Passage of India Nuclear Deal Sends The Wrong Message To North Korea, Iran
Passage of India Nuclear Deal Sends The Wrong Message To North Korea, Iran
Last week, foreign relations committees in both the House and the Senate quietly passed resolutions expressing support for a potential U.S.-India nuclear energy deal. The proposal would provide India with access to nuclear fuel, technology, and reactors from the United States.
Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), access to peaceful nuclear technology has been provided by nuclear states only to those nations that agree to forego nuclear weapons, something that India has not pledged to do nor has the U.S. required. Congressional committees carved out an exception to the nuclear trade law so that India can receive nuclear technology. But the committees refused amendments that would have required the Bush administration to certify the technology would not be used to benefit the Indian nuclear weapons program.
The U.S.-India nuclear deal is “going [to] weaken our case with Iran; it’s going to weaken our case with North Korea,†argued Christopher Paine, senior nuclear programs analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA), who voted against the nuclear deal, explained why:
Terming India as a ‘‘reliable steward’’ of nuclear technology, Watson said her concerns were beyond India. ‘‘I do not fear India with nuclear power. I do fear a world where both India and the US must face a nuclear Iran or a nuclear North Korea. Our key tool for constraining nuclear designs of Iran and North Korea has been Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, or NPT,’’ Watson told The Indian Express. Watson said her main fear was that this legislation would damage the NPT to the point that we would make it harder to stop the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programmes.
The Bush administration does not seem the understand the difficulties. Bush said in response to the recent North Korean missile tests: “I view this as an opportunity to remind the international community that we must work together to continue to work hard to convince the North Korean leader to give up any weapons programs.†The India nuclear deal makes that case harder.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Passage of India Nuclear Deal Sends The Wrong Message To North Korea, Iran
imagine that…
July 6th, 2006 at 3:06 pm“Watson said her main fear was that this legislation would damage the NPT to the point that we would make it harder to stop the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programmes.”
The Iranian program isn’t being stopped by annoying smaller then multiple glass parking lots, and NK already has nukes, so its a bit to late for stopping their nuclear program.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pmoopps, anything, not annoying
July 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pmSo, 20 -25 years from now when India attacks the United States with a nuke-u-lur weapon, we’ll know who to thank for showing them how to make them?
July 6th, 2006 at 3:08 pmyep we already know who to thank for china and korea
July 6th, 2006 at 3:09 pmPakistan is already closely aligned with America’s enemies, this will make it that much harder to thaw relations with it and prevent it selling nuclear technology to those enemies.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:10 pmHere we go again,
July 6th, 2006 at 3:11 pmsetting a double standard that the rest of the world
will see as patronizing those we have an interest in.
Cheap labor from India for corporate call centers &
tech support should not be attached to Nuclear policy!
But the committees refused amendments that would have required the Bush administration to certify the technology would not be used to benefit the Indian nuclear weapons program.
yea… happy f’n birthday, mr. president…
July 6th, 2006 at 3:16 pmBush is trying to destroy the nuclear non proliferation treaty
July 6th, 2006 at 3:20 pmAs India made bombs by not being a member
Therefore should not be praised
The american Goverment should be shot ….idiots
I have totally had enough get rid of bush before i personally fly over there and do it myself
July 6th, 2006 at 3:22 pmSo who’s next for the permanent seat on the UN Security council, can you say India, sure I knew you could.. Those Chinese and Russians just don’t understand us like the Indians do.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:28 pm“Liars”, “hypocrites”, “ecopolitical opportunits”, whatever labels or qualifiers you wish to use, there is no doubt that the US goverment is either insane or diabolically evil. I mean, really, who on the following list represents the gravest nuclear threat to the world:
- North Korea
- Iran
- Isreal
- United States of America
This is getting more insane by the moment. It’s as if the hard lessons learned over the last 50 years are somehow totally irrelevant. Well, except for the one that involves two vaporized cities in Japan that will forever be forced to remember the lesson of how morally inexcusable the pursuit of nuclear weapons technology is.
There will be no sympathy deserved for when that lesson is learned AGAIN in Miami, or New York, or San Francisco.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:29 pmUmm……not so sure abot that…..I usually agree with the articles here….but theres a world of difference between India and Iran or North Korea for that matter……India is big crazy, diverse democracy and for all its faults its shown that democracy and rule of law do work in a third world scenario…..so why not India…..I ask a simple question to all the liberal progressives here…would any of you have a problem if france or UK or canada or australia were given a similar deal…..don’t give me all the bs of npt, i kno that..its racism, pure and simple…oh yes I am accusing the ‘enlightened ones’ of racism…that is all this article is, a blatant example of racism!
