NEWS: Musharraf Deals With That Pesky Independent Judicairy

But if you look at the history of Pakistan, Musharraf took over from an elected super corrupt nut who refused to do anything for the country but help himself. To the huge detriment of the people of Pakistan.
You could kind of see why he would be leery of the same thing happening again.

I guess he could pick a successor and let that person run for general election, but his opposition doesn't have faith in democracy, they just want to use it to get him out of power. So even if they lose they will claim fraud if there was or wasn't any. And there probably would be massive fraud on both sides.

This is why the whole thing is such a huge mess to begin with.

Actually, SirPsycoSexy, I think we agree more than you think.
I don't believe we (USA) have a right to try and control the politics, economy or social structure of any sovereign nation other than our own. However, we do have a history of doing just that. What we are seeing in Pakistan is sort of the 21st Century version of a "Banana Republic". Over the last hundred years or so we have spent more of our time, more of our treasure, more of our blood on trying to exert our influence abroad than we have on putting things right in our own house. Every photo "example" that you posted earlier is proof of that.
But once we have participated in feeding the fires of unrest, we might just have a responsibility to whip out our withered dicks and piss on that fire. We may also have to learn that a true democracy or a true republic does not necessarily result in an American style political system. Perhaps we would be better off leading by example rather than by coercion or economic blackmail. This is the only moral high ground that I am attempting to take. I would, in fact, rather die than continue to support/allow an ideology of imperialist hegemony that has done nothing other than create more strife, suspicion, class inequity and socio-political disparity in this world.

In future I would ask that, if you want to engage in a constructive discussion, you refrain from such divisive tactics as; "So you'd rather die than...". Besides man, "paying a guy we don't like to help us" is how we ended up with Osama Bin Laden in the first place. If we're not willing to take responsibility for the shit we stir up then we don't get to complain when the septic tank overflows.

and you're right... it's another big fukkin' mess

pax

Musharraf has agreed to confirm the election date that had been in doubt of recent days. Personally, it seems to me that his calling the elections into question at all last week was a rather transparent act taken so that he would have a bone to throw to Western critics of his constitutional suspension by 'magnanimously' restoring elections (to say nothing of whether they'll free and fair).

I have to agree with Joe Biden when he said, "We have to move from a Musharraf (policy) to a Pakistan policy." The US has made the mistake of treating Musharraf as Pakistan. He is not. Pakistan is Pakistan.

I think both artpie and SirPsychoSexy, in disagreement though they are, have both made some good points about US policy in this matter. Categorical support for Musharraf may have made some sense at certain times, not because he was ever a great leader but because the alternatives were legitimately far, far worse for the Pakistani people, for the region, and for the world. It may or may not still be the case that he is the only viable option outside of fundamentalist control or failed state status; but it is a slippery slope from supporting the least worst presidential option to propping up a dictator, and as Musharraf crosses that line he takes us with him.

The solution, of course, cannot be a hard-line stance or a disastrous regime change intervention. But there has to be some balance wherein Western powers who have been nearly unequivocal in their leniency, to counter his push towards dictatorship with a pull back towards legitimate democracy, through diplomatic means and economic influence. Because while it may be in everyone's best interest to help keep Musharraf around for his ability to clamp down on extremists, I don't buy that it's in anyone's interest to let him to the same to civil rights lawyers and pro-democracy activists.

You're going to love this headline:

Lawyers Emerging as Pakistan's Political Conscience

Lawyers and Conscience in the same sentence! First time ever!

Meh. You're too dumb to be worth trying to save. All right, I withdraw that.

Let me say it again:

Stupid and barbarous policies only make more enemies. Haven't you got enough already?

Nod.

Supporting sociopaths always turns out badly, but governments make this mistake over and over again. On the other hand, Clinton had a policy whereby the CIA couldn't employ certain violent criminals as assets, and it temporarily disabled our human intelligence-gathering.

While sociopaths' failure of memorty works against us regarding gratitude, it could work for us in terms of their inability to foresee the consequences of their actions when it comes to their being betrayed.

I propose we use relatively powerless assholes then whack them if they get too influential, rather than helping them achieve dictator status. Based on my limited understanding of their psychology, each one will disregard the long-range consequences of helping us, and focus on their short-term gain.

We can use their tendencies against them while ceasing to look like complete assholes ourselves. By we, I mean all western democracies, not just the U.S.