Those 'defending' Pakistani culture fail to realise that culture isn't static

[lastofthepatriots]

People can still read about him. Heck, the effects of his rule are evident today. What is good about it? Freedom of expression and speech were squashed, anyone that didn't toe his hardline view was either killed or locked up in jail. Most importantly he was a dictator. Not an elected leader. Not saying the elected leader but was any better but fgs no dictator should blatantly change society of any country like that - that is, with impunity.

You fail to realize that Pakistani society was always conservative. It was actually Bhutto policies that Zia gets blamed for. Zia was a hardliner, but he was no coward like the generals today. Unlike these generals today he wasn't willing to put up with any bullshit. If ttp ever tried the shit they did during his era he would have literally had their heads on spikes in public. And LaL masjid.... Forget about that drama because he would have buried that maulvi alive.

 

[Enigma_]

You fail to realize that Pakistani society was always conservative. It was actually Bhutto policies that Zia gets blamed for. Zia was a hardliner, but he was no coward like the generals today. Unlike these generals today he wasn't willing to put up with any bullshit. If ttp ever tried the shit they did during his era he would have literally had their heads on spikes in public. And LaL masjid.... Forget about that drama because he would have buried that maulvi alive.

There's a difference between conservatism and extremism. Conservatism does not mean you crush anyone that disagrees with you on facets of life with impunity. Also it is easy not to be a coward when you destroy anyone that goes against you - the generals today are proper military men or at least most of them are - they understand their role in the country. Protecting the citizens from external threats under a democratic civil government is what their role is; not dictating to their country how and what they should behave like. In regards to terrorist groups, I assure you that if Pakistan had a proper structured civilian government then terrorist groups would be dealt with much more effectively and quickly. Not to mention a civilian government can bring in preventive measures against extremism. Agree to disagree with you in regards to Zia but that's my opinion of him.

 

[PAKjunoon]

Please can anyone present the charge sheet against Zia?

Zia was much better then the democraticaly elected dictators!

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Please can anyone present the charge sheet against Zia?

Zia was much better then the democraticaly elected dictators!

Only ruler of Pakistan that never stole money from the country.

Literally the only one.

When he died, I think he had only 10 to 20 thousand rupees in his bank account.

 

[PAKjunoon]

There's a difference between conservatism and extremism. Conservatism does not mean you crush anyone that disagrees with you on facets of life with impunity. Also it is easy not to be a coward when you destroy anyone that goes against you - the generals today are proper military men or at least most of them are - they understand their role in the country. Protecting the citizens from external threats under a democratic civil government is what their role is; not dictating to their country how and what they should behave like. In regards to terrorist groups, I assure you that if Pakistan had a proper structured civilian government then terrorist groups would be dealt with much more effectively and quickly. Not to mention a civilian government can bring in preventive measures against extremism. Agree to disagree with you in regards to Zia but that's my opinion of him.

In the history of Pakistan, all the leaders did their best to crush anyone that disagreed with them.Bhutto killed many opponents and even his own allies.He made a Federal Security Police force for this purpose.He put more restrictions on media then Zia did.He totally destroyed the economy with his Nationalization.And don't forget his part in the 1971 debacle.And other past leaders of Pakistan were no bettee.

But out of all the past leaders of Pakistan,why is Zia-ul-Haq always criticized more then anyone one?

Because of his policies of moving Pakistan towards Islam. That's why everyone is against Zia.

 

[Enigma_]

In the history of Pakistan, all the leaders did their best to crush anyone that disagreed with them.Bhutto killed many opponents and even his own allies.He made a Federal Security Police force for this purpose.He put more restrictions on media then Zia did.He totally destroyed the economy with his Nationalization.And don't forget his part in the 1971 debacle.And other past leaders of Pakistan were no bettee.

But out of all the past leaders of Pakistan,why is Zia-ul-Haq always criticized more then anyone one?

Because of his policies of moving Pakistan towards Islam. That's why everyone is against Zia.

I agree. Pakistan has never had a proper structured civilian government. Never. I am not defending Bhutto. But Zia was no saint. He did more long term damage to Pakistan than any other leader because he destroyed the country's roots. He destroyed the fabric of society. He didn't move Pakistan towards Islam. He moved it towards an extremist version of Islam. Where anyone that went against it was killed - non believer or not. That's not acceptable. Move to SA if you want it.

 

[PAKjunoon]

I agree. Pakistan has never had a proper structured civilian government. Never. I am not defending Bhutto. But Zia was no saint. He did more long term damage to Pakistan than any other leader because he destroyed the country's roots. He destroyed the fabric of society. He didn't move Pakistan towards Islam. He moved it towards an extremist version of Islam. Where anyone that went against it was killed - non believer or not. That's not acceptable. Move to SA if you want it.

Plz explain to me this "long term damage" he did and how did he destroyed country's root and the fabric of society?

 

[lastofthepatriots]

I agree. Pakistan has never had a proper structured civilian government. Never. I am not defending Bhutto. But Zia was no saint. He did more long term damage to Pakistan than any other leader because he destroyed the country's roots. He destroyed the fabric of society. He didn't move Pakistan towards Islam. He moved it towards an extremist version of Islam. Where anyone that went against it was killed - non believer or not. That's not acceptable. Move to SA if you want it.

How many political opponents did Zia kill exactly?

 

[Enigma_]

Plz explain to me this "long term damage" he did and how did he destroyed country's root and the fabric of society?

Look at the country today. Any dissenting voice is crushed by extremists. Other sects of Islam when expressing what their religion means to them is killed or otherwise systematically discriminated against. People are afraid to share their views on the country because they are afraid of being hurt or being killed. Pakistani society in general has become so indoctrinated with Zia's vision that they have decided to forget about civilian rule and take law and order into their own hands. This is acceptable to you? Is this the Islam you want practiced in the country? Just be honest.

How many political opponents did Zia kill exactly?

He didn't kill any directly.

 

[Jf Thunder]

For some its "Misguidance" and "Dis-info" and for others its "Guidance" and "Info".

thats true........

 

[PAKjunoon]

Look at the country today. Any dissenting voice is crushed by extremists. Other sects of Islam when expressing what their religion means to them is killed or otherwise systematically discriminated against. People are afraid to share their views on the country because they are afraid of being hurt or being killed. Pakistani society in general has become so indoctrinated with Zia's vision that they have decided to forget about civilian rule and take law and order into their own hands. This is acceptable to you? Is this the Islam you want practiced in the country? Just be honest.

All dissenting voices are crushed by terrorists,those terrorists that are trained and funded by RAW.Not by Zia!

All the sects and minorities in Pakistan were systematically targeted by the terrorists, not by the State of Pakistan.The one that is most effected are sunnis,the majority.The majority suffers more then the minorities.

Terrorists wanted to start a civil-religious war in Pakistan between different sects and minority groups, but they failed.Do you know why?Because we as society are more tolerant then ever.

 

[Enigma_]

All dissenting voices are crushed by terrorists,those terrorists that are trained and funded by RAW.Not by Zia!

All the sects and minorities in Pakistan were systematically targeted by the terrorists, not by the State of Pakistan.The one that is most effected are sunnis,the majority.The majority suffers more then the minorities.

Terrorists wanted to start a civil-religious war in Pakistan between different sects and minority groups, but they failed.Do you know why?Because we as society are more tolerant then ever.

I'll give you the last line. No doubt as a country we are more tolerant than ever. But that's not saying a lot considering where we were a few years ago. In regards to Zia - he created the environment in which our enemies (both internal and external) could not only just survive but also thrive. It is easy to join the other side when your government decides not to care about what you have to say or need i.e. a dictator in Zia.