Pakistan Army Generals

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
41

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Ji bilkul main smoke karta hoon magar itni bhi nahin ke dhooyein main khud ko bhula doon.

Beherhaal aap ke comments ka shukria.
Qasim Muhammad

BRIDAL PICS.
42

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Mere hasab se halaat itney nahi kharab pakistan main, nahi tu, is kism ke discussion pur hakomat ki bandagi hoti. Akhir freedom of expression hai to, isi liya hum sab yaha bat kar rahe hain.

Azam ne Pak fouj ko bhot dheel dey rakhi hai, esiliye sare desh nachor rakha hai. Har chez ki had hoti hai - Allah jarror koei hal nikale ga.

43

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Democracy is not compatilble with muslims! Most of the muslims rulers were army generals including the rashideens!

44

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

ok Mr.Bush :rolleyes:

45

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

the argument that Generals take over when the system is weak is not true..neither Gul Hasan Khan nor Mirza Aslam Beg took over when Zia died the civilian system was weak neither did anyone launch a takeover after Liaqat Ali Khans murder. Neither did Waheed Kakar or Asif Nawaz take over when the political system was in chaos ..either because of the collapse of the system in karachi or in the tussle between Nawaz and GIK.

The difference is most of those generals were either not interested in politics or were incapable of being politicians (the latter definitely being true in case of Aslam Beg). Professional soldiers like Asif Nawaz ..while they did not like politicians and blocked their interference ..were quite open in their beliefs that involvement in politics gradually erodes the capacity of the army to do it's job. Being a professional competent soldier is a full time job..you can't be half a politician and half a lt general..or in the case of Musharraf 1/3rd COAS , 1/3rd President, 1/3rd book writer.

46

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

zakk, Mush wouldnt have taken over if Nawaz hadnt hijacked his plane and refused to land in pakistan

47

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

WHY do most of pakistani's think negative, if u think negative u get negative results. These generals are very honest people and espacially read this word again ESPACIALLY MUSHURUF. Dont look at empty part of a glass of water look at the other half which is full of water. Its this general who has brought democrecy to the country, new roads are built, roads are full of cars this has only happend during generals rule. Ive lived in pakistan during so called "democrecy period" of nawaz sharif and benizier. there was no democrey they use to call each other traitor now look at them cowerds getting togather and calling each other brother and sister.

I would urge you to think positive and support the goverment and pakistan.

48

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

^ after 1971, we thought likewise and that half glass is still half and will remain half and you never know this thinking may damage us further, I mean according to the present situation.
5 Abi, who was Nawaz Nawaz Sharif by the way?
Nevertheless, none had the right to take over the rein, if Nawaz Sharif had done something wrong, there is a legal system to deal with him. Musharraf could place a civilian as interim Chief Executive and could easily dictate his terms regarding Nawaz Sharif's fate from the back door.

49

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

All writing ridiculous should know:

Musharraf never took over Pakistan, but it was army, that took over Pakistan. When army decided to take over Pakistan, Musharraf was not even in Pakistan.

If army had not taken over Pakistan, Musharraf would have been dead (Pakistan International Airline commercial plane Musharaf was travelling from Sri-Lanka to Pakistan, would have crashed, and all on that plane, including many innocent school children, their teachers, other passengers, and PIA staff, all would have died).

Army acted and took over the country, kicking Nawaz Shareef and his corrupt and crooked government. Later when Musharraf landed, Army asked Musharraf to take over the power.

What I heard, even then, Musharraf was reluctant to take over the power.

I believe, it was this reluctance by Musharraf in taking over Pakistan, kept the announcement of taking over the country by the army until late night. We should remember that army moved around 5 pm and took over complete control by 7 pm (when all relevant were under arrest and control of army at all places). Musharraf landed in Pakistan around 7 pm (after army took over the country) and at that time he was offered the power, but then, announcement of taking over was made many hours later, late at night, much after mid-night (around 2-30 AM).

After that announcement of taking over by the army, all was over for Nawaz and his ignorance (same ignorance that one can see in many Pakistanis when talking about democracy).

** Those who want to keep the army out of power, should not look towards army not to take over the country, but should start looking towards politicians to stop being corrupt, ignorant and idiot. A corrupt politician loses mandate to rule the country once that politician get involved in corruption. Police should arrest such politician even if that person is prime minister, persecute them and court should punish them. **

** Unfortunately, that is impossible in Pakistan, as police and judiciary is corrupt and very weak (and politicians make sure that they stay corrupt and weak). Thus, in a country where police could not arrest a corrupt politician on corruption charges while that politician is in power, judges could not give verdict against him while that politician is in power; it becomes duty of army to kick him even when that politician is in power. **

Police, judges or army, all are government employees not employee of the politicians and they have duty to serve the country, not politicians. In every respectable democratic country, government employees (police and judiciary) act against politicians if politicians become corrupt or misuse the power that they hold, what they hold not as right but as representation of people. If one group of government employee (like police and judiciary) does not act against them (being their accomplice, too scared or weak) then army should act.

