Jump to content

Hua Hin: Hotel pool villas razed to the ground after sparks fly from burning fields - 160 million baht damage in repeat of last year


webfact

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, chrisandsu said:

When you are mass building like that those villas were probably built for less then a million . 

seeing the photos, yes, you are right

 

they also look as if the roof was made of leaves or straw or something similar atop of corrugated material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

The farmers burn the sugar cane every year.

Some rich folk building a resort nearby ain't gonna stop 'em.

 

Maybe 'thatch' isn't the right roofing material to use here.

Thais are driving drunk all year long. If you have an accident with a drunk driver, it´s your fault?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not supposed to burn their fields. Not just because of fire hazards, but due to pollution. They need to be sued for all they are worth, particularly if they are part of the big business sugar conglomerates.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, colinneil said:

Just another example of bloody ignorant farmers, who dont give a s++t about neighbours.

Unless it was a naturally caused fire. 

 

The article in the link stated that the land was abandoned, not cultivated, and didn't say that it was deliberate or caused by farmers burning their fields.  It did say that forensic police were investigating the cause in view of the previous similar fire which doesn't suggest "bloody ignorant farmers who don't give a s++t about neighbours", to use your words.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

The farmers burn the sugar cane every year.

Some rich folk building a resort nearby ain't gonna stop 'em.

The Sanook link in the OP says that the land is abandoned, not cultivated. 

 

Including the link in the OP isn't going to stop some folk from reading it, though.

Edited by Bob A Kneale
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Unless it was a naturally caused fire. 

 

The article in the link stated that the land was abandoned, not cultivated, and didn't say that it was deliberate or caused by farmers burning their fields.  It did say that forensic police were investigating the cause in view of the previous similar fire which doesn't suggest "bloody ignorant farmers who don't give a s++t about neighbours", to use your words.

You must be in need of new glasses, it clearly states in the OP the fire came from burning fields.

Instead of trying to make me look stupid, as you do in many threads, you need to read slowly/ and correctly.

Or should we excuse you on the fact English is not your forst language?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, KhunKenAP said:

They are not supposed to burn their fields. Not just because of fire hazards, but due to pollution. They need to be sued for all they are worth, particularly if they are part of the big business sugar conglomerates.

The Sanook link in the OP says that the land is abandoned, not cultivated. 

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bob A Kneale said:

The Sanook link in the OP says that the land is abandoned, not cultivated.  Including the link in the OP isn't going to stop some folk from reading it, though.

The land behind our home was not cultivated, yet it did not stop the ignorant owner from setting it alight, and almost cost many people here their homes.

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, colinneil said:
8 minutes ago, Bob A Kneale said:

Unless it was a naturally caused fire. 

 

The article in the link stated that the land was abandoned, not cultivated, and didn't say that it was deliberate or caused by farmers burning their fields.  It did say that forensic police were investigating the cause in view of the previous similar fire which doesn't suggest "bloody ignorant farmers who don't give a s++t about neighbours", to use your words.

You must be in need of new glasses, it clearly states in the OP the fire came from burning fields.

Instead of trying to make me look stupid, as you do in many threads, you need to read slowly/ and correctly.

Or should we excuse you on the fact English is not your forst language?

I know that it said the fields were burning, it didn't say how they came to be burning, that is what is being investigated.  The land is abandoned.  I'm not trying to make anyone look stupid, I'm just making a rational observation based on reading the OP and the link.

 

"Or should we excuse you on the fact English is not your forst language?"

English definitely is not my "forst language" [sic]!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, colinneil said:

The land behind our home was not cultivated, yet it did not stop the ignorant owner from setting it alight, and almost cost many people here their homes.

 

The Hua Hin land in question is abandoned land which suggests it may not have an identifiable owner!

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...