The history has proved it again and again that interfering of army in politics is disastrous but Pakistanis are not ready to learn anything from it. Pakistanis and their brave and wise generals. Everybody knows it was the pressure from uncle sam which compelled the dictator to curb on the jihadis and to change his kashmir policy. Did he not sent his troops on the peaks of Kargil to demolish the talks b/w Nawaz and ABV? Was it a wise act of him? The war of thousand cuts that the army waged against India has bled Pakistan dry.
Yaar Fraudia,
Everything I have pointed out you are saying, yes it's wrong.
Then why have Musharraf? You can put a clay doll in power and it could have done the same things for Pakistan.
Musharraf took power saying that he will "clean up" Pakistan.
Civilian Corruption has remained unchanged. Military corruption has skyrocketed.
Extremism has exploded. Still Musharraf has done nothing except make cool sounding speeches in front of Gora crowds while making shady deals with the jihadis and letting them free.
When it comes to national sovereignty also, he makes tall claims - "We will not allow US troops" or "No FBI were involved" etc. But later the truth comes out.
He singlehandedly destroyed our judiciary. What he did with the Supreme Court is shameful.
In the end, he has reduced a nation of 140 million that was insipred by people of the stature of Allama Iqbal and led by people like the Quaid to a one man state.
That is the greatest tragedy for us.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
You're a little off base here.
[/QUOTE]
no mv he's not.. but it's a different topic altogether
the trouble with our Generals is that they are afraid of fighting a war.. period.. when you're making baRhak's like a shair but show your tail and offer compromises everytime pressure situations arise you lose not only your credibility but your dignity too.
Yup.
Look at the dance America is doing with North Korea who MAY have nukes. They only attacked Eye-raaq because they already defeated them and knew they had no Weapons.
We have a million man army with jawaans with lot of jazba who will give any enemy a bloody nose. Even if the top level is spoilt, our troops are second to none, Alhamdilullah.
We were under NO realistic military threat from America.
What we need is a strong leader who has the b@lls to draw the line.
Now Musharraf is moving the line constantly, giving up a little a by little.
First Afghan policy, then internal sovereignty, then Kashmir, now nuclear program.
Who knows what will be given up tomorrow.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
no mv he's not.. but it's a different topic altogether
[/QUOTE]
mv?
You’re right it is a different topic. Pakistan was offered a carrot and a stick they choose the carrot as any rational leader would. You're mistaken if you believe that the stick were sanctions.
Khilari
the ciscumstances that existed when musharraf took office and post 9/11 are very different. No other pakistani leader has faced these kinds of crises.
You are noting that he gave up afghan policy, what would you have liked to see? that pakistan get involved and take afghanistan's side?
They only attacked Eye-raaq because they already defeated them and knew they had no Weapons.
I am talking about desert storm, people did nto think US will invade, and it did..
*kashmir *
what exactly did he give up on? what grounds ahd we gained in the past 56 years? the off chance that someday somehow it will happen? once again global mood towards the freedom fighters changed post 9/11..the political damage is enough that if not for good it is a moot point in the foreseeable future.
then you talk about jazba and our troops..
I hate to state it but if US did attack Pakistan, teh game will be over pretty quickly.. the fight may go on, but Pakistan does not have the navy, airforce, or the type of technology that US has.
and the point is even if our troops can fight, and put up a strong front, if there is another way to avoid a confrontation and putting the awaam in danger why not.
and he made this into a one man country? how soon we forget zia, BB, bhutto, yahya, ayub..how far back do u want to go.
Blaming the nation's ills on one person in such challenging times is a bit strange.
I for one do not recall any government in pakistan which resolved corruption, violence, crime, won some major international disputes, etc etc. can u name some? why then just gauge him by a different standard..he is not perfect by any chance, but in these circumstances especially.. i dont think there is another leader, current or past who would have been able to handle this.
i just talked to my dad and sounds like people are really really really ticked off at the govt for the way they are handling AQ Khan, do you all feel that this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back?
