Yes, there could have been more choices there, or a combination of those, but it really boils down to the simple fact. Too many people are against the idea of putting Pakistani soldiers in the harm's way (whether they safeguard Americans in Iraq, or provide humanitarian or nation-building activities) as a result of this American adventure in Iraq.
[/QUOTE]
It’s good thing military decisions aren't made by the public. I'm confident Musharraf will do what best serves Pakistan’s interests.
Matsui, you are so wrong. America does have a clue about democracy. Shame on you for bringing disrepute to your country.
Coming back to the point, Musharraf can not make decisions in a vacuum. He has backed down already on a number of sensitive issue, in face of popular opposition. In this particular case, there is no clear case of why he should be towing American line. I don’t see no big carrot, and I don’t see any stick worth the price.
^ you are kidding right? It is the same scenario as before the afghan campaign. The new round of debt refinancing is around the corner. $3B is approved. It is all falling in place. Musharraf frankly doesn;t need a consensus. Pakistan is not a democracy. So it will happen. people can say what they want. As long as Mushy is in charge, their is single point of decision making.
What has he backed down on..wheher Music is haraam and other such important causes> I think Musharraf would do the right thing which is in the interest of the country. Hopefully the Musharraf supporters on GS who do not want Paki involvement in Iraq woud support their president.
At this point, I am not sure if even Musharraf claims it to be in the "best interests of the country". The only country in whose best interest it is, is United States of America. No one, else. And USA has not made it worth anyone's while yet. Lets see how it turns out to be.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Coming back to the point, Musharraf can not make decisions in a vacuum. He has backed down already on a number of sensitive issue, in face of popular opposition. In this particular case, there is no clear case of why he should be towing American line. I don't see no big carrot, and I don't see any stick worth the price.
[/QUOTE]
Actually it is the MMA that has backed down on a number of sensitive issues. Musharraf has been pretty consistent right from the start. The Pakistan military and the US generally come to an agreement suitable to all.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Why should Pakistan send its troops to clear up someone else's stinking mess. What did Pakistan gain from abiding by US requests the last time around (aka the last military adventure of the US). What did we gain except Ariel Sharon visiting India and chumming it up with his murderous counterpart Vajpayee.
On a less emotional note, it will bolster support for particular ulama who will see this as yet more evidence that Musharraf is allied with the "Americans". It will just give them more fodder to use in their arguments. Unless it is the UN that is serving as the interim authority in Iraq, and unless it is under the direct umbrella of the United Nations, i don't think we should participate at all.
[/QUOTE]
I think, (could be mistaken), but when Pakistan allowed for U.S. to use airspace etc.. on the way to Afghanistan.. Loans were forgiven and sanctions lifted.
