Nawaz sharif may give Pak/ind relations a boost

[miafridi]

you are not getting what am trying to say.....or we may have to agree to disagree...........when you mention say India as a stake holder, it goes without saying that the govt. has taken inputs from the army and it is on board.......the nation as a whole is a stake holder, army cannot and should be mentioned as a separate stake holder......

Yes, right when talking about the major stake holders. Then there are only 3, India, Pakistan and Kashmiris. But seeing the past history i don't think indian and Pakistan politician will be making decision without the consent of their army's. For the rest of the world this theory of decision making only through political parties will hold true.

 

[desicad]

Yes, right when talking about the major stake holders. Then there are only 3, India, Pakistan and Kashmiris. But seeing the past history i don't think indian and Pakistan politician will be making decision without the consent of their army's. For the rest of the world this theory of decision making only through political parties will hold true.

not only India, Pakistan, but govt. of any country will take its defence forces on board when matters of such national interests involving boundaries are involved, it will be foolish to even think that the army will not be consulted.......again there is a word in your post which I don't agree with.....govt. will need input not consent........and all this I am talking with reference to India and am aware that the dynamics is different there.......and that is reason for you also mentioning again and again army as a stake holder whereas I will never say that............

 

[miafridi]

not only India, Pakistan, but govt. of any country will take its defence forces on board when matters of such national interests involving boundaries are involved, it will be foolish to even think that the army will not be consulted.......again there is a word in your post which I don't agree with.....govt. will need input not consent........and all this I am talking with reference to India and am aware that the dynamics is different there.......and that is reason for you also mentioning again and again army as a stake holder whereas I will never say that............

You live in Pakistan so you should talk in Pakistani perspective no in indian and thats what is did. A stake holder is any party that has interests in a deal. Now keeping this in view the army is the most that suffers through wrong territorial decisions. Wrong territorial decisions erupt wars ans thus create difficulty for the army. The army doesn't want to remain in war throughout their lives. They always want to get some peace. So they are the stake holder not just robots to accept every decision good or bad from the government. Although they would but some of them wouldn't and it raises the situations like army takeover as well. Now you may be right about India that their army has no stakes in governments decisions because their army is not yet annoyed with their governments decision and they are not as involved in wars as Pakistan army. Pakistan army has always been in war since 1947 and probably that is also the reason that army has always tried its influence on the government to decrease their burden which never has happened but the process will keep on continue just because of the civilian government not giving them relief with their bad decisions not involving the army.

 

[desicad]

You live in Pakistan so you should talk in Pakistani perspective no in indian and thats what is did. A stake holder is any party that has interests in a deal. Now keeping this in view the army is the most that suffers through wrong territorial decisions. Wrong territorial decisions erupt wars ans thus create difficulty for the army. The army doesn't want to remain in war throughout their lives. They always want to get some peace. So they are the stake holder not just robots to accept every decision good or bad from the government. Although they would but some of them wouldn't and it raises the situations like army takeover as well. Now you may be right about India that their army has no stakes in governments decisions because their army is not yet annoyed with their governments decision and they are not as involved in wars as Pakistan army. Pakistan army has always been in war since 1947 and probably that is also the reason that army has always tried its influence on the government to decrease their burden which never has happened but the process will keep on continue just because of the civilian government not giving them relief with their bad decisions not involving the army.

can you give examples of bad decisions of civilian govt. which has adversely affected the pakistani army?...............

 

[miafridi]

can you give examples of bad decisions of civilian govt. which has adversely affected the pakistani army?...............

Good decisions doesn't keep a countries army at war at all times. Good government rely more on themselves than the army. But Pakistani government has always needed the army to solve its problems ranging from floods, elections, disasters and wars. Not many countries who have good governments or capable governments need army because they are capable of dealing with such events all by themselves or with very very little help from the army. Army has been annoyed with all this now. They need relief. They can't afford the weak governments anymore.
Now i ask you why everyone in Pakistan is so interested in politics? even my younger brother aged 17 and a cousin aged only 15? what have made their interest in the politics? The answer is they are now annoyed with the government for not being able to give them a happy and easy life. They will raise their voice against the wrong doings of the government and will make protests on the roads against the loadshedding(which is due to bad decisions of government). If they(my brother and cousin being aged 17 and 15) can get annoy with the government then why can't the army? The army also want to get out of this mess and make Pakistan a stronger country so that they can take some rest. They want Pakistan out of the problems that Pakistan is in and so they want to play a role to influence their decisions which will make the government less reliant on the army and will reduce the war like situations.

Conclusion: They are annoyed so they have decided to be part of it.