11.04.2007

pakistan

Query 1: Generally speaking, is it better to have a Muslim country run by a liberal-minded military dictator, or by a democratically elected government that might more accurately reflect the Islamicist values of (a significant portion, if not the majority of) the populace?

Query 2: Does your answer change when the country is armed with nuclear weapons?

The history of US foreign policy suggests that public expressions of concern notwithstanding, we will continue to support Musharraf regardless of how many political prisoners he rounds up. (And I'm not necessarily saying that we shouldn't...per my own answers to the questions above.)

But can we at least start being honest about this whole "spreading democracy" nonsense?

Of course we can't. And now we can add Pakistan to the list of countries in the Muslim world with a population oppressed by a regime propped up by the United States in the name of our short-term strategic interests.

Some pissed-off Saudis attacked us with box cutters. I don't even want to think about what some pissed-off Pakistanis might decide to bring over.

6 comments:

Gino said...

" reflect the Islamic values of (a significant portion, if not the majority of) the populace?"

what is wrong peace,charity, humility toward God, modestly attired women and strong family ties?
i wish we had more of these ourselves, and less of a govt run by a fundamentalist christian foriegn policy.
/devil's advocate.

Brian said...

I have made a slight, but significant, change to the phrase in question. Thank you pointing out my imprecision.

And since when do you fret about immodestly attired women?

Gino said...

i should have rephrased my comment to say 'daughters' instead of 'women'.

Gino said...

is 'islamieist' a word?
or are you borrowing from my act of creative vocabulary?

Brian said...

That's a strike through the "c"...

RW said...

We're the bad guys until we say "OK, you guys are right, we need to stop meddling and futzing around with other countries. Everybody rule thyself." Then all of a sudden people "can't do it without us."

I say this based on the conversations I've had with the Europeans at work, who are opposed to America having a hand in everything but the minute I say "Yeah you're right, we need to let people alone" they immediately change the point and say "but what fills the vacuum?"

To address your question I would rather the people of each country elect their own leaders no matter who they are. If we stopped making ourselves the evil empire in their eyes and pulled back even a little bit the vacuum would be filled with their own self-absorbed squabbles. Coup would follow coup, they'd kill each other for decades and we'd get a decent night's sleep once in a while.