Majority in US Gov okay INDO-US Nuke Deal

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by akiboy, Jun 28, 2006.

  1. akiboy
    Offline

    akiboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Ratings:
    +39
    It was a surprise for the Indian govt. that the majority of the people in the U.S govt. okays the nuclear deal and atleast the first hurdle has been crossed. A few amendments have been made though by the review team. Now comes the major step:- i.e the voting by the Senate all 435 members shall vote on the deal and India hopes it comes in their favour. One disturbing thing about the deal is that the U.S wants India to stop testing missiles ( like they did in 1998 ) and wants it to stop pursuing enrichment activities. Now , India IS A RESPONSIBLE NUCLEAR POWER. WE HAVE NEVER USED WMD'S AGAINST ANY NATION NOR DO WE SELL NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO THE SO CALLED ' ROGUES STATES '. But India needs a nuclear deterrent. India is currently researching the Surya ( Fire ) ICBM having a range of 12,000 km ( which makes it equal to the Chinese DF-21 ) . If the U.S wants India to stop researching on nuclear weapons etc. how can India protect its sovereignty. We need nuclear weapons. There is war going on un Kashmir with terrorists funded and supplied by various jihadist orgs. We have a disputed border with China ( The Mc Mohan Line ) We still havent forgotten how China invaded us in 1962!! While India is competing with China to become the Asian superpower how can we give up our nukes ?? I know this topic doesnt come under U.S affairs but well ...... I do need an opinion on this as I still dont understand what problem does U.S have with India testing missiles !!!

    AksHAY
     
  2. theHawk
    Online

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,898
    Thanks Received:
    2,072
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,786
    I wouldn't have a problem with India testing nukes, just as long as they test'em along that Pakistan/Afgan border :D
     
  3. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    I'm surprised too. Especially since it looks like we are blatantly favoring the Indian government in direct violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
    That's the House of Representatives. The Senate only has 100 members; the House has 435.
    That or we want international moniters in all Indian nuclear facilities, but Singh (sp?) said flat out no. That's what is disturbing. Why won't India allow international inspectors at all its nucler facilities. A, "responsible nuclear power," shouldn't have a problem with international oversight of its nuclear program.
    But India never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). I believe India never agreed to a test ban either, and if they did, they obviously broke it back in the 90s. No one knows how well the India nuclear program is maintained. How safe is it? What are the precautions?
    India already has nuclear weapons, and with that missle, India can easily hit any threat (ie China). India already has nuclear weapons and has a detterent. Even a few missles capable of striking Beijing, Shanghai, or Hong Kong is a serious threat to China. India doesn't need to pursue a nuclear program to protect it from (imagined) threats. China isn't capable of launching a massive attack on India, and they won't go nuclear either. If China even acts aggressive towards India, then all the wealth foriegners have invested in China disappears. Besides, invading and occupying a country with 1.1 billion people is an impossible task, even for a country with 1.3 billion. They don't have the army for it. China couldn't invade India even if she wanted to. It's an imagined threat. Instead of investing in a more nuclear weapons which you don't need anymore, why not use the money on India's collapsing infastructure? Or how about India's massive poverty? South Korea (pop. 60 million) is 12 times smaller than India, but their economy is nearly twice as large and is growing faster than India's, and the South Koreans have an actual threat on their border. If India really wants shine, then you need to stop investing in nuclear weapons you don't need. Instead, India has to deal with more pressing concerns like its infastructure, or its hundred million + citizens in abject poverty.
    Is India going to use nukes on Kashmir or Pakistan? No. Did acquiring nukes end the conflict? No. Kashmir is not a good reason for India to keep developing more nuclear weapons.
    Didn't you guys reach an agreement on that?
    Exactly, IN 1962 under Mao. This is a whole other world now. China isn't going to commit economic suicide over some desolate track of mountains. China isn' a threat to India. Your current nuclear stockpile is more than enought to deter China. Just keep up a respectable army, and if China goes crazy (which it won't), the US and the international community will have your back.
    Dammit, how many times do I have to tell Indians this. India is on a subcontinent. It is not part of Asia.
    On you actual point though, India already has nukes; that's all the detterent you need. The fact that we are even thinking about considering giving you peaceful nuclear power generation technology, in defiance of the NPT and our own laws, shows that we really, really like you guys. From now on, you can count of the US to be your biggest supporter. The US and India are among the four most important nations on this Earth, and of those four, the two of us are together the stongest. India will find no better ally than the United States of America, but India is being unreasonable when they defy international nuclear law, and then expect us to help them and defy the law ourselves.
    Because India isn't part of the NPT. India isn't willing to allow international oversight of its nuclear program. Indai is pursueing a dangerous and pointless, suicidal mini-Cold War with its nuclear program. Any US effort to assist India accomplish any of these goals is in violation of the NPT and our own laws. Unless India signs the NPT, like every responsible nuclear power should, and agrees to international oversight of its nuclear program, the US would be violating its own principles by helping your country, even though we want to. If India wants our help, it has to get its nuclear house in order.
     
  4. akiboy
    Offline

    akiboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Ratings:
    +39
    Dear MR cONLEY ,
    Thank you very much on your views on each and every line of my thread. Firstly let me remind you that the Indian defence budget has drastically decreased and the surplus amount has been added to the PAP'S ( Poverty Alleviation Program ). One more thing we do not have missiles which can hit Beijing or Hong Kong or Shanghai. We have the Agni2 with a range of 2500 km which can strike the Chengdu military command of the Chinese . India wholeheartedly supports U.S efforts to stop the spread the use of WMD'S but if you see statistics India has less than a 100 nukes whereas China has 500-800 of them. India was to test its Agni 3 missile in December 2005 but due to the Indo-US nuke deal we put that on hold. India is ready to sign the NPT provided we are ensured of our right to use nuclear weapons when another country attacks. And talking about our border with China we still haven't reached an agreement on that. Has America forgotten Pearl Harbour ? Likewise we haven't forgotten 1962 !! We respect the U.S role in global affairs and consider it as our number one ally. But , when it comes to China we are all a bit patrotic on that. India is an economic superpower in another 15 years Indian economy will be bigger than China's economy ( Its a fact )
    What if the Pakistani govt is toppled over by a coup and a jihadist regime with its eyes on India and Indian interests crops up in the sub continent ??? It is not mere speculation but IT can happen!! India is not a warmongering nation. We have never attacked but have been attacked History shows that!!!

    Akshay
     
  5. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    I aim to please.
    That's very good to hear. I'm very interested in Indian affairs, but I don't know of an English newsource focused on India. Though I do get a a lot of bits a pieces that I weave together. I'm glad that the defense budget has decreased. Outside of Kashmir (you guys and Pakistan really messed up on that one) India has marginal defense needs. Pakistan isn't a serious conventional threat. Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan are barely recognizable on the map, and China has no incentive and no means by which to invade India. It'd kill both countries. India needs to focus on its poverty, its educational system, its healthcare (terribly distributed), and most importantly its infastructure.
    That does put you at a disadvantage, but you don't need to hit those cities anyway. Nuclear weapons are for having, not using. China and India have a slightly tilted MAD (mutally assured destruction) scenario. Both countries have little to gain and everything to lose from conventional and nonconventional war.
    I believe that India has approximately 80 weapons. While that may not sound like a lot, that's 80 major civilian and miltary targets eradicated. China might have a greater missle range, but as you yourself admitted, India can still hit south, southwestern, and central China. China realizes that, and they know that while they might win a hypothetical China/India nuclear standoff, it would come at an immense cost. They won't attack. Any perceived threat to China is imaginary at best.

