Fatima Jinnah stood firm against dictatorship, says prime minister

[El Sidd]

Most of people considered her and her close friends as traitors
How can she be called "great" when her close friends like bacha Khan and mujeeb were branded as traitors and kept in jail for 90% of their life.

Pakistanis are confused

Either call Jinnah great and accept your mistake of imprisonment bacha Khan and mujeeb

Or call her traitor

You cant have it both ways

We can have it both ways. You can cry all you like about Mujib and Buccha.

 

[ziaulislam]

We can have it both ways. You can cry all you like about Mujib and Buccha.

Nope Fatima Jinnah bacha Khan and mujeeb were traitors against ayub Khan

Irrefutable proof that Fatima Jinnah was in cohots with traitors

 

[SQ8]

'Most of the people'? How can you say that? Fatima Jinnah gave a tough fight to Ayub Khan in the 1964 elections and she was indeed revered in both East and West Pakistan by tens of millions. I don't know why she lost to Ayub but perhaps it was a legit elections by Pakistan's standards with Ayub having the advantages of being in power and had stabilized Pakistan after the utter chaos of the 1950s. This forum may not like me saying but I consider Ayub Khan to be the greatest leader of Pakistan since Jinnah: If today Pakistan even exists, it was because of him!

As for Mujeeb and Bacha Khan: They were too ethnic oriented. Way too much to the point of secession not long after the formation of Pakistan. Far beyond the next most ethnic-oriented people, who are the Balochs. Mujeeb's 'Six Points' were a declaration of independence which no country would ever accept. So glad the East Pakistanis got away--they wanted it and I say best-luck to them; I wished it happened peacefully. The marriage between the East and West Pakistan should not even have happened--there is no 'B' in 'Pakistan', well, unless Arabic is your mother-tongue

Clearly you have a very limited knowledge base on the history of Pakistan. When even his military compatriots considered him a coward and a bumpkin in selecting subordinates - so yes the forum not only doesn’t like you saying it but also finds your entire claim ludicrous at best and ignorant at worst with ZERO factual evidence of leadership claim you make

 

[Meengla]

Clearly you have a very limited knowledge base on the history of Pakistan. When even his military compatriots considered him a coward and a bumpkin in selecting subordinates - so yes the forum not only doesn’t like you saying it but also finds your entire claim ludicrous at best and ignorant at worst with ZERO factual evidence of leadership claim you make

Yes, this forum---which a few weeks ago was predicting Imran to be winning by 65%+ in the upcoming elections.
Fanboism gone beserk. Because Imran started criticizing 'the Establishment' but only AFTER Imran lost power, this forum has turned to be the mouthpiece of Imran Khan, including his wonderful insights about 'the Establishment'. Look at you guys' posts before April 2022!!

 

[ghazi52]

,.,.,.

 

[Meengla]

,.,.,.
View attachment 938224

That was absolutely wrong for Ayub to have done so. She couldn't be a traitor. She was one of the Founders of Pakistan. And, though before my time, I know my family in Karachi supported her.
My point is that, if you look at Pakistan between 1951 and 1958, you'd see utter chaos in a country which was already very fragile and poor. Pakistan was already in the American camp by then but the ruling class proved utterly corrupt and myopic. But Ayub Khan turned things around. He even created a wonderful new Capital city out of nowhere. His legacy in industry and agriculture, as well his investment in the fragile Pakistan's defense, and in nuclear energy, among many other things, are unmatched in Pakistan's history. I don't know now, but I remember into the 1980s his portraits were in shops of Pakistan.
But argument is not for pro Ayub: It is about uncritical affiliations people can have despite evidence to the contrary, and yes, I am speaking about the fanboism of Imran Khan. That this forum, which was glorifying the 1965 war, the Kargil War, the Feb. 2019 events against India until April 2022 has turned so far against 'the Establishment' because Imran said so, shows how uncritical people have become in their fanboism. I bet on the Defense Day, even Ayub's speech about the war was played here. Some introspection is needed. This should not be a forum of Sindhi peasants singing 'Jiye Bhutto' for 50 years!

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Civilians are given random Titles after they are denied chance to reform Pakistan


Qauid - e Azam
Madar - e Milat
Shaheed - e Milat (Liaqat)
Mujeed Ur Rehman (Ghaddar - proven wrong by history)


But Power and Stick goes to Military



Pakistan was formed by Civilians

 

[SQ8]

Yes, this forum---which a few weeks ago was predicting Imran to be winning by 65%+ in the upcoming elections.
Fanboism gone beserk. Because Imran started criticizing 'the Establishment' but only AFTER Imran lost power, this forum has turned to be the mouthpiece of Imran Khan, including his wonderful insights about 'the Establishment'. Look at you guys' posts before April 2022!!

