we're not super nice to China? :mark:

I honestly feel that China should be put in it's place. I think the UK would be far better off if they subsidised manufacturing and such so it stayed onshore. China should never have been allowed to grow into the all powerful country it is now. Europeans are stupid enough to think "We shouldn't copy other people's cars and DVD's" and "we should try and clean up the environment" but China just says "stuff you we're making good money doing what we're doing now" and the west just says thankyou very much for your cheap crappy Chinese built Mattel toys with lead paint.

[BDunnell]

Now we're getting somewhere! But will people lose their jobs if we're not super nice to China? :mark:

I honestly feel that China should be put in it's place. I think the UK would be far better off if they subsidised manufacturing and such so it stayed onshore. China should never have been allowed to grow into the all powerful country it is now. Europeans are stupid enough to think "We shouldn't copy other people's cars and DVD's" and "we should try and clean up the environment" but China just says "stuff you we're making good money doing what we're doing now" and the west just says thankyou very much for your cheap crappy Chinese built Mattel toys with lead paint.

Well, this is the effect of market forces for you.

[TOgoFASTER]

Seems plenty of countries and business having been lining up for the major natural gas resource riches and real inexpensive labor supplied by the Myanmar government to build those pipelines.
The song remains the same.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/10/amid-deaths-cen.html

[Daniel]

Sadly yes it is.

I'd rather that a domestic product is allowed to be competitive in the domestic market with subsidies. All this faffing about with shipping tat all the way from China to here is moronic. Why burn up all that oil shipping rubbish over here from China when you could just make it here and get the raw materials from closer to home with less need for wasting fossil fuels shipping it here? :mark:

I must point out that I'm against subsidising products which are being exported. Why did the foam container for my doner meat and chips on Tuesday come from China and not the UK and why shouldn't it be built here? :mark:

[Tomi]

Why did the foam container for my doner meat and chips on Tuesday come from China and not the UK and why shouldn't it be built here? :mark:

because you get 10 continers from china for the same price.

[Daniel]

because you get 10 continers from china for the same price.
Oh I understand. But at the end of the day you're not just outsourcing the manufacturing of the product, you're outsourcing profits :mark:

[SOD]

Seems plenty of countries and business having been lining up for the major natural gas resource riches and real inexpensive labor supplied by the Myanmar government to build those pipelines.
The song remains the same.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/10/amid-deaths-cen.html


It's easier to do business with a corrupt leader than to have to deal with a democratically elected people with a mandate.

[TOgoFASTER]

Seems many like their slice of the pie just the way it is.

[SOD]

For all of you wringing your hands on why the West doesn't do anything, the answer is simple. China. Nothing in this part of the world will happen or not happen without China giving the final say. Why? No one wants to war with them, and if Myanmar's butchers want to do what they are doing, they do it with the tacit knowledge that the US or UK will not be able to stop it.

If there was oil there, the Chinese would have invaded long ago by the way, either by economics or outright force.

This little nation is a tragedy but it just points out to the weakness of the UN and the system such as it is to deal with this sort of thing. WHen a nation goes against the UN and tries on humantarian grounds to stop the oppression, it usually is castigated for having ulterior motives.

All of you who think the international community and the UN is the way to solve all problems, well here is a perfect example of how feckless it is. Power is gained by the mouth of a well aimed gun, and winning wars. Some nations do so with somewhat tainted motives, but a few try to do the right thing, but at some point, the war you create can be bigger than the problem you are trying to solve. Such is Myanamar.

These thugs deserve to be tossed in jail for life or shot, but no one will do it because to do it would entail either the Chinese actually giving a rat's behind and giving their blessing, or a war with the Chinese to go into their sphere of influence......

Most nations care, but not enough that they can do a damned thing. Hey, I have an idea, lets get the US to do it.... of course, that is the answer to most of the problems of the world since they seem to be the only ones to actually be willing on occasion go in, but everyone doesn't trust them for doing it. Maybe in Iraq, the point could be made, but it still doesn't change the fact that American is blamed for whatever happens no matter whether they do it or not....

Do you have to dodge the militias south of the border who try to stop incursions from Snow Mexicans?

[TOgoFASTER]

If there was oil there

Good amounts of both oil and natural gas seem to be there.

[Placid]

We wished that Beijing was never selected for the 2008 Olympics.

If the Junta extends Suu Yi house arrest, then the Junta will receive an "Iraqi style" 48 hour ultimatum to step down. It will not be Than Shwe's decision. It is Bush's decision.

