:?

Indeed, ALLAH best knows whose a hypocrite and evil person and who is a sincere and pious servant.

"Med" wrote:

Indeed, ALLAH best knows whose a hypocrite and evil person and who is a sincere and pious servant.

yes

allah hu alam.

"Andoverpolo" wrote:

Who is failing?

Killing 18 people, 5 of those being kids is not exactly success...

... I suppose its good for hearts and minds.

Originally I was not too bothered. But with the deaths I am angry at the CIA.

How would they react if their houses were blown up?

would they support these people, or would they side with the opposition?

Admin y u getting into a huff 4?

The emasculated pakistani army has been killings tens of people in South Waziristan, the US only killed 18. Chill out man.

Do you not think I get in a huff when I read others doing the same?

You about zwahiri, he is a criminal. I do not care for him. He can live, or he can die.

However I can get extremely angry when innocent muslims are killed.

we are all criminals.

But why you objecting so much on US doing this? Pak jawans have been raining bombs on the noble people of waziristan for a number of months now.

Forgive me, I may be wrong, but I dont recall you making a huff about that.[size=9] As I said I may be wrong,and u HAVE raised your voice abt it, if I am I'm sorry.[/size]

to be honest I do not know if I have raised a huff about it on the forums.

I do not think that has actually been discussed here...

Also with the Pakistani stuff it has two sides. The army dies have [i]some[/i] (but not much) legitimacy in its actions.

"Admin" wrote:

Also with the Pakistani stuff it has two sides. The army dies have [i]some[/i] (but not much) legitimacy in its actions.

No legitimacy.

Randomly attacking pakistani citizens is not legitimate.

Raining bombs on the mudhuts is not legitimate.

Killing innocent people is not legitimate.

and responding to fire is legitimate...

Over there everything could have been handled much better.

The people should have been taken into confidence.

Deaths of innocents should be avoided at all costs...

"Admin" wrote:

and responding to fire is legitimate...

what fire?

going in all guns blazing and telling pathans to give up their honoured guests isnt gonna achieve anything.

That region has always ben semi-autonomous, infact known as ilaaqa ghayr because the paki government has no say there. They should have left the business alone especially when no action was being taken against the pak governement.

It was semi-autonomous, but still a part of pakistan.

Yes they should have handled it diferently. Yes they should not have just mobilised, but got the tribesleaders to do the work.

But there is still a little legitimacy in pakistan trying to clean its own country up...

as I said the way things are done is not exactly good. It will cause a lot of problems both in the short term aswell as in the long run.

Pakistan is a failed state. Until som1 with true leadership comes along, its gonna remain as messed up as it is.

Did you now ONLY 1% of the population is taxed?

60% of electricity is stolen.

no law, no order, the weak suffer at the hands of the rich.

There money rules, not justice and equality.

"Med" wrote:

Pakistan is a failed state. Until som1 with true leadership comes along, its gonna remain as messed up as it is.

Did you now ONLY 1% of the population is taxed?

60% of electricity is stolen.

no law, no order, the weak suffer at the hands of the rich.

There money rules, not justice and equality.

And the people of Kashmir have to PAY for their electricity!

That may sound normal, but a part of the agreement over mangla dam was supposed to be free electricity...

Can more than 1% of the population afford to pay tax?

(and fyi, some goods are taxed. that hits everyone. I assume you mean income tax. Not many rich people there. Those who are are crooks.)

yes more than 1% can afford tax.

Pakistans problems are too many. I really worry. The system is so messed up.

Slavery still exists, fraud, lack of education, oppression, subjugation of women are all rampant.

How can a country survive when it doesnt get any tax and is relying solely on the army's incomes and foreign aid?

Some Kashmiris push their sacrifice for pakistan, but i aint one of them. As part of kashmir, whatever kashmir has done is nothing special.

Pakistan really does have potential but I just cant understand how one would sort this mess out, the only thing I can see is if an ALLAH fearing alim came who completely purged the system cos thats what is needed.

