Benazir Bhutto dead in suicide bombing

[ranmaniac]

Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: Braznor
Nawaz Sharief must be dancing with joy in private. He is now the sole claimant as the democratic candidate to the prime minister's chair, unless Musharaff's favorite judge (Choudhary) steps in as a rival, of course.

Anyway, the same fate probably awaits all of them.

Try again, Braznor

Sharif barred from running in Pakistan election
Dec. 18, 2007

The assassination changed everything. Your article is outdated. The commission which disqualified him was appointed by Musharaff himself according to your article.

The assassination has eliminated the most credible candidate, Bhutto. I don't think it would be possible for Musharaff to enforce the commission's judgment in sidelining Sharief anymore. He should be as happy as I predicted. Why wouldn't he be? His best longterm rival (as contrast to short term ally against Mush) to the throne just dropped dead!



Mark my words, Musharaff will be forced to allow Nawaz back in running.

P.S : I gotta rush for a few hours, so I will be back to answer your questions later. PM them to me if you like.

Satellite radio from Karachi - over the Internet

Nawaz Sharif radio interview
- party will boycott elections
- accuses gov't of rigging the vote - says gov't has no relevance
- 'no one has any faith or confidence in the gov't or upcoming elelections'

'interim' Interior Minister - radio interview
- blames criminals for demonstrating, says they are doing it for looting
- says they will not reinstate state of emergency, will see this 'incident' through to elections
- Bhutto's husband returning, have guaranteed safe passage for him
- great deal of discussion concerning 'investigation' of Oct 18 bombing by the Interior Ministry, questions as to where it stands and why international assistance was not accepted


- radio reports much arrest around country
- reporting 20-21 young male approached car with Bhutto inside, waved to her, she rose through a sunroof in the vehicle to wave and he drew a 'kalashnikov' rifle and shot her
- Bhutto was dead when she reached hospital, no pulse, respiration or blood pressure

Nawaz is playing a master game. He knows the assassination has changed things in his favor.

He knows without him, the elections won't have any more relevance. He is the only credible experienced politician left and he is the perfect Musharaff baiter. I won't be surprised if many of Bhutto's supporters rally towards him.

He can afford to be arrogant now. He is correct in saying the elections are no longer trusted. Perhaps there was a chance of that being pulled off with Bhutto alive, but with her death, nope.

Musharaff has to allow Nawaz back in or face intensifying civil strife in his society.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

Most of these leaders followed that same tradition, including the ones beloved by history.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: palehorse74
*cough**cough*... ahem:

Originally posted by: palehorse74
The key is to remember that the fanatical aspects and players are a very small piece of the whole, and in no way represent the core beliefs of the truly peaceful majority.

That said, we still need to study and understand the aspects of Islam that do play a role in the current problems. Completely removing religion from the equation prevents one from producing a thorough and accurate analysis.

In essence, it's a small cancer that is slowly eating away at the very large Islamic body -- and some of our own actions and decisions are making it spread faster than it would otherwise -- but their religion is still a part of the problem nonetheless.

We simply need to reverse the trend.... somehow... before the cancer becomes consumed the majority!

STFU

What do you know about east asian politics besides the fact there are some moooslims there?

There aren't that many Muslims in East Asia.

Well, i dont want to keep saying South and South East Asia but South Asia is underinclusive and east asia is overinclusive. ANd there are alot of muslims in South and South East Asia.

I think generally South Asia is where Pakistan is, South East Asia is what it is, and East Asia is the easternmost part of Asia excluding SE Asia (because it already has its own category). That is, China, Koreas, Japan, and Taiwan. So when you refer to a bunch of Muslims in East Asia it doesn't make much sense.

In my experience, most would describe Afghanistan and Pakistan as "Central Asia." At least that's what we called it when I was there...

You could be right on that, I've just seen it on the BBC as "South Asia" and put it there because when discussing Pakistan issues it is often in the context of relations with India, the hub of South Asia. I mean if Pakistan isn't "South Asia" then what is? India, Bangledesh, and Sri Lanka? Seems like too small of a category without Pakistan.

