"The results were interpreted here as a repudiation of Mr. Musharraf as well as the Bush administration, which has staunchly backed Mr. Musharraf for more than six years as its best bet in the campaign against the Islamic militants in Pakistan. American officials will have little choice now but to seek alternative allies from among the new political forces emerging from the vote.

Politicians and party workers from Mr. Musharraf's party said the vote was a protest against government policies and the rise in terrorism here, in particular against Mr. Musharraf's heavy-handed way of dealing with militancy and his use of the army against tribesmen in the border areas, and against militants in a siege at the Red Mosque here in the capital last summer that left more than 100 people dead.

Others said Mr. Musharraf's dismissal last year of the Supreme Court chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, who remains under house arrest, was deeply unpopular with the voters.

Mr. Musharraf, who stepped down as army chief last November after being re-elected to another five-year term as president, has seen his standing plummet as the country has faced a determined insurgency by the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and a deteriorating economy.

By association, his party suffered badly. The two main opposition parties -- the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Pakistan Muslim League-N of Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister -- surged into the gap.

(more ...)

By early Monday night, crowds of Sharif supporters had already begun celebrating as they paraded through the streets of Rawalpindi, the garrison town just outside the capital, Islamabad. Riding on motorbikes and clinging to the backs of minivans, they played music and waved the green flags of Mr. Sharif's party decorated with the party symbol, a tiger.

From unofficial results the private news channel, Aaj Television, forecast that the Pakistan Peoples Party would win 110 seats in the 272-seat National Assembly, with Mr. Sharif's party taking 100 seats.

Mr. Musharraf's party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Q, was crushed, holding on to just 20 to 30 seats. Early results released by the state news agency, The Associated Press of Pakistan, also showed the Pakistan Peoples Party to be leading in the number of seats won.

The Election Commission of Pakistan declared the elections free and fair and said the polling passed relatively peacefully, despite some irregularities and scattered violence. Ten people were killed and 70 injured around the country, including one candidate who was shot in Lahore on the night before the vote, Pakistani news channels reported.

Fearful of violence and deterred by confusion at polling stations, voters did not turn out in large numbers. Yet fears from opposition parties that the government would try to rig the elections did not materialize, as the early losses showed.

Official results were not expected until Tuesday morning, but all the parties were already coming to terms with the anti-Musharraf trend in the voting.

(more ...)

At the headquarters of Sheik Rashid Ahmed, the minister of railways and a close friend of the president, his supporters sat gloomily in chairs under an awning, listening to the cheers of their opponents. "Q is finished," said Tahir Khan, 21, one of the party workers, referring to the pro-Musharraf party.

The party workers said Mr. Ahmed, who was among the ministers who lost their seats, was popular but had suffered from the overwhelming protest vote against Mr. Musharraf and his governing faction.

The results opened a host of new challenges for the Bush administration, which has been criticized in Congress and by Pakistan analysts for relying too heavily on Mr. Musharraf. Even as Mr. Musharraf's standing plummeted and the insurgency gained strength, senior Bush administration officials praised Mr. Musharraf as a valued partner in the effort against terrorism.

With Mr. Musharraf as both president and head of the Pakistani military -- a post he relinquished last November -- the administration poured about $1 billion a year in military assistance into Pakistan after 9/11.

After Mr. Musharraf stepped down from the army, the Bush administration still gave him unequivocal support. Last month, the assistant secretary of state for South Asia, Richard A. Boucher, told Congress he considered the Pakistani leader indispensable to American interests.

Such fidelity to Mr. Musharraf often raised the hackles of Pakistanis, and the newspapers here were filled with editorials that expressed despair about Washington's close relationship with the unpopular leader.

Many educated Pakistanis said they were irritated that the Bush administration chose to ignore Mr. Musharraf's dismissal in November of the Supreme Court chief justice.

The big swing against the Pakistan Muslim League-Q party that supported Mr. Musharraf appeared to bear out the position of the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, who has been a critic of the administration's Pakistan policy.

On his arrival on Sunday to observe the elections, Mr. Biden said: "I don't buy into the argument that Musharraf is the only one. We have to have more than just a Musharraf policy."

