Page 4 of 145 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 2164
Like Tree31Likes

Thread: The Official Pakistan Politics thread

  1. #46
    Cricketer Of The Year Agent Nationaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,809
    I am so overjoyed that this is happening in my lifetime. It will be a great moment in the history of Pakistan when Imran wins the elections IA.

  2. #47
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,805
    Not sure about Imran's policy of removing the military option and having a political solution through Dialogue with the terrorists tbh.

    It may be good political posturing as the mood in Pakistan right now ought to be Anti - West generally, but also not sure how feasible distancing Pakistan from the US in terms of fighting the taliban, not taking aid etc.... would be.

    Also then there is the question of how much power actually a civilian government can wield in Pakistan with the Military and the ISI etc.. always keen to play a political role and being quite powerful. Some of the domestic changes he has proposed are good theoretically, but he would need absolute power of the state to enforce them because the implementation part is the major issue on South Asia right now in every country, not lack of thinking or what is on paper or the statutes.

  3. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux View Post
    BTW Fusion is missing from this thread
    lol.....I thought of posting this earlier but I knew that Fusion will jump in at some point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    Not sure about Imran's policy of removing the military option and having a political solution through Dialogue with the terrorists tbh.

    It may be good political posturing as the mood in Pakistan right now ought to be Anti - West generally, but also not sure how feasible distancing Pakistan from the US in terms of fighting the taliban, not taking aid etc.... would be.

    Also then there is the question of how much power actually a civilian government can wield in Pakistan with the Military and the ISI etc.. always keen to play a political role and being quite powerful. Some of the domestic changes he has proposed are good theoretically, but he would need absolute power of the state to enforce them because the implementation part is the major issue on South Asia right now in every country, not lack of thinking or what is on paper or the statutes.
    While I agree with some of the things that you say at least as far as the enforcement thing is concerned but I feel that one MAJOR problem with Pakistan is the corrupt leadership at the top. This lot has been in power for most of the last 25 years and whenever they come to power they just loot and plunder and do nothing much. The tax payers money is absolutely wasted and looted when these guys are in power. With Imran, I would at least know that my money is not being siphoned off the top in EVERY deal that the govt is making.

    Secondly I agree with Imran that a military option should be the LAST option and not the first option.

    Has there ever been a real concerted effort at talks with these guys? I am not too sure. Also it seems the US itself does not know what exactly does it want to do. After 10 years of war in Afghanistan what exactly have they achieved except for a costly US military base in Afghanistan where the military sits cozily while the rest of Afghanistan is as lawless as ever.

    Imran isn't too far off from the US in terms of policy is he? . Read below

    US says it's ready to talk to Taliban chief

  4. #49
    Cricketer Of The Year Xuhaib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    9,506
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    Not sure about Imran's policy of removing the military option and having a political solution through Dialogue with the terrorists tbh.

    Oh trust me US will get down to this eventually.The millitary option has done nothing but just drained the $$$ down the gutter, with the US economy under pressure they will not be able to sustain this any longer and will eventually use the political dialogue option.


    It may be good political posturing as the mood in Pakistan right now ought to be Anti - West generally, but also not sure how feasible distancing Pakistan from the US in terms of fighting the taliban, not taking aid etc.... would be.

    Imran plans to reform the tax system, finish corruption at the top, get electricity cheaper to make the industrial output more competitive, utilize the unending natural resources in Baluchistan & Waziristan which are not being utilized due to insurgency in these areas. All these factors are bound to create enough revenues that will mean Pakistan will not need any of US conditions based aid.


    Also then there is the question of how much power actually a civilian government can wield in Pakistan with the Military and the ISI etc.. always keen to play a political role and being quite powerful. Some of the domestic changes he has proposed are good theoretically, but he would need absolute power of the state to enforce them because the implementation part is the major issue on South Asia right now in every country, not lack of thinking or what is on paper or the statutes.

