All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Manny wrote:
I can't blame them for their frustration. H1-B Visa and L1 Visas are being abused left right and center. Most oft quoted reason,. Can't find qualified people here to do the same job? Are you kidding me? Maybe they can't find the workers to work for more than 8 hrs a day and get paid only for 8 hrs. But don't say they can't find qualified workers here.
Have you read the comments? Most of those guys have a tenuous grasp of grammar and spelling and are barely coherent over the incessant childish insults. I would be surprised if too many of them are skilled IT workers.
There may be *some* visa abuse going on, but that pales in to comparison with the laws and ethics the American companies, citizens and govt flout the world over.
Yes. They are Peedoff. what do you expect? People say crappy things when they are mad or frustrated and helpless. Its a good indication that all are not right with this H1 and L1. Its not "some" like you mention. Its LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of abuse.
Like someone mentions there, why not India open its borders to Chinese labor. Would you support that under free market? I'd like to see the reaction in India to that.
I have been analyzing the types of people spamming India related articles. So far I have -
1. Members of the white nationalist movement (CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA) spamming due to their opposition to non-white immigration.
2. Members of organised labor and labor advocates spamming because of their opposition to immigration and outsourcing. Some overlap exists here with the white nationalist movement as people like Miano and Matloff have authored articles for CIS and NumbersUSA. Since both are opposed to immigration, some of them have been able to make common cause on the issue. Commenters like Lawson and de La Vega fall into this camp.
3. The average American fearful of job losses. These are not organised unlike 1 and 2 above. These are the rare well argued comments you see.
bart wrote:
Have you read the comments? Most of those guys have a tenuous grasp of grammar and spelling and are barely coherent over the incessant childish insults. I would be surprised if too many of them are skilled IT workers.
There may be *some* visa abuse going on, but that pales in to comparison with the laws and ethics the American companies, citizens and govt flout the world over.
Yes. They are Peedoff. what do you expect? People say crappy things when they are mad or frustrated and helpless. Its a good indication that all are not right with this H1 and L1. Its not "some" like you mention. Its LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of abuse.
Like someone mentions there, why not India open its borders to Chinese labor. Would you support that under free market? I'd like to see the reaction in India to that.
IMVHO, we should call a spade a spade, we all know many Indians are desperate to go abroad & they will do anything to get there. I have personally seen the abuse of Visas in UK & seen my friend do it in the US. I think we can accuse US of hypocrisy on Trade, not on immigration. Further, I have also seen extremely abusive & childish comments by Indians in different context e.g. cricket, politics etc, which have left me positively embarrassed, so lets not stand on a pedestal & preach. We will find all kinds of people in every country, we should learn to ignore abusive comments, by reacting we give it an importance it doesnt deserve. My 2 cents.
The cut-throat competetion with regard to our MRCA deal.
The US muscles out Israel in an attempt to nobble Sweden's bid and price gouge India:
US pressures IAI to drop bid on fighter jets to India
Jul. 5, 2009
Yaakov Katz , THE JERUSALEM POST
Under pressure from the Pentagon, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been forced to back out of a joint partnership with a Swedish aerospace company to compete in a multi-billion dollar tender to sell new multi-role fighter jets to the Indian Air Force. ………….......
The Defense Ministry ordered IAI to back out of the deal after the Pentagon expressed concern that American technology, used by Israel, would be integrated into the Gripen offered to the Indians.
"The stated concern was that western technology in Israeli hands would make its way to the Indians," one Israeli official said.
What was strange about the American request was that Boeing and Lockheed Martin - the two largest US defense contractors - are also competing for the Indian deal. For this reason, Israeli officials said it was more likely that the Americans were concerned that if IAI competed for the deal with Saab, it would force the American companies to lower their prices. ………………
Robert S. McNamara, perhaps the most influential defense secretary of the 20th century, who helped lead the nation into the maelstrom of Vietnam and spent the rest of his life wrestling with the war’s moral consequences, died early Monday at his home in Washington, the Associated Press reported, citing his wife, Diana. He was 93, and according to the news agency, had been in failing health for some time.
Serving Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson from 1961 to 1968, Mr. McNamara oversaw hundreds of military missions, thousands of nuclear weapons and billions of dollars in military spending and foreign arms sales. He also enlarged the defense secretary’s role, handling foreign diplomacy and the dispatch of troops to enforce civil rights in the South.
“He’s like a jackhammer,” President Johnson said. “No human being can take what he takes. He drives too hard. He is too perfect.”
As early as April 1964, Senator Wayne Morse, Democrat of Oregon, called Vietnam “McNamara’s War.” Mr. McNamara did not object. “I am pleased to be identified with it,” he said, “and do whatever I can to win it.”
