Pakistani Establishment will kill Imran Khan - The Guardian

[Zibago]

Also my axe.

Nice tin foil hat sir ji

 

[Indus Pakistan]

And don't worry about western media. He has massive cache with them. More then any other leader in the non western world. In fact his stock value in western media is actually probably greater then even their own leaders but IK said sme things to annoy them. Like blasphemy, feminism and his continous use of Islam. Like a women spurned they react to that sort of thing. But over time IK's magnetic charisma will pull them in again.

More dangerous is foreign security services which will not like his agenda. That is where the real threat is from. Pakistan is full of 'hire guns' who will gladly perform the job of assasins on dollar contracts. And don't forget IK's agenda is going to hurt lout of Pakistan's vested interests who are powerful. These enemies within could join their hands with those abroad. And you can see where we would be heading to.

This danger will become extreme when he goes after the corrupt within Pakistan many of whom are inside the state like senior officials etc

D ground

What is "D ground"?

 

[Reichsmarschall]

I'm sure there are no dearth of Mumtaz Qadris in pakistan army .

Indira ghandi and her son what happened to them?

 

[Suriya]

I just hope that he makes it out Alive.

Prolem with IK is he cant play second fiddle.
I'm too sort of that . I know how difficult it is to play second fiddle even when compensation is best . U feel caged and soon go crazy and also start making mistakes.

Pakistani PM's job which is inherently second fiddle to GHQ will drive IK crazy very soon and loose it's charm on him .

U can hope he doesn't make too many enemies before he goes out his PMship at his lives risk .

 

[I S I]

Prolem with IK is he cant play second fiddle.
I'm too sort of that . I know how difficult it is to play second fiddle even when compensation is best . U feel caged and soon go crazy and also start making mistakes.

Pakistani PM's job which is inherently second fiddle to GHQ will drive IK crazy very soon and loose it's charm on him .

U can hope he doesn't make too many enemies before he goes out his PMship at his lives risk .

Ameen

 

[RegularUnimportantGuy]

 

[IceCold]

What is "D ground"?

Sorry D Chowk

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/imra...arance-is-given-d.570075/page-2#post-10672176

 

[Yaseen1]

I said this as soon as I heard PTI was leading. There is direct and immediate threat to his person. A elite security detail has to cover him 24/7. From now on everything including political rallies need extreme security procedures. I don't trust Russians. Advice from Chinese and a unit recruited from SSG needs to be set up ASAP.

if they decided to kill him they may kill him and no ssg could save him easily like gen zia killed with presence of all security from army.

 

[SirHatesALot]

As long as he takes army with him especially on foreign policy he will survive but he should fight for more control on domestic issues if he really wants to change pakistan. i also hope he will be able to change some of the issues related to regional trade in cooperation with army.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

regional trade in cooperation with army.

No country can be ran without coperation of army. Try run India and go against what the Indian Army holds dear and see what happens. Same in USA. Pentagon carries huge influence. For instance Obama wanted to end the Afghan war and pull out US troops. Instead he ended sending even more. That was because the security establishment 'persuaded him'.

gen zia killed

Because his security detail failed.

 

[SirHatesALot]

No country can be ran without coperation of army. Try run India and go against what the Indian Army holds dear and see what happens. Same in USA. Pentagon carries huge influence. For instance Obama wanted to end the Afghan war and pull out US troops. Instead he ended sending even more. That was because the security establishment 'persuaded him'.

Yes broadly you are correct but its not the same situation in pakistan.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Yes broadly you are correct but its not the same situation in pakistan.

Our establishment is not as consolidated as yours. In case of India - the Indian military, Indian big corporate sector, Indian corporate controlled media, major political elite is on the same page and make the "Indian establishment".

In Pakistan we don't have corporate sector and if we have it;s very small, the media is just ethnic based [Dawn on shouts for Karachi], or narrow one family interests [Daily Tmes shouts Taseer family interests] etc, political elite is riven along ethnic, sectarian groups. Which raises the question who is the only custodian of the state? Well that leaves the Pakistan Army which because of our history and make up has ended up as the custodian of the state. Which is a good thing unless you would want Pakistan to fall apart along trobal, ethnic, sectarian faultlines like Afghanistan.

Pakistan is not unique in this. Prussia in the formative history of Germany had a military which performed the same role. In Turkey the military played the same role until at least 2015.For a century it guided Turkey to where it is today.

 

[Yaseen1]

No country can be ran without coperation of army. Try run India and go against what the Indian Army holds dear and see what happens. Same in USA. Pentagon carries huge influence. For instance Obama wanted to end the Afghan war and pull out US troops. Instead he ended sending even more. That was because the security establishment 'persuaded him'.

Because his security detail failed.

u.s run under influence of israel and not under army establishment.most of u.s soldiers want to exit afghan war but they are forced because of jewish lobby which controls both army and govt and want war for their weapon industry and other fulfilment of religious prophecy

 

[Trango Towers]

It is true. If Imran doesn't bend down in front of Establishment like every (bloody) civilian government, he will be disposed off in the same way Nawaz got.

"Don't you dare touch the foreign policy you bloody civilian."

-Establishment

But does he need to...
What do the establishment want.

They wang a string military anf strong foreign policy. Development at home with job creation and law and order.
If he gives that the people will defemd him as well as the establishment. Remeber when turkish generals rose the people rose too.