    The biggest challenge for Imran the military and ISI cannot stop themselves from meddling in country's politics. I expect him to take the politicans to task if he gets in to power for their corruption and mishandling but can he do the same to the generals who have had their share of kickbacks and swiss accounts over the years these are the questions that interest me.
    .


  5. #50
    Cricketer Of The Year Agent Nationaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,809
    Imran doesn't want to distance himself from the US's friendship. He just doesn't want Pakistan involved in a war in which the US will eventually leave Pakistan a very unstable neighbour.

    Ending corruption and making better use of our resources will allow us to avoid US aid, which by the way never goes to the public.

    Hope Imran cuts the defence budget by a big margin. We don't need the latest defence toys at the moment. We need education, electricity, strong industry, health, etc. However it will be difficult to control the military.

  6. #51
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,805
    Quote Originally Posted by smalishah84 View Post

    While I agree with some of the things that you say at least as far as the enforcement thing is concerned but I feel that one MAJOR problem with Pakistan is the corrupt leadership at the top. This lot has been in power for most of the last 25 years and whenever they come to power they just loot and plunder and do nothing much. The tax payers money is absolutely wasted and looted when these guys are in power. With Imran, I would at least know that my money is not being siphoned off the top in EVERY deal that the govt is making.
    I agree with you here, but that is easier said than done. His personal integrity may be clean but to really clamp down on corruption he would have to act on his supporters as well as close associates from time to time too. And he may require them to stay in power too on the other hand. Especially if he heads a coalition government where the trade off may be between staying in power or acting on corrupt in many instances.

    Also then there is the question of the civilian government not having power to act over the army and ISI and army giving immunity to many associates who do the same. I guess though in this regard it would be a step in the positive direction.

    Secondly I agree with Imran that a military option should be the LAST option and not the first option.

    Has there ever been a real concerted effort at talks with these guys? I am not too sure. Also it seems the US itself does not know what exactly does it want to do. After 10 years of war in Afghanistan what exactly have they achieved except for a costly US military base in Afghanistan where the military sits cozily while the rest of Afghanistan is as lawless as ever.

    Imran isn't too far off from the US in terms of policy is he? . Read below

    US says it's ready to talk to Taliban chief
    But the US don't have to live next to the terrorists, do they? They have ended the Taliban rule and made it tougher to attack them and that's really what there first objective was, even though they failed at mostly everything else.

    And then there is a difference between having talks and keeping military option open/doing operations at the same time, and removing the military option of the table and then having just talks with what are terrorists with extreme positions.

    Taliban's stated aim is to spread and implement their version of Islamic rule all over the region and then the world. What do you negotiate with them with such a position? What can the Pakistani government really offer them?

    It's also clear that many terrorists in the country have support from the military / ISI elements and it is only at this time, that the civilian government should push the military to break of these ties rather than hold talks with them and let them strengthen further and gain a bigger support base in the establishment, which was these guys do when you go soft on them and as a result of the War recruiting people right now ideologically won't be tough in uneducated and uninformed areas either. It may provide short term peace in Pakistan(though have adverse effects in Afghanistan and maybe India too), but in the long term being too sympathetic to what are terrorists will again only come back to haunt Pakistan.

  7. #52
    Hall of Fame Member Cevno's Avatar
    Simon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    15,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux View Post
    Imran doesn't want to distance himself from the US's friendship. He just doesn't want Pakistan involved in a war in which the US will eventually leave Pakistan a very unstable neighbour.
    I think rather than worry about Afghanistan being stable or unstable Pakistan needs to sort itself out first.

    I know the feeling amongst the Pakistani public would be that this war has made attacks there worse and they have paid a big price for their support. This is true partially as USA's conduct and execution has been poor in some regards and also selfish.

