Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto assassinated

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto assassinated

    For those of you who might not have known just yet, Pakistan's former prime minister Benazir Bhutto has been assassinated during a political rally. She passed away from injuries at 6:16pm local time (GMT +5:00). The news article is here:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071227/...UT.dmL2SWs0NUE

    Also, a wiki link on Bhutto:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto

    Personally, I'm not familiar with the politics of that region of Earth. That said, however, I do know this: Pakistan is one of several countries in that region to hold a nuclear arsenal, and it also happens to be one of the most politically and socially unstable countries in the world. And what do you know? It's a country that the US's Bush Administration screws up in its "war on terror."

    My question now is: What happens? IMO, if General Musharaff is not screwed before, we can now stick a fork in him, because he is done politically. Whether or not he has a hand in this attack or not, people particularly in Pakistan will almost certainly tie him with this event in one way or another. The state of emergency fiasco, plus Mrs. Bhutto's assassination, has just about stripped him of every ounce of credibility he has left (if he had any to begin with).
    HF-HENTAI #192, HF-TypeMoon #27, (Unofficial) HF-Navel #7, (Unofficial) HF-Haruhi-Ism #25, (Unofficial) HF-SquareEnix #42

    "If you give a man a fish he will eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he will buy an ugly hat. And if you talk about fish to a starving man then you are a consultant."
    ~ Dogbert

    "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return."
    ~ T.H.White

  • #2
    Musharaff is going out of there dead or alive and mostly dead unless he hide somewhere in europe
    Rule #6: Observe Signature & Avatar Guidelines.

    Signatures, avatars and personal photos are to be appropriate content for all ages and within our specified limits. Signature limits: 700 pixels in width, 150 pixels in height and 100kb max in combined images overall and/or a maximum 5 lines of text with a font size of 1 is allowed. Invalid signatures can and most likely will be removed without warning.

    Comment


    • #3
      This has killed Musharaff politically and quite possible it will kill him literally, at the rate Bhutto supporters are rioting.

      Feel free to add me in Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/ShadowRFox/

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kingx11 View Post
        Musharaff is going out of there dead or alive and mostly dead unless he hide somewhere in europe
        But what country is going to want to house Musharaff? At the very least, he's now as much of a persona non grata as you can get. And given what he has done in his country, he may even be tried in an internation court. That might be an exaggeration, but he was already infamous for the emergency lockdown, and now this...

        EDIT: By the way, what's interesting to me as I'm listening to CNN is the obvious media bias... All media organization thus far has mentioned the possibility that the assassin is "Al Qaeda" or "Taliban" or "Islamic militants," but of course everyone is ignoring what I'm sure is the prevailing thought in Pakistan right now... "Was it Musharraf himself?"

        Now, I don't think he's stupid enough to do this, but on the other hand I didn't think he would declare a state of emergency before either and he did. And no matter whether or not he did it, he's still going to be tied to Bhutto's death in one way or another.
        Last edited by KaiZX; 12-27-2007, 08:35 AM.
        HF-HENTAI #192, HF-TypeMoon #27, (Unofficial) HF-Navel #7, (Unofficial) HF-Haruhi-Ism #25, (Unofficial) HF-SquareEnix #42

        "If you give a man a fish he will eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he will buy an ugly hat. And if you talk about fish to a starving man then you are a consultant."
        ~ Dogbert

        "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return."
        ~ T.H.White

        Comment


        • #5
          If I'm not mistaken, Musharraf has nothing to do with this. I mean, anyone with a little IQ and analytic capacity will know that killing a political rival who is more popular than you are just before campaigning isn't going to work wonders for your own popularity and credibility.

          If anything, it's got to be those Al-Qaeda terrorists who will then capitalize on the social instability for their own agenda. After all, Musharraf has been "aiding" the US in hunting down Islamic terrorists within Pakistan.

          Think about it, in this situation, Musharraf has everything to lose while the terrorists have everything to gain.

          I'm not a Musharraf supporter or anything, but I can't shake the feeling that there's a malicious 3rd party involved in this mess.
          From inability to leave well alone;
          From too much zeal for what is new and contempt for what is old;
          From putting knowledge before wisdom, science before art, cleverness before common sense;
          From making the cure of a disease more grievous than its endurance;
          Good Lord, deliver.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DK3411 View Post
            If I'm not mistaken, Musharraf has nothing to do with this. I mean, anyone with a little IQ and analytic capacity will know that killing a political rival who is more popular than you are just before campaigning isn't going to work wonders for your own popularity and credibility.

