musharaf

musharaf looked pretty embarrassed recently, he knows i have a hell of an impression of him, and ofcourse next to his other worrys its not easy to get the extra ethical and emotional show going to show every such quality to everyone.

ANd then he is under severe fire. AlJ dont really liked my comments on the case,
wich must be because i have a strong admiration for the mans political (not so much diplomatical) skills. He is not a fortunate man for politics, because his skills are unevenly distributed, if he had a quarter of the charisma that he has compassion he would probably be fine, but he only has like a fifth. he is a military and civil organiser of high quality and great conscience, yet he is said to display quite some repression, (i didnt witness it so much, when i was more into pakistan, there was rili no indications of files of disappeared persons in pakistan, some repression must be expected in the destabilised region, i liked that they bombed the red mosque in a show, like i like russia made a deliberate win over georgia if u do it, do it fine and if u do it and do it fine, do it good, matter of being fair about things. Plays a role i distinctly disliked his 'young martyrs' and (perhaps naive, considering the general malreporting of the media his speeches, also the fact a big city and governmental stability was in play, (security issues) played a role.

nuf said, probs was me who cooked it up, not sure, usia agreed, mush was not left much choice, guess he had the fun as well. Great, fair. we are the killers, we have all the arms, but the right of the person on the person goes over everything.
even the right on freedom of belief.
A belief is not free when the person is not free, so that is just plain and logical.

The pakistani army has behaved up to every expectation, if musharaf needs and wants i think he can count on it. Not to forfill his ordres, but to save pakistan or his skin. The impulse to apply this compliment to russia concerning the methods and scales applied against georgia is strong, but let's say there is still alot of smoke over the battlefield to go that far. i think it is a great compliment although i am not always as happy with their deployment.

Musharaf is really a fascinating person. his military genius is more tactical and political then strategical tho, he's rather a strategic failure i think. But he well knows after a few mistakes, and also in the geopolitical respect he has been showing a lot of reason the past few years. His tactical and political military quality itself again is quite huge. i would trust him a mobile position over an offensive or perhaps even defensive. So even musharaf is a man of limited capacitys, when it is about pakistan, the region, or matters of more general international importance he can be trusted, when it is about the greatests of geopolitical questionmarks, indias position, nucleair capacity and probably about his actual methods of control but i am not sure, to some extend sharif and zardari already did everything else noone ever wanted, fire up the war in the north, i might prefer anyone else.
then again like i said he seems to have left militairy roads in huge geopolitical questions wich is the sensible thing to do.

For him more so because he can operate on the level he is best at.
Basically saving the pakistani nations. It's where the english analysts got now,
sheet he saved teh poor blokes past decade, and what else could keep sharif or zardari in check.. very outspokenly so, mh.. could have sth to do with some major bookkeeping of mine, fun that. thumbs up blokes that's pretty great.
Quite a feat really.

Perhaps i think it is an hallucination tho. Whatever, and they check on musharaf? well it makes sense, what else then an institute that can moderate military measures,
and prevent abuse of law could check such a situation, altho i doubt sharif or zardari should be considered for such great dignification.

That besides, and then? who of them will become president? Sharif knows his cards are well, he is identified with the muslim aspect. well perhaps musharaf doesnt rili have that ambition, and even perhaps sharif is not unsuit in that role, personally i think musharaf a better representant of the wahabi kind of moderate modern islam i like most. (i like the synthetic one) i also admit i dont rili care much about religion, but i insist i admire inspiration.

Zardari for his part would bet he wins because the international backers would have no options left, it means sharif would win because if the international backers weighted into the pakistani scales firstly westerners would have a very much fascinated and probably negative opinion about the lawyers, not just cheer because they protest musharaf over formalitys when so much is happening, it's a bit weaker perhaps because musharaf at some point claimed state of national emergency, wich constitutes to much of a wrinkle in the surface of procedure, untill that point the developments should have been evaluated, and it is hard to understand not all the world got interested ,(see there the reason btw. for the idiotic reporting and lack of fantasy)

so that old pakistani grudge at least has been solved..
its not for no reason i am so anti islam in this post, i almost included some dedicated declaration of non-islamism in this post, but there is no need, atheism and secularism should suffice.
i am as dedicated anti christian as china, probably more. And chinese are not supposed to waste food on dead people either.

Don't you think bush is a hypocrit?
You think you can be a "christian" in the 20th century? when ur the sun of a president???
i don't, yeah maybe in malaysia or Jemen, not in the usa. What bush thinks about the saakasvilli, is almost directly related to what i consider his perceptions of religion, he thinks: you would think , if you think it is mad what he is doing, it is the same kind of things in him that in me you think are mad i am doing. Well he's got some pretences, but as mad as he is doing over religion and indeed nationalist fears etc. , is exactly mad enough. The problem is despite i always disliked bush policy's, i always refused to consider him an outright madman, for the dumb reason that sometimes when i made sense it made sense to him. So what i think maddest at him is his war speeches etc. the idiotic comparisons, axes of evil, etc. allies..
and terrorists, being like that, always expressing a hypocrit picture of pittyfullness and hurt interests, and declaring the rest of the world is a collection of mediocre bastards, that i think maddest.

so he is mad, limited even, but to some extend he makes sense, i dont give a damn to bomb ppl that lock themselves up anyway and turn their kids into medieval persona, makes some sense. I don't give a damn about tribal and burocratic positions would have been nice to, but the west is a bit dumb, and thinks like : a servant is a servant and then it will be ok.

so despite he is not in ordre he's been trying to make some starts, he himself has probably been a greater levy on taxmoney then individual freedoms in usa, for his symbolic value.

He can be rather funny too, he is not very narrowminded like many people.
war on drugs..
hilarious
war on terror is plain sad from my pov.
mordor

we are the only ones allowed to terrorise...
insane
all the drugs are ours...
yeah some get that

that's with bush, sometimes you still agree, he would be as lousy a president for georgia as saakasvilli.