Kakodkar has correctly said "If we dont take this opportunity now, history won't forgive us". Of course, nuclear technology comes with its own risks...but nuclear accidents have been under control (except for Chernobyl, coming from a failed state USSR).
People should realize that India (and Pak and israel) are the only three conutries who havent signed NPT (non-proliferation treaty). According to that international treaty, only the 5 recognized countries have Nuclear Weapons. Although India and (maybe Pak, via proxy China) are well known to have nuclear weapons, both countries have been denied Uranium and key technologies now.
The problem is, chainging NPT is not possible, unless India becomes a solo superpower...which is unlikely in next 100 years. But, Bush, although ususally perceived as a Moron, is quite street smart. He is giving India a way (around NPT), by using his muscle with IAEA and NSG. Do not expect, the next president Obama or McCain to go to such lengths to lobby for india's case.
Indias oil price rise is because India is Dealing in Dollers which is constantly depriciating. Switch to Euro or other denominations Oil price hike is not much.
RE:Oil Price Rise
by CSHut on Jul 13, 2008 01:32 AM Permalink
haha! Have you checked the oil price rise in Euros? Also, india's economic strength is closely linked to USA...most of india's fancy exports like IT, pharma, and other things are to USA. If US dollar goes down against Euro, so does indian rupee goes down against Euro.
It can be taken up after NSG delivering the required nuclear material for the life time of the reactors.
As of now its just a waste paper which we need not sign. Let them come up with dispatch schedules, Quality and Quantity of Necluer fuel to be supplied to India. Negotiate the price of fuel and reactors. Work out the cost per unit of power generation. Identify project locations Then think of signing the deal if required.
What if at the end of the day the whole project cost makes the cost of power generation more then what it is now.
Inspection is a requirement of IAEA In which case let them foot the costs of inspection. Which includes there salaries, travel costs stay costs.
Else we may end up having to feed some 100 overseas inspectors per location just for the heck of sourcing nuclear fuel.
Also check contemprory proposals like gas pipe line from Iran, Natural gaas based power generation, Bio diessel etc.
To my Knowledge the whole proposal looks like an intention of dumping some outdated technologies on to India in the name of the deal.
ITS ALRIGHT NO TENSIONS....EVEN IF CONGRESS MANAGE TO SIGN THIS ONE SIDED DEAL WITH USA...ITS ALRIGHT......LET THEM...BECAUSE IN THE COMMING GENERAL ELECTIONS NO ONE WILL GET A MAJORITY ...ITS GOING TO BE EITHER A LEFTIST COMBINE OR THE BJP COMBINE WHICH WILL COME TO POWER....AND WHEN THEY COME TO POWER THEY WILL THROW THE ONE SIDED BILL IN THE DUSTBIN.... AND IT SHOULDNT SURPRISE ANYONE IF CONGRESS DOES NOT MANAGE TO REACH EVEN THE 100 MARK.....BECAUSE THE CONGERESS HAVE FAILED IN EVERY FIELD THIS TIME
RE:tiger200002
by vinay on Jul 13, 2008 01:15 AM Permalink
it is not as simple as that. agreements with gatt made by erstwhile fm manmohan singh during narsinhrao govt were binding to bjp govt of vajpayee, which cudnt b thrown out like tht.
RE:tiger200002
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 01:19 AM Permalink
This agreement can be made ineffective by not acquiring any supplies and not making the IAEA agreement operational.
RE:CPI(M) had issued 300-odd press statements in the last four years, majority of them criticising the government and 50 others concerning the nuclear deal.
by satyarthi on Jul 13, 2008 01:06 AM Permalink
Is there any better way to befool the people of India?
ITS ALRIGHT...NO TENSIONS..EVEN IF CONGRESS ARE ABLE TO SIGN THE ONE SIDED NUCLEAR DEAL...NO PROBLEMS....BECAUSE IN THE COMMING GENERAL ELECTIONS...EITHER THE LEFTEST COMBINE OR BJP COMBINE WILL COME TO POWER.....AND WHEN THEY COME TO POWER THEY WILL THROW THE TRETY IN THE DUSTBIN.... CONGRESS HAS FAILED IN EVERY RESPECT SO IT SHOULD NOT SURPRISE ANYONE IF THEY DONT MANAGE THE 100 MARK..
Much more than India and China, USA depends on oil. Everyone in USA drives long distance to get to work...there is not much public transport. With India and China's economies booming..world wide oil consumption is going up..and hence oil prices are sky rocketing....leading to inflation everywhere..not just in india. If India and China (and USA) do not go to nuclear power, oil prices are gonna keep going up...causing world wide depression and inflation.
Hence it is in USA's interest to make india go nuclear..so at least one big oil price pressure point is removed. USA already has 43 nuclear plants, and there are equally many moronic leftists in USA who oppose more nuclear plants. Hopefully, they will also come around.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by Don on Jul 13, 2008 01:27 AM Permalink
Indias oil price rise is because India is Dealing in Dollers which is constantly depriciating. Switch to Euro or other denominations Oil price hike is not much.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by cynic on Jul 13, 2008 12:48 AM Permalink
US strength is science and technology. If they wish to, they can easily find alternatives. But they are lazy and are misguided by Bush who is a total fraud. The next president will probably give more importance to alternatives.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 12:52 AM Permalink
Just a correction of data. There are 439 nuclear power reactors operating around the world and the US accounts for 104 of these reactors followed by France at 59, Japan at 55, Russian Federation 31 and Republic of Korea 20.
Out of the 35 new nuclear power plants under construction in the world, Asia accounts for 24 of these. While China is building six new nuclear power plants to get 5,222 MW power for its grid, India too is building six such plants which would add 2910 MW of to its grid.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 04:49 AM Permalink
MY CLONE:
Please also tell us intelligently WHEN was the latest of these 104 reactors installed in the USA? :-) Also tell us how many plants have "closed" since they were installed? Little knowledge is always dangerous...
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by Charan Singh on Jul 13, 2008 12:57 AM Permalink
Thanks.
I would also like to say, that USA may also be able to sell some plants to india and make billions....but that is part of globalization...USA's exports have been fumbling...what with India's IT sector, and China's manufacturing. So, their self interests are clear. Of course the deal, per se doesn't force India to buy from USA.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by Hate Who divides on Jul 13, 2008 01:08 AM Permalink
Possiblility only may be true :: 1)US arch rival is Russia which has strong bond with India ......so nuclear weaponisation India means they will lose control among the complete axis of asia and Africa .........once in 1980 during cold war they ask for possesion in Indian ocean for their nuclear submarine to attack sovit Union ..... but India denied 2) They also know how brilliant Indians are ........ one day if not controlled India can deter US too in Nuclear weapons ..... as you know UPA govt stopped the development of Surya ICBM which can reach any US target too .... just to impress west
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by Guest on Jul 13, 2008 01:14 AM Permalink
let's not get carried away with far fetched arguments. There is something called Occam's principle: the simplest explanation is the correct explanation.
The oil price control was the reason USA invaded Iraq. Oil price control is the reason why USA wants india to go nuclear. India did not side with USA on the first (correctly), but it is in India's self interest too to reduce world oil prices.
RE:What is USA's interest in the deal
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 01:15 AM Permalink
US invaded Iraq because it broke the Surrender Treaty after the Gukf War I.
RE:RE:Nuclear deal is good for India
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 12:44 AM Permalink
As for BJP, it is political opportunism, trying to prevent Congress from getting credit that would aid to come back to power
I said it all. Brig Mehta's loss is totally unacceptable. The recent attack in Kabul embassy is cold-blooded murder by Pak-sponsoredb terrorism. Tme has come to warn Pakistan and be prepared for any eventuality.
RE:NUKE DEAL OK BUT US MUST TEACH ITS PRODIGAL SON PAKISTAN TO BEHAVE
by TIGER MAN on Jul 13, 2008 12:40 AM Permalink
USA HAS ALWAYS PROVIDED TERRORIST PAKISTAN WITH LARGE AMOUNTS OF WEAPONS AND ARMS SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR TERRORIST ACTIVITIES AGAINST INDIA...
RE:NUKE DEAL OK BUT US MUST TEACH ITS PRODIGAL SON PAKISTAN TO BEHAVE
by Hate Who divides on Jul 13, 2008 01:29 AM Permalink
Right said ........ it was news that US had strengthen osama bin laden in afghanistan against soviet union ........they bombed afghan to trap him .....in which many innocent died
RE:NUKE DEAL OK BUT US MUST TEACH ITS PRODIGAL SON PAKISTAN TO BEHAVE
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 01:00 AM Permalink
Let me explain US Policy with respect to Pakistan.
US needed an ally in the region during the Cold War days. US had a belief that either India is in their camp or in the opposite camp. There was no acceptance of neutral camp. So India was automatically perceived to be in the USSR camp.
After the World Trade Centre bombing in 1993, US intelligence had listed radical Muslim countries to be the next nemesis in the world. Russia and China were no longer perceived to be same threat to US as they once were.
Libya, Iraq, Iran, Taliban, and Pakistan were identified as the breeding grounds for terrorism while Saudi Arabia was identified as financier. Pakistan and Saudi were US allies where as others were US/Israel enemies. Pakistan is one country that also possesses Nuclear Weapons and they had even contemplated using them during Kargill War.
All the wars have been fought with that goal to eliminate this nemesis. Pres. Mussarraf claimed to be anti terrorism and US cajoled him to assist US with the effect that US has a large military presence in Pakistan.
When US is moving with a single goal to destroy terrorism, you have to appease to get what you want. With US having presence in the region, war will ultimately be won against the terrorism.
During Gulf War II, US purposefully kept Israel and India out of it. If they had gotten involved, war may have turned into a holy war. It remained a war between a particular country and west.
RE:NUKE DEAL OK BUT US MUST TEACH ITS PRODIGAL SON PAKISTAN TO BEHAVE
by Hate Who divides on Jul 13, 2008 01:21 AM Permalink
The way US reacted to terrorism will make more terrorist rather than vanishing them .................. they attacked Complete Iraq just to trap Saddam ........ you want to jutify the as right .......... nobody has the right to invade any country ........... Similar with afghans ............ problem is not killing terrorist ........... But in this procedure lakhs of innocent died ...... many childrens became orphan ............. Islam extremist will definitely take advanyage of this injustice caused to those orphan ......... result in more terrorism
RE:NUKE DEAL OK BUT US MUST TEACH ITS PRODIGAL SON PAKISTAN TO BEHAVE
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 01:30 AM Permalink
Iraq had surrendered during the Gulf War I. For Iraq to remain a sovereign nation, several conditions were laid down. Same is the case with Germany and Japan after they surrendered during WW II. Saddam did not live upto his part of the agreement. US is not responsible for what happened. Innocent people die during any war. Tell me about a war where only military personnel gets killed.
What a great act for countrys interests.....!!!! Very truth ful indeed ,especially amar singh and mulayam.Is there a nobel price for doing anything for countrys interests????
RE:ohhh what a show !!!
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 12:36 AM Permalink
The Nobel prize for acting should in fact to the BJP. In 1999 and 2000 Vajpayee and Jaswant Singh respectively gave an assurance to the Gen Assembly of the UN that India will adgere to a permanent moratorium on nuclear tests.
Former US Ambassador, Talbot in his book revealed that NDA was willing to sign NPT and CTBT which implies giving up the right to test.
Now when the deal ensures this right is not given up India, the BJP oppose such a deal that it is not in national interest.
For this chameleon type of acting, the BJP should be given the Nobel Prize for Acting
RE:ohhh what a show !!!
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 04:54 AM Permalink
MY CLONE:
You ARE funny..... you are ready to believe Talbot, but not the government of the day.
Why would Talbot NOT say that THIS deal is better for India, if in US's primary interests to get the deal signed SOMEHOW?... (everyone knows how anxious Bush is to get the deal... though if is so one-sidedly Anti-USA, why he is so anxious, god only knows)
I think you should give the Nobel Prize for Acting to M/s Talbot and Bush, and the Nobel Prize for gullibility to M/s Singh and Mukherjee.. The Filmfare award for best acting can go to Mukherjee for his superb acting in Singh's absence.... remember his solemn assurances about the trust vote?.. :-)
RE:ohhh what a show !!!
by AK on Jul 13, 2008 12:40 AM Permalink
Are there two of you "All Right". I hope you will agree with my view on "national laws".
RE:ohhh what a show !!!
by All Right on Jul 13, 2008 12:49 AM Permalink
Yes there are two All Rights. I consider myself the alto-ego of the original who spews knickerwallah views. But he is funny, decent and certainly not the Bajrang Dal type.
I think otherwise. The Hyde Act will remain unamended. Only the 123 Agreement gets signed by both parties and when as and when signed, the Hyde Act will be over-riddden.
