Samudra

OK Asim
really how much time do you give musharaff after he steps from the COAS post ?
six months....can we expect him to be either thrown away or hanged like other rulers the citadel of whatever has had ?
no you say ? may be one year.

god ! What an Army , and What a Country , where you cant trust the army,nor the politicians.Where is this country heading to.Word Afghanistan is ringing a bell.
Talk of musharrafs biggest democratic idea of holding a referendum.
Hail Musharraf.

no ? all this not true ? Perhaps then Musharraf recieved a prophecy from gabriel asking him not to step down

Ray

I reply in a language that is your national language.


Ghalib chhuti sarab par ab bhee kabhee kabhee,
Peeta hun roz-e-abr-o-shab-e-mehtab mein

Translated:
Ghalib foreswore wine
But from time to time it's true
When dark clouds span the skies
And the nights are lit by the moon
{he breaks his vows and takes a sip or two}

Go haath mein jumbish nahin, ankhoon mein to dam hai
Rahne do abhi Saagher-o-meena meyrey aaggey

Translated

Though I can no longer stretch my hands
I still have some sparkle in my eyes
LEt the wine jug and the wine cup remain
Before me where they lie.

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

visioninthedark

Wah Wah ... Wah Wah ...


Huzuur,

Pakistan is not quite as dry as the government would like outsiders to believe ...

__________________

Please visit http://www.visiongwadar.com/platinum/index.html

Ray

Ah, such is Fate!

Ah fill this Cup what boots it to repeat,
how Time is fleeting underneath our Feet,
Unborn Tomomorrow, Dead Yesterday,
Why worry about them if Today be sweet?

I, as a foreigner, I believe will be allowed to realise it is not dry.

So, fill the Cup.

Asim Aquil

I give him two years. Yes yes, much is bad, thats what we need to correct. Army is lead by Generals. So it depends upon who is up on those ranks. Pakistan has historically always been ruled by the Army, even during civillian governments. Whenever there was a major conflict, the COAS was brought in to settle the dispute. Musharraf has actually taken steps to take such power away from the COAS. The NSC holds the power. The structure of the NSC is so strong that he can be kept in power even if the new COAS goes ballistic.

I give him two years, and I want him to give up his military position some time soon. In 2 years time he can resign from the presidency and become a politician. Any military person should be out of the service for at least two years according to the constitution.

Musharraf really stings some people... Especially some terrorists, the only threat to his presidency is from the terrorists.

Ray

Chandragupta,

Though I have reservations on certain character qualties of Musharraf, I still think he is the best bet for Pakistan as also for India Pakistan equation with a little help from friend )

I don't think one can put his own character qualties on them. They ahve decided what is good for them.

Within those parametres, like it or not, we have to work around. Trust or otherwise good or bad, that is our fate that is our destiny.

If the subcontinent is cursed, then so be it.

Still Musharraf to my mind is the best bet .

As Asim has said their military has alwys been in the forefront of governance. One can't wish it away

It would not be a correct template to interpose that of India even if the Indian military still believes in the British traditions of being apolitical.

Jay

Appeal to Bush, Musharraf

By Sridhar Krishnaswami

NEW YORK, SEPT. 21. The Human Rights Watch has called upon the U.S. President, George Bush, to impress upon the President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, to keep his promise on stepping down as army chief by the end of the year and restore civilian rule.

It said Gen. Musharraf should ask Mr. Bush to back an independent enquiry like the 9/11 commission to investigate torture at U.S. military detention facilities.

Mr. Bush will meet Gen. Musharraf on Wednesday on the sidelines of the United Nations meeting.

"It's time for the Bush administration to recognise how its support for military rule in Pakistan flies in the face of its pledge to `foster' democracy in the Muslim world.

Return to democracy
"Bush should impress upon Musharraf that claims of a return to democracy are hollow if he tries to cling to the presidency without stepping down from his army post as promised," said Brad Adams, Director of the Asia Division of HRW.

http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/22/stor...2203321400.htm

__________________
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

Asim Aquil

But that is Pakistanis' business and not anyone else's. Commonwealth has recognized Pakistan who removed Pakistan before because of no democracy. The freedom we enjoy today and what we did when NS and BB were in power, is not comparable. We're more free, the US should respect our new found freedom.

tarek

The more read from Jay, the more disappointed I am. The disappointment comes from the fact that he is clearly capable of reason, but insists on being intellectually lazy -- Mr. Bush, in his speech at the UN, has asserted that "democracy" does not mean a particular model, he quotes Myanmaran Angh-sun Su CHi - you may want to read Bush's speech and contrast it with Mr. Musharraf's statements with regard to what "democracy" means, what it's Substance is. - I say contrast, because I think it would be instructive to all, including you.