Ideally, duty of army is to save the country from outside aggression while duty of police and judiciary is to act against those destroying the country from inside. Unfortunately, police and judiciary in Pakistan do not do their duty (rather become accomplice of politicians in looting the country) and thus, army as employee of the country, with duty to serve the country and save the country from any harm, finding country getting destroyed by these inner parasites, force themselves to take that responsibility too.

Personally, I would love to see honest politicians in power but where there are no honest politicians in Pakistan, army is much better. On the other hand, once a person is in power, I do not care if that person has hat of politician or army, I would like to see that person an honest being, working for the best of the country. If that person is working best for the country, it is fine.

Fortunately, I find that Musharraf is working in all ways, best for the country and most of his policies are for better Pakistan, better then any in the past who ruled Pakistan. He is trying to rewind many past evils. He is the most tolerant, straightforward and patient leader that Pakistan ever seen or I believe any country in the world has found.

Musharraf compared to past evils:

Musharraf Vs Ayub Khan: Musharraf is fighting the evil of selective development, and patronisation, hallmark of Ayub era. It was due to Ayub policy of neglect that Balochistan and East Pakistan left completely undeveloped, creating mistrust in East Pakistanis (resulting in separation) while Baloch starting war against Pakistan from 1973 to 1977, against Bhutto government, when Pakistan army was used by Bhutto to kill many Balochs. (A trend that lasted until Musharraf came to power. By trying to develop Balochistan, and other underdeveloped areas (like remote Sindh and FATA) without patronising anyone, Musharraf is changing that trend).
**
Musharraf Vs Yahya Khan:** Yahya Khan was Rangeela general who was slave to his senses and love life, whereas Musharraf is commando general who is willing to fight and risk his life for a cause (trying to make Pakistan progressive and stable).

Musharraf Vs Z A Bhutto: Musharraf is fighting the evil of nationalisation (that stopped all development in Pakistan), intolerance, selfishness, political victimisation, and rampant nepotism, hallmark of Z A Bhutto. (After Z A Bhutto, political victimisation, intolerance, selfishness and nepotism became culture of Pakistan politics and lot needed doing, that Musharraf is doing).
**
Musharraf Vs Zia:** Musharraf is trying to fight the evil of sectarian terrorism, and retarded Jihadism (that is nothing to do with Islam) created by Zia (doing so, Musharraf is endangering his own life but still showing will to fight). Fighting this evil created by Zia, something that destroyed the fabric of Pakistan society and created security risk for Pakistan, needed a very strong and dedicated person in power that it seems Musharraf is. Zia destroyed Islam and Islamic teachings for his own personal goals (and to make USA and Saudia happy), thus a lot is needed doing, to unwind that mischievous misguidance in Islam promoted by Zia, and I believe Musharraf is trying to do his best to unwind that.

*
**
Musharraf Vs BB and NS:** Musharraf is trying to fight evil of corruption, corrupt culture, and stagnant economy, hallmark created by BB and NS. Thus, today we see increasing growth rate in Pakistan, slower inflation rate, booming stock market, booming corporate earnings, stability in dollar exchange rate, increasing international trade, fast declining loans to GDP ratio, fast increasing per capita income, decreasing poverty in the country, stable and increased foreign exchange reserves positions, decreased interest rate, buoyant economical mood, increasing consumptions etc etc etc.*

50

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

^ So you are one of those who hailed Zia as the saviour of Islam and now regretting it, too late to regret Sir, the damage is done.

And One day you will also regret for supporting Musharraf, but again, it will be too late, but I'm sure you will be applauding then another despot and condemning Musharraf.

51

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

What nonsense, Army would not have dared to take over without Musharraf's approval. These things are planned, not just done on a whim.

Whether he was in the country is irrelevant, perhaps you have not heard of a 'telephone'.

As for the rest of your glowing and obviously biased opinion of Mush's perfromance, you need to spend some time in Pakistan to see the ground realities, of the corruption growing, crime increasing, etc,etc.

52

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Shawaiz_K:

No, I have grown up and no more an idiot that can go with lies neither I have any self-interest burden to carry. I voted for him because I was young and illiterate of what was really behind Zia motives and did not knew what to come. My religious knowledge at that time was also limited.

These things happen when:
One is in teens or twenties full of emotions and without logic.
One is trying to save their corruption or corrupt interests.
One affiliated to corrupt parties in power or out of power (and involved in party corruptions) hence, trying to survive with their corruption.
One is corrupt bureaucrat (or their close relatives) and acting to safeguard their corruptions (or preserve corrupt wealth).
One is uneducated illiterate.
One is educated but still mentally illiterate (and cannot think).
One is complete idiot (retarded human-like chimpanzee).
One is ignorant of the truth.

*

Regardless, on surface, Zia regime was not that bad. Zia came after Z A Bhutto regime that was full of political victimisation, nepotism, political bribery, and economical misery for Pakistan (though Bhutto regime gave some benefits to poor too and overall loss but some benefits to country in subtle way). Zia brought some economical prosperity and superficial stability that looks good at the time, when compared to Bhutto era.

The only bad thing that I do not like about Zia is that, in the name of Islam he exploited people, but worse is that, instead of ‘religion of Allah, he brought ‘religion of Shaitan’ that spread in Pakistan like wildfire, causing misery to many and made many zombies.

Today when we see many Ninjas with two eyes exposed, walking on the road in Pakistan, it is gift of Zia. Today when we see, people with beard taking bribe and calling that ‘gift from Allah’ is also gift of Zia (before, these type of people did not had beard). Today, when we find retarded chimpanzee head, because the body was blown when these chimpanzee blow themselves, killing innocents, it is gift of Zia. Today, when we see many madrassas churning retarded human like chimpanzees and zombies (few recently killed in Bajour), that acts but have empty upper chamber, it is gift of Zia. All this farce hudud ordinance (a joke in the name of Islam), is a gift of Zia. (And so on).

Regardless, I have to admit that person wise and from his outer shell, Zia was probably the most humble person (but deceptive) that came to power in Pakistan. (Worse being Z A Bhutto, who was though workaholic, he was most arrogant and deceptive person).

If I want to rate Pakistan leaders (about whom I know and can say something; that is from Ayub Khan onward) then:

If ratings are on them being:

Unattached and unconcerned, Ayub comes first.
Careless, intellectually retarded and pleasure loving, Yahya comes first.
Arrogant, devious, selfish, evil, and deceptive, Z A Bhutto comes first.
Humble, down-to-earth, devious and deceptive, Zia comes first.
Arrogant, corrupt and immoral, BB comes first.
Humble but idiot, corrupt, lacking intelligence but sincere, Nawaz comes first.
Tolerant, sincere, intelligent, and committed, Musharraf comes first.

TheRealDeal:

Kahta hoon sach kay jhoot kee aadat nahie mujhay
Lagtaa hay bura tum ko tou may kiya karoon? :)

[What I have heard that when Musharraf landed and came face to face with generals that done the coup, Musharraf said, ‘Abb mera kiya hou gaa?’ Generals said, ‘Sir, you are in power, you decide.’ ;)]*

53

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Yahya Khan has a unique distinction, he is the only general to keep his promise about holding free and fai elections..criticising him for his rangeela nature ..and that coming from a Musharraf supporter is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Ayub: Pushed through unprecdented economic development but started developing the system of rigging elections blatantly. In the end anyone who can rig the elections against Fatima Jinnah suffered because of that..his economic development like Musharraf created a huge income gap between the poor and the rich and particularly against Mohajirs and then between East and West Pakistan. The end result was when the people voted the 3 largest parties were all eftist parties advocating socialism.

Yahya I've mentioned.

Zia: Like Musharraf used the same excuse that is now staple for military rulers "I've come to power to save Pakistan and because I had no choice" in both cases they were initially quite weak rulers, who came to power through the help of other generals..the similarty furthers as both became powerful within the army once they had American backing. Once they had that backing they both dumped the generals that supported them and purged the army of people they disliked.

54

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Where are they hiding?

55

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Consult a doctor, you are suffering from Generalsphobia.

56

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

i think the simplest of the solution is that army should be privatised... :D

57

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

I don’t understand why our army generals are targeted.. Army has Pakistan a strong force to reckon with and its due to these Army generals that Pakistan is officially an Islamic country otherwise we would have become a Secular country:grumpy: !

58

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

Various reasons, main one being Army has been in power majority of the country’s esixtence, and is the single party mostly responsible for the sad state of Pakistan…despite what your dad/uncle in theArmy will tell you

Pakistan was formed by Jinnah to be a Islamic democracy, not a military junta

59

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

My relatives are in army and they told me that army isn't not corrupt at all.. I think we have some frustated people in Pakistan who sometimes believe mullahs are corrupt and some other times they believe army is corrupt.. whats going on?

60

Re: Pakistan Army Generals

[QUOTE]
Pakistan was formed by Jinnah to be a Islamic democracy, not a military junta
[/QUOTE]

Jinnah also didnt make Pakistan to be a 'Mullah" or a "Feudal" state...why just blame the Army...? If anything, the Army is atleast always ready to lay lives for the country and its people. What have the other 'power' circles i.e. mullahs and feudal (politicians) ever done for Pakistan or Pakistanis...!?