RE:INSTIGATIVE JOURNALIST AND BJP MOLE AURN SHOURIE
by Sincere Citizen on Aug 16, 2007 05:08 PM Permalink
Dude wake up , what happened during BJP rule in 5 years has not happened in 50 years of Congress rule, except Rajiv Gandhi who was a good man and a visionary even he was taken over by Congi goons.
RE:RE:INSTIGATIVE JOURNALIST AND BJP MOLE AURN SHOURIE
by Sankaranarayanan Doraiswamy on Aug 16, 2007 09:04 PM Permalink
Sincere, try to say daily 1008 times Rajiv (Indira)you will have rahul for rajiv. (i left Gandhi because we have only on Gandhi). May Bharat Matha give you a good vision
Beware every citizen of India, this Bloody congress party and the PM are making slave of our country to US. This is another way of invading our country from outsiders. After Britain now US is stepping into our country. All should protest this agreement not only in the interest of our country but the interest of young and future generations also. These dirty fellows alreday one foot in a grave, they are not bother about future. From today onwards make up our mind to oust this congress from power, otherwise our country will not prosper and it will become another Iraq.
RE:123 Agreement
by Neutral on Aug 16, 2007 05:25 PM Permalink
Nothing wrong in what our PM is doing.. India is 60 years old. 60 is retirement age. How long you can be independent? 60 years are enough. So, PM is selling 60 year old person to US.
RE:123 Agreement
by dee mee on Aug 17, 2007 12:19 AM Permalink
for countries 60 is just youthful age .. start of youth.. india is one of the youngest nation..
There does not seem to be any clarity on so many issues. This is clear from the statements being reported from the US and also from the statements from some of the people in the know of things fro0m India. Yet, the deal is being pushed by the PM (and the Super PM).
We all know that a deal was made possible by Indian side making last minute in the written contract. The Indians wanted to obfuscate the test part by keeping silent leaving the issue to be explained in a convenient way. If our erudite PM had kept quiet, this issue might not have surfaced. Now the americans have let the cat out of the bag.
There is no need for India to do a physical test. They can do all the theoretical work, do computer simulation and be bomb-ready. We have lost all the benefit of civilian nuclear power projects and technology up gradation.
In fact all the countries will possess weapon grade nuclear materials; whether anyone will use it or not is a difficult question to answer.
RE:Obfuscation
by hiral joshi on Aug 16, 2007 05:47 PM Permalink
Computer work is not possible without accurate and precise field data. with merely 6 tests data is not reliable in scientific terms. Remember before inducting Agni missile was tested about 16 times.
RE:Where can I find information about 123 agreement? Has anybody read it before replying?
by hiral joshi on Aug 16, 2007 04:51 PM Permalink
here; http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2007/aug/90050.htm Read carefully the terms about termination of the deal.
Firstly, we can build our new reactors without US intervention. Secondly, we can buy nuclear fuel from US or any other country. Thirdly, even if US takes steps to withdraw its fuel supply for whatever reasons, they can't stop supply from other countries like Russia. Fourthly, nuclear test is not the worst thing to happen to the treaty. As long as it happens under exceptional circumstances and keeping US diplomats in confidence, I don't see any problem (although US never admit this officially because of their own compulsions). Al they can do is create a pressure. The worst thing to happen to the treaty is act like a BAD boys. E.g if we export technology to a rogue state or say if we use the same material for nuclear weapons that is supposed to be used for nuclear reactors. We have to make sure we keep our image CLEAN. We can still use thorium supplies in our own country. US couldn't do much economic sanctions after nuclear tests. after 10-15 years, US business will become so much reliant on Indian businesses and Indian market that they won't be able to afford any sanctions in future. Lastly, whenever such major decisions (nuclear tests) are done, any govt has to consider all consequences and how to handle the internation pressure whether the treaty is there or not. If India really needs such tests under exceptional circumstances nobody can stop us. The only thing is we have to be prepared for consequences. Why are we making fuss about it?
RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by sanjeev sharma on Aug 16, 2007 04:50 PM Permalink
Dear Abhay, it is not such a clean simple theory as u have explained. It is totally other way round, the moment US takes steps to withdraw , we will have to return all the crucial equipments, technology and knowhow and it is a one year process, during which all our industries dependent on this energy will die. As a consequent we will always be blackmailed by US to act as per there wishes.
RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by my message on Aug 16, 2007 04:59 PM Permalink
You are absolutely right.
Besides, who decides if we are "CLEAN"??? If the US wishes to take a unilateral decision a few years down the line, who is to stop them and what will be the plan of action from India?? Any clarity from the Govt on these points????
RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by Abhay T on Aug 16, 2007 05:33 PM Permalink
If your arguments are true they can do it even now and even withou the TREATY! These arguments similar arguments were used for foreign investment in India. But without such economic benefits, India can't solve infrastructure problems and at the same time US can't afford to ignore India's importance worldwide. If every other country thinks India is not "CLEAN" then India will be in trouble like Pakistan. If only US thinks so, it won't make much difference because India can buy supplies from other states. They put economic sanctions on us but it didn't make much difference. In the same period, economic liberalisation allowed FDI into India. More importantly India too have its own resources to handle such pressures with or without treaty. The whole point is about technological and economic benefits and not about nuclear tests.
RE:RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by Abhay T on Aug 16, 2007 05:37 PM Permalink
If your arguments are true they can do it even now and even withou the TREATY! These arguments similar arguments were used for foreign investment in India. But without such economic benefits, India can't solve infrastructure problems and at the same time US can't afford to ignore India's importance worldwide. If every other country thinks India is not "CLEAN" then India will be in trouble like Pakistan. If only US thinks so, it won't make much difference because India can buy supplies from other states. They put economic sanctions on us but it didn't make much difference. In the same period, economic liberalisation allowed FDI into India. More importantly India too have its own resources to handle such pressures with or without treaty. The whole point is about technological and economic benefits and not about nuclear tests
RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by hiral joshi on Aug 16, 2007 05:03 PM Permalink
Have you any idea of the measure of the consequences? If we can build our new reactors why do we need US-technology?, If we can buy fuel from Russia, Kazakhstan etc, why do we enter into the deal and buy from imposing suppliers like Australia, Canada and USA? If we do N-test why should we inform or take US into confidence? Are we soverign country or a remote state of USA? Why do we need to prove our clean image to USA? Are they our boss? Are the responsible for the existance of India? Why do we knelt to USA? Your arguements are self-contradictory and infact supporting "not to sign" the deal.
RE:RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by Abhay T on Aug 16, 2007 05:45 PM Permalink
That's because once US accepts India's position, other countries will follow and India gets diplomatic advantage of getting recognition of a nuclear state. Once this happens other countries will start suppliing fuel to India as well. But this is irreversible process. They won't withdraw supplies just because US thinks otherwise. They will only consider their own position. So, India has to only make sure it doesn't do something that's completely unacceptable to entire world like passing the technology to a rogue state.
RE:Dr. Singh is correct
by hiral joshi on Aug 16, 2007 04:55 PM Permalink
If we agree with all of your arguements it indicates that infact we dont need a deal or deal or no deal we wont have any difference. Can you elaborate with your vast knowledge, how fast we shall start getting power?
