Pakistan: a Dry Run for Bushco?

[shadow7]

Does any thinking person really believe that the dictator of Pakistan is able to make ANY political or military decision without the approval, if not the actual direction of the US Government?

The answer is so damned obvious as to be childish. No, he can’t, because money talks very loudly. The 700 MILLION dollars in economic and military assistance the US gave to General Pervez Musharraf this year alone is most definitely not an altruistic gift that comes without strings.

The 800 million dollars scheduled to reach the Pakistani government in 2008 will continue the guarantee that Pakistan will continue to do exactly what the Bush administration. Musharraf would not last a day I office without US aid and protection. Not a single day....

...Could the events in Pakistan be a testing ground for what Bushco might be planning in the US to avoid the consequences of fair and democratic elections here in 2008?

Understand that none of Musharraf’s actions could have been implemented without the approval of the Bush administration. Understand as well that Condy Rice has announced that these actions will not mean the discontinuation of aid to the government of Pakistan.

My full article: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[brewmaster]

I completely agree that the bushco (please don't give them the respect capitalization suggests) has and is in the process of eroding as many freedoms they possibly can, and that the events in Pakistan mirror the U.S. As well as the past 7 years resembling the rise of power of an unnamed dictator in the 30s.

However, I would like to believe that if such a thing as you describe were to happen that people would freak out and start a revolution (I'm referring to taking out the 2008 elections). Hard to say, too many variables. Ultimate question is how angry would your average sheeple be? Enough to fight?

The other possiblity is that there is no need to do such a thing. From what I have heard from the republican nominees, they plan on keeping the same course as the current admin. So rigging the 2008 election so one of those win would essentially be the same as if bush kept the job.

[wise]

Does any thinking person really believe that the dictator of Pakistan is able to make ANY political or military decision without the approval, if not the actual direction of the US Government?

The answer is so damned obvious as to be childish. No, he can’t, because money talks very loudly. The 700 MILLION dollars in economic and military assistance the US gave to General Pervez Musharraf this year alone is most definitely not an altruistic gift that comes without strings.

The 800 million dollars scheduled to reach the Pakistani government in 2008 will continue the guarantee that Pakistan will continue to do exactly what the Bush administration. Musharraf would not last a day I office without US aid and protection. Not a single day....

...Could the events in Pakistan be a testing ground for what Bushco might be planning in the US to avoid the consequences of fair and democratic elections here in 2008?

Understand that none of Musharraf’s actions could have been implemented without the approval of the Bush administration. Understand as well that Condy Rice has announced that these actions will not mean the discontinuation of aid to the government of Pakistan.

My full article: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Bush should be able to control the outcome of everything with power like this! Not.

[blueback]

Isn't it nice to be living in a country powerful enough to absorbe the huge fuckups of its leader and keep on keeping on? I get a warm fuzzy feeling when people point out how badly our top leaders have screwed up while other people are pointing out how successful our country still is. In my mind, that just proves that the system we have here works. No one person has enough influence to screw up the whole deal.

[Nomad]

Musharraf does what he does so he can stay in power. He was given an ultimatum, you are with us or against us. He thought about it and decided he would rather remain in power than fall to "regime change" he does not have a tremendous amount of support within his own country, and many disagree with a Muslim country siding with the US. He is well aware that the US does not trust him. US Administration calling the shots on this crackdown? I don't think so. Our "condemnations" are merely lip service, same as the Shah.

He needs our support, we need his support. It'll be another mess we have to clean up in ten or twenty years, like Panama, Iran, Iraq. Business as usual.

As for the "dry run" theory. Well, I love my country, I believe wholeheartedly in Constitution, and they trained me well. They would probably regret that. I'm not worried.

-Nomad

[brewmaster]

As for the "dry run" theory. Well, I love my country, I believe wholeheartedly in Constitution, and they trained me well. They would probably regret that. I'm not worried.

-Nomad

Well put. I'm not trained but I can do amazing things with a Kalashnikova ;)

[xanodel]

Pakistan's not even a fully functioning country. If I recall correctly, it's teetering on the list of failed states in the world. The country is technically not socially integrated- the reason why the Taliban could hide in Pakistan in the first place, is due to border issues. The ethnic groups along that border between Pakistan and Afghanistan are more loyal to each other than their respective countries in a way. Economically, Pakistan isn't doing well either.

The possible contender opposing Musharraf is Bhutto. However, what I recall from learning about Pakistan, was that Ms. Bhutto herself was not very popular either, and mismanaged the country in more ways than one. The islamists while not liking Musharraf, would be even less likely to follow under her. Both are secularists. Even if democracy, aka power splitting for now, were to form in Pakistan, it'd be too fragile to maintain for long-actually that was the format used by Bhutto and earlier PMs, all of which collapsed within oh, 2 years of formation or so.

I really don't think US, in the end would do anything; and furthermore, any US interference, for or against Bhutto, would just decrease legitimacy of any Pakistani government coming out from it.

[rocksteady]

Isn't it nice to be living in a country powerful enough to absorbe the huge fuckups of its leader and keep on keeping on? I get a warm fuzzy feeling when people point out how badly our top leaders have screwed up while other people are pointing out how successful our country still is. In my mind, that just proves that the system we have here works. No one person has enough influence to screw up the whole deal.

see the thing is, it's hard to percieve the screw ups in day to day life, but if you are fully aware of the issues, you realize that our country is facing a very difficult challenge in the next 5-10 years, and the sooner everyone realizes it, the better. The picture is not quite as rosy as you make it seem, I'm sure everyone was having fun the year before the great depression started.

[blueback]

Well, yeah. I can't predict the future so I don't know if a depression is coming. . .but neither can you.

I'm more attached to the ideals of the American system than America itself. As an airman I swore allegiance to the Constitution, not to America by name. There was a time where America almost split up, that time could come again. I mean, we are a country of immigrants, we don't have the ethnic cohesion of a country like Russia or India. We have the size, but not the genetics.

I think that "America" will live on forever the same way Rome did, through the philosophy it introduced to the world. Even when the borders change, and they WILL change eventually, "Americanism" will never die.

[rocksteady]

nice thought, but keeping our country alive and well is probably the best way to maintain the ideals of "Americanism", otherwise there is a large potential that much of our culture could be "lost"

totally unrelated sidenote: I lived in Pakistan for nine months in the late 90's during the mini arms-race with India, I was 16 years old! Interesting experience.

[ShaiGar]

Actually I believe that the best way to keep the "Americanism" that jefferson and co wanted to create alive, would be for the current USA to fall apart slowly over the next 30-40 years, or for a revolution to occur. (latter preferably but less likely) I too believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, the ideals anyway.

For "Americanism" to fail all it needs is the current trend of corruption to continue.