Gen Ayub, Zia, Musharaf, whose policies were better

[SekrutYakhni]

my dear friend

i appreciate your opinion, participation and patriotism.

by hanging them or putting them in fire will not solve the problem, in my opinion because their loyal voters will come out on the streets and there will be a chaos in the country and i think we can not afford another chaos in Pakistan after the mess taliban has created for us already. moreover, this solution is once again dictatorship type sloution where one person is making all the decisions and west whatever they want they just have to deal with one person only (the worst senario of the dictatorship).

i am not in favor of our politicians and i admit that they are biggest crooks and corrupts of our country but if we give the demoracy a chance to take it course and let the assemblies finish their tenures without problems, i think people will understand their leaders characteristics and chose a better leader next time. just my solution of the problem which do not involve military coupe. please feel free to express your opinion.

thank you for your participation once again


regards

Well your point is valid!
Appreciate it.

 

[Silent observer]

Well your point is valid!
Appreciate it.

thank you for appreciation

regards

 

[FireFighter]

No doubt General Zia was one hell of a badarse General, with one hand, he kept the US outside the door, and with the other hand, he broke the Soviets back and pushed 'em out of Afghanistan without declaring or waging a war, whilst keeping the Indian leadership under his toes, he was a Chief planner and architect, reminds me of examplary military skills of Khalid bin Waleed (ra).


Pakistan's dealing with one superpower right now that has made our life miserable, imagine if we had to deal with 2 of them, and both aligned with the Indians strategically? That would have been the biggest nightmare.

Zia's action & policies have done the most & longest lasting damage to pak whose effects the nation is feeling today.

I don't know who was best for but think it was Gen. Zia who was worst of all.
Also I repeat your statement.
whose policies were better for the country (not only army)...

I think we have a consensus amongst Indians here that Zia was the worst which means he is still viewed as the worst Gen for them.

And I take that as a compliment

Unlike the other two, he was the only General who kept India under his toes without ordering a single bullet to be fired across the intl border.


Musharraf has done tremendous damage in this regard, he showed weakness and bowed down to India politically. He was the weakest link amongst them all when it comes to foreign policies.

 

[FireFighter]

they all had their rights and their wrongs....

it's true that country should never be run by non-civilians....

but every civilian govt. we have had was either un-patriotic and/or corrupt and/or straight-up INEPT and INCOMPETENT!


Results....character.....innovation....straight-forwardness & honesty....pragmatism....charisma...and of course wide-spread support


these are mere examples of characteristics of what we should expect from leaders.....


not slogan-shouting nincompoops.....!

I agree with your overall post but I beg to disagree the highlighted part. Nowhere does it state that the country *must* be run by non-civilians.

I think military is an excellent institution that instills excellent leadership traits into people, character, competence, intelligence and bravery and instills strong patriotism. It could churn out good civilian leaders as well.


American history is a good testimony to the fact that they always select Presidents who have served in the Armed forces.

Therefore, i think great civilian leaders with military backgrounds could be produced.

Many captains and brigadiers often retire earlier to do business or go oversees, they could come into politics as well.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

There are three options for us to come out of this mess:
1. Find a Benevolent Dictator and let him run the country for the next ten to fifteen years---result: Stability, a continuous policy (good or bad). But Who??
2. Have a revolution -- let 100K people die; try to clean the system of corrupt people including corrupt Mullahs (who try to distort Islam)! The flip side is that it can get things to become better or go the Iranian route. A fifty fitfty chance.
3. Let this present system work -- if we do not like the president, impeach him in the parliament (this is the democratic way)--let the so called PPP run the country for good or bad -- things will start improving after a while with the second pillar (army), the third pillar (Judiciary), and the fourth pillar (Media) keeping a watchfull eye-- it is not 1975! Strengthen the NSC (National Security Council) with a clear National Strategy Development role for the Armed Forces, Intelligence Agencies (Right now our foreign policy and strategic goals are dictated by ISI -- so ISI Head would be the logical choice), Chief Justice, Senate Chairman, Leader of Opposition, Foreign Minister, Defence, Interior, and Finance ministers and National Security Advisor should be part of the council with the PM & the President. They can subject specialists as whenrequired.

The answers are all there if we go the democratic route and keep the peculiar Pakistani style of politics and governance in view while developing the model for governance for the country.

Example: If we do not want foreign private security companies operating in Pakistan, pass a law in the Parliament and ban Foreign Security companies -- Let us see what US does after that -- after all they backed off from Turkey when the Turkish Parliament refused to grant a launch pad for the Iraq Invasion. Turkey receives a hell of huge amount from US in FMS credit and EDA stocks annually besides financial support.

My two cents worth of "Wisdom."

The way is the democratic route!!!!!

