Last Gasp of the Imperial Misadventure

#30 by tahmed32 on January 24, 2007 12:22pm PT


your attempts to link kashmir to islamist terrorists


so the ``moderate`` paki prophet tahmed lets his veil drop...the jihadis in kashmir aren`t islamic terrorists according to him..

gee..wonder why LeT and JeM etc have been linked to Al-Queada by the US...

#29 urstruly - thats much better: you dropped your pretense of being in favor of democracy.

The US is guilty as charged in being the foremost nation to bring an end to the Divine Right of Kings and to replace it by We, the People!!

Specific misdemeanors include:

inspiring the french revolution and, when that became a dictatorship, inspiring the french to a second revolution in 1848 which finally put france on the path to democracy.

inspiring the brits to stay the course on democracy. nd from them the indians.

moving japan and germany into democracy after after world war ii.

inspiring the chinese to democracy - with the statue of liberty replica being used by the crowds in beijing.

You have a problem with all this? What do you want instead? for mullah dow-piaza to become the Divinely Authorized Khalifa of Pakistan?

Re: # 31

I do not have time to react to slogans. Thanks for your input.

US tax payer, Indian billionaire arjun!!

at least you are like an amreekan neocon that you like to present yourself as in one way - your attempts to link kashmir to islamist terrorists are as pathetic as attempts of the neocons a few years ago to link iraq to islamist terrorists.

#21 by zeemax on January 24, 2007 6:44am PT


hello peemax..I`m sure they whacked a bunch of your jihadi buddies...if your jihadi brothers were winning, kashmir would have banega`ed pakiland by now, wouldn`t it have....

#26 So the US is run by a faceless elite. even if one accepted your bs, you are in no position to talk about democracy - given that you are always quoting from the ``shariah``, which is the antithesis of the popular vote.

You are a Pakistani, and you call the Pakistan army ``napak`` for going after those who would impose their rule on Pakistanis - i.e. the islamist terrorists.

You live in the US, and you are always defending those who killed thousands of innocent people in the US on 9/11.

You spout democracy from one side of your mouth, and sharia from the other side of your mouth.

Re: # 27

The fact of the matter is that US is committing horrendous acts of genocide in many parts of the world and destroying countries after countries and nation after nation in the name of democracy. So it is only fair to put this biitch to scrutiny and examine it from inside out. Had Americans kept their democracy to themselves then probably no one would have given a shit.

#17 by parthaab
You are a real political analyst with clear vision, Parthaab.
Bush junior was not wrong atall when he declared that his mission was accomplished. Even a blind Freddy could have seen that it is exactly what would happen with the action that the so called coalition of the willing had taken.
The mission is well and truly accomplished in them engineering the civil quagmire that exists there now. You don’t hire the best brains in the White house for advisors not to have seen it coming. Unless we want to judge them of those who only have half of the brain!
The Coalition of the willing are playing the fiddle and shedding crocodile tears while Iraq burns and the Shias, Sunnis, the Kurds, the region and some part of the world is singing:
Jo lagaaye bhi lagey or bujaahye nah bujhey! (With apologies to Ghalib).
Rashid

I am quite surprised at the choreographed nature of union of state addresses in US. What really bothers me is the fact how these events are choreographed not only for the speaker but the audience as well. Everybody just seems to know when to stand up and applaud as if they have memorized a script.

Compare this to annual state of union speeches in countries like britian, France, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh etc. where annual state of union address is like passing through a gauntlet for the Head of the Executive. In some of the countries the event ends up in jootaybaazi like India or Bangladesh or even France, spain, Italy, Japan, Mexio,Taiwan, and many many more countries. In Pakistan the dictator have not mustered up courage to address even one time to his hand picked rubber stamp assembly - because he can`t.

On the other hand state of union address in US seems more like Poliburo party conventions of former Soviet union or present day China.

Re: # 22 Urstruly {``...state of union address in US seems more like Poliburo party conventions of former Soviet union or present day China...``}

The United Soviet States of America has far more in common with its former rival. The SU was a wannabe imperialist power with a system of State-monopoly capitalism, where the ultimate in M&A (mergers and acquisitions) had been achieved by a stroke of genius. There was one ``limited liability`` corporation in the SU, called the Communist Party Inc., that had successfully ``acquired`` the entire economy. Only 4% of the population of the SU were members. Likewise, in the USSA hardly 4% of the population ``owns controlling interest`` in the top 5,000 corporations. In other words about the same proportion of the general population (4%) really matter in the USSA as mattered in the USSR.

