However, instead of picking up the issue and fighting it or even making a strategy to soften it we relied on blaming a man dead for 27 yrs?
How is that fair? How is it NOT THE 27 YRS of BS to blame?
Say Zardari screwed the country now if we sit and keep blaming Zardari, will it automatically fix the problem or will we blame the current govt of not doing anything about it? Then how can we ignore a 27yrs worth of people NOT BEING ABLE TO ADDRESS nor formulate any form of strategy?
Do they lack vision? Yes
Do they lack skills? Yes
Would they have been able to do anything? YES if they ONLY had gotten around the blame game...PLUS everyone was too busy to further suck the country dry then to address a problem that was apparent already!
Oh come on... where did I ever claim that we should do nothing but blame Zia ul Haq, or blame any other third rate buffoon we had in charge,
quote me if I've said that, otherwise don't imply that I made such a case.
In fact if you know anything about my ramblings on this forum, I'm usually bashing every single Pakistani before I single anyone out. Or blame the very top dogs that have come and gone, remember all those democracy rants of mine? yeah, that's what that was about.
It is of little use to blame him and do nothing else. But the purpose of the article and your interpretation seems to tell us the rather weird story that those before him also. It does not absolve him. There may have been other idiots, but he was by far the biggest, and he alone did more damage than most could hope to all on their own. No single man in my opinion can be accredited to damaging Pakistan as much as Zia.
He died 27 yrs ago...Are we gonna keep blaming that he started it or are we gonna man up and solve it or ATTEMPT to start something to solve it?
Can you tell me one country that took a 27 yrs blame game and got somewhere? I can tell you countries that hit peak in 20yrs of working on it!
How long did Japan, Malaysia, Singapore take to peak? Did Japan sit down and balme America? Did Malaysia just cried about British rule?
No they sat down and did something and now are somewhere!
We should definitely solve it. Tell me, when scientist attempted to stop Ebola? Did they just say, okay, here we are, here are some vaccines, let's get busy. No! No, no, they looked for a source, found it was most likely monkeys or bats in Liberia and their consumption, once they understand the origins of the disease, they can attempt to study it's virology in those native species and draw conclusions about it's forms therein. And then they are better suited to deal with it.
You cannot attempt to understand Pakistan's extremist problem, without stumbling across Zia, again, and again, and again. And yes, the Taliban was made years after his death, but it is all linked, he helped sow the seeds for extremism in both places.
You're point is valid, but your accompanying behavior is odd indeed, not one person here has claimed what you're hinting at as the problem here, not one.
So you mean to say once it is started it cant be stopped? So lets say Zia started it but no egghead could stop it in the 27 yrs?
No, it can be stopped, but, it is much harder to stop, requires more time, and an effort of equal proportion to the one that ushered it in, and then a natural period of decay for a few decades.
People who were born in to the Islamist post-Zia Pakistan, whoever they may be, many will be scarred with the Islamism of their upbringing, culture and education. Newer generations with a different philosophy will need to be reoriented in the mean time.
Please understand, societal upheaval is a slow, slow process, it never happens suddenly, it may have it's climax and moment of recognition, but it takes decades and years to get to there.
It hasn't happened yet in Pakistan because, the threat of extremism didn't come about till 2004. Since 2004, it should take at least 20 years before we can properly repair the damage to our society.
Say it as it is....No asshole was interested in stopping it coz each was busy filling his own pockets!
Of course. That's true, incompetency and corruption reached new heights after Zia left. Ironically, the destruction of strong civilian institutional was also a renewed policy under Zia, and he shares part of that blame too.
Zia made way for the corrupt and inept NS and BB game of musical chairs, and Musharraf also made way for the PPP once again, and now NS.
MOST of this was already done pre Zia era and effective....Read the article to see the timeline before blaming...
Not it was not. The hudood ordinances, the pairing of JI to official policy making process, the legitimization of madrasi, the blasphemy laws, the arming of religious militia, the mass indoctrination of Pakistanis and Afghan refugees, occured
DURING Zia's rule and
NOT BEFORE!
We AGAIN reach my points:
No we do not.
Can you tell me which law he introduced what IT MEANT UPON INTRODUCTION not HOW IT WAS MISUSED!
Sure.
I am not going to draw you a map, if you bothered to read, I did mention the Hudood ordinance, and one example, just to prove my point was the zina ordincance,
The Hudood Ordinances - Newspaper - DAWN.COM.
The name is self-explanatory. But the details of the law were such that they made all forms of such activity fit under this one, grossly broad and primitive description. As a result many women who were raped, or the victim of sexual violence were tried under this ordinance.
Pakistan: Proposed Reforms to Hudood Laws Fall Short | Human Rights Watch
This thing became so utterly ridiculous, that at one time, over half the cases brought to courts were acquitted, and that at one time some 8/10 of the women in our jails, were put there because of this ordinance.
Only 2% of those found guilty were Middle Class, and 0 were upper class or elite.
http://www.chicagobooth.edu/~/media/E49831A1165C49EBA902C83648F0CE36.pdf
This thing was so ridiculous that it had to be reformed in 2006
I agree the laws were misused...But some of them were not even what the textbooks claim them to be!
That's true, some were worse than others, but the above example is just one ordinance of many, and the Hudood ordinance were just one feature of Zia's long and unchallenged rule.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM....Everyone wants to efficiently throw the blame on a dead guy instead of showcasing their own misuse and lack of ability to have done something about it!
You learn from History, forget it at your peril. Next we can say whether you do something about it or not, again at your peril.
Again I repeat
So you mean to say once it is started it cant be stopped? So lets say Zia started it but no egghead could stop it in the 27 yrs?
Say it as it is....No asshole was interested in stopping it coz each was busy filling his own pockets!
3rd time you're repeating this. This is what I meant by writing a reply for replying sake.
This one we can blame on him BUT again
If we can agree on that, than there's nothing left to discuss on the point.
So you mean to say once it is started it cant be stopped? So lets say Zia started it but no egghead could stop it in the 27 yrs?
Say it as it is....No asshole was interested in stopping it coz each was busy filling his own pockets!
Good God 4th time you've said this.
Do you even read what you wrote? How do you wage war back in Afghanistan by rearing refugees who do crime in your own country?
I don't think you get it. It is possible to have many Afghan refugees in our cities involved in illicit activity, and still possible to recruit many thousands of refugees for arming and training or the purposes of war.
I will refer you to go actually study the Afghan Jihad, ridiculous attempted comeback that was.
Make sense!
Now tell me the year he came into power?
You missed this part, as I've said for the nth time.
Times were not perfect before him, and Islam was always part of the Pakistani identity, even the most liberal of Pakistanis cannot deny this. The process of indoctrination was started shortly before him, but how then do you propose to absolve what he did thereafter?
And again, you haven't challenged my points, just as I suspected while reading it first time.
