Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

America....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    America....

    Americans want Pakistan to return to Democratic rule..
    Stop sponsoring terrorrism..or at least do it in limited fashion..Like they do it themselves..
    Stop nuclear weapon programme,,,,
    Is there anyhting in the above agenda that is against the ideology of pakistan or her long term interests....
    ( actually if we will have a democratic government , and less fundamentalism, even nuclear issue would become less important)ess

    #2
    As Pak president claimed 'Pakistan can not survive without Kashmir'. Sounds like 'Nicaragua can not survive without Alaska.'

    Comment


      #3
      ZZ, your response has nothing to do with the question in the post.

      Comment


        #4
        In my opinion, Clinton's address is an eye-opener for our Government.
        Over the last five decades, we have been paying a very high price for our obsession with Kashmir. Our singular focus on Kashmir has brought us nothing but insecurity, uncertainty, bankruptcy, illiteracy, dismemberment, lack of basic amenities, and military rule. What Clinton said in his address is clear; abandon the Kashmir-obsession, and focus on developing the economy, democratic institutions, and above all, our human resources.
        It is customary to hold the politicians responsible for all our woes. As a matter of fact, the amount plundered by all our past governments, put together, is only a slight fraction of our annual defence expenditure.
        It's high time we put our act together. Lets become a responsible member of the international community. Lets develop Pakistan into an economic powerhouse, a hub of trade, commerce and investment, and a centre of emerging technologies. Let's educate the uneducated, feed the hungry, provide treatment to the ill, and ameliorate the lot of the common man. For god's sake, STOP wasting the country's resources on Kashmir. Believe me, Kashmir is not worth it.

        Syed Faisal Abbas
        Karachi, Pakistan


        Comment


          #5
          The tragedy of Pakistan is hurdles in the way of democracy. A review of past political history of Pakistan reveals that democracy was never allowed to go through the natural process of trial and error. Hence, anybody who maintains that failure of democracy is due to corrupt politicians is absolutely wrong. Democracy is a social process and all people are responsible for failure. But, what are the main elements that caused this state of affairs?

          Whether you accept it or not, America is a super power. In the world community, it has great influence. Every country works for the interests of its people and ideologies. The American President, whoever he may be, prioritises American interest and their cherished ideology. When America deals with other nations, there is a bargain. The more powerful the government of that country, the more bargaining power it has. The deal is done on the basis of bargaining power. That is natural. Simply, you cannot expect from any country to help you without the interest of that country. You have to prove that your interest and the interest of the other country have exchange values.

          Pakistan, failing to have a strong democratic government, as such is not in a position to bargain with others for its benefit. Mr. Clinton addressed directly to the people and not to the government. Why did the government allow such address? It means America is a super power and small countries accept its demands. Is the speech of Mr. Clinton not interference in the internal matters of Pakistan, which was allowed by the present non-elected government? There is no internal matter in the present-day world. We have to get along with other nations and their advice and criticism. Now, one can understand the message of Mr. Clinton. He demanded democracy, stop to support for Kashmir liberation fighters and acceptance of the disputed border as line of control. Whether or not Pakistan accepts these demands, we have to see.

          The message is clear and unambiguous. To deliver this message the present government allowed Mr. Clinton to address the nation. The people who criticise Mr. Clinton have no logic. They should ask the government, as to why it provided official media facility to Mr. Clinton for such a message.

          Nadaf Mahboob
          San Diego, USA


          Comment


            #6
            sorry for not being clear. i am saying that prime agenda of paki ruling establishment and army is confrontation with india. how can army justify sucking a big part of budget without 'enemy'.
            why so much space is devoted in pakistani newspapers to international matters? even the regional newspapers like 'frontier post' almost never discuss problems of region. does pakistan have such a great international role to play and such worldwide interests to protect (as US has worldwide interests. but even in US coverage to international matters is perhaps less than Pakistani newspapers have)
            priorities seem a priori misplaced. they are not. that is the way establishment wants to run pak. how much time an average indian living in india would spend thinking of pak in a day. not even five minutes or perhaps not at all.
            but if u want to orient masses to wads ur holy agenda, u have to keep feeding them with stories and paranoia all the time.
            i donno if pak can not survive without kashmir. but paki army wont get fat paychecks without kashmir dispute.

            Comment


              #7
              >>Is there anyhting in the above agenda that is against the ideology of pakistan or her long term interests<<

              No nothing wrong in the ’demands’, however as for the democratic rule, ppl need to be educated to understand the responsibilities of being members of a democracy – you can’t have ’I-can’t-do-anything-so-I’ll-keep-my-mouth-shut’ attitude, and that’s is what some of our ppl have. Also military is the largest and most respected ’organization’ therefore ppl are more willing to ’help’ – so things can move quicker. Plus this ‘demand’ should come from our own ppl, none else have the right to interfere.

