Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can anyone read between the lines with what is happening to Mussaref???

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:43 PM
Original message
Can anyone read between the lines with what is happening to Mussaref???
Edited on Fri Nov-16-07 11:44 PM by hang a left
I was reading an article today in the LA Times and from the smell of things and Negropoint's visit; I can only assume the CIA/ISI darling has fallen out of favor with this administration.

Been real busy and have not been able to keep up on the day to day news out of Islamabad.

Anyone have an online course I can take??

on edit: ing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think we ought not meddle right now, frankly. Yes, we wasted money
and faith on Musharraf, and they don't have a democracy right now, and things are bad there for the moment, but we have a tendency to make things worse when we try to intervene. The Islamic population won't take kindly to our obvious interference in their affairs--might make them swing away from us completely and embrace radicalism (they're already leaning that way, apparently). Demanding that they hold elections, in which we try to get Bhutto in there, is risky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JCMach1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. If they are unhappy, the Negroponte will orchestrate his departure-
Edited on Fri Nov-16-07 11:55 PM by JCMach1
There are many choices for the CIA as any number of Pakistani politicians have and always will be on the TAKE.

So far, the CIA and Musharef have done everything they can to keep Bhutto as PLAN B.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. I'm wondering why Negroponte, and not Condi, in this situation?
Is she not equipped to handle this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JCMach1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. She isn't... Negroponte is a dirty dealer from way back... Plus, Pakistan is HIGHLY
patriarchal...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. You must be kidding right??
I believe there is only a mythical divide amongst US intelligence apparatus and that of Pakistan's. So any political upheaval has been conducted by both for a reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. I don't think so--we're really dealing with an unpredictable situation here, and
not one that we wanted. We were played for fools, giving shitloads of money and support to this guy in the hopes that he'd play ball for our team, and now BushCo has egg on its face--and all they can do is verbally persuade and cajole Musharraf into acting like less of a dictator. We won't be cutting off aid or doing any other serious sanctioning. If Musharraf goes down (and I do think he fears for his life), and Bhutto's not safely elected, there's risk of a coup, or an election result that we don't want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConsAreLiars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Well, if you regard the PNAC gang as "our team" you probably are speaking for a minority.
A powerful one, granted. If you don't believe you are a part of the US imperialist apparatus, then you might reconsider the use of terms like "our" and "us" when talking about missions by the bloody-handed black ops agent Negroponte.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. The money was not wasted. It kept Osama Bin Laden alive and safe, giving
the US an excuse to wage wars. In addition it helped to spread nuclear secrets around, another reason to wage wars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. I always figure that the "attempts on his life" were the CIA scaring him back into shape
the oddest part of this is that Bush failed to secure the supply line to the soldiers in Afghanistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1932 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. Confessing that I know nothing about this, but if I had to guess, I'd say that
Edited on Fri Nov-16-07 11:59 PM by 1932
Mussharaf came to power because of the incredible corruption of recent governments who ran Pakistan as a profit-maker for the west and for the powerful in Pakistan, including Bhutto. The US was probably relieved that Mussharaf came to power and not religious extremists, after knowing that either a military coup or theocratic coup was the logical consequence of the breaking point previous corrupt governments pushed Pakistan toward.

I suspect that Musharraf was actually moving Pakistan toward a functioning, fair society, but, for some reason, the west decided it is now time to go back to the wealth concentrating, western-friendly governments (becaue either it's time to get private enterprise back in the game, or because they want instability again, or both), and now the west is backing Bhutto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-16-07 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think our government encouraged Bhutto to go and test the waters
Musharref has been ready willing and able to take our money, but that's about it..

I think Bush wants bin laden before he leaves office, and maybe he promised Bhutto the moon, if she could unseat Musharref, and somehow wrest power from him..and allow us into the areas where bin laden might be..
I think she's gonna end up getting killed, but that won't make Bush lose any sleep..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Interesting point about Bushler promising Bhutto
I, too, think Bhutto is likely going to be killed.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lvx35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. "he promised BhUTTo the MOON, if she could unSEAT Musharref"
I have no doubt that BhUTTo is a US puppet player, as is PERVez, and SODOM Hussein back in the day. You can always tell a CIA job by the fact that their names seem to be cognate with some dirty word...Next time some guy with a name like Salvador Allende gets replaced in a coup by a guy named something like Augusto PENIS-shay you'd know what happened... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. I think Bhutto promised Bush the moon
and has re-assumed her own crusade for power. I like the all-inclusive alliances she's been seeking against Musharraf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
13. I found this thread from the other day interesting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

and this article posted by leftchick on the above thread interesting, as well:
http://tonykaron.com/2007/11/13/benazir-vs-musharraf-is...