 

[pak-marine]

glorifying these no good generals whose stupidity which has costed us half the land , ak47, herion additionally with a internall war and a serious IDP's issue makes me wonder .. if ever Pak be stable !? and i cant help it but to agree with BB's statement ""democracy is the best revenge "' i just hope that Allah survive this demacracy some how and civil admin get so powerfull in Pak that all these past cowardly events + a huge number of unlawful acts conducted by the generals in armed forces can be thoroughly investigated and revealed to public.

 

[FireFighter]

glorifying these no good generals whose stupidity which has costed us half the land , ak47, herion additionally with a internall war and a serious IDP's issue makes me wonder .. if ever Pak be stable !? and i cant help it but to agree with BB's statement ""democracy is the best revenge "' i just hope that Allah survive this demacracy some how and civil admin get so powerfull in Pak that all these past cowardly events + a huge number of unlawful acts conducted by the generals in armed forces can be thoroughly investigated and revealed to public.

We've seen the democratic system run by godless greedy wolfs, and going by your opinion, heck we still have a "democracy" run by some of the most incompetent and corrupt and heinous people on earth. No wonder we have Zardari in place. Pakistan has no hope if we continue this way.

THe drug and ak47 culture has always been there and its rather ignorance that people blame the problem on Generals who defended the homeland from Soviet invasion and threat. When empires break they create blow-backs in neighbouring countries.

I really cant believe people pray for Zardari's govn't to survive, it's unbelievable, and pathetic that these people still call themselves Pakistani.

 

[pak-marine]

FireFighter;642699]We've seen the democratic system run by godless greedy wolfs, and going by your opinion, heck we still have a "democracy" run by some of the most incompetent and corrupt and heinous people on earth. No wonder we have Zardari in place. Pakistan has no hope if we continue this way.

two of these 3 so caled"genius" generals v had suspended the constitution , i will cut it short for you , out of 60years of existence these generals have been ruling the country for more than Half the time. Out of which we had 3 major and 1 proxy war , a division , guns and herione , i dont know what more you think we derserved. Bro you seriously need to reconsider your opinion ,realise please who are the greedy wolves as its late.

THe drug and ak47 culture has always been there and its rather ignorance that people blame the problem on Generals who defended the homeland from Soviet invasion and threat. When empires break they create blow-backs in neighbouring countries.

its a known fact that zia opened the borders and afghans came with all sorts of contraband ..... , didnt that git thougt for a minute what havoc will it bring in pak!? it was his era and he was a general and ruling the country he is the one to be blamed for ..you can call few million ppl ignorant in your ignorance.

I really cant believe people pray for Zardari's govn't to survive, it's unbelievable, and pathetic that these people still call themselves Pakistani.

Its not zardari its Democracy to survive , please have a closer look the circumstances he was brought in the country as a leader. If you ask me the real conspiracy of raw/cia or whoever is to never let democracy flourish they want waderashahi and these twats to stay in power.

 

[Silent observer]

gen musharaf has taken the lead for the first time during this poll. this poll is getting better and better.

thank you guys for participation and comments

regards

 

[EjazR]

@FireFighter

Zia "lost" Siachen to the Indians in '84. Moreover, according to Arif Jamal, he had not authorized any covert operations in Kashmir assuming that India might retaliate across the IB like it did in '65. It was only after his death in '89 that overzealous ISI officers like Hamid Gul launched the proxy war in Kashmir. He was also instrumental in forming SAARC during his presidency.

And in Afghanistan, you give too little credit to the local Afghans who actually fought the war. It is those people who played a major role and lost the most number of lives.

Lets not forget the soviet small arms shipments to Palestinians confiscated by Israelis were taken by Zia for his Afghan agenda. Moreover, he was involved in the operation against the Palestinians in Jordan supporting the dictatorship of the King there against the Palestinians .

 

[Silent observer]

the competition is becoming closer as the poll advances. competition between gen musharaf and gen ayub is now going neck to neck.

thanks for participation guys

regards

 

[Aamir Hussain]

One must take into account the mess that Musharraf inherited when he took over as compared to Ayub Khan; this is more so when comparing both the guys. Ayub Khan did not inherit a large baggage of misadventures upon misadventures done on a global level, by previous leaders. He did not face sanctions or had the advantage (or disadvantage of) a second Afghan War. Moreover, India was still in its nascent development stage, loooking inwards.

Musharraf had a lot more challenges as compared to Ayub Khan. In my opinion Gen. Ayub made a mess of things when there was really no need to go to any war! It set us back to a point where we have still not recoverd from. If things would have been differently handled then, we would have been an industrialised nation today instead of still depending upon agriculture and under threat from looming water wars.

 

[nightrider_saulat]

i think musharraf's policies were very much democratic in a sense as compare to other three leaders

 

[Aamir Hussain]

I agree with you Sir!

 

[Silent observer]

I agree with you Sir!

thank you for yor participation.

btw, dont forget to cast your vote in the polls mentioned at the top of this thread.

regards