Whataboutism - I think IK is a bumpkin.. now whats your play to sucking it up to Ayub?

Unless you’re a trumper in MAGA land, as I say to all competitors in a feature and value show: Prove it!

What factors enabled the Pakistani economy to grow as it did in the 60s ?

How many of them were Ayub Khan’s decisions

How many of his decisions wrecked institutions and representation - that the 65 war fiasco and even leading up to the 71 debacle were all pushed along by him and his snake of a son along with Altaf Gauhar..

So unless you have personal interests in the establishment like a brother or father and cannot absolve ego to look beyond the golden stories - or like many in my family who provide “Ayub Khan was so tall and handsome” as the defense - prove Ayub Khan as the “greatest” leader Pakistan had after Jinnah.

And here is my record of saying Imran Khan wasn’t a great leader nor is he one even now..
So what’s your next move wannabe boomer?

 

[nahtanbob]

Whataboutism - I think IK is a bumpkin.. now whats your play to sucking it up to Ayub?

Unless you’re a trumper in MAGA land, as I say to all competitors in a feature and value show: Prove it!

What factors enabled the Pakistani economy to grow as it did in the 60s ?

How many of them were Ayub Khan’s decisions

How many of his decisions wrecked institutions and representation - that the 65 war fiasco and even leading up to the 71 debacle were all pushed along by him and his snake of a son along with Altaf Gauhar..

So unless you have personal interests in the establishment like a brother or father and cannot absolve ego to look beyond the golden stories - or like many in my family who provide “Ayub Khan was so tall and handsome” as the defense - prove Ayub Khan as the “greatest” leader Pakistan had after Jinnah.

And here is my record of saying Imran Khan wasn’t a great leader nor is he one even now..
So what’s your next move wannabe boomer?

Supporters of military rule ignore the fact Pakistan got a lot of largesse whether it was the Cold War, Soviets in Afghanistan and war on terror.
That made the difference from being a economic disaster. All the economic largesse was squandered away on toys. the results are there to see

 

[Meengla]

Whataboutism - I think IK is a bumpkin.. now whats your play to sucking it up to Ayub?

Unless you’re a trumper in MAGA land, as I say to all competitors in a feature and value show: Prove it!

What factors enabled the Pakistani economy to grow as it did in the 60s ?

How many of them were Ayub Khan’s decisions

How many of his decisions wrecked institutions and representation - that the 65 war fiasco and even leading up to the 71 debacle were all pushed along by him and his snake of a son along with Altaf Gauhar..

So unless you have personal interests in the establishment like a brother or father and cannot absolve ego to look beyond the golden stories - or like many in my family who provide “Ayub Khan was so tall and handsome” as the defense - prove Ayub Khan as the “greatest” leader Pakistan had after Jinnah.

And here is my record of saying Imran Khan wasn’t a great leader nor is he one even now..
So what’s your next move wannabe boomer?

YOU are the whataboutism!! Basically, your narrative against Ayub Khan is built upon the 'anti-Establishment' narrative built by Imran Khan. Before this, you guys were kissing the military badges. And your slap on the wrist about Imran Khan is not convincing! Your's and this forum's narrative against the Establishment is following the Pipe Piper and going back just less than two years would show that!
Evidence and numbers? What about YOU disprove that the Pakistan before 1958 was NOT in worse shape than the Pakistan of 1969??

I have no military background or connections, FYI! We Urdu Speaker Karachiites are not wedded to the military culture of central and northern Punjab. But I give credit where its due and I maintain that Ayub Khan's rule made the fledgling state of Pakistan much stronger.

 

[Goritoes]

YOU are the whataboutism!! Basically, your narrative against Ayub Khan is built upon the 'anti-Establishment' narrative built by Imran Khan. Before this, you guys were kissing the military badges. And your slap on the wrist about Imran Khan is not convincing! Your's and this forum's narrative against the Establishment is following the Pipe Piper and going back just less than two years would show that!
Evidence and numbers? What about YOU disprove that the Pakistan before 1958 was NOT in worse shape than the Pakistan of 1969??

I have no military background or connections, FYI! We Urdu Speaker Karachiites are not wedded to the military culture of central and northern Punjab. But I give credit where its due and I maintain that Ayub Khan's rule made the fledgling state of Pakistan much stronger.