But I'm with you -- if anyone can shed some light on it all, by all means, enlighten us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 05:40 AM
Response to Original message
15. I'm failing..
my on-line course..but Asia Times has some interesting stuff:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page.html

and here's some more:

Pakistan: Princess Ferragamo at the Barricades
Its all about regime change

by Mike Whitney

Global Research, November 16, 2007
informationClearingHouse.info - 2007-11-15

It doesnt take a genius to figure out why the crooked Princess Ferragamo--Benazir Bhuttohas returned to Pakistan. Bhuttos been traipsing all over Washington trying to garner support from think-tank heavies and establishment powerbrokers to help her stage a political come-back in Islamabad. She even hired a high-powered public relations firm to polish her image so the media wouldnt focus too much attention on her past transgressions. Allegations of money laundering and corruption have haunted Bhutto ever since she was driven from office in 1996. Last month, General Musharraf cut a deal with Bhutto which freed her from the prospect of criminal prosecution and allowed her to return home. The arrangement ignored the judicial system entirely. The $1.5 billion that she and her husband allegedly received in a variety of criminal enterprises has simply disappeared down the memory hole.

Another tidbit the media seems to breezily disregard is Bhuttos role in supporting Islamic extremism; the very dragon she is now expected to slay. According to Wikipedia: It was during Bhuttos rule that the Taliban took power in Kabul and gained prominence in Afghanistan. She viewed the Taliban as a group that could stabilize Afghanistan and enable trade across the Central Asia republics. Her government provided military and financial support for the Taliban, even sending a small unit of the Pakistani army into Afghanistan.

But, then, anyone can make a mistake and Bhutto has since offered her sincere regrets and promised to rid Pakistan of the scourge of terrorism. This must be music to the ears of her new patrons in Washington.

Its astonishing how quickly one can "see the light" when their career depends on changing their point-of-view.

US historian, Arthur Herman, in a letter published in the Wall Street Journal, described Bhutto as One of the most incompetent leaders in the history of South Asia; adding that she and other Pakistani elites hated Musarraf because he is muhajir, born of Indian Muslims. Herman claims, Although it was muhajirs who agitated for the creation of Pakistan in the first place, many native Pakistanis view them with contempt and treat them as third-class citizens.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7...


From The Sunday Times
September 2, 2007
How the West summoned up a nuclear nightmare in Pakistan
Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark reveal how misguided deals with Pakistan have created a terrifying threat of nuclear terrorism
Americas reason for sustaining Musharraf in power is that the alternative is even less appealing. The upper reaches of the army, and the retired military elite, are rife with Islamists a legacy of General Zia ul-Haq, the zealot who both ramped up the nuclear programme and gave the military a religious mission when he was president from 1978-88.

The tragedy is that Americas gamble on Musharraf has not paid off. Washingtons nightmare is a nuclear Pakistan controlled by fundamentalists. Yet Musharraf presides over a country that is not only still a nuclear proliferator but the real source of the Islamist terrorism menacing the West.

Al-Qaeda has merged with Pakistans home-grown terrorists, spawning new camps, new graduates and new missions abroad including the July attacks in London in 2005.

At least 17 of the worst Sunni terror groups banned by the US and the UN have been allowed to operate openly and launch recruitment drives, using flimsy cover-names, most of them operating within sight of the Pakistan military.

The Taliban reformed after Musharraf signed a secret pact with its supporters in Waziristan the tribal region of northwest Pakistan in 2004, and again in 2006, leading to what Nato commanders in Afghanistan complained of as a 300% increase in attacks on UK and Afghan forces.

US intelligence sources have accused elements of Pakistans intelligence establishment and army including General Mo-hammad Aziz Khan, who until October 2004 was Musharrafs chairman of the joint chiefs of staff of coaching and sheltering the neo-Taliban.

Pakistan today stands on the failed states index at position 12, just below Haiti, in worse shape than North Korea and Burma. Yet Musharrafs government has been rewarded with a 45,000% increase in US aid since 2001, taking assistance levels to more than $10 billion, five times more than received by any other country (including Israel).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/articl...



US blamed for Pakistan insecurity
Hekmatyar opposes the presence of foreign
troops in the region


Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, leader of a powerful armed group in Afghanistan, has accused the United States of trying to destabilise Pakistan.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera, Hekmatyar said: "Washington wanted Pakistan to face the same destiny as Iraq and Afghanistan."

Hekmatyar, who heads the Hezb-e-Islami group, is opposed to the government of Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president. He also fought against the Soviet occupation in the 1980s.

Hekmatyar was briefly Afghanistan's prime minister after the Soviets withdrew. He fled Kabul after the Taliban took over.

Hekmatyar, who is now on the run, said the deterioration of security in Pakistan was a natural outcome of Islamabad's policies and its very close relations with Washington.

"As long as the US military presence continues in the region, the situation will remain the same," he said.

'US design'

"The United States wants Pakistan to face a similar fate to that of Afghanistan and Iraq. The United States believed that lighting the flames of war in Pakistan would ease the intensity of war in Afghanistan, and that is why they bombed mosques, schools and villages in Pakistani tribal areas.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/239CCFD5-4A63-4A...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-17-07 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. those complaining about her support of islamic extremists
don't have a very good point if they want to use her support of the Taliban as an example. Even today there is support from Karsai in Afghanistan for some elements of the Taliban he knows he can't eradicate. Musharraf has made deals with some factions of the Taliban in Pakistan.

And, don't forget our country's relationship with the Taliban (Zalimay Khalizad) to effect the oil pipeline through Afghanistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 30th 2014, 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC