Musharaf Quote (see details)... Is This Plausible? Or "Hot Air?

Question

Musharaf defending his decision to impose martial law:
"The emergency reinforces the war on terror. So I really don't know how you see emergency as countering or negating the war on terror... So, therefore, all that I can say is I do understand that emergency has to be lifted but I cannot give a date for it. We are in a difficult situation and therefore I cannot give a date."

Also...
-- Elections will be held on January 9th, but refused to say when he will lift martial law.
-- Military courts can now try civilians on charges ranging from treason to inciting public unrest. (announced Sunday)
-- Several senior Taliban commanders, including Mullah Obaidullah Akhund, were released as part of a prisoner exchange one day after martial law was imposed. Akhund was a defense minister for the Taliban and one of the closest confidants to Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/12/1447254

Plausible? "Hot Air"? What effect on the war on terror?

Westhill... Thanks!! Good OpEd and I think his assessment is 'spot on'!
A news item that's bothered me since it came out in July...
Bush's efforts to 'win hearts and minds' have included pumping $750 million of our taxpayer dollars into tribal regions of Pakistan where Al Qaeda is hiding out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/16/world/asia/16pakistan.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1194145285-fsDHj4vhAonrr/HLXXfQSQ

Just so y'all know... I read and reply to answers in 'details', but I don't 'thumb vote' until the question closes.

Answer 1

My question is will this seriously help him rein in the Taliban and al-Qaeda, or will it tie his troops up arresting lawyers in the cities? Can he really consolidate control rapidly enough to subsequently motivate and muster the army to do what has to be done, or to move aside and let someone else do it?

His army has been getting beat every time it goes up into Waziristan. They're winning about one out of four fights, which is pretty low for a standing army against a guerrilla force. The army generally wins the battles, even if it loses the war, but the last time they went up there, over two hundred soldiers were captured, and they were just released within the last two weeks. Perhaps that was part of the prisoner exchange you mentioned.


Short answer is that it is implausible that deploying the military into Pakistani cities and disbanding courts is going to help fight the rise of militant Islamism. If anything, nationwide states of emergency tend to lend credibility to the effectiveness of opposition movements.

Answer 2

If you mean is it possible Musharraf has declared martial law in order to fight terror, then the answer is no. He's only trying to hold on to power.

Here's a great op ed piece on how Musharraf has played the US for a fool

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/opinion/11rich.html?em&ex=1195016400&en=f8cc907c979877a6&ei=5087%0A

Answer 3

you know, we have a distressing habit of creating and/or sustaining our own monsters...you DO have to give the bushies credit for consistency, though...if there's a foreign policy blunder that can possibly be made, they will find a way to make it...maybe their mantra of 'spreading democracy world-wide' should be modified to 'spreading democracy as long as it's convenient'
as for Musharraf? just another run-of-the-mill psychotic dictator, trying desperately to cling to ill-gotten and illegitimate power...the scary part is...this madman has nukes and has threatened in the past to use them

Answer 4

Shouldn't the us invade the pakistan and try to bring democracy like they did in iraq?
I thought they were trying to help the people.
No????????
What? There are terrorists in Pakistan?
Then there's a definate need for an invasion.
I wonder what's taking Mr Bush so long.
Please help the poor people of Pakistan. Bomb them first and then help them.