Bharat Rakshak

What do you expect, after all MMS "promised" to deliver. And like another PM he may loose more than just a face, IF he does not deliver this deal.

Lest we forget (Just BTW, I did not slide the author's name for kicks):



From this report (prepared for the US Congress no less), the following:

[quote="On page 2"]
On July 18, 2005, President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a joint statement that announced the creation of a “global partnership,â€

Dimona(NNRC) is not an IAEA safeguarded facility, so where does IAEA/"safety" come in ?



Katareji

I don't agree with the word "legitimate", when India actually hasn't signed anything (NPT, CTBT, FMCT). So the term is inapplicable IMO. If it is "illegitimate" why do we have IAEA safeguarded facilities (neither have we withdrawn any such) ?. Deriving benefits by signing-up is a different issue all together, as the P-5 have put next to nothing under safeguards.

Let me put it this way, if indeed India were to sign up to this deal, it still is a "de-facto" nuclear state and will remain so, and no so-called "legitimacy" (in the true sense) will be accorded. So Indian's hollering about "achieving legitimacy" is for domestic consumption, the litmus test for it will be the upcoming GNEP.. And Bush is on record saying India will not be considered "legitimate".

boy.. advani has really used the blast word wherever tests could be used.. he is on a beligerent mode... further doubt his age could do any good to his intentions any further. bjp has leadership issues, but i guess, way better than Mr. Stringed Mohan Saab.

on the gnep, india's plan is tangential in the sense, we are basing it on the thorium fuel cycle chtr, that would be dual use for hydrogen economy of the future. quite contradicting to gnep's fast reactors.

It looks like a command from someone else telling what to do
Who are these people

I stand by all my previous statements on Nuclear and Missiles matters, but owing to work pressure as well as heeding to Ramana's directive on the Ban list Warning/Notification, I will not anymore respond to false and libelous statements made by my detractors.

I believe this series of threads has, in a way, shamed BRF for the kind of insults traded.

Keeping off discussion on this thread but watching events in India, I get the sense that people on one or other side of the nuclear deal issue are going to be disappointed and angry, setting the stage for more heartburn and accusation.

I must admit that it has not been possible for me to intervene actively in either side of the debate without appearing partisan apart from the very real fact that the rhetoric and language blew away any interest I had in the issue. I assumed others were interested - but emails have revealed that many people have been upset with the way this thread has panned out.

With Arun having bowed out I am going to lock this therad and will lock or delete all threads on the issue for about 1 week till emotions on BRF cool down.

After that we could perhaps get some sort of discussion going using norms of civility that were discarded on this thread a long time ago. It might me a good idea to start with the assumption that everyone in India is a traitor or an idiot, or has been bought off, so it will not be necessary to repeat those allegation time and again and stick to what discussion minus description of personal attributes of corrupt people to serve as a bulwark for one's own arguments.