    But on the other hand Pakistan can't really absolve itself and especially the Army,ISI etc.... of the blame either. It was not exactly hidden before and is even less hidden now that elements of the Pakistani state have a policy to provide support to terrorist which act outside of their borders, but are based there. Whether it be the Talibani terrorist who have a Afghan agenda or the Anti-Indian terrorist groups like LeT, JeM, Hum etc.... Even Dawood ebrahim had his daughters wedding last month IIRC Karachi in a big hotel, which was confirmed by his own group to Indian news channel.

    Don't agree with a lot of what Hillary Clinton says but she made a statement in her recent tour to Pakistan last week, “You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them to only bite your neighbor”, and this is what is happening now for the past some time now and will happen again in the future if Pakistan goes soft on terrorists using it's territory right now. Not too forget it will be bad for the whole region too. History is full with such examples and even USA has faced the brunt of supporting such rebels/terrorists in the past with Al - Qaeda and 9/11 amongst other attacks. While India did it with LTTE and Indira Gandhi's support to them. When her own son Rajiv decided they were now getting too dangerous and opposed them it resulted in his life being taken.

  8. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    I agree with you here, but that is easier said than done. His personal integrity may be clean but to really clamp down on corruption he would have to act on his supporters as well as close associates from time to time too. And he may require them to stay in power too on the other hand. Especially if he heads a coalition government where the trade off may be between staying in power or acting on corrupt in many instances.

    Also then there is the question of the civilian government not having power to act over the army and ISI and army giving immunity to many associates who do the same. I guess though in this regard it would be a step in the positive direction.
    Most of Imran's party is filled with clean people so you can rest assured that corruption due to his party's office bearers will be much much less (if at all). If there is corruption from his own party Imran can keep a check on that himself.

    Secondly his stated view is that if he came into power in a coalition govt then depending on his status i.e. PM or otherwise. In case he is just a junior partner he will probably not join the govt since the parties in power i.e. PPP or PML will be his enemies in any case. Secondly in case he becomes PM he will act on the charter of his party which he has been proclaiming for the last 15 years i.e. try to bring in a new independent judicial system for the first time in the history of Pakistan. That has always been his stated primary goal. Once such a system is in place there will definitely be a check on corruption whether from his party or from other parties. Not only that Imran is also in favor of importing the corruption laws from China i.e. executing people found indulging in financial impropriety above a certain level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    But the US don't have to live next to the terrorists, do they? They have ended the Taliban rule and made it tougher to attack them and that's really what there first objective was, even though they failed at mostly everything else.
    What does this mean? The US is not supposed to be living here. The whole point is that they have not really eliminated the taliban completely have they? There is no alternative in Afghanistan even after 10 year of US occupation. The US is only present in Kabul and all they do is to sit all holed up in their military base. The rest of Afghanistan is totally lawless and not under their control. As in 88 when the USSR left now when the USA will leave fighting will relapse between different factions and most probably the Taliban will re-emerge.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    And then there is a difference between having talks and keeping military option open/doing operations at the same time, and removing the military option of the table and then having just talks with what are terrorists with extreme positions.

    Taliban's stated aim is to spread and implement their version of Islamic rule all over the region and then the world. What do you negotiate with them with such a position? What can the Pakistani government really offer them?
    The whole point is that nobody ruled out military option. Only that the political dialogue never really started and the military operations started.

    The Taliban neither have the support nor the resources to take over the region and the world. They are not the 3rd Reich that they are being made out to be. The max that they can do is to start suicide bombings (which they have been doing in any case).

    Quote Originally Posted by Cevno View Post
    It's also clear that many terrorists in the country have support from the military / ISI elements and it is only at this time, that the civilian government should push the military to break of these ties rather than hold talks with them and let them strengthen further and gain a bigger support base in the establishment, which was these guys do when you go soft on them and as a result of the War recruiting people right now ideologically won't be tough in uneducated and uninformed areas either. It may provide short term peace in Pakistan(though have adverse effects in Afghanistan and maybe India too), but in the long term being too sympathetic to what are terrorists will again only come back to haunt Pakistan.
    If you had seen Imran's rally yesterday you would have noticed that he called out that he doesn't want enmity with India. Also a number of times he has stated on national TV that the "establishment" will have to go along with him if they want Pakistan to survive. Whether the military will listen or not is not clear BUT what is clear is that Imran certainly would want his way to prevail when he is in power and I believe he also has the integrity to resign if things don't go his way. In the past the politicians also used to compromise with the military because they did not want to let go off their seats of power where they could easily loot and plunder (along with their henchmen).