Half a million American soldiers went to war on his watch. More than 16,000 died; 42,000 more would fall in the seven years to come.
The war became his personal nightmare. Nothing he did, none of the tools at his command — the power of American weapons, the forces of technology and logic or the strength of American soldiers — could stop the armies of North Vietnam. He concluded well before leaving the Pentagon that the war was futile, but he did not share that insight with the public until late in life.
With all that, McNamara's obituary in the New York Times offered two quotes that really jumped out at me, because they offer object lessons for the wars America is waging today:
By 1962, the White House and the Pentagon devised a new strategy of counterinsurgency to combat what Mr. McNamara called the tactics of “terror, extortion, and assassination” by communist guerrillas. The call led to the creation of American special forces like the Green Berets and secret paramilitary operations throughout Asia and Latin America.“Counterinsurgency became an almost ridiculous battle cry,” said Robert Amory, who in 1962 stepped down after nine years as the C.I.A.’s deputy director of intelligence to become the White House budget officer for classified programs.
Sound familiar? It is worth remembering that today's debate over counter-insurgency is not new and that the focus on COIN as a means of fighting Communism in the early 1960s would eventually graduate to the conventional military struggle, which killed so many Americans - and many more Vietnamese -- over the next 15 years. It's not to say this will happen in Afghanistan, but it's something that we have a responsibility to be cognizant of today.
This is particularly true in light of something that McNamara said in Fog of War, which should gnaw at every policymaker who sends America's fighting men and women overseas:
“War is so complex it’s beyond the ability of the human mind to comprehend,” Mr. McNamara concluded. “Our judgment, our understanding, are not adequate. And we kill people unnecessarily.”
That last sentence evoked something in me- Dharma
We were not there to win it, just set up political puppets. I hope everyone knows by now it was all about oil. The largest oil fields in the world are off the south vietnamese coast. The only problem was that it was too deep to extract and they gave up trying to get to it. That is the real reason for the pullout.
Last edited by svinayak on 07 Jul 2009 03:15, edited 1 time in total.
4 Jul 2009, 0000 hrs IST, J S Raghavan
Steve, sitting on the davenport with legs crossed like folded spectacles in its case, was tucking into the canary-yellow lemon-rice, setting
aside the sauteed green curry leaves that had done their flavouring job. My daughter Priya, who works for a downtown software behemoth in New York, had asked him over for dinner with a hidden agenda of showing me how certain Americans lean towards Indianness in the post-meltdown scenario. ''Steve craves our onion sambar and pepper rasam,'' she said, serving them. ''And your yummy avial gravy as well,'' added Steve with a bovine movement of his jaw. ''Yes, appa. I should have told you. Steve can cook select items of Indian food more tastily than some of our culinary moms and mamis.'' Steve wriggled with humility. ''Don't you believe her! But, in reality, Americans by and large buy everything including food, pizzas, burgers, steaks and things, all swiped through credit cards with no concern about mounting debt. A case of buy, eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die or diet. But you guys scrimp on food. You cook your own grub and bring packed lunch rather than spend seven full dollars daily at the Taco Bell, Deli or Subway round the corner. That way you save and move into your own town house before one can say graduated payment mortgage! Pizza may arrive here quicker than the 911 ambulance. Yet, we can do well to requisition the services of your Gandhi-capped Mumbai dabbawalas for networking glitch-free cylindrical lunch box deliveries.''
I was reminded of my mother. Years back, on my contest-won trip to London, she thrust on me an unwieldy parcel of idlis, smothered with chilli powder and gingili oil paste that saw me through the first dark, rainy day at Chiswick. My food-fussy orthodox grandaunt, on her terminal trip to Kasi, took a cloth bundle of dry floury foodstuffs to keep her body and soul together at that holy place believed to be ideal for their eventual disunion. I remembered the diminutive prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri, lauded as 'the short answer to Pak's tall talk', who reportedly made his own chapattis in Cairo. Indeed, we are the pioneering food-packers and movers. ''Yea, some of us now carry lunch to the workplace,'' said Steve. ''If only America wasn't overripe on credit and didn't get into its current bind, head honchos above us giving themselves a pat of fat bonuses for posting huge losses wouldn't have removed workers down the line. Like throwing away curry leaves off from a dish this way,'' he said, putting aside one more green leaf.
We were not there to win it, just set up political puppets. I hope everyone knows by now it was all about oil. The largest oil fields in the world are off the south vietnamese coast. The only problem was that it was too deep to extract and they gave up trying to get to it. That is the real reason for the pullout.
