^ So, you claim that Musharraf was totally helpless as chief of army or president? He managed to stay in power for so long while being threatened by a 'heavy taliban support' in the institution? He could do nothing but ask for prolonged support from US for staying in power threatening Taliban takeover and suppressing political activity in the country?
Your claim that Musharraf managed to rise up to the CoA position and then remain president of the Military Republic of Pakistan for 8 years without support of his subordinates is absurd to say the least.
He had support of the subordinates and corp commanders precisely because he focused most of his energy on al qaeda and left taliban largely alone.** That** is how he stayed in power so long.
reason people were unwilling to accept it because of him and his actions of keeping himself in power.
its all about perceptions people hated him and they perceived whatever he was doing was for himself and america.
As for lalmasji do you know he allowed to to grow to divert attention from judiciary movement, and when it became monster he hit them and hit them wrong although people supported action initially but when there was a chance to get it resolved in better way he bulldozed everything, PM went to eat kulfi and he having his wine...
he was one of the worsts...zardari can be worst as well but they can be contained but these generals when in power cant be..
Him and his actions in keeping in power? Are you implying that if he was a democratic leader like Great Zardari, the public would have accepted a large scale offensive into FATA? Would the public have accepted an operation against lal masjid during the first week when ghazi's ninjas came out with laathis?
I love how when the same people (not you personally, but the right wing contingent) who barely support the operation in swat now, are claiming they would have supported such operations in October 2001.
He had support of the subordinates and corp commanders precisely because he focused most of his energy on al qaeda and left taliban largely alone.** That** is how he stayed in power so long.
Are you even reading what you write?
I read a lot, including what I write, and not only fiction. And I back up my claims too.
You just admitted that he didn't do ANYTHING about taliban during his tenure which makes this debate useless.
I read a lot, including what I write, and not only fiction. And I back up my claims too.
You just admitted that he didn't do ANYTHING about taliban during his tenure which makes this debate useless.
I didn't say he didn't do anything, I said he didn't do enough and I listed the exact reasons why - well known pakistani establishment love for terrorist talibans. Being a COAS is not exactly like being a dictator within the army. Musharraf did as much as he could with this system. So, what are YOU debating about?
Musharraf probably is the worst army chief ever in history of Pakistan. This guy had his much uttered "unity of command" for nearly a decade and yet during his tenure nearly a thousand Pakistani soldiers were killed and yet the Taliban went on from strength to strength. Villagae after village came under TTP control during his regime and despite getting nearly a thousand soldiers killed at hands of Taliban. Compare it with present operation by Kiyani where each day forces are pushing Taliban back.
Musharraf was a dictator. He came into power through illegal means. No matter how you cut it, no matter how corrupt the democratic system, solution isn't a dictator. Musharraf never had mass support in Pakistan, he was always a dictator no matter how liberal his views and no matter what positive thing he may have introduced or tried to introduce. Now with that in mind it didn't matter what kind of action he was taking against the extremists, half-assed or not people were against musharraf and that was that. That's why it's better to have a fuc*ed up democracy than a dictator who is...I don't know..good or not...stay in the army where you belong.
I still remeber his first speech after kicking on the butt of NS. He said his only aim would be to wipeout corruption. NS, SS, BB and AAZ were history to Paki politics and they would never enter in Pakistan. After nine years of his rule Pakistan was not only more corrupt, but bankcrupt, nurtured terrorism to get illegal $s from Bush the mybaap. Finally he hammered the final nail in the coffin of his untruthful promises of honest government by issuing NRO legalizing all corruption and murder cases against politicians. He was the MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENT in the history of Pakistan, it will take decades to restore the postion before he came to power.
Burqay waali khatoon and kehkeshan please don't comment on my above post. I know what would be your answer, justifying this illegal and corrupt president because he is a MUHAJIR. Think above the ethinicity prefrences.
^If you don't want anybody to comment on your post, don't post it! Musharraf was the most honest and committed leader pakistan has had since liaquat ali khan. He was limited by the junle laws of pakistan and the jihadi sympathies of the establishment, but despite that broke ties with the taliban at the official level, something no other leader could have done.