As a starting point for a new policy, Mr. Biden said the United States needed to show Pakistanis that Washington was interested in more than the campaign against terrorism. He suggested that economic development aid be tripled to $1.5 billion annually.

But Washington could take some comfort in the losses of the Islamic religious parties in the North-West Frontier Province that abut the tribal areas where the Taliban and Al Qaeda have carved out bases.

Wasn't it Nawaz Sharif who embraced the Taliban when they were being puppets to Bin Laden's Al Qaida?

Then again, wasn't it on Pervez Musharraf's watch that Bin Laden and Al Qaida colonized the Waziristani provinces of Pakistan???

Lose or Lose. There is no winner when it comes to backing a horse in the PK elections. We just ought to send our dollars who whoever wins and just ask for a fair chance to let our voice be heard in the public square and across the air waves. Just competing with AQ and terrorists for equal time?

Mushareef has promised to expend his political capital to create his legacy.

So Biden wants to throw more money at the problem?

Didn't the US encourage Bhutto to go back to PK?

And yes it should have been denounced when Perez arrested that judge--that's not very rule of law--democratic you know..

Only the NYT would say the vote was against Bush--LOL

Perez made his lousy bed with his policies against people--there have been changes--but not enough --and he went overboard with the arrests.

So Condi has to go grovle and make new friends--Perez isn't a very nice guy.

Murphy

OK-when do the public beheadings start?
I have a few people I think should be on that list............

Others said Mr. Musharraf's dismissal last year of the Supreme Court chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, who remains under house arrest, was deeply unpopular with the voters.

Hell, it even pissed off Spud waaaay over on the other side of the world.

Good news T&C ...in a way.

Despite allowing Bhutto to be killed (if he didn't actually have a hand in it himself), despite threats to the electorate to not vote keeping turnout down, despite over a thousand people dying on the way to this election, it got done and w/o the massive voter fraud everybody was so afraid of.

There is no doubt that anti-Bush sentiment was a part of this sea change. BushCo's actions in the ME especially in Iraq and Afghanistan have angered many folks and stirred up resentment against the west despite the massive AID bribes ...er "payments". Mushy's recent dog and pony shows for the west may have placated some but fewer than in the past. He's gone by his "best before" date. Logic dictates that this dictator has been too much of a dick to be allowed the type of control he's had in the past.

On his arrival on Sunday to observe the elections, Mr. Biden said: "I don't buy into the argument that Musharraf is the only one. We have to have more than just a Musharraf policy."

Biden is correct here. Bush has had a Mushareff policy not a Pakistan policy and now it appears he's backed the wrong horse and the US has some real diplo work to do. Don't send Condi they are still pissed cos she's the one who convinced Benazir to return to Pakistan in the first place.

Spud would really like to see an Obama/Biden ticket in November, btw.

Only the NYT would say the vote was against Bush--LOL

The newspaper that just hired Bill Kristol to be a columnist? It aint the bastion of liberal thought you think it is, Murph, first and foremost it is a pro-corporate entity. Has been for decades. Some of the best liberal writers in the country have written for it and continue to do so but that is hardly the whole story.

All right wing rhetoric to the contrary.

Wonder if Mushy is gonna try to have Sharif killed too?

"I shot the Sharif but I did not shoot the Deputy"

Sorry, that was dumb, Spud just likes singing reggae tunes very badly.

Any excuse will do ya know.

Be Well.

Now that the leadership of Al Qaeda has moved to Pakistan, and Musharraf has been de-sacked by his own country, I guess terrorism can grow unhindered in the area once again. Thanks for finishing the job George.

But then George has never been in control and BushCo never intended to finish anything. Never-ending war has always been the goal. There's little profit for BushCo otherwise. Al Qaeda will live to fight on because the military-industrial machine can only flourish if there's a villain to fear.

Spud would really like to see an Obama/Biden ticket in November, btw.

I also believe that would be a good ticket.

Spud and SpudSuckers should punch their tickets out of here.

