Then don't support military dictatorships.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
If you want to encourage democracy
If you want to encourage democracy
gmc;715761 wrote: Then don't support military dictatorships.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
Supporting a dictator is not a good long term Foreign Policy whatever end you wish to attain but it appears to be the policy of choice.
The list is endless and has always ended in tears.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
Supporting a dictator is not a good long term Foreign Policy whatever end you wish to attain but it appears to be the policy of choice.
The list is endless and has always ended in tears.
If you want to encourage democracy
Bryn Mawr;715932 wrote: Supporting a dictator is not a good long term Foreign Policy whatever end you wish to attain but it appears to be the policy of choice.
The list is endless and has always ended in tears.
Governments never seem to learn from past mistakes though do they? In the days of the cold war you could maybe find some excuse I don't think there's any now. I see both the US and UK are calling for a return to democracy but IMO anyone with half a brain would be able to work out what would happen. I just hope secular pakistanis win the day.
The list is endless and has always ended in tears.
Governments never seem to learn from past mistakes though do they? In the days of the cold war you could maybe find some excuse I don't think there's any now. I see both the US and UK are calling for a return to democracy but IMO anyone with half a brain would be able to work out what would happen. I just hope secular pakistanis win the day.
If you want to encourage democracy
Or maybe they wont
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commen ... 129653.ece
Ironically the President (who has lost his marbles) said that he had to clamp down on the press and the judiciary to curb terrorism. Those he has arrested are progressive, secular- minded people while the terrorists are offered negotiations and ceasefires.
and what's wrong with this statement?
http://origin.dailynews.com/news/ci_7363684
In his television address, Musharraf said he hoped democracy would be restored following parliamentary elections.
No doubt since he's arrested the judiciary he will be able to stand for president and so long as the right man wins democracy will be restored.
The American equivalent would be GW arresting the supreme court judges because they wouldn't let him stand for a third term and then arresting all the democrats for opposing him doing so.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asi ... 129652.ece
Either way, the US has opened itself to serious questions about its policy of supporting General Musharraf at all costs and its willingness to turn a blind eye to some of government's more extreme actions. Ms Rice hinted that while US aid to Pakistan would be reviewed, much of it would almost certainly continue. "Some of the aid that goes to Pakistan is directly related to the counter-terrorism mission," she said, while in the Middle East. "We just have to review the situation."
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commen ... 129653.ece
Ironically the President (who has lost his marbles) said that he had to clamp down on the press and the judiciary to curb terrorism. Those he has arrested are progressive, secular- minded people while the terrorists are offered negotiations and ceasefires.
and what's wrong with this statement?
http://origin.dailynews.com/news/ci_7363684
In his television address, Musharraf said he hoped democracy would be restored following parliamentary elections.
No doubt since he's arrested the judiciary he will be able to stand for president and so long as the right man wins democracy will be restored.
The American equivalent would be GW arresting the supreme court judges because they wouldn't let him stand for a third term and then arresting all the democrats for opposing him doing so.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asi ... 129652.ece
Either way, the US has opened itself to serious questions about its policy of supporting General Musharraf at all costs and its willingness to turn a blind eye to some of government's more extreme actions. Ms Rice hinted that while US aid to Pakistan would be reviewed, much of it would almost certainly continue. "Some of the aid that goes to Pakistan is directly related to the counter-terrorism mission," she said, while in the Middle East. "We just have to review the situation."
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
If you want to encourage democracy
gmc;715761 wrote: Then don't support military dictatorships.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
This USA started as a Republic. Don't start with me Scrat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
This USA started as a Republic. Don't start with me Scrat.
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
If you want to encourage democracy
gmc;715761 wrote: Then don't support military dictatorships.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
How can you possibly say that???
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7077443.stm
Democracy or islamic fundamentalism one thing for sure-well IMO backing military dictatorships because they do what you want is not a good long term way to encourage democracy. It wasn't in iran and it wasn't in Pakistan what replaces them is invariably worse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6940148.stm
Bear in mind Pakistan actually HAS nuclear weapons. If Pakistan goes fundamentalist then Saudi is next. ny bets?
How can you possibly say that???
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
If you want to encourage democracy
nvalleyvee;717161 wrote: How can you possibly say that???
Which part of his post are you objecting to?
Which part of his post are you objecting to?
If you want to encourage democracy
nvalleyvee;717159 wrote: This USA started as a Republic. Don't start with me Scrat.
I object to being mistaken for scrat. I'm far better looking.
posted by nvalleyvee
How can you possibly say that???
Say what and why not? If you disagree say why. Pakistan is a military dictatorship that was a republic until musharrif took over. He is not arresting islamic fundamentalists but the secular opposition. It's giving the fundamentalists a golden opportunity to take over justifying it because democracy has failed.
What relevance does the usa starting out as a republic have?
I object to being mistaken for scrat. I'm far better looking.
posted by nvalleyvee
How can you possibly say that???
Say what and why not? If you disagree say why. Pakistan is a military dictatorship that was a republic until musharrif took over. He is not arresting islamic fundamentalists but the secular opposition. It's giving the fundamentalists a golden opportunity to take over justifying it because democracy has failed.
What relevance does the usa starting out as a republic have?