              As for nukes, either no one should have them, or everyone should have a right to protect them selves. Clinton wouldn’t have visited us, if we didn’t have ’em. Vajpayee would be in Lahore, if we didn’t have ’em, etc. We can’t have a neighbor like India and ignore the importance of our security, in some cases we should learn from history.

              What do you mean by fundamentalism? Religional or national fundamentalism? You’ve probably heard of ’lohey ko loha kaata hai’. Also you’ll hear many well educated people say that they are fundamentalists, though many of them wouldn’t even know how to hold a gun, what is wrong with that?

              You probably meant to say negative religious extremism – to that I agree, that there is a problem which needs to be solved, however hardly any of them is involved in jihad’s that can catch world’s attention. So for rest of the world they are no threat, only for Pak.

              Waise fundamentalism has nothing to do with the way a country is governed, or else world’s large democracies would never have any fundos, which they do. You only have to look at the other side of the border to see examples of that. Personally I would rather have an Iran or China then US or UK, at least I’d know where they stand, and wouldn’t have to swallow hypocrisy at all levels and all forms.

              Comment


                #8
                >>
                however hardly any of them is involved in jihad’s that can catch world’s attention.
                <<

                Sabah, who are you trying to kid? Yourselves? I would have expected a more mature analysis from you.

                Comment


                  #9
                  People, if there had been no Kashmir dispute after 1947 between India and Pakistan, THERE WOULD STILL BE ANIMOSITY BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ! AND THERE WOULD STILL BE HUGE DEFENCE BUDGETS IN BOTH COUNTRIES !

                  WHY ? Because India would still conspire and plot against Pakistan and its very existence, as it cannot except the existence of a Muslim state carved out of their precious Mahabharat !!

                  Kashmir is only the symbol of this Indian 'grievance', and this is born out by the reason India wants to keep Kashmir - to maintain a secular India - even by force !!

                  Had Muslim Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and the Baluchi states (and Muslim Bengal) stayed as part of a united, federal and secular India, then any Muslim grievances would have been dealt with the same way the Muslim Kashmiri's, the Sikh Punjabi's, and the Christian Naga's etc are dealt with by India today i.e. BY BRUTE FORCE !!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    <<<
                    I would rather have an Iran or China then US or UK, at least I’d
                    know where they stand, and wouldn’t have to swallow hypocrisy at all levels and all forms.
                    >>>

                    Then how come so many Pakis seek refugee status in Uk & USA ? WHy not go China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait ???

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Eli,
                      Read the post again kid, I said *I would*, not what the whole world should.

                      Agni, I’ll reply to your post tomorrow Insha Allah.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by kmailik:
                        People, if there had been no Kashmir dispute after 1947 between India and Pakistan, THERE WOULD STILL BE ANIMOSITY BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ! AND THERE WOULD STILL BE HUGE DEFENCE BUDGETS IN BOTH COUNTRIES !
                        WHY ? Because India would still conspire and plot against Pakistan and its very existence, as it cannot except the existence of a Muslim state carved out of their precious Mahabharat !!

                        If so, why Bangladesh is not going for massive defence expenditure. It is also carved out of India.
                        Had Muslim Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and the Baluchi states (and Muslim Bengal) stayed as part of a united, federal and secular India, then any Muslim grievances would have been dealt with the same way the Muslim Kashmiri's, the Sikh Punjabi's, and the Christian Naga's etc are dealt with by India today i.e. BY BRUTE FORCE !!
                        On the other hand grivences in Muslim Sindh, Baluchistan, NWFP and Bengal were dealt with peacefully by Pakistan. Weren't they?

                        [This message has been edited by ZZ (edited March 30, 2000).]

                        Comment


                          #13
                          >>ppl need to be educated to understand the responsibilities of being members of a democracy<<

                          Now, now! At the time of independence, the literacy rate & education systems were the same in greater India. Then how comes that India can nourish democracy for 53 years & Pak needs educated people for it?

                          The major factor coming between Pak & democracy every now & then is the interference of army in the nation's administration; & this attitude of the army is nurtured by the Pak rulers themselves!