The point is that after 30 years has the technology developed enough to extract such oil???
...
When Antony was in Washington on an official visit last year, the son expressed a wish to visit his father. Antony turned down the son’s request because he did not think it was appropriate for the son to share his suite at the Willard Intercontinental Hotel where the defence minister was staying, paid for by the taxpayer. When the American national security adviser, James Jones, visited him in New Delhi about a fortnight ago, Antony was under pressure to sign three defence agreements with the Pentagon. These impinge on the institutional independence of India’s armed forces, and have created an undercurrent of unease among the country’s uniformed officers. Antony stood his ground. His integrity and his firmness (bordering on the stubborn), among other things, constitute a good augury for the UPA government in its new term in office.
I know one is the end-user verification agreement, and another on mutual logististics. Which is the third one?
I was listening to the big O in Russia trying to get them to cooperate with the US and press the "reset" button. Fair enough! Then he says that one of the things the US and Russia can cooperate on is preventing Nuclear weapons from proliferating: and I quote "Today, India, Pakistan and North Korea have Nuclear weapons". Mentioning these three in the same sentence set off a light bulb in my head. And what about the ones who have them and haven't tested yet? You think he doesen't know the level to which every country in the world is when it comes to Nuke capability? I would think Japan can have them in 3 months if push came to shove!
This man really has an agenda to undo the Bush Nuclear deal with India, I wish GOI takes this up when Hillary visits and lets her know in no uncertain terms that this proves, that her boss does not even understand the "basics" why this deal was done. There should be NO discussion on anything related to Nuclear with the US, whether it is civil, military, or proliferation related, period.
What does he expect from Russia vis-a-vis India, makes me wonder.
We will have to wait another 4 years until the recession and all its after effects does the dems in. No point even discussing stage 3 with these double talkers.
If the nuclear deal is undone, it will prolly be the best thing for India apart from being a slap in the face of the UPA which is hell bent on compromising national sovereignty ala Pukistan. So, if Hussein O can pull it off, or at least essentially make the deal unimplementable, we must count our blessings.
Stock 100-200k Tons of Yellow maal from international market and go back to self imposed isolation. This will make every one happy. With empty treasury, Big O should stop entertaining Nawabi hobbies of yesterdays.
Guys: O is turning out to be an Uncle Tom that exceeds even my wildest prediction. Except that he is the poster boy for the Dem's worldview, unllike most Uncle Toms who are Rep's mouthpieces. Notice, he eschews even a phony balance in the manner in which he conspicuosuly avoids Israel when it comes to nukes but mentions India, TSP, and NK. Typically, when the nuke ayathollah big-wigs talk about nukes in the hands of those outside the exclusive P-5 club, they perfunctorily mention Israel even though they do didly squat to thwart Israel's nuke ambitions. Big O doesn't even show that pretense.
derkonig wrote:If the nuclear deal is undone, it will prolly be the best thing for India apart from being a slap in the face of the UPA which is hell bent on compromising national sovereignty ala Pukistan. So, if Hussein O can pull it off, or at least essentially make the deal unimplementable, we must count our blessings.
I think O's handlers (Zbieg, NotBright, Clinton etc) are counting on the fact that Indians can be bought with mere used car salesman talk and slum dog Oscars. Even the the nuke deal imposing stifling conditions on India is too much for them.
You never know, Obama's handlers may be right. Indian leadership can settle for dhimmi status like Japan quite easily.
I have been writing and saying this many times now, that I sound like a broken record, I know. But if anyone had read the latest article penned by PM Manmohan Singh for the G8 summit, it clearly points out to a vision of India that is largely and exclusively economic and his world view exposition, while it calls for multilateralism and a seat at the high table remains firmly rooted in economic matters.
derkonig wrote:If the nuclear deal is undone, it will prolly be the best thing for India apart from being a slap in the face of the UPA which is hell bent on compromising national sovereignty ala Pukistan. So, if Hussein O can pull it off, or at least essentially make the deal unimplementable, we must count our blessings.
I think O's handlers (Zbieg, NotBright, Clinton etc) are counting on the fact that Indians can be bought with mere used car salesman talk and slum dog Oscars. Even the the nuke deal imposing stifling conditions on India is too much for them.
and
Raja Ram wrote:
CRamS,
You never know, Obama's handlers may be right. Indian leadership can settle for dhimmi status like Japan quite easily.
I have been writing and saying this many times now, that I sound like a broken record, I know. But if anyone had read the latest article penned by PM Manmohan Singh for the G8 summit, it clearly points out to a vision of India that is largely and exclusively economic and his world view exposition, while it calls for multilateralism and a seat at the high table remains firmly rooted in economic matters.
