What's new

Why We’d Miss Musharraf

It contradicts most posts which say that Pakistan has an good education system, is a democracy and the Gen M is the best when you say most pakistanis are illiterate who donot know how to vote ? Come one even I as a Brit know how good my local GP is and yes he is Pakistani. You must introspect why he prefers practicing here and not in Pakistan.
 
It contradicts most posts which say that Pakistan has an good education system, is a democracy and the Gen M is the best when you say most pakistanis are illiterate who donot know how to vote ? Come one even I as a Brit know how good my local GP is and yes he is Pakistani. You must introspect why he prefers practicing here and not in Pakistan.

What sort of nonsense is this? Pakistan's education is one of the most improving in the world based on literact (a percent a year plus quite a few universities and technical colleges opening up), but there are HUGE areas of it that are uneducated (nearly 2 in every 5 Pakistanis cannot read or write (compared to 9 in every 10 some 50 years back). That's still a huge amount. Democracy was an idiot concept for this reason alone in the 1971 elections,but whatever.

The people that say "Gen M is the best" are precisely those people who can read and write and do their research for themselves. Those who cannot, just listen to Bhutto and NS, receive a tip-off with the promise of more, and vote accordingly. That's no democracy.

I'm not sure what the GP thing has to do with anything. Could you enlighten us what relevance it has?
 
It contradicts most posts which say that Pakistan has an good education system, is a democracy and the Gen M is the best when you say most pakistanis are illiterate who donot know how to vote ? Come one even I as a Brit know how good my local GP is and yes he is Pakistani. You must introspect why he prefers practicing here and not in Pakistan.

There is a difference between having a good education system, that produces quality graduates, and having an education system that is accessible to all. The former is probably why your GP is so wonderful, the latter is why the majority of the people who voted in the election that brought NS to power had to be bussed in with the promise of a free meal.

Hmm.. perhaps that is why there was no progress on either improving the literacy rate or economic growth during NS's time, he wanted to ensure that his voter base remained intact!
 
Then AM my friend change the system. Convict NS and BB through a court of law. Please dont export them to UK or Saudi A, because when you do that we think you don't trust your own courts or maybe they are innocent.
 
Sorry my friend with due respect to you. You donot do deals with people who are corrupt. You jail them. If you make them leaders and PM's they will be blackmailed by foreign agencies and only Pakistan will be the looser.

Best regards

Did you actually read my post. Talks were being held with the PPP party and who said BB or even NS were going to be made leaders themselves, they are not.

When they come back (NS will be allowed back after the Presidential election), and BB (who was not exiled, she ran away, a self imposed exile), they will both face corruption charges in court.

P.S. In case anyone missed it, no one is doing a deal that will allow BB or anyone to become PM themselves.
 
Then AM my friend change the system. Convict NS and BB through a court of law. Please dont export them to UK or Saudi A, because when you do that we think you don't trust your own courts or maybe they are innocent.

Nawaz would be charged but the Saudi King wanted him pardoned and called asked Musharraf to pardon him and send him to Saudi and Benazir went out of her own free will because she feared she might be charged with corruption charges of be hanged like her father was as she was a corrupt person...

I don't blame you for your hell-bent sorta attitude to prove that Pakistan is a dictatorship! I blame your media...
 
GP= GENERAL PRACTITIONER = SOMEONE I TRUST MY LIFE TO=PAKISTANI,

Do you need more clarifications,

Look dude, you are either being deliberately a bit evasive, or really are not too bright. I don't know how else it's possible to describe your line of argument here. Yes, your GP might be highly intelligent and very well educated, and have been educated in Pakistan..it does after all have some good schools and universities. But the point is (as has been pointed out), there has to be a minimal standard for every single person in a democratic country that is set so that each person can read the news and be able to come to an appropriate conclusion based on what they read.

Let's say in a village in Pakistan of 50 people, 2 are as educated as your GP, 48 cannot read and write. That means the 2 will make an educated vote (I would say Musharraff IMO), and the other 48 would be bribed by Bhutto and NS with promises of goodies. How is this democratic? You have to alleviate two things to make a democracy work..1) Poverty, and 2) Better the education. Pakistan is still not there yet, but it is hoped that enough Pakistanis will cast an educated vote in the coming election.
 
This makes no sense, like a lot of what you have posted. .

so if nawaaz or BB had said ..

"I was however getting some unofficial reports that at lower level due to unnecessary enthusiasm and carelessness, inefficiency and ignorance there might have been some improper case of voting in some areas."

You would still accept that the election was not tainted........blind loyalty



In case you missed it..You said "Or maybe it was an accumulation of sanctions over the past decade on the civilian government" ..: I simply pointed out this was an outright lie, which it is..