    Besides Imran brings with him two other things that no other politician does and the first of those is credibility.

    The second is hope.

    What better alternatives are out there? If nothing Imran brings hope to hundreds of thousands all over the Pakistan. He is seen by many as the only ray of hope. We all know that Imran might not be able to solve all of Pakistan's problems. Hell he might not even be able to solve a single problem but one thing I do know. That he will die trying.

  9. #54
    Cricketer Of The Year Agent Nationaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,809
    The Taliban never intended to conquer the world. You have to understand their mentality. They only wanted a better Afghanistan free from drugs, prostitution etc. That's why they stood up (a talib is a student). Before 9/11 the US never cared for the Taliban because they were harmless. The US only came after Al Qaida. The Taliban even offered to hand over Bin Laden, which the US refused because they wanted the country. Now the Taliban are fighting for their homeland (can you really blame them for that).

    And once the US leaves, the Talibs will come back into power because the Afghan government is weak and is mainly Tajik. Most of the population of Afghanistan is Pushtun and so are the Talibs. Do you really think the majority Pushtuns will support the Tajik government once US leaves. Pushtuns always support their tribe first (that's their mentality).

    Once the US leaves, Pakistan will have a chance to sort itself out. At the moment the military is using this to their advantage by playing their double game with the US and Pakistani people. They are diverting the education, health and other budgets to themselves and also taking money from the US. This is what Imran is trying to sort out. That is why he wants the US gone, so that Pakistan has a chance to manage its problems. But I don't know how he will manage the ISI, however has Zardari managed it, or did Sharif manage it. We aren't voting for Imran to manage the military, we are voting for him because he is better than the rest and he will improve the situation in Pakistan.

  10. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    haha.....classic quote dug up by Xuhaib

    that should answer some of your questions Cevno
    Last edited by smalishah84; 31-10-2011 at 10:20 AM.

  11. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux View Post
    But I don't know how he will manage the ISI, however has Zardari managed it, or did Sharif manage it. We aren't voting for Imran to manage the military, we are voting for him because he is better than the rest and he will try his best improve the situation in Pakistan.
    Fixed

    This is the crux of the matter.

  12. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    A great piece from the political commentator Dr Moeen Peerzada writing in one of his columns

    "Yes! I was only cautious when I wrote my last one liner...people were still gathering at Minar-e-Pakistan; but then they came from all directions,



    and they came with their wives, and wives with their husbands, they came with their children and their friends, they came on their motorbikes, on cycles, on their cars and they walked, and so we know for sure that they were not in the usual government controlled buses, and they were not brought by police and patwaris and by the petty bureaucrats...they were free men and women who walked to the sprawling lawns of Minar-e-Paksitan on their free will for they believed in something...something bigger than their own lives; they wore all colors of Pakistan, they were Punjabis and Pakhtoons and Sindhis and Baluch and Kashmiris..and they showed a remarkable discipline and respect for each other...and what else was different? ...they were young and they were full of excitement and belief..unlike the rent-a crowds of usual Pakistani politicians who sullenly and listlessly listen to the demagoguery of politicians these men and women were full of enthusiasm and self-belief...the presence of large number of Pakistani women, of music, of Shahzad Roy and Strings added a dimension to this political rally that had never been seen in this country before...that was like the Latin American political scene...alive and full of belief..