The deal is to end India's isolation from the NSG. Its not about India becoming subservient to the US which might happen anyway. Its not via the deal. Even with the US, India negotiated certain clauses which are at the discretion of the US President. No US President, regardless of which party he, she or it belongs to, will give away Presidential powers for the sake of primacy of his office. That will be the end of the US Presidency and start of banan republic path.
R^2, In every scenario that I have looked at, gamed is beyond my ken, its the shortfall in economic growth that inhibits India's power or rise. Every where you look there is competetion between paths to be pursued and policies to be implemented. The next few years its imperative that India grows economics wise and holds together i.e. a law and order problem. The slogan has to be growth with peace and security.
So while I did not like the deal for it puts India's security concerns in an outside power's sphere of influence, MMS pursuing growth at this juncture is the right thing. I want internal security and a unity of purpose for all Indians also to be pursued.
If Nuke deal is not implemented from US and it gets scrapped. I will donate 1000Rs to Anaath Ashram. We already got India specific agreement with IAEA, consummated deals with Russia and France. Who cares about others. Hussein's presidency started one day, it will end one day. Something that begins must end. His popularity is plummeting, wait till next year and he will be reviled.
It was a non-"Hussein's presidency" that allowed RU/FR to make those deals. FR + RU - all along - prayed with that presidency. That same presidency can undo all.
Yes, it was a non-Hussein admin that signed the deal, but remember that the strictures, backdoors & conditions on the deal were inserted by Hussein's party in the Senate, with prolly Hussein himself being party to those backdoor legislations.
While the Dubya admin might have had good intentions (ending India's isolation & letting FR/RU deals go through) behind the deal, Hussein harbours no such intentions, he will push for CRE overtly or otherwise. The trouble is that with dhimmi-alpha MMS in power, the UPA will gladly de-nuke India.
It was a non-"Hussein's presidency" that allowed RU/FR to make those deals. FR + RU - all along - prayed with that presidency. That same presidency can undo all.
Rao Sahib
Hussein sahib is not that stupid. If he does that and fox news starts calling him failure by reneging on the deal made by POTUS at that time. America will loose credibility and business. There is nothing Imam Hussein can do about it except making it painfully slow, this tardiness will cost his country more than it will cost us anything. We are used to living in sweltering heat of 40 deg C, but are they willing to lose $20-40 Billion in business that will put about 500k people to work.
Sarkozy is a sentimental guy who knows how to play politics at home front. He sided and chimed with Imam Hussein. Putin on the other hand, is cold, calculative, spinster who only cares about what is best for Russia. They will not let their business derail because Imam Hussein is in charge. Russians even gave us Cryo engine design at the height of Clinton Presidency. Lease a nuke sub right under the nose of Imam Hussein.
^^
Messiah Hussein doesn't exactly care about what the Fox says, he only listens to CNN or the NBC, both of which are dhimmi propaganda machines & these channels will always propagate the dangers of Yindian nucular proliferation. Economy, employment & profits are last things on his mind as Hussein leads USA on the glorious path of the Soviet Union.
While FR & RU may be willing to do business with India, it is best that we go alone. IMHO, we do not need a civilian nuclear programme, all that we have should be purely for military purposes. Face it, nuke plants generate 3% of our power & even per MMS's grand psychedelic dreams, that figure will rise at best to 6% if the nuke deal gets operationalized. This deal is a waste of public money apart from the dangers of CRE. The fact that we are betting on a sector as minuscule as the nuke power sector while doing nothing on the thermal or other renewable options points to absolute (& deliberate?) lack of thought in national policy making by the UPA.
The deal adds a codocil to the NPT. It does not recognize India as NWS but does not condemn it for that. It makes them defacto legal.
All the rest is fluff. It might happen that GOI might buy a couple of plants from US as baksheesh but further commerce is based on mutual interests. And as world turns that might be the course that will be adopted.
The not investing in alternates is to convince the US and the gang that India is sincere in the nuke power path to get the NSG waivers.
No international issue in India’s post-independence history has evoked as much domestic and international controversy as the India-US Nuclear Deal, concluded on July 18, 2005, between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W Bush. Paradoxically, the heat and controversy generated in our Parliament worked to India’s advantage, as New Delhi was able to secure assurances from Washington, DC, on issues like guarantees of uninterrupted fuel supplies and reprocessing of spent fuel, which would have otherwise not been forthcoming.{my point too! The BO admin wants to negate these. That is the crux of the initiatives underway.}
Most analysts agree that while the Opposition BJP made valid points and expressed genuine concerns on the impact of the agreement on India’s strategic nuclear programme and its ability to conduct nuclear weapons tests in the future, the arguments put forward by the Communist parties, alleging that the agreement would undermine the pursuit of an ‘independent’ foreign policy, then and even now, remain specious. The opposition of the Communist parties, which led to their withdrawal of support to the previous UPA Government, strengthened the perception that their actions only complemented the opposition being mounted internationally by China, against the termination of international nuclear sanctions on India.
