What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
46 Comments
- rpi22, on 12/30/2007, -1/+13Hmmm... Who has the most to gain from Bhutto's death?
- martalli, on 12/30/2007, -0/+11It wouldn't be the first time for Pakistan. They have a sad tradition of military rule and banana republic politics.
- CondoleezzaRice, on 12/30/2007, -1/+10How convenient. It's almost like it was planned.
- sandanista, on 12/30/2007, -2/+10These events seem to be working so very conveniently in Musharraf's favor, almost as if he'd planned it that way. I can imagine that if the violence continues for much longer in Pakistan full scale martial law will be imposed.
- martalli, on 12/30/2007, -0/+8Nepotism in politics is sad. Will Bhutto's spouse stand for anything, except that he was her husband, in as much as she stood for being her father's daughter? This is simply politics of power. We have practiced the same thing by elected GWB, who turned out to be half the mind of his father, and look where we are now.
- bradleyjx, on 12/30/2007, -0/+7I hate to say it, but I have to agree with postponing the elections for at least a couple weeks. What happened there would be similar to if the Democratic candidate for president was assassinated on October 25, 2008; there would be so much going on in that week that it seems that the extra time would be necessary, if not called for by at least one party.
...now take it to a country unstable like Pakistan. - JLecker, on 12/30/2007, -0/+7I am Jack's total lack of surprise.
- turpenine, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6his father was a ***** president to start with, so why would have he been any better? people just don't remember.
- Rubab, on 12/30/2007, -1/+7I don't think so as Bhutto spouse has announced to contest elections.. and appealed other opposition leaders to contest also. check here http://www.pak-times.com/2007/12/30/pppp-will-take ...
- basic0, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6Why would he have to do that? Is someone in your media or government opposing him and his administration?
- EntropyMan, on 12/31/2007, -0/+6Musharraf: "Given our undying respect for Madame Bhutto, we are postponing the elections until she feels well enough to run."
- 0ldmankdude, on 12/30/2007, -0/+61. your link is broken.
2. no. - elzilcho, on 12/30/2007, -2/+7Why don't you take us to school then?
- sandanista, on 12/30/2007, -0/+5Saying he is half the mind of his father does not imply that George H W Bush was intelligent.
- saadghauri, on 12/30/2007, -0/+4It wasnt planned, a guy with a gun just happened to be there and he just felt like shooting benazir. And another guy also happened to be wearing a bombjacket, and he thought this was as good as any time to blow up!
(yeah i know what you were trying to say :P) - MasterThief117, on 12/30/2007, -0/+4Yeah, just what was intended. They should continue the elections as scheduled. It will show that Pakistan is strong enough to stand up for itself.
Canceling the elections just feeds into the terrorists. - saadghauri, on 12/30/2007, -1/+5*facepalm*
Yes, because thats all we did before Musharraf came to power, right? - martalli, on 12/30/2007, -3/+7Our great friend, Gen. Musharraf, is certainly no democrat. God help the people of Pakistan, as Bush appears to have little stomach for influencing the democratic process in Pakistan. I don't even know if we should be bothering with the country there except that 1) We already spent $10 billion in aid there - almost entirely for the military (not the people). 2) They are an actual nuclear power on the brink of complete collapse. Pakistan's instability is only worsened by our anemic approach to the Taliban, which has largely pushed the Taliban into Pakistan.
However, instead of concern for the Taliban, who harbored the 9/11 terrorists, we have been bogged down in Iraq and threatening Iran, instead of trying to quell the Taliban and stabilize Pakistan. - gigabyte3d, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Apparently not, Bhutto's party PPP have changed their stance and they want elections on 8th January 08 along with PML-N and PML-Q
- fadeout, on 12/30/2007, -0/+3He'll stand for skimming 10% from government contracts again, I'm sure... he is a total cliche of a "liberal" reformist candidate in it for the money.
- sandanista, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Emergency rule was lifted on the 15 December so the country could go ahead with 'free and fair elections'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22268963/ - anarchistuk, on 08/11/2009, -0/+2Pakistan likely to delay elections....indefinitely.