Well South East Asia should suffice because I believe pakistan and india are part of ASEAN.

 

[ranmaniac]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: her209
When Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated, was Judaism the reason for his assassination?

While he was an orthodox Jew, he acted independently. There weren't ortho jew groups calling for the assassination of Rabin like there were islamic groups calling for the assassination of Bhutto.

100 to 1 you'll find the actor in this case didn't do it on his own.

Like the rest of your analysis, you're full of shit once again.

 

[Andyb23]

She should have just gone and lived in India. Pakistan is fast becoming the failed state it was destined to be.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

Most of these leaders followed that same tradition, including the ones beloved by history.

That's not justification for doing so.

 

[palehorse]

Stoneburner >

Did you read my last reply to your "STFU" attack?

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

Most of these leaders followed that same tradition, including the ones beloved by history.

That's not justification for doing so.

There is no justification whatever. These people are scum and betrayers of civilizations.

 

[Braznor]

For me, India is South Asia. Anything east of Burma is Far East. Anything west of Pakistan is West Asia with Afghanistan probably being Central Asia along with the former Soviet states.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: palehorse74
*cough**cough*... ahem:

Originally posted by: palehorse74
The key is to remember that the fanatical aspects and players are a very small piece of the whole, and in no way represent the core beliefs of the truly peaceful majority.

That said, we still need to study and understand the aspects of Islam that do play a role in the current problems. Completely removing religion from the equation prevents one from producing a thorough and accurate analysis.

In essence, it's a small cancer that is slowly eating away at the very large Islamic body -- and some of our own actions and decisions are making it spread faster than it would otherwise -- but their religion is still a part of the problem nonetheless.

We simply need to reverse the trend.... somehow... before the cancer becomes consumed the majority!

STFU

What do you know about east asian politics besides the fact there are some moooslims there?

There aren't that many Muslims in East Asia.

Well, i dont want to keep saying South and South East Asia but South Asia is underinclusive and east asia is overinclusive. ANd there are alot of muslims in South and South East Asia.

I think generally South Asia is where Pakistan is, South East Asia is what it is, and East Asia is the easternmost part of Asia excluding SE Asia (because it already has its own category). That is, China, Koreas, Japan, and Taiwan. So when you refer to a bunch of Muslims in East Asia it doesn't make much sense.

In my experience, most would describe Afghanistan and Pakistan as "Central Asia." At least that's what we called it when I was there...

You could be right on that, I've just seen it on the BBC as "South Asia" and put it there because when discussing Pakistan issues it is often in the context of relations with India, the hub of South Asia. I mean if Pakistan isn't "South Asia" then what is? India, Bangledesh, and Sri Lanka? Seems like too small of a category without Pakistan.

Well South East Asia should suffice because I believe pakistan and india are part of ASEAN.

You're mistaken, they are not part of ASEAN. That's a stretch to call Pakistan Southeast Asia.

 

[Lemon law]

We must somewhat understand the precise descriptors only applies if all share the same definitions. To me Pakistan is more the near east and the Eastern Chinese region nations would be the far east.

But some of it is rooted in the ways Islam spread in its early history. Islam basically spread East by land until it hit the established Buddhist areas of Central India which blocked its Eastern spread by land. But Islam also spread along the Eastern sea trade routes by sea into much of Indonesia and even east and North to the Philippine Islands.

 

[Andyb23]

India, Pakistan, Afghanistan are all South Asia. I don't understand why people are arguing over geographical definitions here.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

Most of these leaders followed that same tradition, including the ones beloved by history.

Too bad Bhutto wasn't born American. In the USA, we award looters with 8 years of presidency (thanks GWB!).

That's sweet! Here we had the entire nation to them and their families in a platter for all of eternity. Now don't worry, the same shit is about to happen in your nation too under the democrats too.