The UPA Government, in turn, failed to cogently explain to the people of India that what was being undertaken was an effort supported strongly by former Russian President Vladimir Putin and former French President Jacques Chirac, to end global nuclear sanctions on India. Even today, few people realise that with global demand for oil set to outstrip supplies, oil prices in the long-term are likely to rise significantly and become increasingly unaffordable. Moreover, with concerns about global warming and environmental pollution rising, India has to look for non-traditional and non-hydrocarbon options to meet its energy needs. With India unable to import uranium ore because of global nuclear sanctions, existing nuclear power plants with a capacity of 4100 MW were generating barely 1500-1600 MW. Following the nuclear deal, imports or uranium from sources ranging from France and Russia to Kazakhstan and Australia are now possible.
Energy security for the country can be enhanced significantly only by stepping up indigenous energy production. This process would be accelerated if we tap the virtually unlimited reserves of thorium within the country. But, utilising thorium reserves is a time consuming and complex process. This process would involve, first running nuclear reactors based on imported uranium ore and then using the reprocessed spent fuel for plutonium-based fast breeder reactors, the first of which is to become operational shortly. With Indian scientists, according to Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar, having “mastered” the use of thorium-based fast breeder technology, the third stage will be the serial production of thorium-based indigenous fast breeder reactors. The crucial advantage of this route is that recycled fuel can produce 60 to 90 times the energy derived from current processes of fuelling reactors exclusively with uranium ore. It is important to remember that if we maintain present rates of economic growth, we would have to import three times the total electrical energy we produce today, by the year 2050, unless we devise alternate, indigenous energy options.
Contrary to the fears expressed when the nuclear deal was signed, India is not moving in a any great hurry to conclude agreements with the United States till its concerns on guarantees of fuel supplies and reprocessing of spent fuel are credibly addressed. What has happened instead is that Russia has taken the lead with agreements to build two more rectors of 1000 MW each in Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu, with arrangements in place to build eight such reactors in coming years. Moreover, sites have been identified in Maharashtra, West Bengal, Orissa, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, which can each accommodate nuclear power reactors producing around 12000 MW of electrical power.
But India needs to act quickly on issues like handing over a separation plan of its nuclear facilities to the IAEA and enacting legislation consistent with the provisions of the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for nuclear damage, if it is to cooperate on nuclear power generation with countries like France, Canada and the United States, where nuclear power companies, unlike in Russia, are privately owned.
While there were initially doubts on whether the Obama Administration would abide by the letter and spirit of the 123 Agreement concluded on July 22, 2008, there are indications that it is now working to address issues like reprocessing of spent fuel, which have to be unambiguously clarified, before India can sign any agreement for import of nuclear power plants with American companies, which are now largely Japanese owned and operate out of countries ranging from the UK to South Korea. Despite this, those who believed that the signing of the India-US Nuclear Deal would clear the way for India getting access to dual use high-technology items from the US have yet to be proven right. There is nothing to suggest that there has been any easing of such restrictions since the Obama Administration assumed office. This has to be an item of high priority for discussions when US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits India.
Speaking in Washington on March 23, the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy Shyam Saran made it clear that while India remained committed to its unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing, there were serious reservations about the CTBT because the treaty was not “explicitly linked to nuclear disarmament” and the manner in which it was adopted was obviously meant to circumscribe Indian nuclear options. Moreover, he added that while “we cannot be part of a discriminatory regime where only certain states are allowed to possess reprocessing or enrichment facilities”, we would be willing to work with the US to curb nuclear proliferation. Another crucial issue which Mr Saran alluded to was India’s readiness to accede to a Fissile material Cut off Treaty, provided that it was a “multilateral, universally applicable and effectively verifiable” treaty. India has to insist on the treaty being non-discriminatory and internationally verifiable, given China’s readiness to transfer fissile material and nuclear weapons know-how to Pakistan.
Finally, India could take the moral high ground internationally by calling for the outlawing of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons and for de-alerting nuclear arsenals worldwide. Given the opinion of the World Court, which declared the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons as inadmissible in International Law, such moves by India will enjoy widespread international support.
I could have posted this in the nuke thread but it more relevant here as all the issues are US related.