Jay

Tarek,
I didnt write this article, I'm just merely posting it for discussion. you may wonder than I'm trying to degrade Pakistan and Musharaff but I kinda share the same sentiments. An Army General cannot talk about democracy, now Pakistan(is) may think that Musharaff is the best thing that happened to them, but that doesnt change the fact that he's an army general refusing to step down, and he came to power by a coup. IMHO military should not run/interfere with the civilian govt and institutions. It's one of my core beliefs.

tarek

Jay

Why can't a Army General talk about democracy?? See, I donm't have a problem with criticism but I do have a problem with criticism that is merely a point scoring exercise - your criticism is one from which we learn nothing, because it is a criticism that is not rooted in reason or in critical inquiry.
You may recall Gen De Gaulle - do you? DO you also recall the offices he held?? DO you also recall what is project (constitutional)?? DO U RECALL HIS UNIFORM?? DID anyone say FRANCE HAD CEASED TO BE A DEMOCRACY? -- See, in order for yoiur point to be valid, you must define democracy, and i supect that the reason that you have so far refused to do so, is because you know that your position will be indefensible.

You say the President Gen Musharraf refuses to step down, as if he has a obligation to satisfy a majority political sentiment over a minority political sentiment -- For your criticism to be valid, you have to make case for your position, something which you refuse to do.

Now, the decison to takeoff or not, the uniform, is due sometime in dec., the Premier of the country has advised that the Presuident ought not take off the uniform, 86% of Pakistanis, in PEW poll, have a favorable opinion of Mr. Musharraf and 60%, a very favorable opinion -- lets see you make the case that the majority of Pakistans what to see the President take his uniform off.

Look all I'm asking for is that you making challenging and sensible arguments - because I and others want to learn something, to think about things in a way in which we may not have.

Jay

Tarek,
Keeping emotions aside, you still havent understood my post.

Just becoz France did this in the past doesnt warrant that Pakistan can do it now. I didnt live when De Gaulle was in the Presidency, So I dont really want to go there. This is point scoring, for example if some one says that killing children is wrong, you snap back saying that they do it in India, China, USA etc etc what's wrong in me doing it.

Now As I said in my earlier post,
1.Military should not run/interfere with the civilian govt and institutions.Its not raised to do these and it should not do these.
2.Musharaff came to power by throwing an elected govt. It was corrupt, but still people voted and chose them. The said people, who supports Musharaff now supported PPP and PML.
3.Since I dont like the military interfering my civilian govt I hate to see a military uniform wielding officer in any of the democratic institution, including the Presidency. I dont want Musharaff to stay both as President and the COAS. But my opinion really doesnt count, I'm just an outsider.

Military is strictly authorotarian while democracy is not. People cannot decide who their next COAS or CO or Lt.Col is, but they can decide who can represent them in the local city council, state assemble and federal assembly.

tarek

Jay

yet another example of your inablity to reason, the fact that you were not alive or around while Gen. De Gaulle was, does not mean that the analogy is irrelevent - I suspect that which makes you eamine issues in a different light, makes you very uneasy.

It's sad that you choose to take a position for which you can offer no defence - now, why would you do such a thing ? After all, if you had conviction in the position you articulate, you would want us to consider it seriously - and yet, you wish to play victim, by claiming your opinion does not count -- and yet the same time, dismissing the opinion of those of us who are not outsiders? And would you say this was a intellectually honest thing to do?

"1.Military should not run/interfere with the civilian govt" --

Certainly in a ideal world, it ought not. Today in Pakistan, it is not a Military govt but one that is administered by the civilians and political parties.


2".Musharaff came to power by throwing an elected govt. It was corrupt, but still people voted and chose them."

NObody voted to be ripped off, and nobody voted for Nawaz Sharif to become Amir ul Momineen. Musharraf came to power after the elected Premier engineered a attempt to murder him and more than 150 passengers on a PIA flight. Does murder become OK, when it is done by someone who is elected?? (no I'm not referring to Modi)

3".Since I dont like the military interfering my civilian govt I hate to see a military uniform wielding officer in any of the democratic institution, including the Presidency. "

Your frame of reference is yourself?? DO the words "Self-Righteous" mean anything to you??

Look, here's a clue: You can craft any number of arguments that seek to further Pakistani security, the strengthening of institutions, a changed, dynamic political, economic security environment - all of which may be elements of a position that serve as a foundation for the premise that it';s time to take the uniform off.

Ray

I don't find any good reason as to why the military should rule a country.

The military is a minority in size compared to the civiliamn population of any country.

It is insulting to the intellect available in the country if the military is required to rule.

I am not aware of the problems of other countries, but this is my personal opinion.

tarek

Ray

The sentiment behind your post, we can all understand - but the logic is flawed - Now I am not supporting Military rule over any other, I am only pointing out that as you have formulated the position, it is open to assault.

After all, if the opposition is that a minority group is "ruling", how can we make any moral claims with regard to democracy - afterall, democracy and majoritarianism are not the same thing.

Indeed, since when has any leadership position not been a minority one?? You say it is a insult if the Military is required to rule -- I am sure we all agree, and those of us who are Pakistani politicians ought to feel insulted, the rest of us can breathe a sigh of relief. In either case, the government in Pakistan is now civilian, but Pakistani politicians ougfht o continue to feel insulted - they deserve to be insulted for what they have put Pakistan thru .