Zardari and the Politics of Defiance

#84 Posted by zeemax

You are just disgusting...Reading post is like following the army rule book and you want constitution restored? You can't respect the people of your own country, you can't also respect the constitution because that constitutions protects them from unlawful attacks from the army.

"Not anymore. Punjabi soldiers refused to obey orders to fight in Waziristan and FC was used being gullible."

Iss saadgi par koon na mar jaya aiy khuda!

#83 Posted by tahmed32

"provincial autonomy" is fine, but it is simply a means to achieve a more fundamental goal .... And mullahs are not the only individuals in Swat or Bajaur

If you think Fazlullah does not represent a vast majority of Swatis, you would be very wrong. Swatis want Shariah rule and have wanted it since the Wali Swat abdicated to Pakistan. Wali's rule itself was something like Shariah. Did you know that? Jirgas and all?

#77 Posted by HP,

Were Bangalis not Pakistani

No. Not after the six points.

Were Balochi not Pakistani

Yes they are. The secessionist element supported by India (which still survives in bits) was attacked.

were Sindhis not Pakistan

Of-course they were. How many Dakoos were eliminated in that operation? You know very well the entire Sukkur till Ghotki belt was RULED by dacoits as well as the National Highway from Dadu till Sadiqabad. You're just pretending you don't know to win this argument.

You are actually saying that the army will not attack the punjabis.

Yes. Punjab is 70% of Pakistan and that is a fact.

Are the pathan not Pakistani now? Who the fk is killing them---you or me?

Not anymore. Punjabi soldiers refused to obey orders to fight in Waziristan and FC was used being gullible. But they refused too. Why do you think army withdrew?

zeemax: in that case you and i have different priorities - "provincial autonomy" is fine, but it is simply a means to achieve a more fundamental goal.

That goal is respect for the rights and liberties of the individual.

And mullahs are not the only individuals in Swat or Bajaur, so you are calling for the same thing there as hamidm is calling for the rest of Pakistan - rule by an "elite group" that depends not on the people but on their brute power. So, you are and are on opposite sides on this issue.

good night

#74 Posted by ijaz_gul
"Kayani according to Sehgal makes Mush itchy to ditch him while he has the powers."

Mush has no power to ditch the COAS. He is like the Nawaz of 1999 but now army will not tolerate any disruption of the command structure. They may not support the civilians but they will act to support their interest.

I do think that army is perhaps looking for a way out and might ask Mush to leave but for that to happen, we may have to see some more escalation in the lawyers movement. You create fissure points by working on them and taking one step at a time. That appears to be the Nawaz strategy.

Until the amry say so, there is no mai ka laal in Pakistan who can remove Mush from the army house. And to make the army say so, you need to build pressure on the streets.

#76 Posted by tahmed32

Perhaps you should be more careful what you right so there is no confusion on where you stand.

Okay, this is where i stand for your future reference:

I stand for the 1973 constitution of Pakistan, which states it is an Islamic Republic, and what guarantees it contains including Provincial autonomy.

That autonomy includes the Mullahs in Swat and Bajaur if they want it that way. That's all.

zeemax #78 agreed.

#74 Posted by ijaz_gul,

Army wants the house vacated.

The Retired Generals in the ex-Army association today have demanded it. And if anyone thinks these are just retired Generals, they don't know the army at all. The army has a lot of respect and loyalty for their out of uniform. A soldier never retires and that would have included Musharraf too had he left honorably. Now he is very bad for Army's image and they know that. I think none else but the army will deal him a very cruel blow.

#71 Posted by zeemax
"Either the constitution will be upheld, or a VERY violent uprising. And the Pakistan Army will NOT go against the people as HP seems to think."

That is why I don't discuss politics with children.Or the socalled grown ups who live in a make-believe world.

It may get violent before you get the constitution. But saying that army will not go against the people of Pakistan is like submerging your head into the sand.

Were Bangalis not Pakistani, Were Balochi not Pakistani, were Sindhis not Pakistan when the mofo army attacked them? You are actually saying that the army will not attack the punjabis. Are the pathan not Pakistani now? Who the fk is killing them---you or me?

You cross the line and you will see how this army would jump on you in Punjab. You are dealing with the mercenaries and not some National army. Get hold of your sense and learn a few things before using the keyboard.
I am now totally poed!

zeemax: i may be naive, but it certainly seems from your post that you are applauding, not warning, of mullahs coming to power via the gun. Perhaps you should be more careful what you right so there is no confusion on where you stand.

HP #65 People of Pakistan are learning to respect the constitution the hard way - to Musharraf's blatant trampling over their basic rights and the Chief Justice risking life and sacrificing the chance to join Mush and his lotas in looting the country. Indeed, US state bar association websites have articles from US lawyers questioning themselves if they would show the same dedication and self-sacrifice in defense of the constitution as the Pakistani lawyers have done. So, Pakistanis who need lessons in the importance of the constitution are not the ordinary people or civil society.

It is unfortunate that it has dragged on so long (thanks to musharraf and now zardari), since this revolution is costly in a number of ways. But, without the rule of law, Pakistan would have to bear the even greater cost of rule by lotas and ghoondas.

there are strong rumours of faultlines.
Kayani according to Sehgal makes Mush itchy to ditch him while he has the powers.

Also, Zardari is expected to share the pie with your friend Afrasiab, but not NS, because the US wants so.

Army wants the house vacated.

Re: # 67

hp,

stop blaming the army for flaunting the constitution - they couldn't have done it without the judges ..... i think all the judges, droopy eyed or not, should be fired and we should abolish the supreme court and let the panchayats and tribal jirgas handle judicial matters ...... the judiciary in pakistan, along with all other institutions, is a joke ...... the only institution that seems to work is the patwari - he makes the rules and everyone plays by them ....

#67 Posted by HP,

Yes HP, but I believe it is not the same army anymore after getting its ass kicked in Waziristan and Swat and its Lt. General slaughtered on the street in 'Pindi.

#64 Posted by tahmed32,

HP is an anarchist. You're naive Sir, if you haven't discovered that.

And no, you are totally wrong that I'm for Mullah rule rule-by-the-gun in Pakistan. You haven't discovered that either. But indeed that will come about if people like HP do not understand and people like you support him.

No insults intended of-course, but it is a very delicate time, has been for over a year now. Either the constitution will be upheld, or a VERY violent uprising. And the Pakistan Army will NOT go against the people as HP seems to think. They too need to live in Pakistan in the end. They know they will be asked to go and pick watermelons as salary as the ex-Soviet army did.

Do you remember the image of Soviet soldiers marching in a fruit farm and carrying watermelons off at their chests like guns?