Musharraf makes a lot of tall claims. When he came in he promised to root out corruption but his first act was to exempt the judges from corruption investigation so they would legitimise his authority, and also journalists were exmpted from investiagtion so he would get good press coverage and now his whole policy is again non existant.

salaam

i think if pakistan had not taken the US side then we would not be sitting her all comfortable, there would have been huge uproar between people of this country and pakistanis. they would have been branded one of them.

"Med" wrote:

yes more than 1% can afford tax.

Pakistans problems are too many. I really worry. The system is so messed up.

Slavery still exists, fraud, lack of education, oppression, subjugation of women are all rampant.

How can a country survive when it doesnt get any tax and is relying solely on the army's incomes and foreign aid?

Some Kashmiris push their sacrifice for pakistan, but i aint one of them. As part of kashmir, whatever kashmir has done is nothing special.

Pakistan really does have potential but I just cant understand how one would sort this mess out, the only thing I can see is if an ALLAH fearing alim came who completely purged the system cos thats what is needed.

Musharraf makes a lot of tall claims. When he came in he promised to root out corruption but his first act was to exempt the judges from corruption investigation so they would legitimise his authority, and also journalists were exmpted from investiagtion so he would get good press coverage and now his whole policy is again non existant.

So you're saying, vote MMA?

Beast?

Im not too sure abt MMA. ALLAH knows best.

If they were to ever be in power I cant see much changing because each of the 6 parties is going to want to take the country in the direction of their maslak.

I think ideally a bloodless revolution but thats hardly likely, only people who can pull that off are the army. Having said that if there was a mass islamic movement - such as the religious revolution in iran - then it is highly possible that in such a scenario a relatively bloodless coup/revolution could occur.

Pak army would definitely not fire on civilians if there was a mass uprising according to how I understand the situation.

Wow. A Pakistani revolution. :shock:

I'd never considered the possibility.

I can see a general/soldier taking over from Musharraf and going down the Zia route, but anything on a par with Iran requires serious instability beforehand.

I don't think Pakistan is that bad yet. Even Pakistan's enemies wouldn't let it get that bad. India, Iran and US don't want PK nukes in the hands of revolutionaries.

there is a large religious movement WITHIN the army atm.

and the army does have a nack at coup's.

It does not have to be a people lead revolution. One could be carried out by the army.

Either way the gov needs to be capable. I like to current gov. Granted they could have done alot of things better, but it has done things a whole lot better than the previous elected governments.

Dictatorship seems to work for pakistan....

yeh.

Did you know a certain Major Abbasi I think attempted a military/religious coup in 1995?

SubhanALLAH would have been the perfect coup, military and religion together but it was not meant to be.

Abbasi Sahib had a beautiful vision for pakistan.

"Med" wrote:

yeh.

Did you know a certain Major Abbasi I think attempted a military/religious coup in 1995?

SubhanALLAH would have been the perfect coup, military and religion together but it was not meant to be.

Abbasi Sahib had a beautiful vision for pakistan.

Prob failed cos the time wasn't right.

There's one rule about coups and that's...

....

....

timing!

"Med" wrote:

yeh.

Did you know a certain Major Abbasi I think attempted a military/religious coup in 1995?

SubhanALLAH would have been the perfect coup, military and religion together but it was not meant to be.

Abbasi Sahib had a beautiful vision for pakistan.

Never heard of him.

There is no such thing as a perfect coup.

You have to remember soldiers have been trained to kill.

"Admin" wrote:

there is a large religious movement WITHIN the army atm.

and the army does have a nack at coup's.

It does not have to be a people lead revolution. One could be carried out by the army.

Either way the gov needs to be capable. I like to current gov. Granted they could have done alot of things better, but it has done things a whole lot better than the previous elected governments.

Dictatorship seems to work for pakistan....

There is a limited religous movement in army and that too only in the lower quarters. Those with religious conviction are weeded out and very few get to the top. As an example to keep a beard the jawan has to have PERMISSION from his superior officers.

PreGeneral Zia the army was as westernised as the normal british army. It was during General Zia Sahib's dawr that the army was made more islamic. And largely it is due to His legacy that there remain religious trends within some aspects of army.