Myanmar will become another Cambodia and Bosnia/Herzegovina in the circumstances of mass graves. This is why the world do not want to see. If you are a reporter or journalist from another country, you can be expelled or brand you a spy if they find out about military background. Shwe will go down.

[Robinho]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7031171.stm

international pressure is growing, but China and Russia (surprise) continue to oppose the UN and are saying its an i"nternal issue that doesn't represent an international threat"

what a cop out, whilst technically correct it is morally inept, what better way to say "we couldn't give a stuff about anyone else, as long as its not affecting us", total cowardice, i hope the demos and pressure from the other nations can sway things.

officially 10 people killed, unofficially thousands arrested, relocated, beaten and many missing :(

[oily oaf]

It never ceases to amaze and frustrate me how some nations can turn a blind eye and in some cases give guarded support to pariah regimes like the odious bunch of thugs that currently preside over the oppressed people of Burma.
Russia and China are cut from the same cloth as the conveniently myopic African nations that are propping up Mugabi in Zimbabwe.
IMHO of course.

[SOD]

On Monday, an anti-war march will be banned from entering Westminster square. Which country is cracking down on political protests again?

[Camelopard]

If there was oil there

Good amounts of both oil and natural gas seem to be there.

A major investor in Burma is the French oil company Total, (sponsors of the WRC Citroen team). here is a link to their site explaining their situation: http://burma.total.com/en/news/p_5_4.htm usual PR goobledygook and spin.
quote "By promoting responsible behavior, our local teams can serve as a model for business and political leaders looking for ways to address the country's human rights issues."

US oil company Chevron is also a major player in the gas project, despite US sanctions and their response is basically the same as Total. That is any replacement companies would come from China or India and be less likely to be commited to helping the locals......

[Daniel]

On Monday, an anti-war march will be banned from entering Westminster square. Which country is cracking down on political protests again?
Which country is a brutal regime. Which country is worried about terrorists using protests to get closer to important buildings and attack?

[maxu05]

I think that the Chinese and Russians are not so stupid as to rush in an get involved in another countries affairs, unlike that muppet Bush. That's just my opinion, I am not having a go at anyone on this forum. The US president is claimed to be the leader of the free world, (as they say so many times on tv), so why hasn't Bush instigated something ? Not enough oil for you Mr Bush ? Oh well, just having a rant, don't take it too seriously.

[TOgoFASTER]

A major investor in Burma is the French oil company Total, (sponsors of the WRC Citroen team). here is a link to their site explaining their situation: http://burma.total.com/en/news/p_5_4.htm usual PR goobledygook and spin.
quote "By promoting responsible behavior, our local teams can serve as a model for business and political leaders looking for ways to address the country's human rights issues."

US oil company Chevron is also a major player in the gas project, despite US sanctions and their response is basically the same as Total. That is any replacement companies would come from China or India and be less likely to be commited to helping the locals......


Nice meaningless mantra... thanks for passing that on.

What kind of labor did they knowingly allow to build their pipelines? One paid an out of court settlement revolving around those humane labor practices used by their Myanmar partners.
There's the human rights PR BS vs. profit in a nutshell.

Cut and paste from earlier link I posted from here.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...eaths-cen.html

Other companies that have invested in Myanmar's natural gas industry include Nippon Oil of Japan, Thailand's state-controlled oil company PTTEP and Malaysia's state-owned oil company Petronas. Indian, South Korean and Chinese firms are also involved in natural gas exploration off Myanmar's shores, and are currently vying for multi-billion-dollar projects.

[Camelopard]

Nice meaningless mantra... thanks for passing that on.

What kind of labor did they knowingly allow to build their pipelines? One paid an out of court settlement revolving around those humane labor practices used by their Myanmar partners.
There's the human rights PR BS vs. profit in a nutshell.

Cut and paste from earlier link I posted from here.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...eaths-cen.html

Other companies that have invested in Myanmar's natural gas industry include Nippon Oil of Japan, Thailand's state-controlled oil company PTTEP and Malaysia's state-owned oil company Petronas. Indian, South Korean and Chinese firms are also involved in natural gas exploration off Myanmar's shores, and are currently vying for multi-billion-dollar projects.


Sorry Togofaster, I didn't read your earlier post and the link you provided otherwise I would not have posted my link. Sorry if it came across as me defending these companies, I'm certainly not and I must use the sarcasm smilie more often!
I think the point remains the same, whilst there is huge profits to be made, who cares about human rights!!

[TOgoFASTER]

No cossie I fully understood your meaning and I agreed with you.
I just thought there was a need to emphasive the point of these companies and their interworkings with the Myarmar government and where they are from. Plus what they are willing to turn a blind eye to.
I thought it would give a better look into the forces at work and the agenda.