Biden is an idiot for wanting to throw more money at Pakistan.. We should try minding our own business for a change. That money is just a complete waste..

The main reason, we believe, Mushi's favorite party lost, is because they acted tough on the GEO tv people.... tried to shut them down.

GEO has the most watched programming in Pakistan, specially it's 24 hour news channel, "GEO News".

Mushi stepped on them... they stepped back and screw him up.

They are THAT good.

Google for it...

Biden is an idiot for wanting to throw more money at Pakistan.. That money is just a complete waste..


Is it???

Without all these payments, you will have to leave Afghanistan. WHO do you think is keeping you alive?

Read this:

When it comes to America's relationship with Pakistan, remember one
thing: it's all about the fuel.

Many presidential candidates are insisting that the U.S. get tough
with Pakistan. But the reality is that we have almost no leverage.

Why?

The answer can be seen by looking at the American military's fuel logistics nightmare in Afghanistan. Without the cooperation of Musharraf's government, the 24,000 U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan would likely run out of fuel within a matter of days.

The U.S. military is now burning about 575,000 gallons of fuel per day in Afghanistan. And about 80 percent of that comes from refineries in Pakistan.

Without the support of the Pakistani military, U.S. forces in Afghanistan would have only one fuel supply, coming via a precarious logistics line that extends more than 1,000 miles all the way from refineries in Baku (Azerbaijan) and Turkmenbashi (Turkmenistan) to northern Afghanistan.

The fuel from the refinery in Baku is loaded onto rail cars and put on rail barges that then traverse the Caspian Sea. Once in Turkmenistan, the rail cars follow a circuitous route through Uzbekistan before they arrive at the Afghan border, where the fuel is then transferred to trucks.

The long supply lines to the Caspian Sea underscore the importance of the Pakistani fuel. By mid-2006, total fuel storage capacity for forces operating out of the Kabul and Bagram air bases was less than 3 million gallons. Although a contractor for the U.S. military is now building an additional 3 million gallons of storage capacity at Bagram Air Base, if the flow of fuel from Pakistan is completely cut off, American forces could be running on fumes within a fortnight.

Greg Wilcox, a retired Army officer who has written extensively on military tactics and operations, says that should the fuel from Pakistan be cut off, the U.S. would have to try flying fuel into its bases in Afghanistan which he believes would be "mission impossible."

Wilcox told us that when it comes to Pakistan, "We don't have any choice. We got kicked out of Uzbekistan so we don't have any bases there. We can't survive in that region without Musharraf. We are tied to him whether we like it or not."

"I shot the Sharif but I did not shoot the Deputy"



Potato... that was the funniest thing I've read here in a long time. LOL

Toss,

Bottom line this one for those of us who are not as intimately aware of Pakistani politics.

In your opinion:

1. Does this outcome help or hurt the US? Why should I care about the outcome?

2. Does this outcome hurt Pakistan or help it? Why?

3. Does this make it easier for the US to hunt terrorists in Pakistan?

4. Did you vote in this election? If so did you or would you have voted similarly to how this turned out? Why?

Thanks in advance bro, I am eager to hear the thoughts of an actual Pakistani, not some bloody journalist.

Cheers,
Walt

Does this outcome help or hurt the US?


Too early to tell yet.


Why should I care about the outcome?

Because the largest group of muslims in US/Canada are not Arabs. They are from PK. About 3, 4 million (not counting the people they influence over there, like americans they have married or their friends, etc.). You should care, because PK-Americans always vote Republican. You should care because everyone knows or has heard of someone from someones family (or their own) who works in the US.

You should also care because of what I posted above about the fuel supply.


Does this outcome hurt Pakistan or help it? Why?

Probably will hurt PK.

The two biggest winners will have to share power if they want to stand up to Mushi.

However, not so long ago, when the Bhutto's were in power, they helped Nawaz Sharif's daddy get free heart-operation and had lousy made-in-Taiwan pacemaker installed for his dicky heart. He soon popped off. Plus other humiliations.

Nawaz Sharif then came to power and sent Zardari (Bhutto's hubby) to rot in jail where he got to eat food my dog won't eat.

How long are these two going to play nice?

And when the fight breaks out, great fun will be had by all.


Does this make it easier for the US to hunt terrorists in Pakistan?


If Sharif and Zardari start fighting, then nobody will do anything for the US. Everyone will be involved in the fight of the century, taliban be damned.



Did you vote in this election? If so did you or would you have voted similarly to how this turned out? Why?


No, I didn't vote because I am not in Karachi right now. That is where I am registered to vote from. Can't do it from any other area.

No I would not have voted for these monkeys.

Why? Because Sharif was Prime Minister twice (which is why he can't be PM again) and so was Bhutto. I remember both their Govts. as being pretty useless.

They just kept outsmarting each other all through the 90s. Which is why the 90s is known in PK as "the lost decade" in which we nearly went broke.

It is not an accident that the Taliban came to be on their watch. They were too busy fighting each other to do anything for the US or for PK. They are spoiled children.

How soon until Mushie declares the elections invalid and imposes marshall law to stay in power?

But then, nobody is as useless as the islamic parties. They can't run anything.

At least, they are gone. Nobody wants them around.

So, perhaps the US will find it easier to screw up the Taliban. Their political supporters in PK are out of office.

How soon until Mushie declares the elections invalid and imposes marshall law to stay in power?


Too late for that.

They just kept outsmarting each other all through the 90s. Which is why the 90s is known in PK as "the lost decade" in which we nearly went broke.

It is not an accident that the Taliban came to be on their watch. They were too busy fighting each other to do anything for the US or for PK. They are spoiled children.



Btw, this was also when Pakistan sold nuke tech to the Norks.

When the Bhuttos (Zardari now) and Sharifs start trying to outwit each other then "when the cat is away, the mice will play"... and the Norks get nuke tech. LOL

"Spud would really like to see an Obama/Biden ticket in November, btw."

Spud just doesn't get it! We don't give a shit what Spud would like! Spud needs to be telling his CANADIAN voters what Spud would like. maybe THEY will give a shit what Spud would like.

Oh and before I forget, Sharif also targeted Benzair Bhutto with naked pics of her (photoshoped but very convincingly).

Bet her husband hasn't forgotten....

THESE two are gonna be allies???

Toss,

That is very interesting. Thank you for that perspective.

Ypur post about the fuel supply was terrific as well.

I didn't mean to come off as sounding like I don't care, was just curious ya know.

Why is it that PKs vote Republican?

I think what you said about the Islamic parties is pretty informative. Was that portion covered in the MSM?

How secure are those nukes, really?

-Walt

Oh and before I forget, Sharif also targeted Benzair Bhutto with naked pics of her (photoshoped but very convincingly).

I thought the Indians were the only ones that ran around photoshopping everyone.

Why is it that PKs vote Republican?

Lots of reasons...

Like historical reasons. I think it started with Eisenhower.

And then we were the go-betweens for Nixon/China friendship. Without us, you might not have had diplomatic relations with China, even today.

Whenever you have a Republican administration, we have found the US friendly.

Whenever you have Democrats, we have found the US either apathetic or even hostile.

Indian-Americans vote mostly Democrat (opposite of PK-Americans).

Clinton was very much hostile. Dubya is a friend. Helped in earthquake. etc.

Just always seems to work out that way. Republicans are the good guys.

PK-Brits almost always vote for their Labor party, btw. Toady Blair destroyed that relationship. But the relationship between PK-Americans and the Republicans still holds, I think.

And no, we don't like this Obama clown. We don't care if his middle name is "Hussain".


I think what you said about the Islamic parties is pretty informative. Was that portion covered in the MSM?


It was on the BBC. They predicted this would happen a few days ago.

It was easy to predict as the Islamic alliance broke up and some of them boycotted the election anyway.


How secure are those nukes, really?


Very. For example, sure as heck more secure than Russia's nukes.


I thought the Indians were the only ones that ran around photoshopping everyone.


LOL. I had no idea.

Toss,

Thanks for your insight bro.

Your candor and honesty is a welcome change.

Cheers,

For real.

-Walt