A pattern we see in both the Indo-US nuke deal & in treaties like CTBT etc is the question of "who sets the stage & terms of discussion". In the Indo-US deal, the UPA government set the stage with a plan for achieving energy independence by 2050. So, when there was opposition to the plan, this opposition was weakened by the fact that there was no alternate plan for achieving the same goal.
Same with CTBT, FMCT etc - here the U.S is setting the stage & terms of what the nuclear disarmed world will look like, obviously designed to suit itself. As long as we keep talking in terms of the CTBT & how unfair it is, we are only playing defense. Instead, what India should do IMVHO, is float an alternate version to these treaties. This should be a "fair & equitable vision" of a nuclear disarmed/controlled world, as seen by India. Lets call this NFWT - Nuclear Free World Treaty. We can definitely come up with a much more fair version of this treaty, which we then try to get buy-ins from different countries. Start with our allies & non-nuclear weapon states which feel most threatened by the nuclear ones.
Will the world laugh at us: it might. But we can slowly but surely let this gather momentum. Then we dont discuss CTBT at all - we just dismiss it, stating that NFWT is CTBT/FMCT done right.
This will show world stewardship, mingled with rational self interest.
Prem, India has presented this many times and was ignored or politely told come back later. There is an IFS officer called Rakesh Sood who has written many times about getting to zero. Look him up.
The Model NWC prohibits the use, threat of use, possession, development, testing, deployment and transfer of nuclear weapons and provides a phased program for their elimination under effective international control.
I think that is a very good idea, that India should take some lead on a Global Nuclear Disarmament Treaty, which shows a pathway for the NWS to disarm completely.
India should start by getting some other 3rd level powers to sign on it first, countries like Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Venezuela, South Africa, Germany, Scandinavian countries, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Phillipines, Thailand, and Malaysia. Then India can explore whether we can get all other NAM members on board.
Earlier we were not a nuclear mower, so nobody took us seriously. Now people may think otherwise.
Credibility was gone - out of the window the day NSG "voted" to allow India in.
IF the US cannot do business and the others can, then that equation cannot hold either.
Remember BOTH France and Russia sided with the US on a lot of counts. They also wanted to push GNEP (which seems be dead under this admin!! But that is a diff story).
Is there anyone here who believes 9/11 was a insider job ?
--- NSA Security running amok to plug leaks about 9/11
Jul 7, 2009, 00:17
(WMR) -- WMR has learned that the National Security “Q” Group, responsible for security, has grown to an immense security and counter-intelligence force, with an estimated one thousand government employees, contractors, and paid informants. NSA’s Security force is reportedly primarily tasked with plugging any leaks of classified or other information that points to U.S. government’s involvement with the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
---
Mods - If you think this does not belong here please delete the message.
Washington (PTI): The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has sought to take top Congressional leadership into confidence in her endeavour to take the India-U.S. relationship to a new level, which she fondly says is Version 3.0.
Less than a fortnight left for her first trip to India as the Secretary of State, Ms. Clinton had a breakfast meeting with more than a dozen top Congressional leaders from both Democratic and Republican parties on Wednesday, coming from both the chambers of the Congress — the House of Representative and the Senate.
"I appreciate the Administration's determination to strengthen our strategic partnership with India in security, trade, and many other issues of mutual interest," John Cornyn, the Republican Senator from Texas, said after the meeting.
Mr. Cornyn is founder and co-chair of Senate India Caucus.
Ms. Clinton herself was its co-chair last year from the Democratic side.
The statement coming from Mr. Cornyn, a critic of the Obama Administration reflects the bipartisan support the India-U.S. relationship has gained in the last one decade. Clinton, aware of this fact, wants to build on it to, what she says, "deepen" the strategic partnership with India.
The State Department spokesman, Ian Kelly, said Ms. Clinton had broad discussions with U.S. Congressmen on her India trip. "I am not prepared to talk about details, besides previewing her trip and talking about a number of issues on the bilateral agenda," he said.
Attending the crucial meeting with Clinton yesterday morning were Howard L. Berman, Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs; besides Congressmen John Crowley, Jerry Lewis, Jim McDermott, Frank Pallone, Gary Ackerman, Ed Royce and David Price.
Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Senator Richard Lugar, Ranking Member of the Committee; and Senators Robert P Casey, and James E. Risch also attended the meeting.
"Today I had the opportunity to speak directly with Secretary Clinton and several of my colleagues about the United States' strong partnership with India," Mr. Cornyn said.
"India is the world's largest democracy — and one of the world's biggest and most dynamic economies. During this decade, India and the United States have cooperated more closely than ever before," he said.
"I look forward to continuing this conversation as co-chairman of the Senate India Caucus and will continue to rely on the valuable input I receive from many of my Indo-American constituents in Texas," he said.
