Posted on 01/30/2006 5:08:06 PM PST by voice of india
The point is that Zardari was known (and not just by the Pak media) as Mr. 10% long before 9/11/01, let alone Musharraf. As far as accusations against other candidates, you might be able to make the case that his government is promoting them (although I'd say that (1) they're probably true and (2) Mushie's probably worse), but not Bhutto and her dear husband.
Look, you don't have to know specifics about Pakistan to know how this little melodrama will play out. If the old guard gets in, they will be both weak and corrupt. From the peoples' point of view they will be completely useless and they will turn to the Islamists. Call this the "Afghanistan model".
There's also the option that, in order to stay in power, they mollify every faction coming down the pike. This, of course, creates a slightly underground movement that receives money from the government. Call this the "Saudi model".
In any case, this election is much more dangerous than that of the PA. Fatah was Hamas with nice suits. Pak is very much sovereign and this election needs to produce a leader who will put a smackdown on the elements that infiltrate the whole government. For example, you can try to put out a hit on Al Qaeda, but it's hard to do when you can't trust anybody in your army to do the deed. So you conduct a raid and the bad guys get tipped off. Even if Pakistan elected Donald Rumsfeld, I'm not sure that he could do any better.
We have corrupt politicians even in India.
Even in Nevada. Well, maybe that isn't so stark. Certainly in southern California. Still... How about Jim Trafacant in the union belt in Ohio. No... that's not surprising either.... But the stakes in Pakistan are too high to risk turning over the government to someone who was synonymous with corruption. Synonymous. Not just accused. Actually, genuinely one hundred and ten percent corrupt.
"...nobody at State went to this extent when India went nuclear."
You really need to check your history. Having your opinions is one thing; stcking to them in the absence of relevant evidence is something else.
:-$
:-$
That is a pair o' noya
But you're familiar with that one.
Let me introduce you to history (now that you have managed to catch up with technology)......:)
Pakistan wouldnt be in the eternal mess it is,Mush & his ilk hadn't subverted democracy since that country's birth & laid the seeds of Islamic fundamentalism to ensure that the public wouldn't have much animosity towards a dictatorship.Liaqat Ali,Bhutto Sr & Sharif were all thrown out by military goons who didn't do their nation a rats*** of good.The only reason why Mushy is potrayed as the best bet for Pakistan is because the US has a gun to his head,nothing more than that.
TGJ,
you honestly think Hamas would be what it is,if the PA didn't covertly back them???These folks all have the same vision & mission.The MMA,or the big Islamic alliance which is a vital player in the Pakistani national assembly,was propped up by Mushy & his boys to offsetBhutto & Sharif.
You are right,Mushy is the best bet for the US.That is,as long as his head stays on his shoulders or till a nuke goes off.Sad thing is that the price to be paid will be too high.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.