What's new

Zardari govt responsible for failure of ‘FODP’ moot

Why does Pakistani voter vote for them...thats a big question......why not elect someone like Imran Khan.....he may be able to bring about a change.....I hope so.

A nation is what it's people want it to become......

Good question.

Ethnic and religious chauvinism seem to play a part.
Bhutto/Zardaris are Sindhi Shia; Sharifs are Punjabi Sunnis.
30 million feudal serfs told to vote a certain way play a part.
The lack of a sizeable middle class plays a part.

I used to like Imran Khan, and he is charismatic, but he seems a little short on solutions and he is a little too cozy with the mullahs. If he can moderate himself, he may yet be the best choice to break this ongoing family feud.

Even Musharraf has made mistakes, but nobody doubts his loyalty and patriotism.
 
Good question.

Ethnic and religious chauvinism seem to play a part.
Bhutto/Zardaris are Sindhi Shia; Sharifs are Punjabi Sunnis.
30 million feudal serfs told to vote a certain way play a part.
The lack of a sizeable middle class plays a part.

I used to like Imran Khan, and he is charismatic, but he seems a little short on solutions and he is a little too cozy with the mullahs. If he can moderate himself, he may yet be the best choice to break this ongoing family feud.

Even Musharraf has made mistakes, but nobody doubts his loyalty and patriotism.


Are you trying to tell me that An average Pakistani Citizen is so dependent of these feudal lords that he has to do as the say....does this mean an average Pakistani has no choice...no vision of his own.
 
do you see any young politicians in Pakistan....No...

Don't agree with your statement.. if you go each polling, you will find many people also stand up for voting, but they really don't get vote, since not many people knows them.. also same people when comes through some famous party name then they win.. Like i heard a line "if you put a poll through pml n tag for NA 55 then he will win". the mind set has been developed prior to polling... that these guyz will compete, but others are not even put under consideration.. around 70% of the people even don't vote in pakistan since they don't find any one who is honest and un corrupt.. Main problem is the system.. the system is totally corrupted... & it is matter of fact who ever will come he need to do some good investment and produce an campaign to get some support, and what you think if a guy who has invested around 10 million in the campaign will forget about his money after he join the seat? No chance.. The democracy has become a business, and the business where there is no monitoring, it is bound to remain corrupt e.g. Customs on Pakistani boarders..

I am not sure(and I may be wrong) but I guess most of the Pakistani Voters are blinded by anti India sentiment...and Anti India parties are brought back to power again and again.......

Completely wrong!! I haven't seen anyone in my life who has something in their agenda saying something anti-india. (if you have a single example then show me).

Most of the money collected by the way of taxes and aid is used by defense forces......

Again wrong, most of the tax money spended on corruption and other things.. neither it has anything to do with indian.. Defense is the requirement of any country e.g. India increase their defense more then pakistan so should i expect they ministers got vote through anti-pakistani campaign?

other guesses aren't credible as well..
 
Are you trying to tell me that An average Pakistani Citizen is so dependent of these feudal lords that he has to do as the say....does this mean an average Pakistani has no choice...no vision of his own.

ohh come on, 70% of pakistani don't vote at all.. how you can say avg pakistani are dependent upon federal laws. out of 30%, only 8% pakistani select the majority party who create government.. and 8% is not an avg....
 
ohh come on, 70% of pakistani don't vote at all.. how you can say avg pakistani are dependent upon federal laws. out of 30%, only 8% pakistani select the majority party who create government.. and 8% is not an avg....

For the sake of good argument....

Who is responsible to change the fate of the nation....who is responsible to elect a good government.....

Its the responsibility of the citizens of the country to vote....and elect good governance ......if Pakistanis can't go out and vote....I don't think they have right to question whatever is handed over to them.....and I share same opinion for India as well....

If citizens don't perform their duty......they should not expect....anything
 
Who is responsible to change the fate of the nation....who is responsible to elect a good government.....

I am not sure about india, but i know pakistani people don't have much power in this.. in March 2007 a meeting held where it was decided that Musharaf will be president, BB will be prime minister and so o on.. and it was still 10 month for election to go.. so i afraid normally pakistani fate haven't been decided by pakistani citizens.. also democracy is the worst system, since it can be manipulated as you like.. you just need money and power.. Democracy normally divide people into different groups, which ends up on fighting among different groups or end up in making two groups, one who is ruling, and other who is getting ruled..

A system where an education person is equal to an illiterate people, a pious person is equal to an evil person.. will lead such elements into power..
 
I am not sure about india, but i know pakistani people don't have much power in this.. in March 2007 a meeting held where it was decided that Musharaf will be president, BB will be prime minister and so o on.. and it was still 10 month for election to go.. so i afraid normally pakistani fate haven't been decided by pakistani citizens.. also democracy is the worst system, since it can be manipulated as you like.. you just need money and power.. Democracy normally divide people into different groups, which ends up on fighting among different groups or end up in making two groups, one who is ruling, and other who is getting ruled..

