I was under the impression that you were the one that subscribed to counting atoms!!! Perhaps not.
Actually I am, thanks. As against any expectations that a 5% "Unaccounted" loss of fissile material would be "chalta hai". It's easy to see that since 1kg = 10KT, if you lose 5% of, say, 1 ton of Uranium, you have lost sight of 50kg = 5MT. No one can sleep with those kinds of numbers.
OK, now we can list the current status of the Arguments Against the Deal from today's posts above:
1. India's economic growth rate has slowed from 8-9% per year, to ONLY 6-7%. So there is no excuse to demand infrastructure growth, more power etc.
2. Anyway, nuclear power is estimated to NEVER get beyond 5% of India's power generation...
3. Current deal demands separation of military and civilian sectors in Indian nuclear R&D and fuel streams. Such separation is bad...
(Why is the separation bad?)
4. Because the US will insist on counting atoms in the Indian MILITARY SECTOR (though there is NOTHING in the deal about in any way infringing on Indians military nuclear sector).
5. That's OK (the absence of any such language in the 123 deal) because the IAEA is ANYWAY going to disappear within a few years.
6. So then the US will insist on sending its own inspectors to follow the atoms of US-supplied fuel into Indian military facilities. (why would India send the US-imported atoms into military facilities, I wonder.. when ALL domestic-mined uranium is available for the purpose..)
You see what I mean when I say that the arguments against the deal have long since run out of reason and logic, and are now way deep into (well... not 4 me to say what it is into.. ).
IF not, then this is where we differ ...... as I pointed out earlier, the US wants to count atoms. The US will stop India at some point in time, ONLY because of counting atoms. The US will insist on her accountants being in India ....... IAEA will vanish in a few years for sure (so will NSG).