@SQ8 is not a IK supporter, you are shooting in wrong direction.

 

[Meengla]

Supporters of military rule ignore the fact Pakistan got a lot of largesse whether it was the Cold War, Soviets in Afghanistan and war on terror.
That made the difference from being a economic disaster. All the economic largesse was squandered away on toys. the results are there to see

Money pumped into Pakistan was probably mostly related to 'security' matters, but, yes, American help to Pakistan's economy, especially in the 1960, contributed greatly to make the fledgling state of Pakistan become much more stable. There were three distinct phases of American help to Pakistan: The 50s/60s. The 80s. The 2000s. But at least in case of Ayub Khan, the 'waste' was lesser than what followed him. I have heard that he used to go to inner Sindh and stay in tents and personally ensure some water-management projects were done correctly. Pakistan's agriculture owes a lot to the American help then AND to the Indus Water Treaty. Someone above complained about IWT: Well, Indians too complain about that and even more than hinted at revoking that. You can't please everyone.

But nations don't progress on being security states. If Pakistan were to become a 'normal' State and away then the 'Security State' paradigm has to end. For Pakistan to get rid of the choke-hold of 'the Establishment' then the 'Security State' paradigm has to end first. But without an alternative, Pakistan would be courting with an unimageable disaster.

 

[ziaulislam]

Yes, this forum---which a few weeks ago was predicting Imran to be winning by 65%+ in the upcoming elections.
Fanboism gone beserk. Because Imran started criticizing 'the Establishment' but only AFTER Imran lost power, this forum has turned to be the mouthpiece of Imran Khan, including his wonderful insights about 'the Establishment'. Look at you guys' posts before April 2022!!

That was absolutely wrong for Ayub to have done so. She couldn't be a traitor. She was one of the Founders of Pakistan. And, though before my time, I know my family in Karachi supported her.
My point is that, if you look at Pakistan between 1951 and 1958, you'd see utter chaos in a country which was already very fragile and poor. Pakistan was already in the American camp by then but the ruling class proved utterly corrupt and myopic. But Ayub Khan turned things around. He even created a wonderful new Capital city out of nowhere. His legacy in industry and agriculture, as well his investment in the fragile Pakistan's defense, and in nuclear energy, among many other things, are unmatched in Pakistan's history. I don't know now, but I remember into the 1980s his portraits were in shops of Pakistan.
But argument is not for pro Ayub: It is about uncritical affiliations people can have despite evidence to the contrary, and yes, I am speaking about the fanboism of Imran Khan. That this forum, which was glorifying the 1965 war, the Kargil War, the Feb. 2019 events against India until April 2022 has turned so far against 'the Establishment' because Imran said so, shows how uncritical people have become in their fanboism. I bet on the Defense Day, even Ayub's speech about the war was played here. Some introspection is needed. This should not be a forum of Sindhi peasants singing 'Jiye Bhutto' for 50 years!

I thought the same for most of my life since I was 15.

Surely ayub built many things but he destroyed the fabric of federations. His actions led to revolt in Bengal(including building Islamabad)

Countries take time to build and improve it's institution. India suffered under stupid democratic policies but ultimately it's institutions developed.

The legacy of politicans are duffers and worthless was started by ayub and we are still suffering from the consequences

People will also argue that him gaining 120maf of water and giving up 40maf of water was okay but as Jinnah argued India never claimed the western rivers since at that time it was not conceivable to divert bigger river across Kashmir terrain into Punjab

Ayub should have worked for a better deal like other countries that are downstream have.

Rather then accepting India demand of full control and diversion

 

[Meengla]

@SQ8 is not a IK supporter, you are shooting in wrong direction.

Perhaps a closet-supporter.
I don't know why my praise for Ayub's era was so wrong? There is a context to my support for Ayub! The context is the chaos and the fragility of the nascent state of Pakistan between 1951-1958. Yes, there was the American help to Ayub, but Americans also helped Zia and Musharraf but they just couldn't capitalize on that help while Ayub did.
And I don't shed tears over Bangladesh. It was already written in 1948. That marriage was not bound to happen but I wished the divorce was peaceful.
Anyway, it is hypocritical of PDF members to criticize Ayub for the 1965 war when that war has been celebrated on PDF forever--until Imran Khan planted a different narrative!

 

[Areesh]

Yes, this forum---which a few weeks ago was predicting Imran to be winning by 65%+ in the upcoming elections.

He did won 16 out of 20 seats in Punjab elections that happened last year in July under pdm government. That is 80% win percentage

Forum is not wrong after all