- guy6600crazy, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2I dont have any right to enforce it on them, but the army has! They always take down democracy when it comes into existence! When Nawaz sheriff tried for peace talks on Kashmir, it resulted in Kargil intrusion. When Mush tried for peace talks on Kashmir, nothing went wrong. Why is it so? Think about it! The army is supreme there and if it is not tamed, it will always keep on toppling governments.
- SiNN4R, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Am I the only one not suprised by this?
- martalli, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Maybe the elections will be free insofar as any real competition will be dead or scared off.
- ThomasPaine23, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2"He needs to stay in power. " And you have the right to enforce this on them?? Let pakistan determine their own fate.
- guy6600crazy, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1She may be a corrupt politician, But she was indeed brave enough to face the terrorists. She went to rally even after frequent death threats, without proper security. That was dumb, but brave.
P.S: I am not from her nation. Nor am i her supporter. - guy6600crazy, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1Yup even though Musharaff is responsible for the failed security of Benazir, He needs to stay in power. Only he can be a strong ruler as he has control over the army. Democracy is good but i am sad to say that the politicians have no control over the military.
- saadghauri, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1thats because the army keeps taking over the country
- branjb, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1puff puff pass
- Myonosken, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2It was about a month ago. Did you forget?
- guy6600crazy, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1link broken. No digg.
"Oops, what you're looking for isn't here!
The page you requested is not here but there are a few things you can try:
Try searching for the story you're looking for using the form above.
* Go to the homepage to see the most recent stories.
Pretty sure it's a website bug? Please let us know and we'll try to get it fixed." - inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Don't be giving them ideas!
- martalli, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Ugh, Pakistan is not necessarily "in the 9th century". I suspect that some readers here probably think Pakistan is in the Middle East, too.
- skews13, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1wait a ***** minute. didn't i just hear bush say the other day he wants musharaff to go ahead with the elections as scheduled,and didn't musharaff say that they were going to?what,bush hasn't sent his latest hush money check?
- npsken, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1Actually the link isn't broke, Digg's parcing messed up the url:
http://www.digg.com/world_news/DIGG_THIS_PLEASE
But really, you should all go bury that story... - AlbinoRaven, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1In Canada the media are reporting that the elections are not taking place until they have someone to run for them. Currently Pakistan does not have anyone running according to CBC.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/12/31/pakistan. ... - saadghauri, on 12/30/2007, -2/+2Sorry to rain on your parade, Benazir was easily the most corrupt prime minister Pakistan has ever had.
- bjornski, on 12/31/2007, -1/+1He himself wouldn't have much to do with it, but the people that put him in power very well might.
Let's see. Which upcoming candidate would they pick? - mesarah, on 01/14/2008, -0/+0very sad
- bjornski, on 12/31/2007, -2/+2Ron Paul!
- guy6600crazy, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Musharaff & the Al-Queida. Now that Benazir is no more and Nawaz sheriff is disqualified from elections, some candidate from Mush's side can win the elections. Benazir was hard on the Terrorists and fundamentalists. So now that she is no more, the terrorists have also gained.
- ronpaul20008, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Who cares, we're already in Iraq, and it's too inefficient to coordinate the move of soldiers, especially when everybody has a different idea of what to do, so let's just keep destroying the Iraqis. After all, the ones trying to stay alive shooting at our military in defense are "terrorists".. actual terrorists... we need to kill them all, after all it's a war on terror, you know? "WE MARCHED RIGHT IN, WE CAN MARCH RIGHT OUT ..... BRING THEM HOME"
- bjornski, on 12/31/2007, -2/+1Being dugg down already?
Are the negative votes because I'm wrong? So Ron Paul DOES support Bush and his administrations policies? - fadeout, on 12/30/2007, -8/+2Another thread full of conspiracy theorists that know absolutely nothing about Pakistani government and history.
- Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -18/+11bush will probably do that here in the U.S. too, after creating another false flag attack.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is