Pakistan General Elections 2024

Take it easy bro.

The idea is to keep fighting (within constitutional limits) until the other side capitulates.

Its a long and arduous journey.
 
Olympus81 said:
The idea is to keep fighting (within constitutional limits) until the other side capitulates.
Click to expand...

And to fight with what little sense we can gather. At least SOME consideration should be put on how it might impact the 'ghareeb awam' (poor masses) who make up the majority of the country.

And that fight can't be fought by trying to influence the external detractors who lead to this mess in the first place inside Pakistan...
 
Protagoras said:
No one here is idiotic enough to call for sanctions against Pakistan.

No one should be campaigning against the IMF deal.

The focus should be on particular individuals.

Read about the Magnitsky Act.
Click to expand...
The test for the Magnitsky Act. is very difficult to prove. That is why bar a few major cases surrounding genocide and war criminals, it has never been applied to politically sensitive cases.
 

Party position in NA as of 9:30am​

Updated Feb 10, 09:30
According to the ECP, independent candidates lead in NA by securing 99 seats while PML-N has managed to secure 71 seats. The PPP has clinched 53 seats in the NA and MQM-P has bagged 17.

The PML-Q has won 3 seats till now, while the recently formed IPP has won 2 seats and the JUI-F has bagged the same number. MWM, BNP and PML-Z have each won a seat each in the NA.
 
RescueRanger said:

Party position in NA as of 9:30am​

Updated Feb 10, 09:30
According to the ECP, independent candidates lead in NA by securing 99 seats while PML-N has managed to secure 71 seats. The PPP has clinched 53 seats in the NA and MQM-P has bagged 17.

The PML-Q has won 3 seats till now, while the recently formed IPP has won 2 seats and the JUI-F has bagged the same number. MWM, BNP and PML-Z have each won a seat each in the NA.
Click to expand...

A few people bought and sold and the next setup is born.
 
DevendraRajput said:
Bhai the day democracy (even if it were in name only) is removed from your nation, people will not be even able to emigrate out of Pakistan and Pakistani outside will not send a single penny in Pakistan.

This name-only (according to some Pakistani here) democracy is keeping the feudal lords and generals from not going to real extreme in which anything that you own can be taken away from you anytime they want with full legitimacy. The powerful atleast want to keep a perception of legitimacy. The moment that band aid is taken off, the position of generals or higher up will be hereditary or will be decided by gun. Your situation will deteriorate to that of Afghanistan in its really bad days.

Right now powerful have to do something to keep a perception of democracy for getting legitimacy. If they do not have to do that too, it will be a real hell.

This democracy (or whatever you want to call it) is keeping that calamity away.
Click to expand...

I think the word that you are trying to allude to is 'accountability'.

In a power-sharing arrangement accountability will be present in some form or another. No I am not talking about full spectrum accountability where corruption is absent. Accountability as in there will be some level of leverage between the stakeholders in a power sharing arrangement to keep them in line.

That's not really democracy. It is a component of democracy but not the real deal.

My criticism is more so towards people from certain classes (particularly the irreligious, westernized English speaking elite) who feel that they are 'entitled' towards a western-style democracy. They are 'entitled' to speak for the poor conservative masses as if they represent their interests.

Do these people not understand the context behind it all? Look at all the factors - literacy rate, foreign influence, the poor masses looking for a easy way out/short term gain. That's what drives the greater public. All in all you have a terrible setup where democracy can't function at all. Long story short the people are not ready for democracy as it is normally interpreted.
 
RescueRanger said:

Party position in NA as of 9:30am​

Updated Feb 10, 09:30
According to the ECP, independent candidates lead in NA by securing 99 seats while PML-N has managed to secure 71 seats. The PPP has clinched 53 seats in the NA and MQM-P has bagged 17.

The PML-Q has won 3 seats till now, while the recently formed IPP has won 2 seats and the JUI-F has bagged the same number. MWM, BNP and PML-Z have each won a seat each in the NA.
Click to expand...
Utter nonsense
 
Baali Jutt said:
We already have an election - give him a simple majority and let him do his thing in Federal
he'll become another Zaradari within 4 years, he dies politically
that's it, game over
Simple!

You can get a 5th generation jet from China, you can support the Taliban for 20 years, you can make the nuke, you can start multi decades long infrastructure projects with China that US is fully against and has been since the beginning, you can do military drills, trade with Iran, you can get tech from North Korea, you can hide osama
Yet you couldnt let an idiotic populist rule for 1.5 more years or they can pick and choose seats in Pak
yes sounds farfetched to me

This was pak army's doing, specifically top 3-4 generals, now others have to follow through with it
US is just a cope that IK uses for political reasons and army allows it because alternative POV is even worse (Bajwa & Co growing tired of IK because of a corruption scheme dispute (Bajwa & co wanting a greater share and IK putting a stop to it) and general low IQ nature of Bajwa)
US just "allows" it to happen, they were never the main instigators- it came from GHQ itself
Click to expand...
Adding on to my point
US ke maathe pien Ch***ya likha hai kya ?
They didn't know our history, politics?
Didn't they know who makes foreign policy in Pak? - of course They know us more than we know ourselves
A civilian IK who was a Bajwa puppet repeating same page rhetoric everywhere (even if he was not but really they know historically military makes foreign policy not civilian, has been the case for 70 years)

Even IK himself said in his public speech - before visiting Russia he asked Bajwa if we should follow through or not
Bajwa said you should (maybe he was trapping his own PM, who knows, he was a filthy man)

Who would US be angry at- the military chief who made the policy as they have historically, chief who sanctioned the visit
or the PM who was not even in the driving seat of this policy decision?

ofcourse they'll lay blame at the military chief not the frickin civilian PM lmao
If they wanted Pakistan to do something, theyd call the chief directly, why would they blame a harmless civilian PM for anything?
The whole story is illogical, laughable and low IQ made for political campaign consumption not worth a serious discussion
 
Fatman17 said:
View attachment 17965
BD citizen
Click to expand...
Big difference
IK won from every province of Pakistan and can potentially form governments in 2 provinces and 2 territories, IK is loved by Pakistanis across ethnic, socio-economic, sect lines, a patriot through and through
Mujeeb won in Bengal only by stroking ethnic identity trying to rule over a diverse country 1000s mile away where he barely won a seat or 2 through sheer population advantage over another extremely popular opponent ZAB who had presence everywhere like IK barring Bengal
Different scenarios except for of course mandate issues (unfortunately like a chunk of our elections (and after election aka 1999 coup after PMLN 2/3rd majority, Benazirs assembly dissolution) over our 70 year history)
 
Last edited:
Baali Jutt said:
Big difference
IK won from every province of Pakistan and can potentially form governments in 2 provinces and 2 territories, IK is loved by Pakistanis across ethnic, socio-economic, sect lines, a patriot through and through
Mujeeb won in Bengal only by stroking ethnic identity trying to rule over a diverse country 1000s mile away where he barely won a seat or 2 through sheer population advantage over another extremely popular opponent ZAB who had presence everywhere like IK barring Bengal
Click to expand...

Yes you are right - IK and his vision is ideologically motivated to some degree. Mujeeb's political platform was essentially Bengali rights and autonomy....not really a concrete ideology.

True democratic practice needs ideologically motivated leaders and a voting public that has a sense of stake on the country's governance based on ideology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top