...SR

Re: # 24

Thank you SR. I don`t think anyone has any doubts in their mind that a minute faceless elite group runs the country with an illusion of democracy and all. Frankly, if one to think on academic basis, how a country can be called democratic when only half of the ``voting age`` population votes and the winning candidate gets little over even half of that. I am seriously beggining to have doubts on election or vote as a vehicle to achieve ``rule by the people and for the people``. and it is not just US, it is accross the board. The Musharaf phenomenon can be taken as the pig-without-the-lipstick aspect of this illusion. What do you think.

Re: # 26 Urstruly {``...I am seriously beggining to have doubts on election or vote as a vehicle to achieve ``rule by the people and for the people``. ...``}

The principle that state power should be subservient to the people, and not the other way around, is the most sacred and fundamental corner stone of a ``democracy.`` All other considerations are secondary to this basic goal. The trouble is that there is no flawless mechnism with which to setup a state system which ensures that the state does not become a tool of coersion or exploitation in the hands of those who are vested with the state`s executive authority. Majority rule can quickly turn into mob-rule if the minority rights are not held sacred... and mob-rule can be every bit as bad as a ruthless monarchy, if not worse. A cursory study of The Terror in Paris under the ``committee of public safety`` will convince you of that. So then what is the answer?

Most people will instinctively say that voting is the best way to elect ``representatives``... Sadly, on closer examination we realise that more often than not ``elections`` turn out to be, paradoxically, unhealthy for the basic spirit of democracy. This is because the electoral process is easy to subvert. Take America for instance. The US Congress was supposed to be, in Thomas Jefferson`s words, ``...a portrait in miniature of the people of the United States...``, that is, if America was to be a true democracy. In that event Congress should have consisted of over 50% women, 11% blacks, 12% Hispanics etc, etc, and 1% Jews and 1% Muslims (My percentages are not exact, but you get the point). What we have instead is a Congress that consists of 95% white men, 45% of whom are lawyers. (We shall not mention religious heritage.) Clearly, this flies in the face of Jeffersonian ideals. But this is what you get if you hold elections, flawed as they are. But there is a better solution.

In this modern technological era a random computer generated list would be a better choice than the primitive system of voting. Most voters don`t ``know`` their elected reps any way. So neither will they ``know`` their computer selected reps. The voters lists do an adequate job finding jury members to sit on trials, so why also have a ``Congress Duty``...? Of course you would have screening safeguards to keep the serial killers, rapists and wackos out, as you do in a jury selection. These guys would have only one term (unless they hit the lottery again) so no lobbists offering PAC money for re-elections. Each representative would get a whole office full of staffers and there is no reason to think that they will do any worse of a job than these rascals who presently run for office. Surely we could cut down corruption and represent the voice of people better by this method of computerised true democracy.

{``...The Musharaf phenomenon can be taken as the pig-without-the-lipstick aspect of this illusion...``}

Here I must disagree. Although no particular fan of Musharraf himself, I have revised my old misguided liberal notions about the role of Paki army in politics. Let me explain.

First, you have to get rid of the silly idea that the army is in fact a military service. It is not. Since there is no possibility of a future war with Bharat (and God knows we never thought beyond Bharat) there is no need for a military. You might ask, How do I know there is going to be no war? Simple..!! All the land on the Pak-Bharat border has been bought up by the senior army officers. There is thus an incentivised built-in guarantee of peace.

So, Pakistan has no further need for an army, therefore the army has transformed itself into a professional political organisation.

Now given that the various other political organisations (or parties) only make provisions for the rich and powerful to rise to the top, they are not very democratic. Only the wealthy can afford to rise above the level of local area politics. However, there is only one political party, the army, where a fellow from a safaid-posh gharana has any hope of rising to the top. Its not a perfect system, but hey... its the best we seem to have managed.

...SR

Re: # 24

Yep, USA is same as USSR... your pearls of wisdom are simply out of this world :)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#10 by mohar11

Does it make sense to you?

No it doesn`t. But read the following Newsweek report from January 2005
and some pieces of the puzzle may fall in place:

‘The Salvador Option’
The Pentagon may put Special-Forces-led assassination or kidnapping teams in Iraq.

After you`re done with the above, contemplate upon what the two British SAS men were doing when caught in a booby-trapped car packed with explosives and disguised as Iraqis:

British Uncover Operation in Basra: Agents Provocateurs?