invade pakistan

gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#91
No friggin' way!

I could not in good conscience attack anyone for being consistent in the application of genuine principle. It's hypocrisy that I hate. And the right wingers on this forum have shown plenty of that over the years.

If you were consistent and had any real principle, you would be calling for a Bush led invasion, the arrest and decapitation of Musharraf, and the restoration of democracy in Pakistan.

How to pay for it? Just impose a tax on the wealthy who stand to benefit from the war.

See? It's all easy.
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
#92
Quote: Originally Posted by gopher View Post

`` Trudeau did the same over a couple of lousy kidnappings.``


So far as I recall he did it after having been urged to do so by the Quebec pm and Montreal mayor.

So if Musharraf said he's only instituting emergency measures because his aunt Bea in Michigan "urged" him to you'd take it all back and support him right? Right?

Who cares who urged PET, he did it.

Quote:

While some were arrested, constitutional rights were not eliminated

Wrong. Dead wrong. War measures act elimates all individual rights. Police were breaking into homes and seraching without cause or warrant.

Quote:

and sham elections held as has been done by your hero Musharraf.

My Hero?

What elections, Mooshie did a coup.

Quote:

Now it's time to do the same in Pakistan and it is also time for the Republicans to stop being such a bunch of phonies and to call for Musharraf's head as they did with Saddam. But, of course, they would have to have some measure of integrity in order to do so and that is not likely to ever happen.

Huh?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071105...e_071105211845
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf on Monday to press him to end the country's state of emergency and restore democracy, her spokesman said.

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695228855,00.html
Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte delivered the message that Musharraf must end emergency rule as soon as possible...
Negroponte said he "urged the government to stop such actions, lift the state of emergency and release all political detainees" and that "Emergency rule is not compatible with free, fair and credible elections."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n3457752.shtml
Bush Calls On Musharraf To End Crackdown

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,309116,00.html
Congress and the Bush administration are taking a second look at U.S. aid to Pakistan in the wake of Musharraf's declaration of emergency rule.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#93
I thought Musshy took off the uniform today and slipped into a suit.
 
Just the Facts
Free Thinker
#94
Quote: Originally Posted by YoungJoonKim View Post

It's just that it was under different situation and completely...completely out of leginament reason...which was to protect Canadians

How many Canadian were killed during the FLQ crisis?

How many Pakistani's were killed in the weeks leading up to Emergency Rule?

End of argument.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#95
Bush + Rice call on Musharraf to end his dictatorship and this is ''proof'' that they intend to stop his repression ---


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!


You must be joking!

If this is proof of their intentions and shows a good side, why didn't they do that with Saddam???


If Bush had any real integrity he would bomb the flyin' s**t out of Musharraf and restore democracy at once to Pakistan. And if you had integrity you would demand no less.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#96
Sharif Blocked From Pakistan Election

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...122962,00.html



``
Opposition leader Nawaz Sharif risks disqualification from Pakistan's crucial parliamentary elections after an official rejected his nomination papers Monday. The decision could deepen the political crisis that has engulfed Pakistan since President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule one month ago.``




By contrast, the people of Venezuela held a democratic vote to defeat Chavez's goal of continuous administration. While the margin of victory was small, nonetheless it does represent the majority of the citizen's voices.
Musharraf should set a better example for his people by doing the same as Chavez.

So let's hear all the right wingers in this forum call for the same.


I'm betting it won't happen as that will mean a demonstration of integrity which is something they lack.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#97
What happened to all the comments from the forum's right wingers???

They hate Chavez because he supposedly doesn't like democracy but the election went unimpeded.

So why aren't these same critics crucifying Musarraf on this forum???
 
Zzarchov
#98
The election went, and he let it go, for now (his own words). IF he leaves when he's done office then we will see.

How can you say Musharraf is bad for coming to power in a coup? Chavez tried to take power in the coup in the early 90's, and he apparently is what Musharraf should be like.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#99
``Chavez tried to take power in the coup in the early 90's``


Against whom?

Against Carlos Andres Perez who was a neoliberal!!!
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#100
... thereafter Chavez employed democratic processes unlike Bush's ally Musharraf!!
 
Zzarchov
#101
Quote: Originally Posted by gopher View Post

``Chavez tried to take power in the coup in the early 90's``


Against whom?

Against Carlos Andres Perez who was a neoliberal!!!

So its ok to ignore the will of the people with violence and bloodshed if you don't agree?

Its not ok for you to decide if "Neoliberal" is good or bad for other people. He's a thug who is happy to kill and enslave people who dare disagree with him.

You can vote for any leadership you want, as long as its him. Otherwise he has shown through actions he is willing to use violence to enforce his order against the will of the people.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#102
If you read the news of the day you would know that he renounced violence thereafter.

Your Republican hero Musharraf, like Bush, refuses to do the same.
 
Zzarchov
#103
No, they renounce violence all the time. Its easy to say words renouncing violence when you are already in power.

Chavez also claimed he wouldn't use military force to try and stage a coup the first time, then he changed his mind.

He's in power now, so he thinks coups are bad. When he's out of power, he'll change his mind (again) and use violence to attempt to overthrow democracy (again)
 
#juan
No Party Affiliation
#104
Quote: Originally Posted by Zzarchov View Post

No, they renounce violence all the time. Its easy to say words renouncing violence when you are already in power.

Chavez also claimed he wouldn't use military force to try and stage a coup the first time, then he changed his mind.

He's in power now, so he thinks coups are bad. When he's out of power, he'll change his mind (again) and use violence to attempt to overthrow democracy (again)

Venezuela

Rise to power

Ads by Google

The Chavez Referendum - The Int'l Herald Tribune reports on the results of voting in Venezuela ( www.iht.com )

Chavez Ravine History - Photos & Documents Walter O'Malley builds own stadium! ( www.walteromalley.com )

Chavez Loses Oil World - With Chavez Losing in Venezuela Oil World Celebrated. A Free Report ( www.MoneyMorning.com/oil_Venezuela )


Since 1989, Chávez and a group of fellow soldiers had worked clandestinely to build the Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement. The movement first surfaced in 1992 during a time of riots, strikes, and scandals that were threatening the long-touted stability of the country. Chávez led insurgent troops in a bloody but unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the Perez government. After the failed coup, he was jailed for two years before being pardoned by President Rafael Caldera. Upon his release in 1994, Chávez visited Cuba and praised President Fidel Castro and "the Cuban way." A charismatic figure and fiery orator, he formed the Polo Patriotico (Patriotic Pole), an alliance of 14 minor parties across a wide political spectrum.
In March 1998, Chávez reappeared on the political scene, mounting a populist campaign that harnessed discontent among ordinary citizens and disadvantaged groups who were angered by the corruption and cronyism of Venezuela's political system. He accused the country's traditional parties of being dishonest, of catering to the elite and to foreign investors, and of mismanagement of the oil revenues. Chávez enjoyed the support of leftist intellectuals and the Fifth Republic Movement, a largely leftist party led by former coup leaders. He also had the backing of nationalists, large landowners, and conservative business leaders in agriculture and manufacturing who hoped he would keep out foreign investors. Among his legions of mostly poor supporters, Chávez is known as El Comandante. At his closing campaign rally, he drew more than 700,000 people, many of whom wore the red parachutist's beret that had become his trademark on the campaign trail.
On 6 December 1998 Chávez became the youngest elected president in Venezuelan history, defeating his closest challenger, Henrique Salas Romer, a Yale-educated economist, by 56.5% to 39.5%. Immediately after taking office, Chávez delivered on one of his electoral promises and held an election for a constitutional assembly. The assembly immediately began to write a new Constitution. Because Chávez's election also brought about the end of the traditional political parties, Chávez supporters won an overwhelming majority of the seats in the constitutional assembly. Logically, the new Constitution was custom-made for Hugo Chávez and suits perfectly well his political ambitions. After its adoption in 1999, Chávez ran for a new 6-year term in the presidential elections held in July 2000, easily defeating Francisco Arias by 57.5% to 39.5%. The Venezuelan Constitution allows for a plebiscite to be held during the midterm election. If the president is defeated, he must resign from office.
 
Zzarchov
#105
Chávez led insurgent troops in a bloody but unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the Perez government
Nothing in that history says anything other than "He's a strong man intent on power through any means he can"
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#106
``When he's out of power, he'll change his mind (again) and use violence to attempt to overthrow democracy (again)``


Great prediction.

Next time you look into your crystal ball, tell me the upcoming lottery numbers.


 
Zzarchov
#107
So your logic is, a confessed mass murderer won't kill again "because he said he wouldn't".

Great, lets empty out our prisons, no jail time if you promise not to be bad again.

Someday you'll learn about the world and lose your naive nature.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#108
``lets empty out our prisons``


Only so long as they are filled with Republican war criminals:


http://sundaymag.ca/index.php?id=718
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#109







History repeats itself!
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#110
SPEAKING FREELY
The plan to topple Pakistan's military
For the United States, it is not about President Pervez Musharraf any more. It is about clipping the wings of a strong Pakistani military, denying space for China in Pakistan, squashing the intelligence services, stirring ethnic unrest and neutralizing Pakistan's nuclear program. Musharraf shares the blame for letting things come this far. But he is also punching holes in Washington's game plan. - Ahmed Quraishi (Dec 5, '07)
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#111
I'm still waiting for the forum's right wingers to demand a Bush invasion of Pakistan.

Let's hear it!

''Invade Pakistan!

Restore democracy!

Freedom for Pakistanis, NOW!!''





 
darkbeaver
Republican
#112
There are lots of essays pointing at subversion of Pakistan from the failed project of Afghanistan where private security firms have become a problem to everyone except the US forces.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#113
And still no reply from the forum's hypocritical radical right wingers.

Thanks for proving the point that you have no principles!
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#114
Hey radical right wingers ---

Since you have nothing to say about Bush puppet Musharraf, tell me again about your views on Chavez ...
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#115
Gopher you bad Rodent you have driven the righteous wingnuts away, now who we going to play with?
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#116
Oh, gee --- and I thought I was doing them a favor!


 
Said1
Free Thinker
#117
What was the purpose of their meeting? Both of them look like they're thinking 'ew, ew, ew'.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#118
In both meetings they were sealing their alliances.

History, as always, repeats itself.
 
Blackleaf
#119
Quote: Originally Posted by Daz_Hockey View Post

They'll never touch Pakistan, because, because.b.b..b.b.b.b..........because, they got......NUKES!!!!!




And they really arent afraid to use em

And because Pakistan is a member of the Commonwealth - well, it was until it was booted out a few weeks ago.

But because Pakistan, like all members, values its membership of the Commonwealth then I'm sure it'll get things sorted out there as best as they can in order to be re-admitted.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+1
#120
LOL! All they have had is 8 years in order to do so.

That line is so hilarious that even fascist Musharraf had to laugh at it:


 

Similar Threads

13
Why did they invade Canada?
by scratch | Jun 17th, 2008
20
Who should America invade next?
by jjw1965 | Dec 18th, 2005
3
US To Invade Canada
by missile | Oct 17th, 2005