If Hillary wants a decent welcome, she should avoid speaking on
1. Kashmir
2. Afghanistan: decreasing India's role in Afghanistan in deference to Pakistan's sensitivities
3. Decreasing our troops strength on the Indo-Pak border.
If she wants to make India happy, then
1. Unconditional offer to join UNSC as a permanent veto-holding member may not be bad
Government on Thursday said that the United States has not expressed support for a permanent seat for India in an expanded United Nations Security Council. "While the US has stated in the UN that it supports expansion of the Security Council in both permanent and non-permanent categories, it has not expressed support for a permanent seat for India in the expanded Security Council," External Affairs Minister S M Krishna told the Rajya Sabha in a written reply.
...
...
DeMint: America is ‘Where Germany Was Before World War II’
By David Weigel 7/9/09 9:42 AM
Last night, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) gave a short talk and Q&A at at the National Press Club about his book “Saving Freedom.” DeMint told a room of around 100 people about a conversation he’d had with an Iranian immigrant who was panicking about the surge of government spending and control under President Obama and the Democrats. Americans should listen to immigrants like her, said DeMint.
They understand socialism. They understand tyrants. But none of us have ever had it here. We don’t even know what it looks like. Part of what we’re trying to do in “Saving Freedom” is just show that where we are, we’re about where Germany was before World War II where they became a social democracy. You still had votes but the votes were just power grabs like you see in Iran, and other places in South America, like Chavez is running down in Venezuela. People become more dependent on the government so that they’re easy to manipulate. And they keep voting for more government because that’s where their security is. When our immigrants get here, they’re worried, because they see it happening here.
DeMint worried that it was the “eleventh hour” for freedom, but he disputed a question from a man who wondered if America was ripe for another revolution. “The reason I’m convinced we can do this in a civilized way is that I’ve seen, on a number of issues, that when people get informed and want to change their government, the government will change.”
In a CNN exclusive interview, Pakistan military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said in return for any role as a broker between the United States and the Taliban, Pakistan wants concessions from Washington over Islamabad's concerns with longtime rival India.
We should expect more "friendly advice" from the coalition against terror.
In a CNN exclusive interview, Pakistan military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said in return for any role as a broker between the United States and the Taliban, Pakistan wants concessions from Washington over Islamabad's concerns with longtime rival India.
Go ahead. Make my day. Pakis - stupid as they are - have dug their grave. All India has to do is say "prove it that you can".
George W. Bush was president for eight years, some say eight long
years ... so if you believe they were long years, and you're
one of those who believe he got dumber and dumber the longer he
remained in office, how do you feel about the
following?
Had George W. Bush made a clumsy joke at the expense of the Special Olympics (viz., helping the intellectually handicapped), would you have dismissed it as a non-issue?
If George W. Bush had given an iPod to the Queen of England containing
videos of his speeches, would you have thought "how cute!"
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of SaudiArabia , would
you approve?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and referred to "the Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as the understandable slip of a Harvard law grad?
If George W. Bush had appointed people to high places whose flawed character impaired them to the extent that they had difficulty remembering to
file, much less pay, their income taxes, would you have dismissed this
as minor cock-up that will all work out for the betterment of the
nation?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have
approved?
If George W. Bush had taken a cue from Hugo Chavez and politically dragooned a Republican Congress to allocate 5.6 Billion dollars for the creation of a civilian volunteer security force as strong and well equipped as the regular Army, mandating that this quasi-military force fall under his
personal command and control, would you have been concerned?
If George W. Bush had proposed doubling the size of the national debt, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed doubling the national debt again over the next 10 years, would you have dismissed it with a "tsk, tsk"?
If George W. Bush pushed the passage of a $785 Billion Stimulus bill and promised transparent tracking to reveal precisely how monies from the bill would be spent, then postponed oversight until 2010, would you approve or
would you think something "fishy"?
If Bush had promised 48 hour advance posting of the same bill on the internet, but only released it to the public two hours before congressional approval,
wouldn’t you have questioned his ethics?
If Bush's White House Staff had spent over $300,000 flying Air Force One low over New York (for a publicity photo fly-by) scaring the hell out of the
city’s residents, wouldn't you have expected Bush to make the pictures
public? Would you have approved? Obama won't give them up, yet he saw
fit to release the secret "torture memos".
If George W. Bush had been "addicted" to using a TelePrompter and seldom giving a speech without having one, would you have approved? Would you think he was intelligent?
If George W. Bush had pre-approved/pre-selected the list of reporters allowed to ask questions at his press conferences and refused to call on the
correspondent from MSNBC (FOX with Obama), would you have approved? Is that a fair and balanced news conference?
If George W. Bush and a Republican Congress had given hundreds of millions of dollars to a group (the right-wing equivalent of ACORN) after its
members had been convicted of voter registration fraud, would you
approve of them doing the 2010 Census, which will determine
congressional districts for the next 10 years? Will you trust ACORN in
2010?
Would you have approved of George W. Bush moving the census from the Department of Commerce into the White House and putting his Chief of Staff in control of the counting?
In the aftermath of 9-11, if you knew George W. Bush prohibited the CIA from
water boarding Islamic extremists who possessed information we needed to
prevent attacks that could potentially killed millions of Americans, would you have approved?
Oddly enough, Barack Obama has committed all these faux pas in just 17 weeks -- so brace yourself, sit back and enjoy, we still have approximately
three years and eight months remaining for more surprises. Or
probably seven years plus because with the help of the press, we
continue to look the other way and don't see where we are
headed!!!!!
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world.
I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."
“India is asserting itself in ways we didn’t imagine possible” a decade ago, with “foreign investment, its technological reach, the importance of Indian corporations, and this creates frictions with the United States,” says Stephen P. Cohen
While India has “a growing capacity and willingness to act” on global problems, its relationship with the United States has yet to be tested during Mr. Obama’s watch, says Evan Feigenbaum, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for India under Mr. Bush. On strategic issues, from cutting carbon emissions to ratifying a global nuclear nonproliferation treaty, the two sides need to “manage disagreements towards compromise,” he says.
“India is asserting itself in ways we didn’t imagine possible” a decade ago, with “foreign investment, its technological reach, the importance of Indian corporations, and this creates frictions with the United States,” says Stephen P. Cohen
While India has “a growing capacity and willingness to act” on global problems, its relationship with the United States has yet to be tested during Mr. Obama’s watch, says Evan Feigenbaum, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for India under Mr. Bush. On strategic issues, from cutting carbon emissions to ratifying a global nuclear nonproliferation treaty, the two sides need to “manage disagreements towards compromise,” he says.
Some abstract mumbo jumbo formulations. In real, hard-core practical terms, US is playing its cards right and getting everything it wants from India including its containment through arming TSP to the teeth, and smothering TSP terror against India through deft diplomatic speak. And India is just a mute spectator; far from asserting itself. Hilary is going to do a mega equal equal when she goes to India & TSP, and there will be more such abstract nonsesne to soothe Indian ego.
At the same time, he says India needs to exert leadership on threats to global security if it wants to be treated like a world power. “So far, India’s been a bystander” on the spread of nuclear weapons, Mr. Cohen says, “running away from any larger arms-control agenda” by refusing to join efforts to stop trafficking of weapons materials.
Nuclear arms have long been a point of contention. India has resisted signing a comprehensive test ban treaty unless the entire world moves to nuclear disarmament. While the United States wants to stop a regional arms race, India has been adding to its nuclear arsenal, as have its neighbors China and Pakistan.
So now lets pressure India, its easiest!
Daal mein kala hai. I would not discuss anything wrt Nuclear or even ratify anything new for the next 3 years, 8 months. It obviously feels India is just as bad as China and Pakistan, and maybe North Korea too; and let me not forget Iran.
The developed countries developed based on cheap fossil fuel, and now they want to shut another door on India (like with the P5), even though its emissions are 1/100 times lower per capita than the developed countries? No one in the West wants to listen to this logic. I would watch trade with the US too. Not get in too deep with no alternate vendors, and pay only when goods are delivered.
As long as they practice fuzzy math and voodoo calculus, best to push NAM and MMS is doing this, I see.
Days before US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives here on her first official visit after taking charge, India is learnt to have firmed up a site each in Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh that will be dedicated for the first US nuclear reactors after the nuclear deal.
...
It’s learnt that officials from both sides have also firmed up the Technology Safeguards Agreement which will allow India to launch satellites built with US-origin equipment. This is expected to be signed during the visit and is an important precursor to the Commercial Space Launch Agreement, which has been pending for a long time.
Another crucial agreement that is on the verge of being finalized over the next couple of days is the End-User Verification (EUV) Agreement, which would then permit US to sell defence products to India.
However, sources said, US is not keen to go public on this because exceptions have been made for India, deviating from the standard format of the EUV so as to accommodate Indian concerns over on-site inspections. This agreement was delayed due to Left opposition in the last UPA tenure. Another agreement on science & technology cooperation will also be concluded during the visit which will set up an endowment fund — with equal contributory partnership between the two countries — to facilitate exchange of people and projects.
...