Pressler Amendment
Adopted 1985. Sec. 620E[e] of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 as amended.

Originally banned most economic and military assistance to Pakistan unless the U.S. president certified, on an annual basis, that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device, and that the provision of U.S. aid would significantly reduce the risk of Pakistan possessing such a device. In October 1990, President George Bush was unable to issue this certification, which triggered the Pressler amendment prohibitions. In 1995, the Brown amendment exempted most forms of economic assistance from the Pressler amendment prohibitions.
Arms Control Association: Arms Control Today: Confrontation and Retreat: The U.S. Congress and the South Asian Nuclear Tests

As you can see pakistan was under economic sanctions,until 95 when the brown amendment exempted most forms of economic assistance but not all.

Observed Economic Statistics

Pakistan received $6.4 million in aid in FY1996, and $2.5 million in FY1997 under the counternarcotics and food aid programs. (US Agency for International Development, FY1998 Congressional Presentation)

Pakistan paid $658 million for 28 F-16s, which were stored at a US air force base in Arizona after Pressler amendment barred transfer. (Associated Press, 25 May 1995)

"US aid had totaled about $650 million annually. But last month, the US, pinched by budget austerity, decided that even if Pakistan gives up its nuclear-weapons program, it only will receive about $200 million." (Wall Street Journal, 5 February 1991, A8)

Military spending accounts for almost half of Pakistan's $13 billion annual budget. India spends slightly more in absolute terms. (Associated Press, 8 January 1996)

"As 1998 began, the only tangible benefit Pakistan received [from the Brown amendment] was the delivery of $368 million worth of military equipment, which it had paid for already, and the renewal of investment guarantees." (Kux 168)

"Across Pakistan, the economic news worsens by the day. Since the nuclear tests in May, the prices of such basic goods as food and gasoline have shot up by as much as 25 percent. The Karachi Stock Exchange had lost 40 percent of its value before Thursday-and it dropped again after the missile strikes. The rupee, Pakistan's currency, has lost 30 percent of its value against the dollar." (International Herald Tribune, 8 August 1998, 1)

"Pakistan depends on foreign aid to cover its budget deficit, and was jolted when the IMF stopped one payment of a phased, three-year, $1.56 billion loan package as part of economic sanctions following the nuclear tests." (Associated Press, 7 September 1998)

"The immediate pressure is acute, with reportedly less than three weeks' import cover, and reserves insufficient to cover the estimated $1.7 billion owed over the next eight weeks to foreign commercial banks and to the World Bank and the IMF." (International Herald Tribune, 4 September 1998, 8)

"Mr. Sharif's fall-back solution for the economy is an aid package expected from the Islamic Development Bank and other Middle Eastern donors. But though this could amount to as much as $1.5 billion, it is no long-term solution when the external funding shortfall this year is likely to be $4 billion or more." (Financial Times, 27 August 1998, 9)

"Since the Indian tests, the KSE-100 index has fallen more than 40 percent. But in the past two weeks, the market has clawed back 9.5 percent on expectations that Pakistan is about to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to end its nuclear row with the west. Reports that the Jeddah-based Islamic Development Bank has extended a $200m loan to co-finance a $1.5bn Islamic loan fund for Pakistan also helped sentiment." (Financial Times, 22 September 1998, 38)

"There is now only about $500m left in liquid foreign reserves or just two weeks' worth of imports, down from over $1bn when the nuclear tests were conducted." (Financial Times, 7 October 1998, 4)

"The country's foreign exchange reserves have fallen sharply to just over $400m, … and it has accumulated almost $1.4b in unpaid debts to commercial banks and other creditors since June, when sanctions were imposed." (Financial Times, 2 December 1998, 4)

"Sanctions imposed on Pakistan following last year’s [1998] nuclear tests precipitated a balance-of-payment crisis and a near default on its external debt. The Pakistani economy, unlike India’s, faced an immediate foreign debt crisis. A U.S.$1.56 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) helped stave off default and stabilize the country’s external financing position. … Although an IMF loan has enabled the country to reschedule U.S. $3.3 billion of its short-term bilateral debt with the Paris Club of official creditors, the country’s external financial position remains vulnerable. With declining foreign remittances and foreign exchange earnings, Pakistan is vitally dependent on debt rescheduling agreements to meet its external payment obligations. At present, the government is seeking to reschedule about U.S. $800 million in commercial debt with the London Club of commercial creditors and U.S. $520 million in offshore trade debt with a group of commercial foreign banks." (Center for Strategic Studies, South Asian Monitor no. 11, 1 July 1999)

