Pakistan was created coz some muslims(the muslim league) were cowards and assumed that the majority will jeopardise the muslims existence in India and jinnah was greedy.As the intentions pakistan became weak and became a banana republic with military coes and turmoils.
Musharaf is hanging on coz he needs to put enough money into the swiss bank before he quits at the expense of the ignorant pakistani public. nawaz shariff wants to sell his sugar to the neighbouring india with out any problem coz he cant sell it in pakistan..that an average pakistani dont have even an one time meal.
benazir again wants the feel of power to satisfy her greed and she very well knows that pakistan will not be better even for ages to come.
imran khan another preposterous politician who dreams of taking pakistan into greater heights...unfortunately that will never happen.
pakistan will ultimately fall to the mullas and islamic jehadis..and inturn to the US bombs.
RE:BANANA REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 03:56 PM Permalink
Musharaf is a mohajir in pakistan and a self proclaimed messiah of pakistans war on terror,ultimately he needs to fatten his pocket and dumb the ignorant pakistani public into a hell. shariff is an industrialist whose only interest is to sell his sugar to the high consumer India..as pakistani poor can't afford to buy even one time meal. Benazir is power greedy and her sole aim is to drop the pakistanis into more poverty and ignorance. only a leader who's level headed can save pakistan, bangladesh and for that matter any islamic country.
RE:BANANA REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN
by Avi Mitra on Sep 10, 2007 03:58 PM Permalink
As Indians we all want a prosperous Pakistan because a good neighbour can only help in our own development - "Just Dreaming"!
What more can anyone expect out of the "Hitler" of modern society Pervez Musharraf? Pakistani people must eliminate this man from their society as he is an enemy to their country and undoubtedly to India. His greed and aggression will never end. He will not allow anyone to bring democracy as he knows that he will be killed by his own men if he loses power.
RE:Democracy will never return to Pakistan
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 04:11 PM Permalink
all the politicians are greedy in pakistan, who's not....they know that pakistani public are ignorant and can be easily cheated. no wonder pakistans rank is 13 and 8 for the most poverty stricken country in the world and the most percentage of illiterates.bangaladesh is the only the leader for pakistan in asia.
RE:Democracy will never return to Pakistan
by Debmalya Ghosh on Sep 11, 2007 12:00 AM Permalink
... and the not-greedy honest politician from India is ...?
RE:RE:Democracy will never return to Pakistan
by anil b on Sep 10, 2007 04:00 PM Permalink
unfortunately , the wild beats are the pakisthan army supported by the US .
Some naive social thinkers feel that a stable pakistan is in the best interets of India. However it has been observed that as long as pakistans stands whether stable or unstable there is always a threat to India. The mere existance of pakistan is a moral boost to terrorists outfits wihin India which are getting arms and amunition from pakistan to play havoc here in India If India needs to win the war on terror then it can only be achieved by destroying pakistan. It would be very naive to argue that a democratic govt. in pakistan would eliminate the terrorist organization. That will never happen. Destroy pakistan once for ever and there won't be terror.There ia a saying in Hindi 'Na Rahega Baans...Na Bajegi Baansuri"
RE:Eliminating Terror hub
by shehbaz nisar on Sep 10, 2007 03:54 PM Permalink
what the hell u r talking u have forget that islam teaches a man to love if we point one finger to other religion the other four finger point at us did u understand
RE:Eliminating Terror hub
by Glady Seth on Sep 10, 2007 04:08 PM Permalink
what !!! that dose islam teach ?????? love ? peace ? harmony ? you must be joking.
shehbaz nisar, could it be that because muslims have four wives therefore four-four fingers point back at them?
Aadi Manav -- what you are saying Nehru had the opportunity to do. But in his infinite wisdom, (read, under the spell of wife of the last Viceroy of India, Edwina Mountbatten) didn't.
Here's a quote from "INDIAN SUMMER The Secret History of the End of an Empire" By Alex von Tunzelmann.
