Can we Question Army ?
Most of the people on these forums say that we should differentiate between Musharraf and Army. We already know even the politicians stay very cautious about Army.
Would it bad to question the top leadership of Army?
Can we ask what it has achieved for us in general?
Can we ask Army to stay away from running government?
Can we point to any country where General has successfully turned the country around and made a name forhimelf?
We do know Army has done some great projects during the "peace time" and also provided relief whenever nation faced a natural disaster/calamity
econfused, the army is an instrument of the Generals. Without the support of this institution, there would have been no coups d'etat. These Generals are just ordinary people like you and me. The only difference between them and us is that they command an army of around 600,000 armed and trained men paid for by us. It is not easy to resist such force with blogs like pkpolitics and parties like Imran Khan's TI.
By law, in Pakistan you cannot debate the role of the army. If you do, you'll be arrested on the pretext of subversion of the army. Now, you can also be tried for treason in military courts. The elected parliament can also not question or even debate the defence budget. Hence, the army is not answerable to the people. Unless the role of the whole institution is discussed and changed, I don't see any hope that the army will ever stay away from grabbing power whenever there is a 'crisis'. In fact, it will even engineer crises where there are none. When Gen. Ziaul Haq took over, the opposition and Bhutto had already agreed on new elections. Hence, the crisis had receded, but even though well aware of the situation, the army still deposed Bhutto.
In my opinion, no institution or individual is sacrosanct and everything should be discussed. Discussing the role of Generals without reference to the army is like discussing a dacoit without his weapons.
There was one General, who supposedly successfully turned his country around even though there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding him. It was Charles de Gaulle of France. However, I don't think he stands any comparison at all with our Generals. For a brief overview of his work, you can go to this link:
There is no question in my mind that Pak Army is an 'evil organisation'; period. The earlier thread about 'Role of Army' had many comments and anlaysis. I brought that thread up for you to read.
Thanks, I must have missed that one of out.
the gr8st project of our army...
bhai electronicaly confused ,
I think ,mushrraf and army are no different .
actuallay musharraf is just a face...
army is the one institue ....has been power hungry for so long that we have a longer period of army rule then the civilian rule.
mushrraf is wrong ...
so do Yahha khan...
so do Ayub khan...
so do Zia ul haq...
different faces of power hunger ...
but from a same institution.....
army should be questioned !
the money we the poor earning ....
giving them in the shape of taxes....
the money we r getting in the shape of aid ...and getting worst after effects of it ...
where is the aid money actually going ?????
i want to ask Mr.Kiyani...
if he is not busy with his tailor ...
giving him order for a black sherwani.....
U r absolutely correct. Mush is just the front-page . The real evil is army .
Pakistani masses can't grow until we get rid of this rouge army.
Just to add further when we talk of establishment its both military & civil. I was wondering who leads the civil establishment? How it works? And how it can be controled?
I do not think ESTABLISHMENT (Bureaucracy) is that powerful by itself. I think it is set of monkeys who just change sides based on the government. Some part which is openly known for is sides or honesty become OSDs during a government change. These monkeys particulary don't care who is in government. Essentially they are same like 70% Awaam which doesn't care who is in power.
Thanks for the info.
Can we Question Army?
No. We cannot question Army, if it is performing the Duties according to Constitution.
Yes. We can question Army, when it starts exeeding its Constitutional limits.
Then it is not a professional and respectable Institution anymore.
.............Free and fair elections for legislative assemblies do not usher in democracy for Pakistan. We never achieve a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
What we get is a â€˜democracyâ€™ where people are replaced by civil and military officers and their rich industrialists, traders and land owning supporters. It is their government, by them and for them.
It is a great pity that to protect their vested interests, no mainstream political party, civil society activists or Harvard and Oxford educated intellectuals have advocated that the police administration at the level of city, town and Union Council should be put under their respective elected bodies. None advocate that all criminal cases should come up before a panel of citizens agreed to by the accused and the prosecution to determine guilt or otherwise (the exception of the PPP-SB proving the rule.)
Mobilising peopleâ€™s political power seems to be the only way to take Pakistan out of the 60-year old morass.
This statement had been true for last 60 years. Now first time in history we have seen a drop of change after 9th of March. We will not see the change in days or weeks, but it has to happen. We might have people like IK b4, we never had a movement like this before. It might see dormant, but things has change and will change.
Whoever comes to power has to keep in mind, that they have to work, if they want to loot any further. They can only make money, if there exists a country. These "new" winners has to work toward education, energy, law and order.
Saw an accident of major on the road cause he broke the signal and hit with a boy riding a bicycle. The area was being controlled by Army unit. When people ( many belong to army) gathered around. They started blaming the kid by saying "Are u blind". Ah Poor kid and supreme Army.
I got a better one. A relative had his car parked on the roadside. A fauji riding a motorcycle came and hit the parked car in the back. Of course the fauji got hurt so the car owner took him to the hospital on that very car. A day or two later the fauji was given a clean bill of health and released from the hospital. Well, within a week he died as there was some internal injury that went undetected. But guess what happened next? Well the army came and arrested this fella. hey found out he had just retired from a top post from WAPDA (second tier from the MD position) and did not release him till they forced him to sign away all his pension benefits to that dead fauji's family. That was about ten years ago. To this day he gets no benefits for a lifetime of service.
army can be questioned .
but question of 100 million dollars .
who will question army?
public ? which has been suppressed to the end level with inflation , absence of basic necessities and lack of education and employment & law and order ?
political Govts? which has became corrupt to the last degree and thus are weakest link in the structure . to make army answerable to them .
courts ? can courts make army answerable ?
maybe a constitutional expert can answer it logically.
media ? with all the power and popularity media has , its still not as powerful to call a serving military man in their show , and grilled him .
on contrary , some media channels are praising , following and getting funded by army only .
USA ? USA has made our army answerable .
but it should not be the case .
they keep calling on our army chief and questioning him .
but if we wont have any one , from inside the country .
then some one from out side will come .
and make army answerable for his own reasons and backgrounds .
which would not be a pleasant and favorable situation for us .
"the gr8st project of our army..."
Who needs Bengalis? It's deja vous all over again...
A ditto in every way, from lining em up to shooting point blank those that survive the firing squad...
(And of course the Army has declared both tapes as fake ;-) )
This is so called Justice. In such justice victim suffer and Predator got the benefits.
Well what u quoted it reminds me an event from history.
"a man once went to the town of thugs to trade. As he entered in the town thugs gather around to loot his luggage. In struggle to survive one of the thug threw a stone on the man due to which man was injured. So people gathered around and took him to the court for justice. The Cheif Justice of court hear both the cases and finally he gave his decision in favour of thug because thug said that when "i threw stone on him it hurt me" and the man was fined by the court of justice.
So is the case of Army.
Well, that one reminds me of this one I posted a couple of days ago (though off-topic):
(Maybe the guys defense too was "i had a bit bad afterwards")
no you cant question army about why they had killed so many civilains in swat.