"Pakistan’s economy is in the midst of a recession. Output growth has slowed from 4.3 percent in 1997-1998 to 3.1 percent in 1998-1999, … Growth in agriculture slowed sharply from 3.8 percent in 1997-1998 to 0.4 percent in 1998-1999,… Growth in manufacturing has also slowed steeply of the last year, from 7.9 percent to 2.7 percent." (Center for Strategic Studies, South Asian Monitor no. 11, 1 July 1999)

"Foreign direct investment fell over the last year from U.S. $436 million to U.S. $296 million, and portfolio investment from U.S. $204 million to U.S. $4.7 million." (Center for Strategic Studies, South Asian Monitor no. 11, 1 July 1999)




I then pointed out that the nuclear sanctions were not applied on NS's government - they were not, the India-Pakistan relief act could be enforced for one year following the nuke tests, and clinton did exactly that. He temporarily lifted economic sanctions on Pakistan till 1999 when Musharaf took over. Why not do some research?

The letter further noted that in July, Congress passed section 902 of the India-Pakistan Relief Act of 1998, which authorized the President to waive the application of U.S. sanctions to India and Pakistan, and that on December 1, 1998, the President waived the sanctions after determining that the waiver would increase the likelihood of progress toward U.S. nuclear non-proliferation objectives. The President's waiver authority ends on October 21, 1999.
NEWS RELEASE 99-054; APRIL 19, 1999

Note this is a US government website. I find it funny the way you'll quote CNN, when it suits your line (even though you've given no link).

In fact, the true story is that NS's government had virtually NIL economic sanctions.. Virtually all the economic sanctions were on Musharraf's government between 1999 and 2003.

BBC News | Americas | US eases India and Pakistan sanctions
Wednesday, December 2, 1998

President Clinton has suspended some sanctions imposed on India and Pakistan following their nuclear weapon tests in May.

The decision opens the way for the two countries to receive loans and investments from American financial institutions, as well as military training.

The details of the announcement were released on the eve of a meeting between President Clinton and Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in Washington.


How come clinton was lifting sactions of nawaaz if there where no sanctions on him.
"Why not do some research?":coffee:
 
So you're accepting that Musharraf should have sided with the US against AlQ/Taliban..

When did i not accept that mushy should have let the americans fly over pakistan to bomb afghanistan?....he had no choice,he could not stop the american and it is what any democratic govt would have done.

Then what has now changed? Why should Musharraf side with the AlQ/Taliban in FATA? Your argument is flawed as usual. Lacks logic.

Can you not even see the difference? letting the american bomb afghanistan is completely different to sending pak army into FATA and killing your own people.
 
It's funny the way you claim to be not against Pakistan Army, when you class all leaders of the PA as the same. Anyhow, let's overlook this huge dollop of hypocrisy. Would a democratic party have implemented it? :rofl: you think the MMA would not have?? .

What a fool......answer the question
Would the PPP have introduced the hudood
Would the PML have introduced the hudood

PESHAWAR, Feb 3: An MPA of the ruling Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal on Thursday tabled two private bills in the NWFP Assembly suggesting that music and dance in public places and educational institutions, and using photographs of women in advertisements be declared penal offences punishable by up to five years in prison along with a fine of up to Rs5,000 and Rs10,000, respectively.
MMA MPA seeks law against music, women's photos in ads -DAWN - Top Stories; 04 February, 2005 .

Do you understand how a democratic system works?
The MMA have tabled a private bill,that is unlikely to get passed......but a military dictator can force through anything he wants without the consent of the people ,like zia with hudood and mushy with attacking his own people.

In fact, if you knew the reasons behind the "drive to Islamization", you'd know the laws which were created by Zia were created through different processes compared to Musharaf. The laws such as Hudood were created by Saudi scholars, and the proper process was side stepped so that saudi funds could be obtained for the soviet fight. Your argument goes something along the lines of....all of Zia's sins are Musharraf's sins..a ridiculous notion to anyone with an unbiased perspective. .

Military dictators dressed up as president have been a disaster for pakistan..zia or mushy



In 2000, Pakistan's consitution had been suspended, because civilian governments were temporaily usurped. Under constitutional conditions, judges would swear allegiance to the constitution. It was only due to there being no constitution that they had to swear allegiance to an individual. This has since been abolished again under Musharraf's rule.
Your line of argument is again twisted. The truth was that Musharraf had every right to suspend the CJ - this was never in question despite what the media reported. What the courts found, was insufficient evidence to convict the CJ. This does not mean he was not guilty. It means that they did not feel Musharraf had enough evidence to be sure he was guilty of those abuses of power. According to the Consitution of Pakistan, Musharraf only needs to be of the SUSPICION that Chaudary was abusing his power, to call the SJC to look into the matter..there was therefore no abuse of power by Musharraf in this case, and the fact he accepted the court decision is a first for any president in Pakista's history.