    What Imran said? he may not be as charismatic as Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or as trained a speaker as Benazir Bhutto but the message he delivered, and delivered with all sincerity was more original and powerful ever heard from a politician in Pakistan since the Bhutto speeches of 1960's and 1970's....perhaps for the first time in the last 40 years a politician has emerged on the scenes of Pakistan who actually put forward a political agenda, an agenda that could be defined, understood and implemented; when he says we will get rid of the usual Patwari and thana he is laying down the vision for a progressive Pakistan...a Pakistan in which land assets could be traded without the fear of fraud...if we achieve this, or at least move in this direction, we will enter a new era of commerce....and what was refreshing was the total absence of "demagoguery", Imran did not talk of the liberation of Kashmir, usual rhetoric against India or ultimatums to America, kind of things which cannot be implemented, he talked of things that are possible...it was so fun to listen to him...it was this balanced, sophisticated political message we so wanted to hear but could never hear from these buffoons who have ruled our lives in the last 20 -30 years...



    What has changed? Elections are far off, and there is many a slip twixt the cup and the lip but today a new Pakistan was born or perhaps the Pakistan of 1960's and 1970's was revisited; a Pakistan that existed before Ronald Reagon the and Gen. Zia ul Haq struck the faustian bargain against Soviet Union, the faustian bargain that lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union but left Pakistan in a perpetual crisis of the politics of personality cult, of feudals and Pirs and Sajada Nasheens..today PTI has brought forward the politics of ideas and issues and this will not only effect us but will effect the structures and power politics inside the other parties...to fight PTI they will have to change...



    Lets watch it as it evolves, lets make a pledge that we will all vote in the next elections and we will demand a free fair transparent election process..we will ensure a transition of power in this country..from feudals and criminals and thugs into the hands of decent human beings, first step has been taken...."

  13. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    And in The News (one of Pakistan's leading English dailies)

    You had to be there to see the waves

    "
    I have covered a number of rallies in this park, which is infamous for gobbling up many a political fortunes because of its sheer size, and Sunday’s rally brought back memories of BB’s return from exile during Zia days. It’s a ground where you bring in fifty thousand and it appears like five but Imran packed it to capacity. I leaned over to senior journalist Mujeebur Rehman Shami and asked him about the crowd and he said that in his opinion the crowd was even bigger than the last big one gathered here by late Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. Even a close comparison would have sufficed actually but to say it could have even been bigger says it all."
    Last edited by smalishah84; 31-10-2011 at 10:32 AM.

  14. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,737
    And from one of Dawn's articles

    "Speaking very clearly on foreign policy, Khan stated that his party does indeed want relations and friendship with the US – BUT, on the basis of equality. He doesn’t want to be America’s puppet – how is that a bad thing? We won’t get dollars, true, but we may manage to get some respect. He doesn’t want to fight America’s war – what’s wrong with that? Last time I checked, we were pretty desperate to claim our sovereignty, which is impossible when our government itself allows the US to drop its missiles inside our territory. But then if that doesn’t happen – who will fight the monsters we created that are blowing people up? Imran Khan thinks dialogue is the solution – so you don’t agree, sure. But it’s not as if military action has so far achieved too many results either – if anything it is breeding terrorism – but then again, everyone has an expert opinion these days on how to get rid of militancy, if anything Khan is entitled to his – especially when he has the courage to say all this without an entourage of feudal guards around him or a bullet-proof podium to protect him."

  15. #60
    Cricketer Of The Year Agent Nationaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,809
    Great article about the Jalsa.
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Yeah, look, it gives me a pain deep inside my uterus to admit it, but it's Ajmal until such time as we get a working throwing law again.
    Never in a million years would I have thought Brumby to admit this!!!!!!

Page 4 of 145 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Official Programming Thread
    By vcs in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 25-01-2012, 08:57 PM
  2. Pakistan vs England Jul-Aug-Sep 2010
    By gunner in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-07-2010, 08:41 PM
  3. India Pakistan Slug-fest !!
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 17-08-2009, 10:50 AM
  4. Pakistan Squad
    By Xuhaib in forum 2009 ICC World Twenty20
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-05-2009, 06:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •