Musharraf rules out stepping down.

[gopher]

I can only speak for the USA experience: immediately upon approving of the Constitution, numerous conflicts arose. This involved shutting down certain newspapers and the temporary detention of people viewed as dissidents. But this did not involve kidnapping or exile of dissidents. Moreover, there were no assassinations or fomenting of internecine warfare in outlying states such as those conflicts in certain tribal areas in Pakistan today.

Musharraf did not have to kick out judges and replace them with cronies who readily approve of his ill advised actions. His imposed exiling of Bhutto and Sharif were clearly illegal and merited impeachment. Yet nothing was done. And now Bhutto is dead. Pakistan stands on the verge of chaos.

This would NEVER have happened if Musharraf had permitted reforms.

 

[Zzarchov]

No violence with the USA over constitutional changes or confusion eh?

Ignoring the whole "states rights" issue of the Civil war, I think you need to look at your nations early history a little better gopher.

 

[jimmoyer]

Anybody here think who ever replaces Musharaff or whatever system replaces Musharaff will be automatically better ?

 

[CDNBear]

Anybody here think who ever replaces Musharaff or whatever system replaces Musharaff will be automatically better ?

ME!!!

 

[Praxius]

Um, yeah... that's like asking the same thing about Bush.

Only a monkey could do worse then he did.

Added:

(Bush or Mush'Head)

 

[CDNBear]

Um, yeah... that's like asking the same thing about Bush.

Only a monkey could do worse then he did.

Added:

(Bush or Mush'Head)

Hmmm, equally f'up...:-?.

If you had to chose...hmmm, what would you say?