I think people will be really really really ticked of if we had some sanctions imposed and then they were really really really hungry.
awam did naray baazi when nawaaz refused to stop the nuclear tests..
they will sacrifice this, sacrifice that, will stay huingry, will do this will do that..BS.. ppl started bitchin about the impact of sanctions which were placed due to the tests.
People could do a whole lot more for pakistan if instead of just being really really really ticked off, they were really really really honest and paid their taxes :)
Re: Re: Re: Demise of Pakistani nation
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Code_Red: *
The time will tell, who is saved. The fact of the mater is that we were not a good nation. We blame every leader of wrong doing. but we forget that we made them leaders and we gave them power.
What the hell if he transfered any technology. We should have backed him. And never should have cofessed any wrong doings. Has America and Britain ever confessed that they unjustly waged war on Iraq and killed thousand of innocent people. Has russia ever appologised for killing millions of Afgans.
And talk about unity of Muslim ummah. Unity with traitors like Libya and Iran. Who saved their ass, and stabed their brothers in back. shame on them and shame on us.
[/QUOTE]
Bro
Its all about who has got the Bigger Stick(danda).
Lekn as for "save", I agree waqt he batyaeee gaaaa.
Lekn dil chootaa naaa kareeee. Khuda behtar karegaaaa.
Ameen.
Re: Re: Re: Demise of Pakistani nation
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Code_Red: *
The time will tell, who is saved. The fact of the mater is that we were not a good nation. We blame every leader of wrong doing. but we forget that we made them leaders and we gave them power.
What the hell if he transfered any technology. We should have backed him. And never should have cofessed any wrong doings. Has America and Britain ever confessed that they unjustly waged war on Iraq and killed thousand of innocent people. Has russia ever appologised for killing millions of Afgans.
And talk about unity of Muslim ummah. Unity with traitors like Libya and Iran. Who saved their ass, and stabed their brothers in back. shame on them and shame on us.
[/QUOTE]
We elected Janab Nawaz Sharif Sahab. Lekn he was
dismissed. And accussed of selling out on the issue of
Kargil.
^Countries enact laws to make people pay taxes. Even the highly civilized scandinavians pay taxes not because they love their countries but mainly because they are aware of the dire consequences. In Pakistan nobody is brought to book, neither the tax fraudster nor the military dictator.
I also appeal to all citizens of Pakistan, in the supreme national interest, to refrain from any further speculations and not to politicise this extremely sensitive issue of national security.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
the ciscumstances that existed when musharraf took office and post 9/11 are very different. No other pakistani leader has faced these kinds of crises.
You are noting that he gave up afghan policy, what would you have liked to see? that pakistan get involved and take afghanistan's side?
[/QUOTE]
I disagree, the Russian attack on Afghanistan and the 1971 crisis were not less in any sense. Do you think the Pakistani Army was better then? Just because there was an attack in US, Pakistan should change it foreign policies because a neighboring (forget Muslim) dependable country was in imminent threat from a superpower. It happened before as well. There where other options that the leadership could have used, or mediated. But the leadership proved impotent both on political and military grounds.
Our leaders care too much about the international mood and care less about their own citizens, the simple reason is that they do not represent the masses. Not only this they want the masses to follow their ideals.
Give me one incident, any source, where Pakistani people came out in protest for being suffering from the sanctions. The leaders may have done that, because they are totally dependent upon international aid. But sanctions never heart the Pakistani people more than the policies of its leaders.
As far as I can recall until 2001 Pakistan has always been under some sort of sanctions, so it’s not new. I wish the Pakistani, people ask some thing in return of these taxes they pay as well, like representative leaders not like the Choudries, Mians, Jatois, Bhuttos, Lagahraiz, who have been the leaders by not paying taxes.