July 6th, 2006 at 3:32 pm#13
Yes, blame America first! That’s what liberals do best. Forget everything else America has done as a nation for the rest of the world. It must suck being a liberal and have such a negative outlook in life.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:38 pmI know we’re all agast by bushco’s lack of principle, lack of continuity, and lack of thinking ahead. They have no principle outside of their corporate lackeys controlling the world, and they couldn’t be bothered to think ahead. Why? We rule is all they care about. (PS bushies – look up Empire in any encyclopedia. They last what? 100, 200 years?)
So, we aren’t surprised they don’t care enough to think. But if Karma has any say in it, nukes won’t go off in the US. There are easier & cheaper ways to disrupt the US. Last time it only took ‘em 19 plane tickets & some motel rooms. You think their budget just went up to multiple billions to build a nuke & secretly transport it here? NO! But other states having nukes, well that’s a horse of a different color.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:39 pmRix
The problem isn’t exactly India, it is India and Pakistan. The two countries loath each other, and this deal with India is going to make it that much harder to control Pakistan.
Pakistan has demonstrated that it has nukes, and is willing to sell the technology before (They sold it in fact, to North Korea) this deal means it will be harder to prevent them doing it again. That is why selling this technology to India is wrong. Besides, it violates the NPT, and America really should stick to its treaties.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:40 pmrandi – leave your hate at the door. you are a putz.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:41 pmFaiz,
North Korea pulled out of the NPT, forget about that? Not only that, but North Korea has shown that they are interested and have in fact created nuclear weapons. North Korea has attempted to blackmail others by threatening with nuclear weapons. Has India done so?
Iran covered up their nuclear program for 20 years, in violation of the NPT. Iran obviously has an intent to acquire nuclear weapons, something India has already had for many years.
Giving India, an ally, help with peaceful nuclear power after they already have nuclear weapons is not the same thing as demanding that Iran follow the NPT, allow inspections, and reaffirm that they are not building nuclear weapons. The NPT does not make it illegal to have nuclear weapons, it only makes it illegal to produce them.
It comes down to India already having nuclear weapons, and the fact that both North Korea and Iran have threatened other nations with force, have stopped cooperation with inspections, and are not allies of the USA at all.
The only message that is being sent is “sorry guys, but you should have built nuclear weapons before entering into the NPT, and you should be our allies instead of threatening us”. If that message is “wrong”, fine.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:42 pmOh boy the Bush Regime and the GOP Congress are hypocrites about nukes as well > shame on every one of them!
July 6th, 2006 at 3:43 pm#14-Rix,
You obviously do not understand the big picture so let me put in it big letters for you: ALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE BAD REGARDLESS OF WHO HAS THEM. So, to answer your question, I would have the same problem if it were France, Canada, or the state of freaking Maine.
Nuclear technology must not be allowed or condoned to be used in the development of weapons, period. That is understood the world over. So why would the provision that memorializes that have to be removed?
And do not believe for one instant that the USA occupies any moral high ground. If anything, the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:45 pmIndia is an Amazing place
most of the good things in the world have come from India, Yoga, the wheel, the number zero
70% of the country are Vegans and would never hurt any living creature,
– most amazing race on earth the dravidians
But I still say Bush was wrong to break the nuclear non proliferation treaty – Bloody idiot bush is – Go on attack korea but leave Iran Alone – muslims are much much better people than christians too
and As for hindu’s truly amazing people – love india to bits
July 6th, 2006 at 3:46 pmIndia has threatened to bomb Pakistan with nukes on numerous occasions, and Pakistan has threatened to bomb India with nukes in retaliation! Not a good idea to stoke that nuclear fire!
July 6th, 2006 at 3:48 pm#15-Randy,
Beings that I do not accept the label of “liberalâ€, I would not be so intellectually inept as to think that I could speak for them. Unfortunately it appears that you do not maintain such a standard.
Now, I don’t see how your blanket statement of “Forget everything else America has done as a nation for the rest of the world†is even applicable here, especially since you do not reference anything specific, so I will ignore it accordingly.
The problem and issue here is not allowing the development of nuclear weapons. And there is not a nation on earth that can be trusted with them. Period.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:51 pm19#Seixon
Mohamed ElBaradei – director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency – responsible for verifying for other NPT signatories that no source or special nuclear materials had been used in furtherance of a military purpose, had just reported, after more than two years of unprecedented highly intrusive inspections, “I have seen no nuclear weapons program in Iran.”
