U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Ohioguy bhai: I think you were accidentally born into a desi family. Your comments are more conservative than most Rush Limbaugh corn holes.

22

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Mushy called it the best he could however Bush, being as dimwitted as he is could have even bombed Paki. If he were so smart we wouldn't have seen him send America into the hell they are stuck in now.

23

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Thats because the entire Islamic and Arab world is supporting Lebanon along with many other 3rd world countries

Who the hell was going to support Pakistan and especially after 9/11?

The Arabs didnt help us out when we tested our nukes in 1998 and our economy tanked...

24

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

uh huh. is that so? well according to most folks, the world was bloody. it just took 9/11 to wake some folks up to the 'real' world... when their little bubbles were burst.

25

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

so according to you the real world is suppose to be in constant war?

26

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Agreed. In this sense, Musharraf had little choice, and did the humane thing for his countrymen. Happily, with this in mind he played his card very well, and actually managed to milk the cow in the process.

It does also, once and for all, rests the case (as you so say) that America is somehow an 'ally', or the two have some mutual understanding.

27

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

'is suppose to be'? mate it all ready is isnt it?

28

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

When did I say that USA is a good ally of Pakistan.

USA has interests and needs and currently it has interests and needs from Pakistan

So as long as Bin Laden company continue to be on the run, the need for Pakistan will continue and Pakistan will prosper

Pakistan needs to cross an economic and financial threshold after which even if USA withdraws we are still able to sustain our economic growth

right now its being powered by US financial aid, when we are able to sustain growth on our own, we can give bin laden to usa

29

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

not only that, but they would have put economic sanctions on pakistan which would have made pakistan poorer than it already was.they were also going to get India involved to go after Pakistan.It would have been a nightmare for Pakistan if Musharraf had not co-operated.Musharraf is believed to have lost about 10 pounds in stress after 9/11 and ofcourse he had no choice but co-operate.tell that to idiots like Imran Khan who think Pakistan should have showed more balls.

30

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Few ports and powerplants? You're wrecked. Those would be fixed in months...Pakistan does not (unlike her Arab counterparts) rely on the West for most of it's industrial know-how, so it's unlikely any kind of sanction (which France and China would not participate in due to investments and projects on Pak soil) would have any kind of long term impact.

The American threat should have been construed as a threat to carpet bomb cities, what some Analysts at the time thought were a good idea.

Talk of attacking Pak nuclear installations is deranged...that stuff is embedded within a mountain, so it wouldn't be worth the risk.

Any action would be for "show" and would invariably be bloody...Mushy did the right thing...

31

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

^^ Exactly,

India even openly said that USA could use bases in India to attack Afghanistan

India was pressing USA to declare Pakistan a state sponsor of Terrorism

That would have placed us under sanctions and that would have totally destroyed our economy and for what, for Afghanistan?

Unlike Syria or Iran who are also called State sponsor of terrorism, Iran has Oil which it can sell and support its economy and where as Syria has the Arab World to help it out

Who was going to help out Pakistan in its dire needs?

Some Pakistanis are so stupid that they dont look at the bigger picture

Musharraf by supporting USA in Afghanistan has brought economic prosperity to Pakistan, improved our standing in the world, made us into a non-nato Ally, etc..

Musharraf has been one of our best leaders in Pakistani History

32

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Let me take you guys back in time. It is October 12, 1999 and General Musharraf has just sacked PM Sharif. What was the situation like in Pakistan that year?

===========
ROBERT OAKLEY: That’s right. The politicians tend to rely upon the army even though they proclaim that they’re a democracy; they rely very heavily upon the army, and they accord the army a great deal of political weight. At the moment, there’s a great deal of political opposition to the prime minister. But, above all, the country is in bad shape. And Paula can perhaps tell you more about that, but the economic situation is terrible. There’s a great deal of social unrest; there’s a great deal of sectarian violence. And I think the army reacted not merely to the challenge but also to the general feeling that the situation is out of control in the country.

But I think that Ambassador Oakley has hit upon a very important point here, and that is that the governance of Pakistan generally has been in tremendous disarray, not just through this last term, but through the last ten years, and, some would argue, the last ten to twenty to thirty years. And many of the policies that have been taken by this last government, which are quite similar to those taken by his predecessors, have tended to be highly personalistic, so that even an action such as firing one person, something that would not even make it into the newspapers in my countries, becomes an activity in which the prime minister not only feels it necessary to come on to national television to explain it, but it becomes a personalistic activity in which, in the face of losing his job, the chief of the army staff sees it necessary to take over the entire country. And this kind of almost uncontrollable urge to take large moves and make large gestures in order to solve administrative difficulties is one that has plagued the country now for many decades.

As a result, the country has come to be extremely isolated. And it’s very difficult in a global economy of this sort now, to try to fix your economy at a point of tremendous isolation. And that’s what’s happened.

It will take some sort of Pakistani miracle to change the mentality of their political leadership.