Translation:
Musharraf tried to scapegoat me. But I threatened to bring him down with me. Both of us have been lying through our teeth, so please don't make us lie again and again.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Khilaari: *
Yup.
We have a million man army with jawaans with lot of jazba who will give any enemy a bloody nose. Even if the top level is spoilt, our troops are second to none, Alhamdilullah.
We were under NO realistic military threat from America.
[/QUOTE]
Well I thought you were quite rational up to this point. Khilaari, there's no doubt that jazba and a million man army can give anyone a bloody nose as we can see right now in Afghanistan and Iraq, but is that the extent of your ambitions?
Mushy might have his faults but he shouldn't be attacked for trying to point his country in the right direction. Pakistan can do a lot better than become a nation whose only cause is to give countries a 'bloody nose'.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by epicurean: *
Pakistan To Get Record $700 Million
WASHINGTON, USA: Feb 04 (PNS) - Pakistan will get a record fund allocation of $ 700 million from the United States for financial year 2004-5. The amount is part of the five-year (05 to 09) aid package that totals $ 3 billion - $ 1.5 billion in Defence and $ 1.5 billion in economic support assistance.
In an interview with APP, the Deputy Chief of the Mission, Mohammad Sadiq Monday said the United States Administration has suggested "a record fund allocation of over 700 million dollars for Pakistan for the U.S. budgetary year 2005."
It is higher than the previous fund allocation for the current year, which amounted to 395 million dollars, of which figure, half was utilized in debt repayments saving on the debt interest amount.
"This is despite the fact that there was immense opposition from Indian lobby and others, who tried to bring about different enactments in a bid to halt the proposed earmarkings," Mr.Sadiq stated.
Out of $700, the allocations are $300 in Economic Support Fund, $300 for Foreign Military Financing, and remaining $100 forother areas including allocations for child health development assistance, anti-terrrorism, border security and training, support for narcotics control.
He said Pakistan has utilized the $200 million for Economic Support Fund for repayment of its debt. It helped in writing off of almost $500 million debt to the US.Pakistan's foreign debt and liabilities total $35 billion, of which $33 billion is debt.
The $3 billion package was announced by President George W. Bush at Camp David in a meeting with President General Pervez Musharraf on June 24, 2003.
According to the agreement, $600 million will be disbursed each year - half of the amount being for defence equipment purchases and remaining half for economic development.
President George W. Bush signed and submitted to the Congress
the budgetary allocations Monday.
[/QUOTE]
Nations that survive on 'hand-outs' don't progress.
Allama Iqbal must be referring to such when he said the following:
Woe to him that accepts bounty from another's table
And lets his neck be bent with benefits!
He hath consumed himself with the lightning of the favours bestowed on him,
He hath sold his honour for a paltry coin,
Happy the man who thirsting in the sun
Does not crave of Khidhr a cup of water!
His brow is not moist with the shame of beggary;
He is a man still, not a piece of clay…
- Allama Iqbal
I heard Khan Saheb also put the nuclear blueprint on eBay. Is this news correct ?
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Some1: *
I heard Khan Saheb also put the nuclear blueprint on **eBay*. Is this news correct ?
[/QUOTE]
Well, aside from E-bay, it can't be only AQ Khan. He, himself, stated along with other government officials that there are more than a dozen people involved in weapons trade. We can't just accuse AQ Khan of everything and there is a possibility of military involvement as well. Pakistan has been dictated or "governed" by military rulers for about 30 years. It is highly unlikely that Gen. Mush or Gen. Jahangir Karamat would not know about this. AQ Khan can be forced to say what he stated in his televised address. Not that he didn't do anything, but he shouldn't be responsible for everything.
Praise Be To Allah
We have survived before, and will keep surviving by the grace of Almighty. We can post our comments here, and blame the president or Dr. A Q Khan, but as brother Rehman suggested that we should close this chapter right here once and for all, and move on. It's not feasible to discuss and drag such sensitive issues.