What is not correct? Are you disputing the well known fact that much of pakistani public was pro-taliban until barely a few weeks ago?
Wow!
That's exactly the line Musharraf used to chant in front of Americans to ensure his own survival.
Please give me a single proof that Pakistani public was ever pro Taliban and endorsed their version of sharia to be adopted by the state. When did Pakistani public ever elect mullahs or religious extremist in an election except the MMA in 2002 in a highly manipulated and rigged elections to show Americans that *Pakistani public are pro taliban nut cases and Musharraf as a person is the good guy and a friend of America. *
Musharraf was the worst ruler in the history of Pakistan who sold motherland for his own personal petty power hunger by projecting a wrong image of Pakistani people in international community who otherwise would have questioned the legitimacy of his own presidential/military/chief executive status.
That's exactly the line Musharraf used to chant in front of Americans to ensure his own survival.
Please give me a single proof that Pakistani public was ever pro Taliban and endorsed their version of sharia to be adopted by the state. When did Pakistani public ever elect mullahs or religious extremist in an election except the MMA in 2002 in a highly manipulated and rigged elections to show Americans that *Pakistani public are pro taliban nut cases and Musharraf as a person is the good guy and a friend of America. *
Musharraf was the worst ruler in the history of Pakistan who sold motherland for his own personal petty power hunger by projecting a wrong image of Pakistani people in international community who otherwise would have questioned the legitimacy of his own presidential/military/chief executive status.
Single proof? How about the thousands who went to Afghanistan pre-2001 to fight alongside Taliban or the many many more who wrote in their favor, donated to them etc? Public may have voted for the usual feudal parties, but support for Afghan jihad and Taliban rule was always high. Even now, you have JI, JUI, PML-N, PTI supporters crying over the deaths of our "muslim talib brothers". The proof is all over the media even today.
Single proof? How about the thousands who went to Afghanistan pre-2001 to fight alongside Taliban or the many many more who wrote in their favor, donated to them etc? Public may have voted for the usual feudal parties,** but support for Afghan jihad and Taliban rule was always high.** Even now, you have JI, JUI, PML-N, PTI supporters crying over the deaths of our "muslim talib brothers". The proof is all over the media even today.
With your logic even Obama is a Taliban. Being opposed to Bush mentality does not mean being supportive of taliban mentality.
If a few hundred people went for Afghan Jihad how does it prove that majority of Pakistani people are pro taliban.
These rantings can impress people frem west but can not fool Pakistanis.
PTI lost a lot of support recently just because of their pro taliban stance. This is a big proof that Pakistanis at large do not support extremism.
As far as somebody getting happy over killings of even enemy represent a very sick mental state.
Lal masjid was never "buldozed" it is still standing.
Secondly.
*There was NO woman killed. Unless you have a name or names of women. Then you post them here. *
Thirdly
No one was TRAPPED in the mosque. They REFUSED to come out. And in fact these Jihadis shot and killed so many law enforcement agents.
Mullah Aziz burqaposh should have been hanged for his crimes aka inciting a rebellion against the state.
*Why do you all love to post lies and untruths. This really boggles ones mind. *
well burqaposh! no woman killed in lal masjid operation. haah1 so you want names aaan of these women to be written here. so why dont you yourself write the name of women killed by talibanic attacks when you call them terrorists who they are also in reality. also do put ur statement on urself man. dont be silly
Single proof? How about the thousands who went to Afghanistan pre-2001 to fight alongside Taliban or the many many more who wrote in their favor, donated to them etc? Public may have voted for the usual feudal parties, but support for Afghan jihad and Taliban rule was always high. Even now, you have JI, JUI, PML-N, PTI supporters crying over the deaths of our "muslim talib brothers". The proof is all over the media even today.
well MQM Man! they all do not cry for talibans but for our pashtun brothers and sisters who are displaced during operation and for migrants also. if you say every pashtun a talib then this is idiotic behaviour and hypocrisy.