Dictatorship works BETTER than democracy. But the dictators so far have been weird. Trying to be dictators but at the same time playing around with deomcracy.

The best government IMO would be one supreme religious leader - the Ameer - who has a council of ulama to consult with. Simple.

And yeh I knw its not realistic.

with current crop of scholars, I would not recomend that.

The majority are absolutists.

There is no possible middle ground.

And politics is choosing the lesser of two evils. Now add absolutists to the mix, and you will get fireworks, and naivetty.

[EDIT]

And dictatorship is not better that democracy. Neither is democracy better.

Both are methods of government. Some will work in some places, some in others. Both can be Islamic. Both can be Unislamic.

I LOOOOOOOOOOOOVEEEEE fireworks.

[size=9]hehehehehe[/size]

"[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4614486.stm wrote:

BBC News[/url]"][size=18]Pakistan rally against US strike[/size]

Thousands of Pakistanis have taken part in anti-American protests after an attack on a village near the Afghan border that killed 18 people.

The main demonstration was held in the main city of Karachi with protesters chanting "Death to America".

The missile strike apparently targeted al-Qaeda's deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was said not to have been there.

The US has not commented on the strike. Pakistan has protested, but its leader warned people not to harbour militants.

"If we kept sheltering foreign terrorists here... our future will not be good," said President Pervez Musharraf in speech broadcast on state television.

US media say the attack was carried out by the CIA.

Zawahiri has eluded capture since the US overthrew the Taleban in Afghanistan in 2001 despite a $25m bounty on his head.

Osama Bin Laden's second-in-command is regarded as the ideological brains behind the al-Qaeda network, says BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera.

The Egyptian has also become its most visible spokesperson, issuing a number of video and audio tapes, whilst Osama Bin Laden has not been seen or heard from for more than a year.

Musharraf criticised

About 10,000 people rallied in Karachi, Pakistan's biggest city, chanting "Death to American Aggression" and "Stop bombing innocent people".

Hundreds of riot police were deployed to keep order.

A leader in the coalition of anti-US Islamic groups that organised the nationwide protests said General Musharraf must step down.

"The army cannot defend the country under in his leadership," Ghafoor Ahmed told protesters in Karachi.

In Samarbagh, near the Damadola village where the attack occurred, protesters denounced Gen Musharraf for co-operating with the US.

Foreign presence

Damadola is in the Bajaur tribal area, about 7km (4.5 miles) from the Afghan border.

Jets - or in some accounts a Predator drone - reportedly fired missiles at a particular housing compound in the village.

Reports citing unidentified Pakistani officials say the strike was launched on intelligence that Zawahiri had been invited to dinner in the village.

However, a senior intelligence official told Reuters news agency they had no evidence he was present at the meal.

Damadola was the stronghold of a banned pro-Taleban group, the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi, the agency reported an official as saying.

The US has about 20,000 troops in Afghanistan, but Pakistan does not allow them to operate across the border.

Pakistan has about 70,000 troops in the border region.

[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4614486.stm]BBC News[/url]

Salam

US is not doing itself any favours by making enemies within the Pakistani populations.

What happened was that CIA got wind that Al Qaeda number two was coming to town for lunch. However, he did not turn up. CIA fired missiles. They didnt know he had cancelled his meal.

We know this strike on Damadola was a terrible misjudgement in which innocent people got killed. However, US government needs to do something nice to make up for such mistakes. Women and children died in that accident. People want some sort of apology and compensation.

[b]Senators Say Airstrike Was Justified [/b][url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/politics/15cnd-senators.html]New York[/url]

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/international/asia/15pakistan.html]Pro... in Damadola[/url]

Omrow

ok.

1. They attacked a sovereign nation.
2. They had flawed intelligence. again.
3. They never killed any terrorists
4. They killed 5 children amongst the 18 dead.

Which step was justified?

Salam

Be reasonable. They did not attack a Sovereign nation. They had permission from the Pakis.

They were in hot pursuit and innocent people do sometimes die why you are chasing a criminal.

We have to remember that these fanatic are our enemies as well as enemies of non-muslim nations. They have attacked New York and they have attacked Bali.

Omrow