 

[Thumboor]

FUUUCCCKKKKKKK........Now this is too much of these assholes....IK needs to talk about/against it....They are building a narrative, shaping and fertilizing people's opinion around the world...They will kill Khan and then will blame that on Pak army/ISI....

Imran needs to come on TV, in English language, should blast western media otherwise this will create exceptional problems for Imran, army and Pakistan....the way they are tarnishing Pakistan/ISI....

Can Imran Khan fulfil Pakistan’s voters’ hopes and keep the generals at bay?

It’s not hard to see why Imran Khan’s stunning victory in the Pakistan elections attracted global media coverage. The story of a cricketing hero and former playboy turned political superstar and scourge of the establishment that spawned him was too good to miss.

Given Pakistan’s history of army coups, Khan’s rise to power seemed like a modern parable foretelling the triumph of people’s democracy over the dark-suited, sunglassed forces of “deep state” military control, manipulation and repression.

Beguiling though this storyline is, it did not really happen that way. Indeed, Khan owed his success, in part at least, to the covert meddling of those same shadowy spooks and generals, according to EU poll monitors. Yet who governs Pakistan, and how, is still a matter of high international importance. Take female suffrage. Equal voting rights are absent in some Muslim countries. But Pakistan, where women comprise 44% of eligible voters, has made exceptional progress. Veiled female residents of conservative tribal areas such as South Waziristan made history last Wednesday when they cast votes for the first time.

Pakistan matters because, with its youthful population of more than 200 million (66% are under 30), it is a country of vast potential handicapped by endemic poverty, illiteracy and inequality. It is also, not coincidentally, a battleground pitting anti-western Islamists, schooled in international jihad in Saudi-funded madrassas, against the secular, anglophone elite. It is central to the “war on terror”. Its stability and security, or lack of it, has a potentially global impact.

For the British, Pakistan exercises an abiding fascination, rooted in the Raj’s disastrous part in its bloody 1947 birth and in continuing, close ethnic and cultural ties. For the Americans, self-anointed heirs to empire, Pakistan plays the dual role of indispensable ally and duplicitous villain in their endless Afghan drama. For many in India, Islamabad is the nuclear-armed bogeyman next door. For expansionist China, Pakistan is a key link in its grandiose Belt and Road trading franchise, reliant on Beijing’s loans, investment and goodwill.

How the untested Khan, wholly lacking in governmental experience, will approach these complex issues and historical burdens is open to question. What is clear is that he has changed radically since his hell-raising West End days. Launching his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, meaning “movement for justice”, in 1996, a newly earnest Khan, now 65, made doing God’s will and fighting corruption his main aims in life.

“Far from being the Islamic welfare state that was envisaged, Pakistan is a country where politics is a game of loot and plunder,” Khan wrote in his memoir, Pakistan: A Personal History. His new party, he said, would strive to “end exploitation and ensure a society based on honesty, merit and integrity”.

Khan espoused a conservative religious outlook, favouring sharia law and controversially backing radical anti-blasphemy laws. His criticism of US drone strikes earned him the nickname “Taliban Khan”. And he rediscovered his family’s Afghan roots and Pashtun tribal identity. Coincidentally or not, this won him support among conservatives.

Likewise, courting populist opinion, Khan turned against Pakistan’s western-educated ruling class, despite graduating from Oxford university. Colonialism had wrought lasting damage across the subcontinent, he wrote, by destroying self-esteem. “The inferiority complex that is ingrained in a conquered nation results in its imitation of some of the worst aspects of the conquerors, while at the same time neglecting its own great traditions.”

Twenty years spent clambering up Disraeli’s greasy pole may have mellowed Khan a little, but not entirely. Observers say he remains a passionate, volatile man with authoritarian instincts.

But the conciliatory tone of Thursday’s victory speech, in which he called for national unity, surprised and relieved critics. Khan said he would seek improved relations with India and Afghanistan, where a nascent peace process is inching forward.

He even offered an inquiry into opposition allegations of vote-rigging. Although the row over the “stolen” election will rumble on – minor parties say they plan street protests – Khan’s offer seems to have drawn its sting. The main opposition, the PMLN, has dropped its threat to boycott parliament and accepted defeat. An editorial in Dawn newspaper, headlined “Time to move on”, declared Khan and the PTI had demonstrated “genuine national political appeal”. For that reason, it said, “he ought to be given the political space to try and turn his ideas into reality”.

Whether Khan can do so, while maintaining a calm, unifying approach, is now the biggest question in Pakistani politics. Two immediate problems stand out. One is how to prevent the economy imploding under rising debt and devaluation pressures. The other is how the new government can escape the embrace of the overbearing military, which will expect payback for its campaign “assistance”.

Pakistan’s generals are accustomed to exercising sole control of foreign and security policy. Challenging them can be a career or even life-ending experience. So if Khan, for example, wants to break with the US, befriend India, or talk to terrorists, he had better watch his back. Whatever the popular storyline says about democracy redux, the hidden hand on the new prime minister’s shoulder is real. It will be hard to shake off.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/29/imran-khan-pakistan-election-victory-analysis

I m stunned, literally....Security of IK needs to be hell alert and of quality...Take help of Russians/Chinese.....I m sensing great threats from west

@LoveIcon @Oscar @MastanKhan @Salza @Indus Pakistan others

The guardian is a centrist-liberal newspaper, so obviously their opinion on IK will be wrong. They seem to enjoy the status quo, so fight against people trying to shake up the system. Whether its corbyn in england, maduro in venezuela or khan in pakistan.

Their coverage has always been shamelessly one-sided.