Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Imran Khan hopeful of change US anti-terror policy
Share:
by hussain | November 5, 2008 at 08:07 am
238 views | 44 Recommendations | 23 comments
Firebrand Pakistani politician Imran Khan, who has been opposing the US war on terror since its beginning, has expressed the hope that the US president-elect would change the policy of war against terrorism for good. Imran Khan, a cricket star-turned-politician who boycotted the February 18 general elections in Pakistan in protest against sacking of senior judges by former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, said the US vice president-elect Joe Biden has a better understanding of the region.
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf (PTI), Chief, Imran Khan hoped that Barack Obama’s win in U.S. presidential election would bring positive change regarding policy of war against terrorism.
He was speaking at a seminar in Mohammad Ali University here on Wednesday.
Khan said that US vice president Joe Biden has a better understanding of this region and hoped bother leaders would resolve the terrorism issue through dialogue instead of use of power.
He lashed out at government for inducting 55 ministers in federal cabinet under present circumstances of unemployment, poverty, social injustice and economic turmoil. He termed the induction as irrational.
PTI chief urged the students to take the ongoing crises as an opportunity for brining change in system
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (23)
at 08:31 on November 5th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 21:46 on November 5th, 2008
Many thanks for flag.
at 09:02 on November 5th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 21:47 on November 5th, 2008
Many thanks for flag.
at 09:41 on November 5th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 21:50 on November 5th, 2008
Thanks for flag.
at 11:31 on November 5th, 2008
Solve terrorism by talking to terrorists? Is this guy on crack? There is no middle ground on the issue of terrorism. What's to talk about? Do we allow "limited acts of terrorism"? How about allowing the blowing up of Western buildings less than 20 storeys tall? Or maybe a "suicide bombings permitted" zone? Perhaps a cap and trade system would work. terrorists could trade Terror Points between themselves to ensure that terrorism is efficiently dispensed. I would like to hear what this "politician" suggests the "talk-solution" would look like.
at 12:01 on November 5th, 2008
eastvanray, talking to terrorists isn't the entire plan. There is more and terrorism will be defeated.
at 12:08 on November 5th, 2008
OK. Please enlighten me. What, exactly, is the plan then?
at 12:14 on November 5th, 2008
On a public forum? Hah!
at 12:31 on November 5th, 2008
So the truth is that you HOPE there is more to the plan NOT that there IS more to the plan. Faith is fine for religion but it is dangerous in politics.
at 21:51 on November 5th, 2008
Faith is always a faith, no matter it is religion, politics or anything else.
at 12:50 on November 5th, 2008
Dear Eastvanray, by the what is definition of terrorism? This guy (Imran Khan) is not a crack but a person widely respected at many places in the world and I think you may know much about him. If not, you can find it here: http://www.maverickpakistanis.com/politics/imran_khan.htm
You may know that there are causes of the ongoing bloodshed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq and addressing those causes may lead to peace and tranquillity. Have you read that 36 innocent civilians, including women and children, were killed when US planes bombed a wedding party in Afghanistan? Is this not a terrorism?
As for your curiosity to know about the plan, there may be many options but killing more peoplee in the name of so-called war on terror is no solution and is adding fuel to the fire. The way this futile war is being fought will lead to an unending bloodshed and nothing else.
at 12:58 on November 5th, 2008
When was the last time a religious war was won by talking? No war is ever won until either one side is decimated or they decide that they have suffered enough death and distruction and surrender to their opponents. Do you think Al Qaeda or the Taliban will be surrendering anytime soon?
at 02:08 on November 6th, 2008
If wars are not won by talking, they could not be won either without talking. As for surrender by Al Qaeda and Taliban, I am afraid it would be the invading troops boarding planes and flying away just like the Russians whom I had seen sitting on tanks marching to their disintegrated homeland. I'm not how soon it would happen because everything takes its time to happen and a war is the most unpredictable thing in this respect. However, if one goes by the pre-election Republican rhetoric against Obama, it may happen sooner than expected.
at 08:24 on November 6th, 2008
Finally a guy from North of the border who doesn't have his ears clogged with Marxist bleeding heart wax. Thanks
at 21:59 on November 5th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 22:02 on November 5th, 2008
Sanjay, thank you very much for flag.
at 04:25 on November 6th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 05:12 on November 6th, 2008
Many thanks for flag.
at 08:23 on November 6th, 2008
hussain, I like this story. It's good stuff. Yeah now we have a president sympathetic to terror groups like Hamas. I am sure all the radical muslims are passing out candy in the streets.
at 08:38 on November 6th, 2008
panzerlawyer, thanks for flag and comment. Don't worry, the US president-elect would be sympathetic to what you called terror groups or not but his election would hopefully bring positive changes for Americans.
at 08:37 on November 6th, 2008
I'm not drinking this kool-aid.