            If anything, it's got to be those Al-Qaeda terrorists who will then capitalize on the social instability for their own agenda. After all, Musharraf has been "aiding" the US in hunting down Islamic terrorists within Pakistan.

            Think about it, in this situation, Musharraf has everything to lose while the terrorists have everything to gain.

            I'm not a Musharraf supporter or anything, but I can't shake the feeling that there's a malicious 3rd party involved in this mess.
            Yes, if you look at it from that perspective, but there's another layer to it too... and that's the layer of the January elections.

            With Bhutto's death, the biggest immediate question is whether Pakistan's January 8th elections are going to be held as planned.

            I'll be honest with you that I was tempted to say that myself. When I first saw news of her death, my immediate thought was "Oh, Islamic militants." But that kind of thought shows a lack of skepticism that we need for this situation.

            What we're forgetting here, and what all the major news media here in the US aren't saying, is the complicated political struggles in Pakistan right now. You don't have just militants one side and "reformists" on the other. Bhutto and her party represented a majority of Pakistanis, but they are the most liberal group in Pakistani politics. We're forgetting Nawaz Sharif, the other opposition leader, as well as Musharraf's party, which is conservative but are not Taliban. That's not even including the Pakistani Army, who may have their own political agenda.

            And no, Musharraf doesn't have everything to lose. The longer he delays the elections, the longer he stays in power. And in an authoritarian government like the one he had when he declared a state of emergency, the phrase "everything to lose" all of a sudden takes on a whole different meaning.

            That's why a simple answer of "Oh it has to be terrorists" is naive, and perhaps dangerously naive. I'll agree though that the stability of that region is now in serious jeopardy, and there's good reason to be afraid that Pakistan will descend into the kind of chaos that Iraq is now.

            And that sums up why I hate the Bush Administration. Freakin' failures...
            Last edited by KaiZX; 12-27-2007, 08:50 AM.
            HF-HENTAI #192, HF-TypeMoon #27, (Unofficial) HF-Navel #7, (Unofficial) HF-Haruhi-Ism #25, (Unofficial) HF-SquareEnix #42

            "If you give a man a fish he will eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he will buy an ugly hat. And if you talk about fish to a starving man then you are a consultant."
            ~ Dogbert

            "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return."
            ~ T.H.White

            Comment


            • #7
              The Talibans had a "you do not bother us, we do not bother you" policy with Musharraf but that was shot to hell with the 9/11.

              Musharraf is not going to Europe, he is going to the US of A since for the US of A democracy does not rank very high in the conditions to be one of their allies, Pakistan always been a traditional ally of the US of A and rarely been much of democracy.

              Another thing Benazir Bhutto is not much different that Musharraf.

              The danger is the Taliban take over because sudden you have Afghanistan II and one with nukes, of course before that happens you can be sure India and China will step in.

              Comment


              • #8
                Well Pakistan is toast. Bhutto was corrupt but she was planning to finally end serfdom in the Northwest Frontier Province where all the extremists come from. The whole reason folks are blowing themselves up is they've been denied any political rights or freedoms in that area unlike the rest of Pakistan. Back to incompetence as usual, maybe things will fix themselves in the next generation.
                "There is no greater sorrow than to recall happiness in times of misery."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Drakron View Post
                  The Talibans had a "you do not bother us, we do not bother you" policy with Musharraf but that was shot to hell with the 9/11.

                  Musharraf is not going to Europe, he is going to the US of A since for the US of A democracy does not rank very high in the conditions to be one of their allies, Pakistan always been a traditional ally of the US of A and rarely been much of democracy.

                  Another thing Benazir Bhutto is not much different that Musharraf.

                  The danger is the Taliban take over because sudden you have Afghanistan II and one with nukes, of course before that happens you can be sure India and China will step in.
                  I can't speak for India, but I'm not sure I agree with your sentiments about China. It's almost certain that if the Taliban take over, that they will do something to ensure that the nukes aren't used. However, China's foreign policy lately has been a hands-off approach, as in "you don't bother us we don't bother you" thing that you talked about.

