Nuclear India or Nuke Free India?

[kumarmohit]

True. But if nobody had them, the extra resources could be put in better places. I have no objection to missile defense. It is the offensive power I find unnecessary.

Frankly Dear, the world already has enough extra resources to take care of people in trouble, What is lacking is the will of politicians.

The politicians are as unwilling to invest in development as they are unwilling to fire nukes. I am not saying that they are totally idiots, they do strike on good ideas, like the Palna scheme where the govt is going to adopt girl child if parents are unwilling to keep it but frankly this is going to make more people leave their children to govt care. If they can mount such a thing they have more than enough resources, also the scheme is good but what if some one leaves a boy? They cant leave the kid alone as that would be barbarianism but the boy cant be financed because of the law.

The problem is not lack of resources, but vested interests and lack of will and complications which occur from case to case and time to time which can both be good and bad.

On the other hand, if any country used a nuke against another country, whether their target had them or not, the rest of the world would be forced to guard their interests. That in itself would be a sufficient deterrent for most countries.

I already mentioned terrorists are excluded

 

[lalam]

I guess this has become a matter of importance for we don't wanna feel left behind do we...All other countries has it so why should not india in fact we'll feel small if we do this...The future don't look so good with all this nuclear but we have no choice but to get in the pack for fear of elimination.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Nuke Free India? no way

 

[planetcall]

This world is preparing for war on warfooting. Having a deterrance is of no use until you have an edge over your enemy. This is a blind race and we are very much part of it. Nuclear technology has given us a new dimension of growth and an ultimate power to our militia. We have two big enemies eyeing for the very opportunity so we also have to prepare. Development is essential but also essential is to have the WMDs so that the message goes clear that India is not what it used to be in 1961.

 

[Aberforth]

@ thunderbird.117 - Nazis committed crime against humanity and the perpretors have been broght to book for it. Same is the case with Saddam and his Baath regime. What about Ronald Regan and George Bush? Did we see them brought to book for genocide in Iraq, Vietnam, Guyana, Libya, Somalia, etc? No and not likely too soon. Remember the Swiss bank's proofing from political influence survived Hitelr but not the Bush regime. Who is worse?

What if for some weird chain of reasoning US, Pakistan or China decides to bomb the hell out of Delhi and Mumbai? The whole world is more likely than not to look and talk political ideologies while people die. Which isn't likely to happen so long as India is nuclear. It will be akin to tiger feeding on a poisonous toad.

China's history is a proof how the world kicks around a weak country for their own interests. Today everyone likes to keep a wide smiley face in front of China inspite of their domestic market getting rollered by the Chinese. It wouldn't have happened and China would have been under US occupation if USS Missouri went ahead and China had no nukes in the 1960s.

@ planetcall - Well said. India needs to show the world it is no longer a potential colonial destination for anyone and India dictates the terms in today's political scenario in its own interests rather than others quoting their greedy 'wants'. A strong millitary and defence system is a strong 'self esteem boost' for such to happen.

 

[ssdivisiongermany1933]

No chance of denuclearizing ,it's a rubbish idea

 

[gxsaurav]

I don't want to see a "Nuclear Bomb" India, rather I want to see a "cheap nuclear power plant for 10 years " India.

Having nuclear bombs alone does nothing to make a country. It's methods & ideology does. We can & will progress even if we do not have nuclear bombs

 

[premsharma]

No way without Nuclearisation. Thanks Vajpayee for parading Guts. It was public demand.

 

[Stick]

I don't want to see a "Nuclear Bomb" India, rather I want to see a "cheap nuclear power plant for 10 years " India.

Having nuclear bombs alone does nothing to make a country. It's methods & ideology does. We can & will progress even if we do not have nuclear bombs

Dada,

The day India has no Nuclear Bomb, first Pakistan will attack with support of China.

We experience same situation with we didn't have Nuclear Bomb in 1965, 1972 and 1975.

I didn't forget about Kargil but it was not Open War.

 

[gxsaurav]

war means money. pakistan & China are making money through india. No way they are gonna attack india.

 

[thunderbird.117]

war means money. pakistan & China are making money through india. No way they are gonna attack india.

Oh really. I do not believe that crap. Have you learnt that you should never trust your neighbours?. Have you learnt that both this countries who said they are friends and will backstab you once you believe them. This two countries have attacked India in the past and occupied indian terrority.

 

[Stick]

war means money. pakistan & China are making money through india. No way they are gonna attack india.

They can make billion times more if GRAB India.

 

[gxsaurav]

ok ok....i don't know much about polytics. I said it cos right now i don't think india needs nuclear bomb, it needs electricity, food, & water...along with jobs

(slides in the shadow)

 

[thunderbird.117]

ok ok....i don't know much about polytics. I said it cos right now i don't think india needs nuclear bomb, it needs electricity, food, & water...along with jobs

(slides in the shadow)

Who said that was politics?. It was a basic knowlege and a common sense.