                          Even after riding a huge wave of popularity in the aftermath of the 19-days Bangla war, General Manekshaw & the Indian army didn't even think of interfering into the politics;...
                          Whereas in Pak, the army can overthrow any government any time & try to hang the elected PM!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Mohabbat....
                            Thank you.
                            Sabah ,
                            You frustrate me....;-(
                            As much as I can understand, you try to defend paki policies..Its like saying" we are not as wrong as you are saying we are".my approach id totally different....Where we stand today leaves a lot of room for improvement. and inorder for progress we would have to recognize what needs to be done differently. we must be doing somehting wrong to be where we are today.( Or do you believe that we are not capable of doing any better )
                            I am not saying if pakis should haves nukes or not, ( my personal opionion is that its a sad part of human history , where so mnay reosurses are devoted to create means of destruction) all I am saying here is that ..WE CANNOT AFFORD IT. ( please dont tell me we wouldnt survive without them, our survival as a nation is in more threatened by having them) Plus , a grenade in monkeys hand is much more dangerous then in rational ones...And they have a right to interfere cause they put khairrat in our pockets.
                            Now the other issue, fundamentalism is ONLY NEGATIVE..there is no positive fundamentalism.....Its a narrow opinion which gives a perverse sense of superiority over all others...at best it makes ppl judgemental , and at worst , creates armed mobs ready to kill anyone different...
                            ZZ,
                            Thats better......

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Agni, there is a huge difference in terrorists, Mujahedeen and armed troops – and if you are thinking about Kashmiri mujahedeen, then they are not what I call negatively influenced religious extremists. And these kinds of ppl are not a threat to the world, only for them they are fighting against. I guess that’s all I have to say on this.

                              Nova,
                              >>As much as I can understand, you try to defend paki policies.>>
                              NahiN Nova, I’m not defending anything, I just gave you my opinion.

                              >>Its like saying" we are not as wrong as you are saying we are<<
                              Again no, I was just trying to say, that there are different ways to see the same problem.

                              >>.my approach id totally different....Where we stand today leaves a lot of room for improvement. and inorder for progress we would have to recognize what needs to be done differently.<<

                              Agree, and how do you suggest that we should recognize our needs? Khud ko kis ki nazar se dekheiN ham? Have you been following our new polices? What is your opinion on them? Have you given any feed back? Perhaps we should start looking behind the CE’s uniform and see what he is doing for the ppl of Pakistan, instead of what rest of the world thinks he should do for us.

                              >>we must be doing somehting wrong to be where we are today.( Or do you believe that we are not capable of doing any better )<<
                              There are so many things that we have been doing wrongly, from which one is lack of interest in Pak politics, and endless criticism (almost like making fun). Why not make a move when you can? Why do we have ’na khud karo na siki ko kerne do’ attitude?

                              >>all I am saying here is that ..WE CANNOT AFFORD IT. ( please dont tell me we wouldnt survive without them, our survival as a nation is in more threatened by having them) <<

                              Nova, we have had nukes for years now, we only tested them with India, and it’s not like we have increased our ’nuke budget’. As for surviving, it’ll be pretty dumb to fight against nukes with gulail hai na? Btw. Were you following Indian ’threats’ right after they had tested their nukes? Is our nations survival more threatened? Sorry failed to understand this, kaise? Our Pak nation is proud to have them. Do we have a reason to trust our neighbor and others? If not don’t you think we should be prepared? If you think that we can trust them, could you plz help me believe that too.

                              >>Plus , a grenade in monkeys hand is much more dangerous then in rational ones...And they have a right to interfere cause they put khairrat in our pockets.<<
                              Shabash, that’s the way to talk about the country our bazurg died for! Khairayat lete kioN haiN? Don’t tell me caus we spend all our money on nukes so we need khairayat to survive. How did we elect the Governments who begged for money? Some times it surprises me to hear ke ham ne kahaN kahaN se bheek maangi hui hai, so why didn’t we stop them? We had democracy; we could do it then hai na.

                              >>Now the other issue, fundamentalism is ONLY NEGATIVE..there is no positive fundamentalism.....Its a narrow opinion which gives a perverse sense of superiority over all others...at best it makes ppl judgemental , and at worst , creates armed mobs ready to kill anyone different<<

                              If it’s only negative then how can it have two sides as you’ve described? I’m a fundamentalist and no threat to anyone, not even to my stupid tota.

                              Eleganica
                              Democracy always needs educated ppl – how many jahil do you know who are capable of making a good decision.
                              And educated ppl is not = Phd’s. And no comments on Indian democracy or hypocrisy.
                              A marshal law in India is ’impossible’ not because of the respect for demo, but cuz of your countries size. Imagine your troops running the countries and ’fighting’ against ’terrorists’ in different states and controlling the LoC etc.

                              [This message has been edited by sabah (edited March 31, 2000).]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X