war&peace
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2015
- Messages
- 33,771
- Reaction score
- 18
- Country
- Location
This is factually and empirically wrong. No sir, nation has had ups and downs like all the nations have so this is really a sweeping statement and I'm always against such statements and, politely, would like to throw it in a trash can. Furthermore, recent, international report showed that on an average a Pakistani was way happier than an Indian despite all the terrorism and precarious plight of the economy. This kind of words I normally hear from our enemies who want to see and portray our nation as disappointed and demoralized. I do believe you are a good Pakistan but be careful with the words especially when online since these do have an impact.
Can you enlighten me how will this decision/deal/compromise boost the morale of the soldiers on the ground? Believing that their chief took a u-turn or compromised on Dawn leaks and their DG ISPR took his words back. Please provide me with something that changes my mind because I really want to. I love my army but I just can't wrap my head around this reality.
Furthermore, there is an old saying that army is nothing without a nation and it is especially true in the modern warfare. When the nation stands behind the army, it fares very well on the battlefield. It is very clear from 1965 and 1971. In 1965, the nation was united and stood behind the army while in 1971 it was divided so the tragic result.. as the army was engaged in fighting with the common people, traitors, insurgents and Indian army in the east Pakistan and the nation was not involved like it was in 1965. SO nation's moral is as important as an army's. Any army that thinks it something different from the civilians is doomed. It has to be an integral part of the nation and think for the nation. The nation and army have to work like a unit. It is this "demoralized" nation that has been providing the army with the defense budget, respect and the soldiers (I believe still that the army recruits from the civilian Pakistanis. Not some especial breed from another planet or country).
Well I had more hopes from the dawn leaks than Panama case, initially, for the reasons of perception/image of army which it has been building lately starting with RS and then Gen. Bajwa that under the Army Act, the army can independently take an action in such cases and it does not need any approval from the govt or SC. But army lost that opportunity and failed to exercise the freedom with was bestowed upon it.
So now pinning all the hopes into Panama case is kind of unrealistic, unfair and a practical admission that "Oh we can't do anything despite being the most powerful institution in the country but let's see what you can do SC judges" and throwing all the onus on their shoulders.
So what if SC also takes this route of non-confrontation and compromise for some "greater national interest"?
All institutions have to fulfil their responsibilities and this is what army has been claiming for at least a decade. Please don't play this game of passing the ball and shirking the responsibility.
I'm glad that you mentioned that because I knew people would be justifying this decision using Sulaih Hudaibya but let me tell you this case is not similar to Sulaih Hudaibiya in any way and there are major differences. Generally, the people who use Suliah Hudaibiya as an example have never read the history but I hope you have read it in entirety. Please read my signature since I believe that's more relevant to Dawn leaks. I have to go brother, so I will discuss it with you later and provide you the reasons why I think so.
Best regards
WnP
Last edited:
aap tu heart attack de rahay hain 