The above excuse is so weak i am not going to even bother answering it.
 
This bit of genius....

Pressler Amendment
Adopted 1985. Sec. 620E[e] of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 as amended.

Originally banned most economic and military assistance to Pakistan unless the U.S. president certified, on an annual basis, that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device, and that the provision of U.S. aid would significantly reduce the risk of Pakistan possessing such a device. In October 1990, President George Bush was unable to issue this certification, which triggered the Pressler amendment prohibitions. In 1995, the Brown amendment exempted most forms of economic assistance from the Pressler amendment prohibitions.
Arms Control Association: Arms Control Today: Confrontation and Retreat: The U.S. Congress and the South Asian Nuclear Tests

As you can see pakistan was under economic sanctions,until 95 when the brown amendment exempted most forms of economic assistance but not all.

....... was then followed up by this bit of genius

"Why not do some research?":coffee:

You know something? What everyone on this thread has been trying to get through your steel sealed skull, including those with a lesser grasp of English, seems to be elusive to you. You are a perfect example of why democracy would be a failure in Pakistan until education is sent up a notch or two. This is the point (and I've actually minimized this post, so that this would register with you..the rest of what you've posted I'll come back to later)

  • ***Important point***

    Quote from your article; "exempted most forms of economic assistance". This refers to economic AID, not to sanctions on the Pakistan economy per se. The sanctions on the Pakistan economy were only introduced after the nuke tests in 1998, but these were cancelled by Clinton due to the India-Pakistan Relief Act till 1999, when Musharraf took over.


  • ***Important point 2 to register***

    There were NO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS OF THE PAKISTAN ECONOMY UNTIL 1999-2003 (when Musharraf was in charge). Previous to this period there were only MILITARY SANCTIONS and ECONOMIC AID to Pakistan was cancelled by the Americans. But CANCELLATION OF ECONOMIC AID DOES NOT EQUAL ECONOMIC SANCTIONS TO THE ECONOMY (which Musharaf DID have to contend with).

You will note I have used caps. This is in with the hope that I don't have to re-type a point I've tried to drill through your head and make register for the last 6 pages..a good waste of bandwidth, time, and patience :wave:
 
What sort of nonsense is this? Pakistan's education is one of the most improving in the world based on literact (a percent a year plus quite a few universities and technical colleges opening up), but there are HUGE areas of it that are uneducated (nearly 2 in every 5 Pakistanis cannot read or write (compared to 9 in every 10 some 50 years back). That's still a huge amount. Democracy was an idiot concept for this reason alone in the 1971 elections,but whatever.

The people that say "Gen M is the best" are precisely those people who can read and write and do their research for themselves. Those who cannot, just listen to Bhutto and NS, receive a tip-off with the promise of more, and vote accordingly. That's no democracy.

I'm not sure what the GP thing has to do with anything. Could you enlighten us what relevance it has?

Ok. SO basically u'r argument is that people who cannot read or write ar are otherwise not educated enough by your standards do not deserve to choose their own government. Right? I'd like to know how many of the "adequately educated" people in Pakistan are of the same opinion.

I don't wish to make comparisons since this issue does not concern me directly but from what I've read , Adolf Hitler(may his soul rot in hell!) sincerely believed that commonpeople did not have the intellectual capacity to choose the right leader for their country.That was why he rejected democracy and felt that Dictatorship was the way to go.
 
Ok. SO basically u'r argument is that people who cannot read or write ar are otherwise not educated enough by your standards do not deserve to choose their own government. Right? I'd like to know how many of the "adequately educated" people in Pakistan are of the same opinion.

Don't read what I haven't written.
My argument is that people need a BASIC standard of education so that they can READ. They don't need to be university educated, just be able to read.

I don't wish to make comparisons since this issue does not concern me directly but from what I've read , Adolf Hitler(may his soul rot in hell!) sincerely believed that commonpeople did not have the intellectual capacity to choose the right leader for their country.That was why he rejected democracy and felt that Dictatorship was the way to go.

Actually Adolf Hitler believed his voters to be the most intelligent group of people that there is. He rejected democracy because he wanted to remain in power. You drawing a comparison between Hitler and not wanting democracy today is one of the most absurd comparisons i've read on here. It is a simple fact that democracy does not always work well, and is not always the best form of governance..it depends on whether you have the right parameters in place, which they are in the West, and they are coming to the right situation in a place like Pakistan. As an example, Turkey is ready for democracy, and they have it, they do not have vast areas of the population uneducated so they cannot read or write. Pakistan is not, not yet. But will be in about 10/20 years or so.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom