Musharraf imposes emergency rule - Page 2

mimo2005 · 11-21-2007, 08:35 PM

The recent bomb that killed 170 people and left hundreds wounded in Pakistan was strapped on a one-year-old baby by his jihadist father, who blew himself up with his child. Seriously when religion and Politics meet = bad mix.
Seriously , this stinks.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...37,00.html?wtf

**Drew1369** · 11-22-2007, 01:50 AM

thats disgusting

cstr20cstr · 11-22-2007, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mimo2005

The recent bomb that killed 170 people and left hundreds wounded in Pakistan was strapped on a one-year-old baby by his jihadist father, who blew himself up with his child. Seriously when religion and Politics meet = bad mix.
Seriously , this stinks.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...37,00.html?wtf

But it just shows how sick and fanatical some of these radical muslim groups are.
I don't know what's worse, these fanatics, or the fanatical leftists that think GWB/U.S. is the "real terrorist"........

**EnglishPaul** · 11-22-2007, 10:00 AM

At least the bomber blew himself up. When did GWB last fight on the front line in Iraq/ Afghanistan? Kings used to lead their men to war. Seems like presidents just send their troops to slaughter.

If you believe that martyrdom brings eternal glory, then wouldn't you want that too for your kid. Most people don't believe it does. Most people couldn't believe in a god that called for it. But if you do believe, these actions are consistent. I am happy it wasn't an atom bomb he strapped to his body!

Perhaps Bush the Great should storm in to Pakistan and sort the chaos out, hey cstr?

**bruiser** · 11-22-2007, 02:56 PM

Perhaps Bin Laden should also be seen leading his men, eh?

**EnglishPaul** · 11-22-2007, 03:05 PM

I'm not sure they are his men. More like followers of his ideals. Or graduates of his training programs.

But good point, the death of Saddam Hussain stopped the battle in its tracks.

**linderman** · 11-22-2007, 07:14 PM

has less than a decade rotted our minds ????? Bin laden was fighting with his men, do you all forget he was spotted in Tora Bora during the fighting in the mountains ?

King george never had the guts to participate in a fight for his country; not even from the relative safety of his US reserve jet fighter which few ever remembered him training with.

a real leader leads from the front and has compassion for his service men that have died.

When our nation selects presidents that have not completed any service carreer in a full manner, why should be expect or think we are getting a person of that quality ?

GW is as far from a Reagan, Jack Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt as earth is from jupiter I am confident History will judge him accordingly and he is young enough may to even feel some of the shame brought about by his deceptive actions to invade a nation on false pretenses; during a time when the U.S. was severly hurt. He abused the trust we had bestowed upon him, to defend our constitution and our country.

**Drew1369** · 11-23-2007, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by linderman

When our nation selects presidents that have not completed any service carreer in a full manner, why should be expect or think we are getting a person of that quality ?

Yes because all of the times the hero Clinton deployed the troops he was right there on the lines with them and he completed the most amazing tour of duty when he served in the military... wait... what?

**Deleted090308** · 11-23-2007, 03:59 AM

Pakistan suspended from Commonwealth.

**linderman** · 11-23-2007, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew1369

Yes because all of the times the hero Clinton deployed the troops he was right there on the lines with them and he completed the most amazing tour of duty when he served in the military... wait... what?

I never was nor ever will be a slick willy fan.

anybody who is that dedicated to any party to support whom ever they throw in the ring is getting short changed. My party is the same as hiring a new employee, the best person available at the time.

**Chode** · 12-02-2007, 09:37 AM

Just a little something for you folks who aren't nervous enough already.

canard · 12-02-2007, 11:06 AM

what i think most people forget is that on an international front surely its more desirable for pakistan to be under an unvolatile secular dictatorship than a radical islamist democracy?

**EnglishPaul** · 12-02-2007, 11:43 AM

You could say that, for international security, Pakistan would be better leveled to the ground. It doesn't make it right for the Pakistanis though, does it?

canard · 12-02-2007, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishPaul

You could say that, for international security, Pakistan would be better leveled to the ground. It doesn't make it right for the Pakistanis though, does it?

i dont agree with this but i can see your angle but you can also argue its better as it is now for pakistanis than it would be under (state backed)shariah law

**EnglishPaul** · 12-02-2007, 12:35 PM

But if it was a democracy, that would be the people's choice. I wouldn't like shariah law, but maybe many Pakistanis would. Probably only men, but probably only men can vote(?). Hitler was voted in under a democracy, and that was the populations choice at the time. Democracy assures no. outcomes but the one of the people (except with GWB vrs Gore!)

**Chode** · 12-02-2007, 01:37 PM

Pakistani women have been voters since 1947. Like India, Pakistan has a vital democratic tradition, but in revolutionary situations, the tendency is usually for the extremists to dominate the moderates and assume power. So, as I see it, this is a situation where the U.S. and Europe really need to start supplying some covert support (money) to Pakistan's democratic leaders, and more overt pressure on Musharraf. I don't even have a problem offering Pervez a carrot such as $100 mil and an estate in Miami if he takes an early retirement.

A "stable, secular dictatorship" in Pakistan might be more aligned with Western interests than a fundamentalist Islamic theocracy, but I believe that the rising tides of democratic aspirations and radical Islam make this an impossibility in Pakistan. The only realistic choices the West has are to sit on the sidelines, or back the team we want to see win when Pervez is ousted.

yustr · 12-02-2007, 04:08 PM

The best form of government would be a benevolent dictator. The problem is that none are.

Yeah, we (the West) are really between a rock and a hard place.

**EnglishPaul** · 12-05-2007, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chode

The only realistic choices the West has are to sit on the sidelines, or back the team we want to see win when Pervez is ousted.

