Talk:2003 Phnom Penh riots

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cambodia Mid‑importance

2003 Phnom Penh riots is part of WikiProject Cambodia, a project to improve all Cambodia-related articles. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group on Wikipedia, aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Cambodia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.CambodiaWikipedia:WikiProject CambodiaTemplate:WikiProject CambodiaCambodia articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cambodia To-do:

Let us work in the best reference and presentation of archaeological sites of Cambodia beyond Angkor like Sambor Prei Kuk, Angkor Borei (Takeo), etc.

Should disambiguate Republican Party for Democracy and Renewal and generally try to link up social conscience with right-wing values.

I'm looking for the best picture or any informations about the KAF's U-6 (Beaver). It seem that the KAF had 3 aircrafts. But in 1971, during the viet cong's sapper attack at the Pochentong Air Base,at least 1 Beaver was destroyed.In 1972 at leat 1 Beaver was refurbished with a new engine. http://www.khmerairforce.com/AAK-KAF/AVNK-AAK-KAF/Cambodia-Beaver-KAF.JPG

Thankfull for this info. [Unsigned]

Thailand Low‑importance

	Thailand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I just wanted to chime in on this topic here. This is my personal opinion as a Thai resident and I don't know how I can fit this one into the article.

To say that Thai people claimed Angkor Wat as part of Thailand is incredibly absurd. I have never heard anyone saying this before in my 21 years of living in Thailand. Most of us don't care about the borders. Yes, we were all taught about how we lost territory in the history books, but none of us has any desire to argue for the lost territory.

To say that Ms Suvanant Kongying believed Angkor Wat belong to Thai is like saying Jean Reno believed Statue of Liberty belong to French.

The only border dispute that seemed to be bothering Thai citizens right now is the Khao Phra Viharn temple, right on the Thai-Cambodian border. But again, there're no aggressive attitude for reclaiming such areas.Suredeath 13:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that. Thanks to politics, tension now run high. Most people didn't give a damn about Khao Phra Viharn before Samak become Prime Minister.Suredeath (talk) 15:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe what you wrote above is true. Frankly, a lot of Cambodians are stupid, in fact, very stupid. They would believe wholeheartedly anything and everything that pleased them, they would rather live in their own perfect dream world than wake up and believe in facts, in short, they are very naive, stupid & lazy, believing anything that others tell them as long as it pleased them without even making an effort to verify the information. Just look at the Khmer Krom & Vietnam articles, they denied all historical facts & statistics from the government of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam) as well as the government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, CIA World Fact Book, Ethnologue or even logical reasoning but they believe in the all true, all seeing organization that I have never heard of before (I belive it is called Khmer Krom Foundation or something like that). If somebody tell them Genghis Khan was Cambodian, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be an edit war in the Genghis Khan article.