Others are interested in doing it in order to settle the country down a little bit and put it on a stable course, and they would argue for a long-term transition apolitical government, because the last time they tried this, the politicians came in and undid all the proper things which is the technocrat government had done. So, they themselves recognize that there are basic political weaknesses in the structure and the mentality of Pakistani civilian leadership.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec99/pakistan_10-12.html

33

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

More:
Pakistanis do not like military rule, yet there is more relief than despondency about the takeover. There were spontaneous celebrations at the ousting of Mr Sharif. The deposed prime minister had systematically undermined every institution capable of challenging, or even questioning, him, from the courts to the press to parliament. The economy, which slumped after punitive sanctions were imposed in response to Pakistan’s nuclear tests in May 1998, remains on the verge of bankruptcy.

Pakistan’s economic isolation would raise the spectre that makes Pakistanis and westerners alike shudder: default, devaluation, inflation, revolution.
http://www.economist.com/research/backgrounders/displaystory.cfm?story_id=249032

"It is because of the government’s own misdoing that the people wanted to throw them out and the military being the only organised, established and credible force had to stabilise the situation. It’s the government itself which always looks up to the army whenever there is a problem, an internal security problem, floods, catastrophes, or any national issue. If there are elections they request the army to help. If there is a census to be held, they approach the army. If they want to check schools and teachers, they look to us. If they want to set the railways right they again come to us. So the army in Pakistan is actually seen as a body that can deliver. It is they themselves who create this environment, and then they suffer from a sense of insecurity.

The following chart spells out the measures which former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif adopted to consolidate his hold over power.

Chart Three Measures Reasons Implications
Annulment of President’s power under the eighth amendment of the constitution to dismiss the government in April 1997 Fears by the Sharif government that it may become a victim of that power Erosion of the President’s powers as comparted to the prime minister
Removal of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and attack on the building of the Supreme Court in November 1997 to harass senior judiciary Fear that Sharif may be disqualified in a corruption case by the Supreme Court Erosion of the judiciary’s power to check the policies of the government
Pressure on President Farooq Leghari to resign from office in December 1997. President had supported the Chief Justice in his tussle with the prime minister Induction of his trusted man to the office of Presidency
Imposition of emergency following the nuclear test of May 1998 Nuclear tests coercive measures against opposition
Resignation of Chief of Army Staff, Gerneral Jehangir Karamat in October 1998 General Karmat’s proposal to set up National Security Council Furth consolidation of Sharif’s power
Crackdown on the media May-June 1999 Publications of corruption stories against Sharif and his colleagues Setback to the democratic process

When Nawaz Sharif assumed power for the second time in February 1997 he had pledged to cleanse the economy from corruption and provide good governance to the people. For the first 100 days he focused on accomplishing these objectives but as time passed he reverted back to a state of indifference on the real issues. According to an investigative report, "International bodies and official Government of Pakistan documents indicate that bureaucracy and business sponsor corruption amounting to at least US $ 2 billion a year from the economy. At least US$ 4.2 billion is missing from the government’s financial institutions and there are 483,094 documented bank defaulters in the country. According to a conservative estimate, taxes and duties worth US$ 3.2 billion is evaded every year while the number of taxpayers in a country of 140 million stands at 1.6 million. According to the State Bank of Pakistan source, a major portion of defaulted loans is stuck with 250 leading businessmen and members of the political elite of the country. On the external front, because of the law and order situation and other problems, foreign investment in Pakistan in 1998 declined to US$ 360 million from an average of US$ 2 billion from 1994-95 to 1997-98. It is believed that overseas and local Pakistanis have kept US$50 billion in foreign banks overseas. In addition to this, remittances of overseas Pakistanis registered a decline of 43 per cent during the first two months of current fiscal year (1998-99) aggravating the problem of balance of payments. The decision of Sharif’s government to freeze foreign currency accounts and its confrontation with the Independent Power Projects (IPP) shattered the confidence of the business community and foreign investors. Although sanctions imposed on Pakistan in the aftermath of its nuclear tests in May 1998 caused damage to the economy, the government did little to broaden the tax base and plug corruption holes.
http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/wa/wa_00thr02.html

34

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

I agree to your analysis.

35

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Allah ki zaat se bara koi nahin. We should place our complete faith in Allah first.

I fail to understand how could we have been bombed back to zero, when we boast of such a good army, air force, & navy. Are they only there to party & booze off, & when national protection is the need of the hour, you just take off your shalwar & ask the US president to come hump us...???

The US was never a friend of Pakistan, & definitely never will be. This just shows, what lengths they are ready to go, if it is in the interest of US population.

36

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

you are right that we must trust in God but that doesn't mean a suicidal trust against logic. God has given us minds to use and not using our thought would be rejecting His favor. The Taleban did not reflect Pakistani values and were a bad gamble.

37

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf


Thank God He (God) saved us, true, Musharraf was the source of rescue.... not much of rescue in fact, but buying time for the country.... just don't goto sleep because you see "all is good" around.

38

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf


I agree, this is not something new, almost every Pakistani sorta had guessed that but now its coming out of horses mouth so it becomes "official".

39

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf


and what makes you think Musharraf will "stay in power"? for some I reason I see another "aur jahaaz hawa mai pat gaya" coming soon.

40

Re: U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

Thats called "Wishful Thinking". Look it up.