A system where an education person is equal to an illiterate people, a pious person is equal to an evil person.. will lead such elements into power..

May be..... you speak from your experience.........what kind of system you suggest should be a good option for any country.....I think every individual is equal...no matter what his education background.... and should be given equal opportunity......to move up the value chain............then if he does not put enough efforts.....its his decision ...and he has no one to blame but himself.....
 
ABOUT ZARDARI ,i want to add some some article here when he was selected .
PAKISTAN IS GOING THROUGH A DARK PHASE .

---------- Post added at 06:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:26 PM ----------

If there's a case to be made against democracy, few countries make it better than Pakistan.

On Saturday, Pakistani legislators will elect a new president to replace Pervez Musharraf, the general-turned-strongman who resigned the office last month.

In one corner there is Mushahid Hussain Sayed, a former journalist and one-time political prisoner of Mr. Musharraf who is nonetheless running as the candidate of the general's old party. Mr. Mushahid, probably the best of the bunch, stands next to no chance of winning.

In another corner there is Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, candidate of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's party. Mr. Sharif -- whose record includes bankrupting his country, presiding over a disastrous military campaign against India, and attempting to implement Sharia law while awarding himself near-dictatorial powers -- has made it clear he intends to gut the powers of the presidency should he return to office.

And then there is Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of slain former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and leader of the Pakistan People's Party. Mr. Zardari, who has compared himself to Jesus (an innocent accused of crimes he did not commit), is easily one of the most notorious figures in the long parade of horribles that make up the country's political history. He is, of course, expected to win Saturday's ballot handily.

Just how bad is Mr. Zardari? It would be a relief if it were true that he was merely suffering from dementia, a diagnosis offered by two New York psychiatrists last year. But that diagnosis seems to have been produced mainly with a view toward defending himself against corruption charges in a British court.

Mr. Zardari -- who earned the moniker "Mr. 10%" for allegedly demanding kickbacks during his wife's two terms in office -- has long been dogged by accusations of corruption. In 2003, a Swiss magistrate found him and Mrs. Bhutto guilty of laundering $10 million. Mr. Zardari has admitted to owning a 355-acre estate near London, despite coming from a family of relatively modest means and reporting little income at the time it was purchased. A 1998 report by the New York Times's John Burns suggests he may have made off with as much as $1.5 billion in kickbacks. This was at a time when his wife was piously claiming to represent the interests of Pakistan's impoverished masses and denouncing corrupt leaders who "leave the cupboard bare."

It's an open question whether Mr. Zardari will be more or less restrained in his behavior if he's elected: His return to politics has meant the dropping of all charges against him and the release of millions in frozen assets. (The presidency will also confer legal immunity.) That may make him one of the few men in Pakistan to get richer this year: The economy, which grew in an unprecedented way under Mr. Musharraf, has tanked under civilian management. The Karachi stock exchange has lost about a third of its value and the currency about a fifth in recent months. Markets often have better memories than voters.

It's also an open question whether Pakistan's increasingly dire security outlook will focus Mr. Zardari's mind on the urgent tasks of governance. Mr. Zardari has sought to parley himself internationally as a pro-Western candidate, and maybe he is. Yet over the weekend the Pakistani government agreed to stop its air strikes on the Taliban, in exchange for which Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, a religious party, agreed to throw its support to Mr. Zardari. The Taliban has used previous cease-fires to regroup and re-arm for operations against both Afghanistan and Islamabad.

Then there is al Qaeda, now openly endeavoring to use its last redoubts in Pakistan to take over the country. Last month, Ayman al-Zawahiri issued a long broadcast (in English, no less) denouncing Mr. Musharraf as an American tool and calling on Pakistan's army to come over to his side.

That call was unlikely to be heeded against Mr. Musharraf, who could count on the loyalty of his troops. But Mr. Zardari is a caricature of everything that's morally bankrupt with the country's Westernized elite, and thus an inviting propaganda target for al Qaeda and the Taliban. It doesn't help, either, that they are working fertile political soil: 71% of Pakistanis oppose cooperating with the U.S. in counterterrorism, and 51% oppose fighting the Taliban at all, according to a June poll.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban feed on chaos, and a Zardari presidency will almost certainly provide more of it. For Pakistanis, this is a self-inflicted wound and a rebuke to their democracy. For the rest of world, it's a matter of hoping that Pakistan will somehow muddle through. For now, however, this looks like a Category 5 hurricane, dark and vast and visible just offshore.
 
what kind of system you suggest should be a good option for any country...

Don't know about other countries, but a country like pakistan khilafah is the best system..

.I think every individual is equal...no matter what his education background....

By educated i never meant Education background but educated means who is learned.. btw i asked you, what kind of system is this where an evil person's vote is same as white color..

May be Democracy is good, but only in ideal societies, where you have less evil, 90% people are learned and knows about their rights.. 90% people care for law.. 90% people are loyal to themselves.. which is not possible practically ..
 
