The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Atomic Buddha - fuelling New Delhi > Comments

Atomic Buddha - fuelling New Delhi : Comments

By Jonathan J. Ariel, published 16/8/2007

Hostility to New Delhi’s nuclear ambitions is at best, couched in ignorance, and at worst, in bigotry.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
"Whatever reactors we put under safeguards will be decided at India's discretion. We are not firewalling between the civil and military programs in terms of manpower or personnel. That's not on."
India had no intention to quarantine its military program from its civilian program because nuclear scientists would work across both programs. - India's chief scientific adviser, Rajagopala Chidambaram, in an interview with The Hindu newspaper.
- http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/uranium-sale-to-fuel-arms-race-imran/2007/08/15/1186857593210.html

http://www.myspace.com/icanw
Posted by Atom1, Thursday, 16 August 2007 11:47:48 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
you could do something about this,if you had cir and/or direct election of ministers. it's called democracy. but you don't, and you can't do anything about it.

so why talk?
Posted by DEMOS, Friday, 17 August 2007 7:47:00 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'd like to meet the real Jonathon, he is obvioiusly very opinionated and has a lot of scholarship and research in his writing, which I have also read. But Mate, don't think you are always right, the unwarranted assumptions and vituperation for those you don't agree with may be remembered when you're older. "Atomic John" could be the 21st century soubriquet applied to John W.and his Mate George W. who he follows in everything- it seems.Robert G. was our P.M. in a former time who earned the nickname "Pig-Iron Bob" I wonder if he still thinks his exports did a lot of good too.
Posted by TINMAN, Friday, 17 August 2007 3:50:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SHONGA

You claim I’m all for ignoring the NPT and my policy is one of: ‘sell, sell, sell’. My point is that the NPT is a joke. Some people will advocate (with a straight face) that we don’t sell to India (a non NPT signatory but good nuclear citizen and a democracy to boot) yet in the same breath suggest we sell to major non western powers who, when not engaged in selling nuclear technology to rogue states, are too busy oppressing their own people.

Ho Hum

I agree with your sentiment ‘the use of the bomb was the INEVITABLE outcome of the historical processes that lead to its manufacture in the first place’. But that does not negate the fact that dropping the bomb brought forward the end of the War in the Pacific, saving countless Allied and Imperial Japanese lives. Does it?

michael_in_adelaide

I agree with your comment ‘The real motivation behind this is to build a coalition of India, Japan, Australia and the USA to counterbalance China's emergence'. But I ask you, is it so bad that we nail our democratic colours to a mast composed of like minded democracies? Are we ashamed of our Christian values and our belief that no men should live with his freedom denied him? Must we walk on the Asian stage with our tail between our legs and head bowed unable or unwilling to say to all who will listen that our resources are indeed for sale but not values.

Plantagenet

You are spot on when alluding to Rudd being a sino-sycophant.
My point on Muslims is simply to venture that non state actors such as Islamic terror groups pose the greater proliferation risk and not nation states. And hence arguments proposed by Kevin Rudd and Gareth Evans (and others)are poppycock.
Posted by Jonathan J. Ariel, Friday, 17 August 2007 8:54:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In response to DEMOS ("it's called democracy. but... you can't do anything about it.")

http://www.votenuclearfree.net
Posted by Atom1, Friday, 17 August 2007 11:50:15 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The NPT apologists need to draft a new treaty.. the one promised in article VI of the NPT.

How about the destruction, under UN supervision, of all nuclear weapon cores within 5 years?

By 2012 a world free of nuclear weapons. A simple treaty to draft.. only a few articles required.

India has said it will sign such a universal treaty.
Will the US? Or Russia? Or China?
Posted by john frum, Saturday, 18 August 2007 11:18:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy