china has ordered 55 new nuclear plants and that has got allthe world companies of france russia and US wooing them ...so they r not that interested in max eleven that india might offer them ,,,so the deal is our requirement no theirs
Congress is hurrying up for nuclear deal to divert peoples' attention from real problems of the country, which it seems to hv achieved for the time being. Congress should reply to the flg questions:
1. The day before the IAEA document was in public domain, why did it say that the document cannot b shown to anyone outside the govt, as it was a secret document and its showing to others will result in threats to our nuclear reactor?
2. Why did it not take the Left, on whose support it is running the govt, and main opposition party BJP in confidence?
3. If the deal was so good as it is trying to show, then why did they delayed it so much that the present US govt may not hv enough time to get it passed?
4. The deal is so lucrative for the US business that no US President will dare to oppose it, then why is it trying to show that if there is delay, the deal will not b passed by the next President of US?
RE:Congress is hurrying up to divert peoples' attention from inflation etc.
by sajindranath on Jul 14, 2008 05:12 PM Permalink
The left in any way needed a issue to pull out of the Govt. before the Lok Sabha election. Since its main opposition would be the congress in the states it is strong. If it went along with the congress till the end, what issues would they have when they ask for votes?
RE:Congress is hurrying up to divert peoples' attention from inflation etc.
by Ram Sharma on Jul 14, 2008 05:26 PM Permalink
I am asking questions from Congress to find out their real motive.
As regards importance of Left, Pranav Mukherji went to meet Jyoti Basu, even after Left withdrew the support. Why?
It is best for India or not best but we need the energy. We have to go ahead at the same time as and when US government shows any negative because we have signed 123 agreement simply we will kick him and come out all the agreements. Actually presently it suits us and we are accepting. Tomorrow he says our Indian soldiers should go to Iran to fight with their country it is not possible. The same thing he should dictate us what we have to do what we have not to do. Though it is not practically but US should keep his mind that once china & Inida people starts running towards US, the entire country will vanish and I hope one day dream also become true but making way bridge or some modern techniques. They may be more technology-wise powerful but brain is always in INDIAN. They should keep in their head. We also accept our country two factor which is always are able to grow up one is population another important is corruption and mismanagement. If demand and supply principle we will follow correctly we are able reach sky level and nobody will touch us.
AS PER THE US ESTIMATES PUBLISHED IN THEIR VARIOUS PRESTIGIOUS PUBLICATIONS AND AS PER THE VIEWS OF THEIR SCIENTISTS INDIA WILL BE ABLE TO GENERATE ONLY 5% OF ITS ENERGY NEEDS FROM THE NUCLEAR PLANTS IN THE NEXT 30 YEARS AND THE COST OF THAT ENERGY WILL BE ALMOST DOUBLE THE COST OF THERMAL OR GAS BASED ENERGY. IN FACT THE OLD TECHNOLOGY REACTOR SALES HAVE THEM MORE INTERESTED IN THIS DEAL RATHER THAN INDIA'S INTERESTS. INDIA ON THE OTHER HAND WILL HAVE TO PAY HEAVY PRICE FOR EVEN THE IAEA INSPECTIONS IN EUROS.BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY INDIA'S SECURITY IS AT RISK.....
Even if the nuclear deal does not permit another nuclear bomb testing by India, why do we have to stop the nuclear deal. Because. 1. Now we dont need any test. Then why should we give up nuclear deal 2. If we need nuclear test in the future, then we will give up nuclear deal and then we will go for a test.
Even in the worst case, we will have nuclear energy assured till we test a nuclear bomb.
I think the good management plan of India's energy security is to go for a deal now.
Suppose if you have the plan of testing a bomb tomorrow, there is no point in speaking about CND. But if you dont need one in the near future (because already you have the test data which can help us through some significant length of tiem), we can go for a test.
I think this is the business deal.
If there are any other concenrns apart from India's testing the bomb, can some one elaborate.
I think in all the possible concerns, we can very well go for a deal.
RE:Nuclear deal
by Asheesh on Jul 14, 2008 04:54 PM Permalink
According to the deal, we cant use the "Material obtained from trade" to conduct the tests...We can still use our military reserves for that purpose...
RE:Nuclear deal
by Aravind k on Jul 14, 2008 04:52 PM Permalink
Dont think much.... If we are going nuclear test in future, all relationships with the world will cut-off...think this point. Business requires relationship always..
RE:Nuclear deal
by subash bose on Jul 14, 2008 04:58 PM Permalink
True. I agree with you. Did we not test the bomb in BJP period and yet command a respect for us in the world arena now.
I think it is not just an isolated incidents - nuclear bomp testing. What value we represent in the world forum has to speak for us in the periods of trouble.
What our attitude towards general peace and tranquility in the region. It all will have to speak for us.
If we really are a forward looking nation, having no intention of agression, I think we can manage - even the possible occaions of bomp testing in the future.
RE:What is the view of Naqvi
by ashish bhagat on Jul 14, 2008 04:53 PM Permalink
bjp is not oppossing the deal. your so called secularists: CPM & their cronies, Bahenji and her gundas are oppossing it.
RE:What is the view of Naqvi
by Rukmesh Singh on Jul 14, 2008 05:00 PM Permalink
mr. bhagat.. bjp is opposing the deal.. har channel par dekho.. they are opposing it in all the ways they can. Dont try to defend them ..
RE:What is the view of Naqvi
by Rakesh Sharma on Jul 14, 2008 05:25 PM Permalink
BJP IS OPPOSING BECAUSE OF THE SECURITY CONCERNS AND THEY HAVE PROMISED A BETTER DEAL WHEN THEY COME TO POWER. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
RE:RE:What is the view of Naqvi
by rajesh prajapati on Jul 14, 2008 05:31 PM Permalink
So, what are the security concerns ? They have neither been spelt out in the Deal or by the BJP! It is just a red herring or a ghost of an objection, without any substance!
RE:What is the view of Naqvi
by rajesh prajapati on Jul 14, 2008 05:30 PM Permalink
So, what is the BJP doing, if not opposing the deal? Will it vote for it ?
If everything is for the good of the country, why cant the entire agreement be tabled in the parliament? There is something to hide in the Hyde - Government should make the agreement public before signing. This will also enable the congress to face the general public in the next election.
RE:Is it?
by rajesh prajapati on Jul 14, 2008 05:01 PM Permalink
Have you read the draft agreement on the net? I am shocked after reading all the 130 clauses that India is getting away with so much inspite of the draft being drafted along with IAEA! Revealing such a draft ahead would have let the cat out of the bag and let get the Ayatollahs of peace in the west cry blue murder - a fact India should worry about now. Even, now that draft is already out neither the BJP nor the Left can point to a specific clause in the draft that can be termed anti-India or unpatriotic! The BJP even talks about re-negotiating the deal given an opportunity without pointing out what is it that they would want to change! And the Left has suddenly started talking about other failures like inflation, etc..... Shocking ! Even, I am shocked that MMS and his team could actually get a deal like this !
RE:Is it?
by Shekhar Agarwal on Jul 14, 2008 06:39 PM Permalink
Rajesh...u seem to be one of the very few guys who talk sense on these discussions on the nuclear deal. Any one who says that the deal is either inferior or is against "national interest" (as every opposing party puts it), should be asked to spell out the exact objections to the clauses as per the draft and how it can be improved upon. Why cant they act in the same "National Interest" and work together with the ruling Govt. in concluding a deal that is beneficial to public at large. It is obvious that all these guys put together would not reach anywhere close to concluding the deal. In case the Congress fails the confidence vote, the Left and the BJP should guarantee the voters as part of their Manifesto in the next general elections on what would be their version of the agreement for the deal, failing which they would never contest any further elections. All this rhetoric is just a sheer waste of everyone's time. They simply cant digest the fact that MMS and his team have actually gotten away with a very decent deal for India. The way all Left leaders are reacting on TV is a clear evidence of their frustration levels. There is not a single country in the world now that is not facing inflationary pressure. Having said all this, I must confess that I hate most of the politicians (including many in Congress) who are full of gas but little substance. At least the politicians from the Left are relatively more honest and mean what they say. India needs an INTERNAL REVOLUTION.
RE:The Real Problem
by Gopal on Jul 15, 2008 06:23 AM Permalink
Friend, Please see the contentious issues in the Hyde act 1. No freedom to handle spent fuel. 2. No guarantee for alternate fuel supply 3. India is not a technology developer but a recepient. 4. India to side with US in NPT 5. India to participate with US National Security Administration for NPT. 6. Reporting of US President on the efforts of India in containing IRAN. 7. India denied space related dual use technology 8. India denied strategic planning of nuclear programms. 9. Stopped India in the production of fissile materials. 10.No joint move for universal nuclear disarmament. 11.All future agreeents are to be in consistent with this act. Hyde act is the enabling act for the 123 agreement.
Leaders declare that all these are wrong but failed to arrange a debate in Parliament. LEFT and BJP failed in the parliament to expose the omissions
Is it not surrendering our freedom and sovereignty?
