http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/15/world/as...amp;oref=slogin

 

Pervez Musharraf, the President of Pakistan, has decided to resign, and is currently negotiating the details of his resignation, according to Pakistani sources.

 

Apparently the impetus for his 360-degree turn in position (yesterday he vowed to fight impeachment charges) was the unwillingness for the military to exert pressure on the public. I guess they decided, since he quit his military post, to say, "You're not the boss of me."

 

Currently being speculated as under negotiation are immunity from prosecution (from what, I'm still not clear) and whether or not he will be allowed to remain in Pakistan.

 

 

 

Adios, Perv. :mischief

But is he going to be replaced by someone worse?

But is he going to be replaced by someone worse?

usually what happens :confused

But is he going to be replaced by someone worse?

usually what happens :confused

It looks like the military is finally going to let democracy take its course, at least.

 

I have no idea what the Pakistani Constitution says about presidential succession.

 

EDIT: It's the Chairman of the Pakistani Senate, which is Muhammad Mian Soomro, 57, a member of Musharraf's Pakistan Muslim League party (PML-Q).

But is he going to be replaced by someone worse?

usually what happens :confused

It looks like the military is finally going to let democracy take its course, at least.

 

I have no idea what the Pakistani Constitution says about presidential succession.

 

EDIT: It's the Chairman of the Pakistani Senate, which is Muhammad Mian Soomro, 57, a member of Musharraf's Pakistan Muslim League party (PML-Q).

Does he have any ties to extremist groups?

EDIT: It's the Chairman of the Pakistani Senate, which is Muhammad Mian Soomro, 57, a member of Musharraf's Pakistan Muslim League party (PML-Q).

Does he have any ties to extremist groups?

Not according to Wikipedia, they tend to be in favor of the Pakistani military. They held the National Assembly until 2008, when they were beat by the democratic-socialist Pakistan Peoples Party (the party of Benazir Bhutto).

But is he going to be replaced by someone worse?

usually what happens :confused

It won't matter when Barack Obama or John McCain invades them.

I;m not to sure that will happen... We are spread to thin and I think we are going to be engaging even more...

And who exactly is a future US president going to invade Pakistan with? Phantom soldiers?

I agree with him that we need to attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan, if the Pakistanis will not touch them. However, nowhere, even on McCain's platform, have I heard anything about an invasion.

First, explain to me how American military operations to any extent will make us safer.

If it is a low key special ops type mission, it would have a better chance of success. It's likely that Al Qaeda's primary leadership is based in that lawless area of Pakistan. Taking them out, especially Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri, would be a huge blow against terrorism.

 

A large military force would be a bad idea, and airstrikes cause too many civilian casualties.

I dont think an attack on Pakistan is even a remote possibility. They might not be strong allies but they do just enough to keep us happy and the world at large rather indifferent.

 

Two -istans that I could see becoming potential targets, however, are Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Talk about deteriorated relations, awful human rights, and in Uzbekistan's case a dictator. But I dont see this as happening for a long time.

I would not be opposed to a special ops mission to eliminate the primary offenders.

 

However, at this point that isn't an option. The time has come and gone. They are well protected by the mountainous regions and local tribesmen. It will likely take much larger scale operations.

It's possible you are right. This country badly needs to invest more in humint (human intelligence, or spies) rather than sigint (signals intelligence, such as satellite photos). Last month I finished reading Richard Clarke's newest book about the problems with our intelligence agencies, and he spent a significant portion of the book talking about how sigint is a waste against terrorist organizations, or any kind of organization not part of a state's military. He stressed that the US needed to make a major effort to try and infiltrate Al Qaeda or another similar organization.

The problem extends further than that. The CIA on multiple occasions gave the Clinton administration precise locations of Bin Laden and other suspected terrorists with little to no collateral damage and Clinton refused to take action. Ironically, it partly was indeed Richard Clarke who denied action on all ten or so attempts, citing lack of authority.

Clarke himself has said that was not the case, and that part of the problem was Congressional Republicans accusing him of 'wagging the dog' with the 'threat' of Al-Qaeda, to distract the public from the Lewinsky scandal. Because of this, he was not able to get very many operations approved by Congress against Al Qaeda. Unfortunately this would all come back to haunt our nation, as we now know.

I dont think an attack on Pakistan is even a remote possibility. They might not be strong allies but they do just enough to keep us happy and the world at large rather indifferent.

 

Two -istans that I could see becoming potential targets, however, are Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Talk about deteriorated relations, awful human rights, and in Uzbekistan's case a dictator. But I dont see this as happening for a long time.

 

Nah, I doubt they would get involved in Central Asia. Talk about further penetrating the Russian "near abroad." And besides, Uzbekistan is our favorite nation in Central Asia, so I don't see why we would invade them.

Nah' date=' I doubt they would get involved in Central Asia. Talk about further penetrating the Russian "near abroad." And besides, Uzbekistan is our favorite nation in Central Asia, so I don't see why we would invade them.[/quote']

It could easily be moved to Kyrgyzstan.

 

Oh, and after a weekend of official denials, Perv announced today that he is indeed resigning.

 

This is not time for individual bravado. I lose or win in impeachment proceedings"]

 

Parliament will elect a new president in 30 days. Soormo will act as president until then.