 

[Lemon law]

The problem Musharrif is facing involves democracy. Musharrif for his first two terms was able to play half military dictator and half democratically elected leader. But his third term will shred the Pakistani constitution and this is what much of the fight is about as Musharrif has packed the courts to avoid being ruled as unconstitutional.

And Musharrif has been forced to resign his head of the army status. It was clear to all that Musharrif had to broaden his political support and with the death of Bhutto, thats not going to be possible. And now Musharrif has made dangerous enemies in both the Pakistani military and in the broader moderate political community.

The main danger to the US is that Msuharrif will be deposed or assassinated, and the next leader likely to come from the military could make the Afghani occupation swiftly untenable.

 

[Andyb23]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The problem Musharrif is facing involves democracy. Musharrif for his first two terms was able to play half military dictator and half democratically elected leader. But his third term will shred the Pakistani constitution and this is what much of the fight is about as Musharrif has packed the courts to avoid being ruled as unconstitutional.

And Musharrif has been forced to resign his head of the army status. It was clear to all that Musharrif had to broaden his political support and with the death of Bhutto, thats not going to be possible. And now Musharrif has made dangerous enemies in both the Pakistani military and in the broader moderate political community.

The main danger to the US is that Msuharrif will be deposed or assassinated, and the next leader likely to come from the military could make the Afghani occupation swiftly untenable.

I've seen your posts before, you're very arrogant and post very long winded statements about south Asia. The thing that gets me is that you can't even spell Musharraf????

If an unfriendly government gains power in Pakistan I'm quite sure America will immediately begin air strikes on Pakistani soil.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The problem Musharrif is facing involves democracy. Musharrif for his first two terms was able to play half military dictator and half democratically elected leader. But his third term will shred the Pakistani constitution and this is what much of the fight is about as Musharrif has packed the courts to avoid being ruled as unconstitutional.

And Musharrif has been forced to resign his head of the army status. It was clear to all that Musharrif had to broaden his political support and with the death of Bhutto, thats not going to be possible. And now Musharrif has made dangerous enemies in both the Pakistani military and in the broader moderate political community.

The main danger to the US is that Msuharrif will be deposed or assassinated, and the next leader likely to come from the military could make the Afghani occupation swiftly untenable.

How about the fact of Pakistani nuke weapons getting lost in the chaos?

 

[Aimster]

Let's nuke India while we are at it since they have hundreds of millions of Muslims living there.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The problem Musharrif is facing involves democracy. Musharrif for his first two terms was able to play half military dictator and half democratically elected leader. But his third term will shred the Pakistani constitution and this is what much of the fight is about as Musharrif has packed the courts to avoid being ruled as unconstitutional.

And Musharrif has been forced to resign his head of the army status. It was clear to all that Musharrif had to broaden his political support and with the death of Bhutto, thats not going to be possible. And now Musharrif has made dangerous enemies in both the Pakistani military and in the broader moderate political community.

The main danger to the US is that Msuharrif will be deposed or assassinated, and the next leader likely to come from the military could make the Afghani occupation swiftly untenable.

How about the fact of Pakistani nuke weapons getting lost in the chaos?

Heh, the battlefield has moved to Pakistan from Iraq. Looks like the US will have to 'surge' in Pakistan too. Just read an article that says the US will send more Special Forces to Pakistan next year.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Just goes to show you how suck fscks who don't care about human life behave...

They need to start killing the entire families of these suicide bombers or something since they obviously don't care about their own or anyone elses...

Islam cannot have a democracy in a 3rd world shithole country like anywhere in the Middle East. They would have to outlaw the practice of fundamentalism and adopt a more 21st, 20th, 19th, hell even 15th century religion.

Ever consider the possibility that prosperity and independence from foreign domination tends to be a better environment for democracy that any particular religion?

Leading democracies tend to be the nations in the world who have more prosperity and to be the powers, not those who have the heavy hand of some other nation over them.

Consider the non-Muslim nations who are not so well off - the US has *undermine* democracy in many nations, from Iran to Vietnam to Nicaragua to Chile to Saudi Arabia and many others. Poverty has seen authoritarian regimes thrive, from African nations to Central American nations, think death squads. Of course, poverty has been the enemy of democracy in communist nations as well - look at any communist nation.

The millions of Muslims in the US contradicts the poster's bias against Muslims. If anything, I'd understand their taking stronger actions in response to the hundreds of thousands of their fellow Muslims being killed for ultimately selfish and wrongheaded reasons, but you don't see pretty much any of that. Many of these Muslims are from the nations the OP talks about. In some European nations, there are Muslim groups who are more dangerous - but who are also apparently treated analogously to blacks in the US when they rioted.

I hear some white people in the US rioted too when they felt they weren't treated fairly, a little over a couple hundred years ago.

No, the anti-Muslim sentiment is the problem not the solution, just as some thought the solution to 'uppity blacks' wanting more equality was to increase the pressure on them.

I have yet to see one person who expresses the anti-Muslim thinking take one ounce of responsibility for just maybe their own government being wrong for killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, mostly women and children, with the economic sanctions that caused sever malnutrition, disease, etc. HOw would they react to seeing their community's women and children killed that way because some other country's government was in the mood to do that?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: GrGr

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The problem Musharrif is facing involves democracy. Musharrif for his first two terms was able to play half military dictator and half democratically elected leader. But his third term will shred the Pakistani constitution and this is what much of the fight is about as Musharrif has packed the courts to avoid being ruled as unconstitutional.

And Musharrif has been forced to resign his head of the army status. It was clear to all that Musharrif had to broaden his political support and with the death of Bhutto, thats not going to be possible. And now Musharrif has made dangerous enemies in both the Pakistani military and in the broader moderate political community.

The main danger to the US is that Msuharrif will be deposed or assassinated, and the next leader likely to come from the military could make the Afghani occupation swiftly untenable.

How about the fact of Pakistani nuke weapons getting lost in the chaos?

Heh, the battlefield has moved to Pakistan from Iraq. Looks like the US will have to 'surge' in Pakistan too. Just read an article that says the US will send more Special Forces to Pakistan next year.

"more Special Forces to Pakistan"... link?

 

[Aimster]

Nightmare,

A) You are the poster who brought Islam into this thread. No surprise
B) You keep bringing up Muslims and Middle East. - What does Pakistan or Islam have to do with the Middle East?
C) There are a handful of Democratic Muslim nations. In fact some of them are in the Middle East.

D) Stop posting.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: ranmaniac
Benazir Bhutto had more enemies than she did hot meals. It didn't help that she also looted the country during her rule, as did Nawaz Sharif during his rule as well.

Most of these leaders followed that same tradition, including the ones beloved by history.

That's not justification for doing so.

There is no justification whatever. These people are scum and betrayers of civilizations.

Agreed.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Let's nuke India while we are at it since they have hundreds of millions of Muslims living there.

LOL,

You know what's tragic about your statement, Aimster?

First thing first, your statement is probably going to come true.

Next thing, it's going to be Pakistanis who are going to be doing the nuking, not the west.

 

[Lemon law]

For once I somewhat agree with palehorse74 who points out---How about the fact of Pakistani nuke weapons getting lost in the chaos?


Heh, the battlefield has moved to Pakistan from Iraq. Looks like the US will have to 'surge' in Pakistan too. Just read an article that says the US will send more Special Forces to Pakistan next year.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The danger of loose nukes from Pakistan mainly exists if the religious right of Pakistan can gain control. Sadly sending US special forces onto Pakistani soil can only have the effect of weakening Musharrif and enraging their religious right. And would also likely be too little to late. Bhutto was an advocate of US boots on Pakistani soil and that may be one of the reasons she is now dead. But I agree, the danger of Pakistani loose nukes is a huge danger meeting a very unpredictable situation.