I still don't understand what the hell was the Vietnamese government thinking when they decided to occupy Cambodia for 10 years (1979-1989). We should just raze Phnom Penh to the ground then withdraw and let Pol Pot finish his work. Well, maybe they didn't know at the time the Cambodians are that ungrateful as to abuse their own saviors, discriminate against Vietnameses in their country and can you believe it, a lot of them even believe Vietnameses are responsible for the death of millions of Cambodians while Pol Pot was just trying to stop Vietnameses from killing more innocent civilians.--lt2hieu2004 08:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watch what you say. By your words, you are stupid. To rationalize and say all Khmers are stupid is racist and retarded. Vietnam shouldn't be a trusted source of information for population figures of people that are being oppressed. Cambodia and Khmers in general suffered enough for anyone so retared as you to say such awful words. Angkor means alot to Khmers, thats why we acted in radical way when a newspaper publish something like that, even withought a any credible source. Angkor represents Southeast Asia's largest contiguous empire, one that lasted over a milenium and had important cultural and governmental contribution to neighboring Thailand, so when a newspaper claims that a thai actress said that Angkor wasn't khmer, that would cause stir. What if someone was to point out that Vietnamese culture is largely Chinese, would that cause a stir? CanCanDuo 03:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you are the one who came to the conclusion that all Khmer are stupid, not me. I said "a lot of Cambodians are stupid", not all. However, since I'm so nice I'll not argue against your conclusion and just accept it as fact. Anybody can say whatever they want about Vietnamese culture, in fact, a lot of Chinese claimed Vietnamese culture is largely Chinese, but you don't see us killing people, trashing building, destroying our own economy. Anyway, this incident was started by a stupid Cambodian reporter, picked up by other stupid Cambodian media around the country and finalized by a group of retarded Cambodians. Compensation was then paid to the Thais by a stupid Cambodian leader who couldn't even stop a bogus claim from causing damages. Cambodians all around, keep up the good work and uphold the legacy of Pol Pot.--lt2hieu2004 09:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are nuts. Thailand and Vietnam were invading Cambodia at one time or another. Don't try to sugarcoat it. Every country has its share of history it should be ashamed of. The point was blind nationalism is a scary instrument whether it be in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Thailand.Suredeath 13:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, Vietnam and Thailand both invaded Cambodia and I'm sure you can see that I didn't deny that in anyway. Except for my last paragraph which is what I think we should have done in 1979, all I said is fact without any personal bias. I didn't even attempt to sugarcoat our invasion of Cambodia. In fact, I believe our army invaded Cambodia in response to their numerous incursions into Vietnam - not to save any Cambodians, we couldn't care less about them. But whatever the initial objective of the invasion, we did save a lot of Cambodia along the way. Just imagine how many more Cambodians would die if Pol Pot were in power for a few more years. --lt2hieu2004 14:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suredeath, consider this: quite a number of Cambodians are very nationalistic and have strong resentment towards Thais. Many were or had relatives mistreated and abused by Thai soldiers in the refugee camps, so the hatred that some Cambodians already held for Thais in the past grew a lot stronger there unfortunately. Any strong spark, whether it be synthetic or natural, can light a fire.

Cambodia had to to international court just to get back Preah Vihear. And having had Thailand rule over the province of Siem Reap in the past until it was receded back to Cambodia through that treaty with the French, a bigotted nationalist can think that Thailand also wanted Angkor Wat back. And some still wonder why there is a replica of Angkor Wat at the Grand Palace in Bangkok (although they may have no idea that this replica was built before Siem Reap was receded back to Cambodia). So if any over-zealous nationalist hears about Thailand claiming Angkor Wat (the most precious thing to nationalistic Cambodians) on the radio and newspapers, you can only imagine they would go on a rampage. But most Cambodians are passive and it wasn't like the whole nation participated in this riot. Most Cambodians would not kill over such a thing, they'd just be ranting about it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have beef against Thai people generally. I'm just trying to show you a window into their point of view, the nationalistic ones at least. --Hecktor 21:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article

I listed this as a good article due to its concise and NPOV (perhaps a bit too much, lol, but then again I have an intense dislike of Hun Sen) summary of the incident, even though it's a bit undersourced. However, corroboration can easily be found through a straight-up Google search of, say, "phnom penh riot temple." If I have time perhaps I'll come back and flesh the sources out. In the meantime, kudos to whoever originally wrote the bulk of this. Nicolasdz 08:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article removed from Wikipedia:Good articles

This article was formerly listed as a good article, but was removed from the listing because the article lacks references except for two external HTML links in the last section. --Allen3 ^talk 12:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC) $Insertformulahere$ [reply]

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/20565.htm
- In 2003 Phnom Penh riots on 2011-05-25 07:34:59, 404 Not Found
- In 2003 Phnom Penh riots on 2011-06-11 06:18:10, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/Cambodia_riot/
- In 2003 Phnom Penh riots on 2011-05-25 07:35:00, 404 Not Found
- In 2003 Phnom Penh riots on 2011-06-11 06:18:12, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources modified on 2003 Phnom Penh riots

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just attempted to maintain the sources on 2003 Phnom Penh riots. I managed to add archive links to 2 sources, out of the total 2 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.

Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.

Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made:

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]