                  The country I am most worried about is the United States. Given how obsessed American politicians are with being the dominant influence in that region, I am almost certain that a Taliban take-over equals American involvement. After all, in the last eight years, the Bush administration has reignited a new Cold War, except now instead of the Soviet Union as our "enemy," we got Al Qaeda and Islamist "extremists" and Iran and all that.
                  HF-HENTAI #192, HF-TypeMoon #27, (Unofficial) HF-Navel #7, (Unofficial) HF-Haruhi-Ism #25, (Unofficial) HF-SquareEnix #42

                  "If you give a man a fish he will eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he will buy an ugly hat. And if you talk about fish to a starving man then you are a consultant."
                  ~ Dogbert

                  "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return."
                  ~ T.H.White

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DK3411 View Post
                    If I'm not mistaken, Musharraf has nothing to do with this. I mean, anyone with a little IQ and analytic capacity will know that killing a political rival who is more popular than you are just before campaigning isn't going to work wonders for your own popularity and credibility.

                    If anything, it's got to be those Al-Qaeda terrorists who will then capitalize on the social instability for their own agenda. After all, Musharraf has been "aiding" the US in hunting down Islamic terrorists within Pakistan.

                    Think about it, in this situation, Musharraf has everything to lose while the terrorists have everything to gain.

                    I'm not a Musharraf supporter or anything, but I can't shake the feeling that there's a malicious 3rd party involved in this mess.
                    Maybe even the Bush/CIA camp to further their grip in that part of the world and increase their war on terrorism? Of course it might be the Indian government to destabilize Pakastan even more and hopefuly(to them) regain the land stolen by the UN?
                    Last edited by bobuild01; 12-27-2007, 01:44 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bobuild01 View Post
                      Maybe even the Bush/CIA camp to further their grip in that part of the world and increase their war on terrorism? Of course it might be the Indian government to destabilize Pakastan even more and hopefuly(to them) regain the land stolen by the UN?
                      The India-Pakistan rivalry has seemingly died down in recent times, however, so that theory doesn't hold much water. As for the CIA, that's also unlikely. The Bush administration had been putting all their eggs in the Musharraf basket, and Bhutto is the person they've focused on for political reconciliation since Musharraf's "state of emergency" dilemma. Getting Bhutto to agree to share power with Musharraf is the one way that the "democracy" in Pakistan can be legitimized, so it would make no sense for the U.S. to kill her and make its own job harder.
                      HF-HENTAI #192, HF-TypeMoon #27, (Unofficial) HF-Navel #7, (Unofficial) HF-Haruhi-Ism #25, (Unofficial) HF-SquareEnix #42

                      "If you give a man a fish he will eat for a day. But if you teach a man to fish he will buy an ugly hat. And if you talk about fish to a starving man then you are a consultant."
                      ~ Dogbert

                      "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return."
                      ~ T.H.White

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        "Stolen by the UN"

                        Kashmir is the disputed area and the only thing the UN did was cease fires, the whole things is supposed to be settled by a plebiscite under UN supervision but never happened.

                        De facto each claimant administrate the area they control, India have all the reasons to trust the UN since they were the ones asking for its intervention in the first place.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Shame on it. I do not know much about Pakistani problem. But what i can say that country will become 'hot', either just for weeks or forever.
                          Chance that Mussharaf masterminded Bhutto's dead rather slim i said. Even if he can held his power more longer, but in the end the instabilities will become too much for everyone handle. And who knows? Perhaps it was militant doing after all...
                          Come to my so-called gallery,
                          at here and
                          my deviantart page
                          Critics and comment deeply appreciated

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hmmm must be the history books I had to read in highschool and college had that and the other restructurings especially in the Jordanian area following WWII confused with reality. I have noticed a different view of history in more recent texts though, understandably.
                            Maybe I was thinking of the end of the Brittish imperialism era instead, sorry. I will have to look it up in loc.gov. for older texts.
                            Anyway whatever is happening there isn't good.

                            Those were my own biased views but since I heard about it the american media and government are focusing on the nukes more than the people there. This evening Bush said he would do "whatever was necessary" to make sure they(nukes) "did not fall into the wrong hands".
                            Last edited by bobuild01; 12-27-2007, 07:56 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Oh wow. And I thought it was the doing of some fundamentalist fucknut group who couldn't come to terms that a female plays a role in politics.

                              Of course, Mursharaff comes second in the suspect list, but even if he was behind the killing, it seems like he's really drove a dagger in his own side with it.
                              When reading my posts, please imagine hearing them in Norio Wakamoto's Kaneto Shiozawa's voice.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X