I would, all the way.
Military rule is very effective for a developing country.
Really? Are you sure? Do you want me to remind you of how Pakistan dealt with economy under the Military ruler? From Good to worse, then East Pakistan to Bangladesh, 80's policy, and then TTP/MQM. They are bad receipts for the economy which also restrains from furthering the development ahead.
The only reason Pakistan economy is stabilized because of PMLN with its reformed economical policy. That's why majority from Pakistan army are not happy with that. Glad General Raheel looked for bigger picture hence cooperated with Nawaz Sharif for the stability of the economy of Pakistan. Unfortunately, not everyone is General Raheel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No Military rule. Even from the beginning of Islam, it started with democracy taking public inputs into account which led to the first democratic elected government of earlier Muslim state, Abu Bakr (R.A).
There is no place for dictatorship in human world nor endorsed by Islam either. It must be civilian government from the public inputs. It is public support that God supports with fully heart, not dictatorship that goes against the wills of public and rendering them voice-less.
The bottom line is that it must be civilian government only for the sake of public and stable economically.