    Besides, India doesn't need as many weapons as China currently possesses. For a large portion of the Cold War, who do you think had more nuclear devices? It was the Soviet Union, quite a few more for awhile. Who won that conflict though? The United States. The number of nuclear weapons India has in comparison to China is irrelevant. As long as India has the bomb, and can strike the Chinese homeland, China would never dare to attack your country.
    Good, at least you guys are trying to creat the illusion of being a normal power.
    The treaty already says you can do that. If India is attacked with nuclear arms, then India can retaliate with a nuclear strike. That's exactly what the NPT is about.
    STILL!?! You guys need to get on that. We are talking about a barren remote stretch of mountains that no one has ever gone near. I remember reading about how India is laying claim to some glacier on the India/Pakistan border that no one has ever visited before. India has more important things to do than focus on these trivial border disputes. Give Pakistan and China a good compromise and go focus on your domestic situation. If India is going to be a world power this century, then you need to stop fighting with the neighbors over where the fences go and start building the house.
    No, we remember Pearl Harbor, but we don't let event irrelevant to today's geopolitics outweigh our actual concerns. The United States isn't preparing for a rematch with Germany, Japan, and Italy. The Sino-Indian border dispute is over 40 years old. It's time to move on and start focusing on important matters.
    Good, India is going to be our most important ally for the next century, as long as India remains a democracy and a bastion for liberty, free enterprise, and strives for equality. The United States will always be there for your country, always. However, the relationship between our two countries is young and fragile. India is hurting our relations with this nuclear deal. India has not signe the NPT, has acquired nuclear weapons in defiance of the international community (although I will admit that a nuclear India is probably better for the world then a non-nuclear India), and refuses to allow inspection of its nuclear program. Under the current deal, 8 of India's 22 nuclear plants will remain totally unsupervised by the IAEA. India refuses to cease producing nuclear weapons, and is trying to force the United States to disregard the NPT- whose enforcement is the only justification we have for insisting that Iran and North Korea disarm- and break our own laws. If the US helps India by awarding your country with nuclear technology, the entire concept of the NPT goes out the door. Our justification for preventing Iran and Noprht Korea from acquiring nuclear technology disappears. Without hte commitment of the United States, the NPT becomes meaningless, an our efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear materials is severly hindered. However, if India were to compromise on the terms of the agreement, then we could easily transfer nuclear energy generation technology to your country while remaining within the scope of US and international law. However, India, as far as I know, has refused to do this, and is hurting the deal and our relationship,
    Don't let China become to India what Japan is to China, it'll just hurt your country and the world. I don't care if you guys are patriotic, engaging China in a mini-Cold War nuclear arms race is a pointless waste of time, money, and lives.
    Really? You're going to have to provide me with some reference for this. India's economy is $800 billion; China's economy is some $3 trillion. China is also growing faster than India, I don't see how this is possible.
    A possiblity, but having even more nuclear weapons isn't going to positively affect the situation. You already have a MAD situation with Pakistan. More nuclear weapons won't do anything useful in such a situation.
    True, except for maybe Kashmir.

    By the way. one question. You're obviously from India, so why are you in Dubai? Are you attending college there or something?

    Edit: This is my 666 post. Beware, it is evil.
     
  6. akiboy
    Offline

    akiboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Ratings:
    +39
    Yeah I live in Dubai I attend High School there. I'll reply TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOUR QUOTES IN THE FOLLOWING DAYS. I am beginnimg to enjoy this little debate of ours!!!
     
  7. akiboy
    Offline

    akiboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Ratings:
    +39
    PS: In Kashmir too we never went offensive It was Pakistan that started the attacks right after Independence ( Refer to the aftermath of 1947 and you will knwo )
     
  8. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    Why are you going to high school in Dubai? I have a lot of classmates who went to great high schools in India and are now here for college (Actually had an Indian roomate last year as a Freshman). Why not stay there.
     
  9. akiboy
    Offline

    akiboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Ratings:
    +39


    I have been here since 1994!! I may come back to India in the next year or so or else apply for university/college in U.K!!
     
  10. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    Wow, that's a long time. Good luck with the college apps. You should consider the US too.
     

Share This Page