The following is the meaningless mantra I was refering to...
"By promoting responsible behavior, our local teams can serve as a model for business and political leaders looking for ways to address the country's human rights issues."

[leopard]

I think China and India have to keep their interest behind their option to stay reluctant and silent over crisis in Myanmar.

The growing requirement of oil of China has competency to seek the source and is in planing to build the pipeline in Myanmar, besides Myanmar would become alternative route for oil supply from west Asia and Africa and cut off its dependency from current route of Street Malacca wedged between Malaysia and Indonesia.

ASEAN actually can urge Myanmar to implement the better democracy and may sanction them from the membership. However the neighbor countries as individual has its importance on Myanmar and this might have put them in silence besides the reluctant of interfering others.

Just for reference ;)
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/04/13/news/edvatik.php

[Malbec]

The only thing that will bring about the downfall of the Burmese government is if there is a schism within the army itself, and the only way the protesters can bring that about is to set off a bloodbath so big and brutal that army units openly start rebelling or refusing to follow their orders.

If China or India or any other power do anything short of invading Myanmar they will simply be ignored by the Burmese army. Sanctions are simply pointless.

Sadly thats the reality and it doesn't look as if the Burmese people have the stomach for that bloodbath.

[Daniel]

The only thing that will bring about the downfall of the Burmese government is if there is a schism within the army itself, and the only way the protesters can bring that about is to set off a bloodbath so big and brutal that army units openly start rebelling or refusing to follow their orders.

If China or India or any other power do anything short of invading Myanmar they will simply be ignored by the Burmese army. Sanctions are simply pointless.

Sadly thats the reality and it doesn't look as if the Burmese people have the stomach for that bloodbath.
The problem is that invasion is a naughty word. I'm sure if China marched a few million soldiers in and say "Oi you stop with the human rights violations and give the people democracy" or next time we'll be back and it won't be pretty" then the military would give control up so fast it wouldn't be funny.

[Malbec]

The problem is that invasion is a naughty word. I'm sure if China marched a few million soldiers in and say "Oi you stop with the human rights violations and give the people democracy" or next time we'll be back and it won't be pretty" then the military would give control up so fast it wouldn't be funny.

I doubt that China would invade Myanmar and the Burmese army would never give up without a serious fight.

There's an old saying, never fight a land war in Asia. The British never had an easy time in Burma and remember that the Burmese made life incredibly difficult for them when the Japanese attacked. The Japanese found the Burmese difficult when they turned against them late in the war.

The Americans and Chinese will look at a map of Burma and the people and will both remember what happened to them in Vietnam.

Noone wants to invade Burma because there isn't sufficient reason to do so and they know that historically invading forces have suffered horribly there.

Its those pacifistic Buddhists and their fighting reputation that keeps them away ;)

[Daniel]

I doubt that China would invade Myanmar and the Burmese army would never give up without a serious fight.

There's an old saying, never fight a land war in Asia. The British never had an easy time in Burma and remember that the Burmese made life incredibly difficult for them when the Japanese attacked. The Japanese found the Burmese difficult when they turned against them late in the war.

The Americans and Chinese will look at a map of Burma and the people and will both remember what happened to them in Vietnam.

Noone wants to invade Burma because there isn't sufficient reason to do so and they know that historically invading forces have suffered horribly there.

Its those pacifistic Buddhists and their fighting reputation that keeps them away ;)
True. The Americans are still in what may be their 21st century Vietnam so their appetite for invasion will surely be low

[leopard]

Why would sanction be pointless? We can't live alone without others, as a nation Burma will need to interact with others for fulfilling something they didn't have. However the more constructive talks is preferable than giving them sanction.

Invasion isn't a good idea I doubt there are nations would want to invade another but ... ;)

[Placid]

Insisting on dialog will get nowhere. Invasion is the only solution.

[TOgoFASTER]

What a world.

[Malbec]

Why would sanction be pointless? We can't live alone without others, as a nation Burma will need to interact with others for fulfilling something they didn't have. However the more constructive talks is preferable than giving them sanction.

The Burmese economy is largely self-sufficient so it won't take a big hit with sanctions. Limiting trade with the country will hit the poor and middle classes first which is fine if you want to motivate them to overthrow the government or change the system (which was the point of the sanctions against South Africa) but in Burma's case motivating the people against the government clearly isn't the problem.

The people in power are not going to be hurt by sanctions. There are always back-channel routes of getting what you want and money is not a problem for the ruling classes. You have to use other means to hurt them.