 

[gxsaurav]

In my prespective, common sence means giving the people of a country better way of living, removing poverty, developing bussiness & lifestyle, cuting taxes & subsidies...

 

[thunderbird.117]

In my prespective, common sence means giving the people of a country better way of living, removing poverty, developing bussiness & lifestyle, cuting taxes & subsidies...

I doubt if that is going to happen because :-

country better way of living :- For me a better living should be like this. Tell this people to stop cutting the trees and destroying ecosystem. It happens due to People Greed and selfish. That is increase the price of private vehicles or limit the number of vehicles and decrease price of public transport. Bangalore is getting crowded and it is stinking due to pollution.

removing poverty :- Name one country which does not have poverty?.

developing bussiness & lifestyle :- That is happening slowly.

cuting taxes & subsidies:- Say that to indian government. They are planning to increase all the tax for everything.

 

[Aberforth]

Dada,

The day India has no Nuclear Bomb, first Pakistan will attack with support of China.

We experience same situation with we didn't have Nuclear Bomb in 1965, 1972 and 1975.

I didn't forget about Kargil but it was not Open War.

Pakistan may not laungh a full frontal attack against India but seeing their chargin today we can well imagine the diplomatic edge they would have had in any discussion had India no nuclear weapons. Now when there are talks its more like, "Hey boy (Pakistan), don't be too demanding. I'll show you mine if you show me yours.". If India had no nuclear bombs and Pakistan and China had the situation would have been, "Hey boy (India), don't be too oversmart, we have big balls and big guns, give us way." It would have been a diplomatic weakness and defeat for India in most talk because of the nuclear scare. As we all know US does and did nothing to keep Pakistan in check despite all its war and agression against India we can never trust UN or US to do anything about diplomatic defeat.

What India's edge in Nuclear technology does is teach other countries who are hostile that India is not far behind and not worth messing with. Of course that also ensures no country will attack India due to fear India could equally hit back or at least cause them substantial damage if they do. India, as we know is responsible and unless grave threats won't go for wanton destruction of even hostile countries, forget others. In world politics power plays a big role and ethics and humanity gets a backseat (some say its meant for the weak).

 

[thunderbird.117]

Pakistan may not laungh a full frontal attack against India but seeing their chargin today we can well imagine the diplomatic edge they would have had in any discussion had India no nuclear weapons. Now when there are talks its more like, "Hey boy (Pakistan), don't be too demanding. I'll show you mine if you show me yours.". If India had no nuclear bombs and Pakistan and China had the situation would have been, "Hey boy (India), don't be too oversmart, we have big balls and big guns, give us way." It would have been a diplomatic weakness and defeat for India in most talk because of the nuclear scare. As we all know US does and did nothing to keep Pakistan in check despite all its war and agression against India we can never trust UN or US to do anything about diplomatic defeat.

What India's edge in Nuclear technology does is teach other countries who are hostile that India is not far behind and not worth messing with. Of course that also ensures no country will attack India due to fear India could equally hit back or at least cause them substantial damage if they do. India, as we know is responsible and unless grave threats won't go for wanton destruction of even hostile countries, forget others. In world politics power plays a big role and ethics and humanity gets a backseat (some say its meant for the weak).

True. I heard that USA gave weapons to Pakistan when they were fighting a war with india. They are now given billons of dollars to pakistan for every terrorist they catch and give them to USA. It is like USA is the one who is sponsoring terror and helping this extermist and saying that USA is making the world safer. They are making it more dangerous everyday.

 

[Aberforth]

It is like USA is the one who is sponsoring terror and helping this extermist and saying that USA is making the world safer. They are making it more dangerous everyday.

From a political standpoint US dislikes terrorism and extremism in its homeland but its foreign policy is entirely different. Destabilising governments of stable democracies or republics is its favourite pastime. Panama, North Korea, China, Guyana, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba anyone? Same is the story with US-Pak relations. Because India was self sufficient and decided not to join any blocs during the cold war gave US a complex and they decided to keep check on India's independence and neutral stance from world politics. If there is constant political/millitary conflict between countries, development is hampered as resources and energy is spent on millitarisation and conflict resolutions. Millitary and political stability are the first steps to ensure economic stablity and social empowerment. Correct me if I am wrong, I'm open to logical alternative ideas.

 

[Ganeshkumar]

Ya it is USA Who r sponsoring Terrorism by giving Billions of dollars to Pakistan which is having main EXPORT of only TERRORISTS.
But I think soon US n Pakistan will be in cold war...