I don't know what Rajeev's credentials are but he's missing one big picture - Why does he and the others who oppose the deal always think that this deal is only about nuclear energy?
The deal will open the door for India to act on world stage which She cannot ignore by not going for this deal. Does the author think India has the talent to act on world stage without the good friendship with big powers? And this deal is one important step in getting closer to the other world powers.
One would argue what's the purpose that She be in international focus. Think about what happened in early 90's when India was a closed economy and the PM had to open the doors. My opinion is with a billion strong population, it's a MUST and not an OPTION that She take leadership of the world not just for her interests, but in the larger interest of the world.
RE:Rajeev credentials
by Bhaumik on Apr 25, 2008 06:45 AM Permalink
Rajeev's credentials? He is an RSS activist who contributes narrow extremist view-points of RSS on the net.
He has a fan following of people who share his Islam-phobia and fundamentalist view points. When he write anything else, he is completely out of depth and ignorant of the topic as in the present case.
If you Google him you will find his oeuvre, a typical one is that in which he theorizes that the tsunami that killed 25000 opeople world-wide was sent by Gods as a punishment for the arrest of Kanchi Sankarachaya by the TN Government. Also, his articles (in rediff itself!) after the Gujarat riots are revealing of his journalistic inclinations..
He is a contributor of articles in similar vein to Rediff.
RE:Rajeev credentials
by Sahadevan KK on Apr 25, 2008 02:49 PM Permalink
I fully agree with Bhaumik. We comrades pay a lot of money to all our shills in the media. We hate it when someone writes against us. Of course, if an RSS guy has an opinion, we shout against printing it, as comrade Bhaumik does here. But when our comrade guys have opinions, (eg "China's chairman is our chairman", or "Tibet belongs to China"), we shout from the rooftops about freedom of speech.
RE:Rajeev credentials
by Bhaumik on Apr 26, 2008 06:37 AM Permalink
"Sahadevan KK" (why hide under someone else's name?),
That's a cheap shot. I am neither your comrade nor your own fundementalist/ extremist type.
I hate any kind of extremism, whether it is yours/ Rajeev Sreeenivsan's or that of the leftist. The worst is religious extremism (like tali**ban's, yours).
RE:Rajeev credentials
by Manjula A on Apr 25, 2008 02:37 PM Permalink
It's just that China pays a lot of money and money appeals as much to saffroninst as to pinkos.
RE:Rajeev credentials
by aus ant on Apr 24, 2008 10:37 AM Permalink
Rajeev's credentials? He has the largest collection of KHAKI CHADDIS among the so-called journos in the US!
RE:Rajeev credentials
by Nirpinder Singh on Apr 24, 2008 09:34 AM Permalink
We are already in the World Stage by virtue of having a quarter of earthly humanity in our nation! We should be concerned about making ourselves presentable on the world stage. Rather than committing ourselves to buying expensive overseas technologies we should concentrate on developing our own manufacturing capabilities. Witness we have some very good naval shipyards yet we are paying outrageous amounts to Russia for retrofitting of an aircraft carrier! What could be a worse waste of money? We should just buy a dry dock big enought o hold the aircraft carrier and work on it ourselves. We have to get real. We will never be able to buy the respect of developed nations by purchasing their technology. If we develop technology ourselves then we will be respected.
I think since India is surrounded by hostile countries who wish it ill, most of all China, the deal has some advantages from the security perpective, not that the US is a very reliable ally. This maybe one reason why the Left (with instructions from their Chinese masters), are hell bent on killing this.
1) Author suggests improving energy efficiency by strengthening building codes? I have lived in India all my life, I don't think any builder in the entire country follows any building codes.
2) The author uses the common fallacy of pointing out that there hasn't been a new nuclear reactor built in the US in recent years. This is a wrong argument, because there hasn't been very many of any power plants built in the US in recent years. The US is already a RICH country, they already have sufficient power production. Can you say the same for India?
3) Author suggests that going back to the Nehru growth rate of 2-3 percent would be tollerable? Therefore condeming even more people to poverty?
4) The author says that nuclear energy won't provide all of India's needs right away. Fine, but in the LONG run it will provide a significant portion. France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear sources. Why must Indians always dream so small?
RE:Disagree
by Prashanth on Apr 23, 2008 10:16 PM Permalink
The whole point he is making is that even IF builders follow the building codes, the codes themselves are not conducive to saving energy as they were not done with saving energy in mind.
The point is that US haven't built one in decades. Therefore its possible that they dont have up to date technology in nuclear reactors. But I don't agree with his point totally.
The point he is trying to make is that it is tolerable for the 'Nehru dynasty' Congress party.
On this point, I agree partly. But it takes a HUGE investment to come up to a 70% level that not many countries can afford plus there is the problem with adequately dealing with nuclear waste, radiation etc.
RE:Disagree
by BrotherhoodofNod on Apr 24, 2008 10:29 AM Permalink
I agree ..esp.."problem with adequately dealing with nuclear waste, radiation etc." I fear that indians might be very careless in handling nuclear waste..as u can clearly see how we handle other waste... bt having said that..we still need to work to find alternatives.. Dont know what the IITians are doing in this front..all they can do is go to US and get settled.. if they are the brightest and the smartest(as they claim)....and if they dont look into these serious matters..then we are doomed..
RE:Disagree
by Sahadevan KK on Apr 24, 2008 11:03 AM Permalink
Our leaders said globalization is good. Indian people suffered a lot. Nuclear did not allowed by the Left. People of India escaped from the web of the US.
All valid points. I had the same thoughts. I would say that you missed spelling 1 important point - and that is the advantage of this treaty to the US. And I would say that it's all positive for US - 1. strategic partnership - maybe good for both. 2. Less fight for hydrocarbons (as India will get some energy from nuclear) - better deal for americans. For India it's not all bad - setup reactors in remote places/islands. Demand latest technology - maybe france's - they are all 1 western group i would say.
RE:good for US
by raj sreedhar on Apr 23, 2008 09:38 PM Permalink
on, All politics. Leaders on the Left playing politics they are not worried about national interst. They are looking after China's interst. UAE is going to have similar agreement with the US. An a Arab country. Over there they are looking after the welfare of the nation and progress. China's biggest trading partner is the United States. They opned up all kinds of American retail chains. Sky didnt fall. Here again, they keep the politics and ideology away for the interest of both nations. Both benifits. Left is going oppose anything American. But,they love to send their kids to study in US or UK. THINK ABOUT IT.
RE:good for US
by Sunil Chandrashekharan on Apr 24, 2008 12:31 AM Permalink
I would say 90% stuff they sell in Walmart is Made in China ....The left is only saying any agreement should be mutually beneficial ....not do what america wants. China when they opened up they also got the technology transfer which made them grow bigger
RE:RE:good for US
by Jayanta Choudhury on Apr 24, 2008 02:04 AM Permalink
The left is always acting against India. Recently, Sitaram Yechury compared Buddha to Karl marx and Ambedkar and labeled them all as philosophers. First of all, Buddha is much bigger than philosopher, I wonder if they would dare to say Mohammed a philosopher. It is tantamount to Blasphamy to Buddhists. Left kicked out Taslima Nasrin for Muslims calling her blasphamous but will they kick Yechury if Buddhists call him Blasphamous. They are so petty political, that they picked Buddha because Buddhism is one of the most passive religion also Buddhism does not believe in existence of God so a good fit for Marxist atheism. Picked Ambedkar to woo the lower caste and they like to lick the bottom of Karl Marx irrespective of the taste. They will never emphasize any past glory of India, they had termed Netaji as a pet dog of Tojo, they had termed Rabindranath Tagore as a poet of nobility. They just don't like anything that is glorious for India. They are bent in defaming and debilitating any object of pride in Indian culture and history. Are they any better than Islamic plunderers like, Shah Abdali or Nadir Shah? I agree that the nuclear deal is not going to benefit India but I want it to happen as the Left is opposing it. I sincerely doubt that through the left party China is interfering in Indian affairs. Having the deal will be a small victory against Chinese conspiracy against India through the left cronies.