Don't know about other countries, but a country like pakistan khilafah is the best system..

Well I can't comment on this as I am not aware of this system....so I would rather not make a fool of both of us.


By educated i never meant Education background but educated means who is learned.. btw i asked you, what kind of system is this where an evil person's vote is same as white color..
Thats democracy for you....but remember....in no Country..Number of Criminals and evils would be more than number of white colour. so the system would rather balance out the evil on its own.


May be Democracy is good, but only in ideal societies, where you have less evil, 90% people are learned and knows about their rights.. 90% people care for law.. 90% people are loyal to themselves.. which is not possible practically ..

Are you suggesting that Pakistanis do not deserve a democracy
 
Are you suggesting that Pakistanis do not deserve a democracy

Nope.. not until there is some criteria, rules to be put for taking stand in election.. (e.g. Musharaf put compulsion of at-least graduate to stand up in election) Not until Law is empowered and respected by all citizens (not just white color), not until the corrupt reside in the system.

A Patriotic/Pious dictator is much better then Corrupt Democratic system..

n no Country..Number of Criminals and evils would be more than number of white color.

That's what you think.. try this... go to some signal.. and ask all traffic police to go, and tell only 3 cars to break signals.. I can assure you, you will find atleast 50 guyz following those three cars...

btw how many parties in india normally compete for federal government?

I remember a quote,

Gandhi said “The best thing to happen to India would be to be reigned by a dictator as just and upright as Umar, RA.”
 
Last edited:
Nope.. not until there is some criteria, rules to be put for taking stand in election.. (e.g. Musharaf put compulsion of at-least graduate to stand up in election) Not until Law is empowered and respected by all citizens (not just white color), not until the corrupt reside in the system.

A Patriotic/Pious dictator is much better then Corrupt Democratic system..

Do you think democracy in Pakistan has been given enough opportunity to stablize.....to check if there is someting wrong.....and to rectify...weed out challanges....Pakistan has seen Dictators for more than 70% of the time since its creation.

You have India as an example.... a democracy for 6 decades and system still in process of weeding out challenges....

Point I want to make: You need to have a stable democracy for a long time may be couple of decades....to create a stable just system.

You can't have it of the shelf.....it has to be created by Pakistan....for Pakistan......and for that you need a lot of trial and error.....there is no proven system for any country......
 
Pakistan has seen Dictators for more than 70% of the time since its creation.

Not precisely, each time the dictator joined the government, the democracy was always there to destroy that government, Like Ayub had ZAB and co, Zia had BB and co, Musharaf had again BB, NZ and cos. Similarly, there was an democratic government working under dictators..

Point I want to make: You need to have a stable democracy for a long time may be couple of decades....to create a stable just system.

If this is the case then i can say we should have a stable dictatorship like a kingdom for couple of decades.. just for your information, Zia made an record GNP which so far no country can break, similarly musharaf put this country on no 4 on GTP per capita.. both things destroyed only after democracy joined back.. like ZAB start taking loans, while zia never did, bb and ns both also continue to follow tradition of ZAB, but musharaf discontinue that tradition.. now again Zardari, gillani are back on same tradition..

can you answer me, why it is required to take loan only in democracy not in dictatorship?
 
If this is the case then i can say we should have a stable dictatorship like a kingdom for couple of decades.. just for your information, Zia made an record GNP which so far no country can break, similarly musharaf put this country on no 4 on GTP per capita.. both things destroyed only after democracy joined back.. like ZAB start taking loans, while zia never did, bb and ns both also continue to follow tradition of ZAB, but musharaf discontinue that tradition.. now again Zardari, gillani are back on same tradition..

can you answer me, why it is required to take loan only in democracy not in dictatorship?
Ahh...remember Musharraf Breaking Pakistan's "proverbial" begging Bowl.....he was able to increase GDP....that was great....but then he also managed to take wrong decisions...thats why he was pushed over is guess......

Loans.....hmmm thats subjective.... dictator ship means less expenditure on essential services...health....education.....infrastructure ... obviously there will be less money required.....
 
but then he also managed to take wrong decisions...thats why he was pushed over is guess......

But Why he toke some wrong decisions? Check that as well, since he was scared of lossing power for so-called democracy.. I already mention, democracy always try to make things worst.. it was democracy which was also doing corruption under musharaf's government (of course he left them because pakistani constitution were demanding some democracy).. if let suppose there is no democracy what will happen?

Loans.....hmmm thats subjective.... dictator ship means less expenditure on essential services...health....education.....infrastructure ... obviously there will be less money required.....

Compare Musharaf's time Budget vs today's budget.. that was spending more on education, that were spending more on development works.. that was working more for health.. Interestingly in musharaf's time more people got scholarship and send to abroad for higher education, in his time more buildings roads, and highways were build.. look at khi for example..

Look at IT, look at Technology, we were try to compete india in both.. but now if you go, then government will say, we don't have any comparison with india..
 
Back
Top Bottom