ajpirzada
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 6,011
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
IIRC, the civilians had already taken decisive steps protesting against military dictatorship. Recollect the lawyer's agitation when Mush went against the judiciary by sacking Justice Chowdhary? That is a good sign. Likewise, what you need are good leaders who can step up and fill those shoes, not the military men.
This is a dangerous precedent. History is replete with examples where military slowly filled the shoes of civilian leadership leading to disastrous consequences for the population. Why, even Pakistan's history is a good example. Military has its own agenda or purpose and they will act according to that. Civilian requirements are many times at loggerheads with those of the military and relinquishing responsibility to the military does not bode well to a population's interests.
Its up to you people to stand up and take control of your country and let your Army know who is the boss. Armed forces as an institution is or should be the servant of the population, with the sole purpose of protection, not the other way around.
1: sir riding the wave of public anger is easy. when it comes to strategic affair, you really need to be in-touch with the ground reality.
2: gud leaders dont just pop up. they take time. that is why i am saying that let the things move on atleast for now. a clash bw civil and military will be much catastrophic than they both sitting on the same table lovingly.
3: once this system starts moving, it will produce gud leaders from within these politicians and then there wont be any need for military establishment to provide guidance.
at this crucial point if civil leaders, who are completely out of touch with Afghanistan dilemma, do some blunder which goes against our national interest we might see another marshal law.