http://paloaltoonline.com/square/print/2007/11/08/bush-lectures-musharraf


Town Square

Bush lectures Musharraf

Original post made by Chitzpah in DC, Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 8, 2007

From a BBC news story:

Web Link

"Mr Bush said he told Gen Musharraf it was not right to continue as both president and head of the military."


Either Bush is completely clueless or he has his nerve. Isn;t Bush in the same position? Maybe he should resign also.
I guess it is a continuation of the Republican "do as I say, not as I do" way of life .

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Nov 8, 2007 at 9:50 am


Actually, you, as opposed to the President, could use some clues. President Bush, just like his 42 predecessors, and in accordance with our Constitution, is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. BUT...unlike the situation in Pakistan, the President is a civilian. In our democracy, civilians head the military and our government. In Pakistan, under Musharaff, the military heads both. A military official, as opposed to a civilian official, is not subject to elections. Uniformed military also have more strict standards of personal and professional conduct (which clearly didn't apply to our previous President.)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Chutzpah in DC
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 8, 2007 at 10:02 am

Steve--what goes on in Pakistan is not the point. the point was that Bush was telling Musharraf that he could not continue as both, while doing it here in the US.
Pakistan is an independent country and Bush should not be lecturing others on what to do.

"Uniformed military also have more strict standards of personal and professional conduct (which clearly didn't apply to our previous President.)"--what does this have to do with the subject we are discussing or do you never miss an opportunity to put down Clinton?. Shall we then discuss the malfeasances of Nixon, Reagen and Bush while in office, as well?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of another community
on Nov 8, 2007 at 10:06 am

Musharraf is so much more cunning than Bush. As I heard it explained on a News program, Pakistan has received over $10 Billion in aid and the U.S. keeps sending him the Big Bucks. Musharraf has no incentive to catch Osama Bin Laden because if he's captured the U.S. may stop sending him the money. So, it is in Pakistan's best interests to keep Bin Laden free and in their country.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Chutzpah in DC
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 8, 2007 at 10:10 am

I also thought that Bush has no interest in catching Bin Laden--obviously he promised right after 9/11 to get him, but 6 years have gone by and his name is hardly mentioned at all by Bush and the White House.
Anyway, if we should capture Bin Laden then we might win the "war on terror" and then what will the Republicans do? They learned a valuable lesson after Russia fell and plan never to let that happen again


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 8, 2007 at 2:38 pm

It is vital that oder be maintained in Pakistan. I would prefer that we not cut ruling authority.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of another community
on Nov 8, 2007 at 3:44 pm

It would never surprise me to wake up one morning and find the British have captured Bin Laden. They are moving troops out of Iraq and redeploying them to the border regions of Afganistan. After the bombings on the London Underground and buses, they have every incentive to capture him.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by anti-bush
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 8, 2007 at 6:14 pm

George should change his first name to CLUELESS...and that still doesn't capture the ignorance and arrogance of this ego-centric power-crazed dork...and the divided US continues to go nowhere but down.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by GMC
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 8, 2007 at 6:24 pm

"I guess it is a continuation of the Republican "do as I say, not as I do" way of life ."

You mean, like Al Gore?