I'm no history schooler, but didn't America back Bin Laden when they wanted to swing the balance of power? And likewise didn't America also back Saddam Hussein?

11-21-2007, 08:35 PM	#21 (permalink)
mimo2005 Manager, The Relaxation Room/Analyst, Security Team Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 10,734 OS: xp	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule The recent bomb that killed 170 people and left hundreds wounded in Pakistan was strapped on a one-year-old baby by his jihadist father, who blew himself up with his child. Seriously when religion and Politics meet = bad mix. Seriously , this stinks. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...37,00.html?wtf __________________ TSF has outgrown its server, again. Please help "Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo"

11-22-2007, 01:50 AM	#22 (permalink)
Drew1369 TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Seattle, WA, USA Posts: 2,291 OS: Vista Business	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule thats disgusting __________________ Marge: We wouldn't be in this trouble if you'd just paid the heating bill! Homer: I thought global warming would take care of it! Al Gore can't do anything right!

11-22-2007, 10:00 AM	#24 (permalink)
EnglishPaul Still no avatar Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sheffield Posts: 989 OS: XP SP2	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule At least the bomber blew himself up. When did GWB last fight on the front line in Iraq/ Afghanistan? Kings used to lead their men to war. Seems like presidents just send their troops to slaughter. If you believe that martyrdom brings eternal glory, then wouldn't you want that too for your kid. Most people don't believe it does. Most people couldn't believe in a god that called for it. But if you do believe, these actions are consistent. I am happy it wasn't an atom bomb he strapped to his body! Perhaps Bush the Great should storm in to Pakistan and sort the chaos out, hey cstr?

11-22-2007, 02:56 PM	#25 (permalink)
bruiser TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,648 OS: xp	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule Perhaps Bin Laden should also be seen leading his men, eh?

11-22-2007, 03:05 PM	#26 (permalink)
EnglishPaul Still no avatar Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sheffield Posts: 989 OS: XP SP2	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule I'm not sure they are his men. More like followers of his ideals. Or graduates of his training programs. But good point, the death of Saddam Hussain stopped the battle in its tracks.

11-22-2007, 07:14 PM	#27 (permalink)
linderman Moderator, Hardware Team Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 14,022 OS: win 2000 pro / Win XP pro My System	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule has less than a decade rotted our minds ????? Bin laden was fighting with his men, do you all forget he was spotted in Tora Bora during the fighting in the mountains ? King george never had the guts to participate in a fight for his country; not even from the relative safety of his US reserve jet fighter which few ever remembered him training with. a real leader leads from the front and has compassion for his service men that have died. When our nation selects presidents that have not completed any service carreer in a full manner, why should be expect or think we are getting a person of that quality ? GW is as far from a Reagan, Jack Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt as earth is from jupiter I am confident History will judge him accordingly and he is young enough may to even feel some of the shame brought about by his deceptive actions to invade a nation on false pretenses; during a time when the U.S. was severly hurt. He abused the trust we had bestowed upon him, to defend our constitution and our country. __________________ If you cant be polite and friendly; then please be silent. Last edited by linderman : 11-22-2007 at 07:22 PM.

11-23-2007, 03:59 AM	#29 (permalink)
Deleted090308 Not... Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 22,282 OS: Xp	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule Pakistan suspended from Commonwealth.

12-02-2007, 09:37 AM	#31 (permalink)
Chode TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 784 OS: Windows XP Pro	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule Just a little something for you folks who aren't nervous enough already. __________________ Sweet!

12-02-2007, 11:06 AM	#32 (permalink)
canard Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5 OS: vista	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule what i think most people forget is that on an international front surely its more desirable for pakistan to be under an unvolatile secular dictatorship than a radical islamist democracy? Last edited by canard : 12-02-2007 at 11:32 AM.

12-02-2007, 11:43 AM	#33 (permalink)
EnglishPaul Still no avatar Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sheffield Posts: 989 OS: XP SP2	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule You could say that, for international security, Pakistan would be better leveled to the ground. It doesn't make it right for the Pakistanis though, does it?

12-02-2007, 12:35 PM	#35 (permalink)
EnglishPaul Still no avatar Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sheffield Posts: 989 OS: XP SP2	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule But if it was a democracy, that would be the people's choice. I wouldn't like shariah law, but maybe many Pakistanis would. Probably only men, but probably only men can vote(?). Hitler was voted in under a democracy, and that was the populations choice at the time. Democracy assures no. outcomes but the one of the people (except with GWB vrs Gore!)

12-02-2007, 01:37 PM	#36 (permalink)
Chode TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 784 OS: Windows XP Pro	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule Pakistani women have been voters since 1947. Like India, Pakistan has a vital democratic tradition, but in revolutionary situations, the tendency is usually for the extremists to dominate the moderates and assume power. So, as I see it, this is a situation where the U.S. and Europe really need to start supplying some covert support (money) to Pakistan's democratic leaders, and more overt pressure on Musharraf. I don't even have a problem offering Pervez a carrot such as $100 mil and an estate in Miami if he takes an early retirement. A "stable, secular dictatorship" in Pakistan might be more aligned with Western interests than a fundamentalist Islamic theocracy, but I believe that the rising tides of democratic aspirations and radical Islam make this an impossibility in Pakistan. The only realistic choices the West has are to sit on the sidelines, or back the team we want to see win when Pervez is ousted. __________________ Sweet!

12-02-2007, 04:08 PM	#37 (permalink)
yustr Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert Posts: 4,855 OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro My System	Re: Musharraf imposes emergency rule The best form of government would be a benevolent dictator. The problem is that none are. Yeah, we (the West) are really between a rock and a hard place. __________________ I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry In Vino Veritas