It was the culmination of a lifetime's struggle; and yet, as Nehru later confided to his sister, his mind had not been on the splendid words. A few hours before, he had received a telephone call from Lahore in what was about to become West Pakistan. It was his mother's hometown and a place where he had spent much of his childhood. Now it was being torn apart. Gangs of Muslims and Sikhs had clashed in the streets. The main gurdwara-the Sikh temple-was ablaze. One hundred thousand people were trapped inside the city walls without water or medical assistance. Violence was a much-predicted consequence of the handover, but preparations for dealing with it had been catastrophically inadequate. The only help available in Lahore was from two hundred Gurkhas, stationed nearby, under the command of an inexperienced British captain who was only twenty years old.
They had little chance of stopping the carnage. The horror of that night in Lahore set the tone for weeks of bloodshed and destruction. Perhaps the Hindu astrologers had been right when they had declared 14 August to be an inauspicious date. Or perhaps the viceroy's curious decision to rush independence through ten months ahead of the British government's schedule was to blame.
The world was redefined that night, but not in the way that most of those present thought. On either side of Old Europe, two new powers were rising to world superiority-and both took a close interest in the new dominions of India and Pakistan. In the East, Stalin's Russia was in the process of supporting Communist movements across Europe and Asia, bolstering the influence of Moscow and extending its borders. In the West, the president of the United States of America had announced the Truman Doctrine just five months before. He had stated his intent to promote democracy across the world and resist the tide of communism flowing forth from Russia. The Americans had become particularly concerned about its flow into India, and Russian agents were already suspected of funding Indian Communist parties in Bengal. That very night, Nehru's sister and close confidante, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, was in Moscow, preparing to present her credentials to Stalin as free India's first ambassador.
... as free India's first ambassador. Though its envoys were on good terms with Nehru, the U.S. government was alarmed by these developments and moved fast to create a new alliance with Pakistan. During the nineteenth century, Britain and Russia had played the "Great Game" for control of central Asia, centered in Afghanistan and the territory that would become West Pakistan. In 1947, the United States was gearing up to play a new Great Game against Russia, and the slow but significant rise of a fundamentalist Islamic movement would ensure that Afghanistan and Pakistan would remain at the center of international politics well into the next century.
As darkness fell on 15 August 1947, Delhi's Mughal Gardens glowed with thousands of tiny lights set among the jacaranda trees, and with hundreds of distinguished guests. Among the long avenues of gold mohur and flame-of-the-forest trees, princes chatted cordially to freedom fighters, and Hindu radicals to British soldiers. There was a sense of hope and magic, as two of the twentieth century's greatest men fulfilled their ultimate ambitions. Nehru became leader of a free India, and Mountbatten played the role of a king-with Edwina as his queen. Few of the guests watching this display would have suspected that the celebration was about to be blown apart.
RE:Eliminating Terror hub
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 04:00 PM Permalink
where does it say? it wasn't said in islam ..its an old saying in chinese....dont borrow things so easily like anu malik and bappi lahiri.
RE:Eliminating Terror hub
by Vinay Gupta on Sep 10, 2007 04:03 PM Permalink
What is the point in reporting everything abuse. You people canot even respect the others view point . Leave religion apart. I reproduce-I agree with u Aadi. Though it may sound communal but it is true that a Islamic nation can never live in peace with a secular society. Islam doesnot permit muslim to respect other religion. Islam belive in spreading it's religion and killing looting raping all is allowed. In early days it was not given a name but now it is called terrorism!
You are right that any govt be it democratic or other cannot make Pak a civilised society. They will always remain a danger to India
Mr, nisar, if Islam so good a religion then why is not spreading in same way as it spread when soward aws the law or other were not strong?
Musharraf is good for pakistan but not for india as he staunch supporter of Kashmir to be part of Pakistan.He is the one who was responsible for kargil war. For India Sharif is better bet.
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Sanjay Raina on Sep 10, 2007 03:44 PM Permalink
Mr musharraf should leave the Pakistan & live happly in INDIA SANJAY RAINA
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by bharat on Sep 10, 2007 03:48 PM Permalink
It is not correct to use articles before proper nouns. It should be this way - "Mr. Musharraf should leave Pakistan" (not 'the Pakistan').
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by nishant mishra on Sep 10, 2007 03:52 PM Permalink
why you want to invi one more idet in india.Sice we have allready tones of, that's we made PAKI
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Abdullah Saikh on Sep 10, 2007 03:46 PM Permalink
no one leader from pakistan are good for us!!! Nawaz was worst pm!!Kargil was Nawaz & Bajpayee's brain child!!! Both were wanted to come back in power playing a sentimental game with both country's ppls!!! Pakistan is a small country when military realised the true they thrown out to Nawaz !! But India is great & big country where Military cant controll such a bad situation!!But remember one thing some COl had been said regarding Kargil & they told to politician we military could not toleret if we found any politics with our sentiment!!!
RE:RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Abdullah Saikh on Sep 10, 2007 03:54 PM Permalink
Yes beta,nam bharat rakhne se kuch nahi hota,bharat ke khoj karo!!
RE:RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 04:05 PM Permalink
i doubt that shaikh is a mushraf supporter from pakistan. Kargil war was a misadventure by musharaf and the whole world knows that. Vajpaee retaliated and drove away the pakistani cowards.Mushraf palyed kargil to sabotyage shariffs chair. Shariff wanted Indias support coz 99% of his sugar was sold in India.
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 04:04 PM Permalink
i doubt that shaikh is a mushraf supporter from pakistan. Kargil war was a misadventure by musharaf and the whole world knows that. Vajpaee retaliated and drove away the pakistani cowards.Mushraf palyed kargil to sabotyage shariffs chair. Shariff wanted Indias support coz 99% of his sugar was sold in India.
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Vishal on Sep 10, 2007 03:49 PM Permalink
where has Vajpayee come into picture in kargil war.Vajpayee just retaliated the war which was seeded by Musharaf without the permission of then prime minister Nawaj Sharif.
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Abdullah Saikh on Sep 10, 2007 03:53 PM Permalink
Kargil was sabotage by both government!! It was nasty politics by BJP & Nawaz!!
RE:RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by abdul wahab on Sep 10, 2007 04:08 PM Permalink
i doubt that shaikh is a mushraf supporter from pakistan. Kargil war was a misadventure by musharaf and the whole world knows that. Vajpaee retaliated and drove away the pakistani cowards.Mushraf palyed kargil to sabotyage shariffs chair. Shariff wanted Indias support coz 99% of his sugar was sold in India.
RE:Musharraf is good for pakistan
by Vinay Gupta on Sep 10, 2007 03:49 PM Permalink
Why Mussaraf, all pakis and also in India many are suporter of either merger of Kashmir in Pak or Independent Kashmir
RE:RE:Musharraf is meanest
by tathya on Sep 10, 2007 03:38 PM Permalink
Other things what is said here is correct.But Mush may never have war directly with India.Covert war ,he is already doing which our great leaders are not able to see.
Panchkula , 3.20pm., afternoon, Monday, 10th Sept., 2007. We know a dictator as long as he keeps Force Majore under his iron fist,can ride rough -shod over constitutional Rights of even once powerful statesman ,like janab Newaz Sharif Sahib , who has been allowed to come to his Pakistan Home by the Supreme-Court.This ill-becomes to a gentleman who has been canvassing for ,himself, international approval by trying overtime to appear enlightened and Moderate constitutionalist! Now, he shows his bloody mentality in raw.One only hopes the powers that be have the wisdom to avoid, bloodshed, as once blood spills amongst innocent masses there is no end who shall be decimated when..all lovers of humanistic democracy, hope, that Paki-Civil -Society asserts and restores sanity soonest.D. Goel
RE:Learn
by dinesh on Sep 10, 2007 03:36 PM Permalink
Let m/s JUSTICE know that corruption and system of governanace called democracy as practiced in this subcontinent are two wheels of chariot .so long as their is no social upheavel or trubulance the so called corrupted governance is far better than so called non corrupt dictaotarship
at least in corrupt democracy voice of people does make an impact in social cycle of the society not available in one man show where "JO ACHA LAGA AUR SUIT KIYA WHO KIYA BAKI JAYE BHAD MEIN"
