Well when you look at the entire philosophy of Military, its role is not just guarding the boarders of the country but to safeguard the people's lives. Army and Government are not something different or exclusive from each other. There must not be separate thinking about Army and Government. To me, both should be seen as one. Why do we make Army our enemy by posing it some alien institution, or a hostile institution? Army/Military is a part of our country. Its been this hostile thinking which made our military took active part in politics and seize power through force.

I wonder why people take Military and Government as elusively separate things? Can't there be a coordination between the two?

@Game On:

My point of my previous post was that Governments around the world are not controlled by the people but by some other institutions. Be it Army, CIA, Freemasons, Illuminati or some other agency.

What is Zulm: Zulm (lit: injustice, wrongfully depriving someone of his legal and moral rights), from a moral perspective, means to wrongfully take something for oneself or grant it to another person, and to, thereby, deprive the person, who actually had a rightful claim on that thing.

Millitary coup or government is a zulm indeed. Every institution must work within the constitutional boundaries.

Fortunately,Army is not the biggest political party.

Unfortunately,Army is the most powerful politics driver.

Regards,

__________________
When you try, you risk failure. When you don’t try, you ensure it.

Thats indeed a grim reality , that our political system is so weak, that our army very quickly interferes in the matters far from what its job requires.Repeated dictatorship in the country is its crystal clear example. No doubt the institutions have to strengthen themselves to compete army , but actual question is how to depoliticize the mindset of our army? This can surely be attained only with efforts of transparent and conscientious political leaders, again the question arises such Utopian leaders are almost extinct in this part of the world, from where to bring such leaders? who can run all the federating units, army, judiciary and media together and see them in their respective parameters.regards

__________________
"To me , death is nothing but happiness, and living under tyrants nothing but living in a hell. (Tohaf-al- Uqoul , P. 245)" Hazrat Imam Hussain Ibn Ali a.s

@imranahmad131
Agree with u on most points there.

@game on
Why SHOULD'NT the military play as an on-looker. You know, instead of always seeing things from the same old, boring perspective- one shud try and think from out of the box. Politics, like any other science needs and invites new ideas and concepts. If there can be a system of checks and balances in the US constitution, where the three wings of government keep a check on each other- why cant we include the military in the scheme of things? We shud move on from the now, much misused notion of government and democracy. Perhaps if we follow such a system, and provided a government fails to deliver (not unlike the present one), the military would be required to come in tandem with other branches of the state (eg, the judiciary) in order to decide if a coup is the need of the hour. I mean, do we honestly think the present state should continue beyond devastation? Now really?

Secondly, referring to the question put forward for Imranahmed; in USA, the CIA is a separate organization, not really coming under the military. However they often work closely with each other. But in countries like Pakistan and Israel, their spook agencies are almost synonymous with their military. This is why we use them interchangeably when we talk of Pakistan military's/ ISI's role in A-tan.

this is very interesting question, but the 63yrs history shows that our army has some definite role in the national politics partly because that pakistan is de-facto security state and partly because of civil leadership dilemma. pakistan is most sensitive region in the world that always tends to have more enemies in different ways.civil leadership is not competent and and have always fished in the troubled water e.g in the first 9 yrs , pakistan witnessed almost 11 pm. All of them were civilian and every thing was at stake at that moment. ayub khan rightly intervened to get rid of corrupt leaders. again the 1970 election result was not recognized by western wing civil politicians by raising the slogan''EDAR HUM UDAR TUM'' disintegrated pakistan .Furthermore in global power politics pakistan played defined role especially in the containment of USSR. In this era pakistan was guided by military.HAD there been civil regime in pakistan at that time, we would have got no benefit. but pakistan guided by zia consistently pursued the nuclear program CREATING NO ROOM FOR WEST TO RAISE QUESTIONS AGAINST OUR NUCLEAR PROGRAMME and magnified the standing army as well, in addition to enormous folw of dollars . again the double game between CIA and ISI AFTER 9/11 has necessitated the role of army in national politics.civil leadership is more illiterate more selfish, more feudal and is also lacking viable strategic out look for the region and collectively these factors have created space for army to play direct role in regime,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, democracy is the only instrument in the hands of less competent, illiterate, selfish politician to continue their feudal grip on society to satisfy their ulterior motives. benazir was not assassinated by terrorists but she lost her life because she came in clash with national interest by showing willingness to Washington on various sesitive strategic matters like A-Q KHAN, access to nuclear program me,dismantling the influence of ISI in afghanistan . bugti killing is another example. further people voted for ppp not for zardari's sake but today the most corrupt in the nation is head of the state. this is the new paradigm shift in our political culture, the outset of new era of personalized politics in the name of democracy. under such circumstances i think benevolent army role as party is commendable

i think army rules all over not by their power but with thier devotion and integrity

Army as an institution is the guardian of the motherland's interests. The act of individuals couldn't be applied and associated with the whole institution.

__________________
“There is no God but You (Allah Almighty), You are far exalted and above all weaknesses, and I was indeed the wrongdoer”. AL-QURAN

Military dictators form their own parties and buy the loyalties or blackmail the corrupt politicians but it doesn't mean whole of the institution is involved in it. Recently Army Chief has abolished political wing from Military Intelligence similarly earlier ISI was also debarred from dealing political affairs as well. Military is not at all a political party thought it is/was working as godfather of Pakistani politics.

__________________
No matter how fast i run or how far i go it wont escape me, pain, misery, emptiness.

well if the biggest political party is the one with the most time in the government ...........its the army.........

__________________
Tundi Bad-e-Mukhalif say na ghabra ay auqab
Yeh to chalti hay tujhey ouncha uraney k lye

@ Prince Crowns,

The best lover is one who criticizes the wrongs, said J.K staple.

Agreed not whole army are to be blamed. But you must agree to one fact :It is weak institution. Reasons: How a Single dictator can hold hostage 7 lacs men army for decade??????? Despite infringement and violation of ARTICLE 6,of constitution of 1973,why other officers didnt take action??? it means Command is more important than constitution?

Any institution which takes part directly or indirectly into politics is certaily a party in this game. May Allah keep our ARMY away from dirty POLITICS and make it pride of MUSLIM WORLD.

__________________
"Man shall have nothing but what he strives for". (Al-Quran. Al-Najm:39).


"""""SHIKAARI BUNNA SHIKAAR BUNNAY SE BEHTTAR HAI"""""""