Get your facts right or switch to a fox news blog site -
July 6th, 2006 at 3:51 pmBruce,
You are wearing the blinkers which the US foreign policy has worn since the begining of the Cold War…..that is the world is divided into parts- either you are with us or you are against us…so since India is cozying up to USSR, they are our enemies…..my friend, the world is more complicated than that…a miserable failure of extemists on both sides of the right-left divide to appraciate it….now as far as South Asia is concerned…why should not the US try to be more far-sighted about Pakistan…a cauldron of mailce which has spread its tentacles far and wide…and you would have to wear really dark glasses not to realise that…..so instead of trying to do something abt it……the US is ‘mollifying’ Pakistan….by ignoring the ‘nuclear black market’ it has run, just to name a few relevant ‘faults’ in this context….by selling it F-16s, no less!..oh joy….look theres a war on terror…and while you and the Bushies both, might disagree on the hows, wheres and the whys…it is quite important that the US actually win it….tho my confidence in the Bushies to achieve anything is zilch.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:53 pmwhy does America not do a your constitution says and stop meddling in foreign affairs
July 6th, 2006 at 3:56 pmalso the UN does not get involved in Internal desputes
For once in my life I aggree with Bush that bloody constitution is a piece of paper
Why not just wipe your arse on it and be done with it
Stay at home and worry about your own people
You are the most evil race on earth
Buggar off
Doodle Bug,
Did I say that Iran has a nuclear weapons program? I said that they want nuclear weapons. Or would you rather have me believe that Iran, in a region where Pakistan, India, Israel, China, North Korea, and Russia have nuclear weapons, a country that hid its nuclear program for 20 years, a country that simply won’t allow full inspections of its facilities, a country with a president who believes in the apocalypse, wants to remove Israel from the map… you would have me believe that they only want a nuclear power program?
Yeah, that’s what Saddam Hussein got a nuclear reactor from the French for too, nuclear power. Yup. Totally.
I think you’ve just proven why people like you would be dangerous to put in power of the USA. You’re willing to basically ignore every single fact staring you in the face and believe homicidal maniacs at their word.
July 6th, 2006 at 3:57 pmIt’s hard work being this stupid
July 6th, 2006 at 3:59 pmForget everything else America has done as a nation for the rest of the world.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:02 pmComment by Randy — July 6, 2006 @ 3:38 pm
Please, name one thing besides the hot dog.
Juan C,
Please, name one thing besides the hot dog.
You can’t even get ahistorical, slanderous remarks correct.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:06 pma country that hid its nuclear program for 20 years, a country that simply won’t allow full inspections of its facilities, a country with a president who believes in the apocalypse
Comment by Seixon
I got it: US
July 6th, 2006 at 4:07 pmHumanist
I agree with you….ALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE BAD….only a mad person could say otherwise…..but my objection is on the following ground:
You see we don’t live in wonderland…so theres a lot of crap in this world….Bush, nuclear weapons, Bush (oh I already said that), diseases etc…..and we live with it…hell any utopia will not have a single gun, but the point is we live in a painful world, so shit happens…and countries and ppl have guns and nuclear weapons! Its not a happy situation but why go after a third world country…oh wait they are monkeys who are not responsible enuf to handle sophisticated tech which only the US, UK, France etc can do. My friend, I understand the big picture too well….You see I have’nt seen anyone say “But wait, we have this thing called Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, which decides on who gets nuclear tech depending on the majority skin color in that country”……So my not so humble conclusion – racism.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:08 pmYou can’t even get ahistorical, slanderous remarks correct.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:10 pmComment by Seixon — July 6, 2006 @ 4:06 pm
Gee. I just wanted to help US. Not even the hot dog…well. Still, you have to name one thing US has done, without any interest, for the world.
35% of Europeans think America is a bigger threat to the world than Iran – WHY
well heres america statistics for you you twat
Sampling of Deaths From US Military Interventions & Propping Up Corrupt Dictators (using the most conservative estimates)
Nicaragua 30,000 dead
Brazil 100,000 dead
Korea 4 million dead
Guatemala 200,000 dead
Honduras 20,000 dead
El Salvador 63,000 dead
Argentina 40,000 dead
Bolivia 10,000 dead
Uruguay 10,000 dead
Ecuador 10,000 dead
Peru 10,000 dead
Iraq 1.3 million dead
Iran 30,000 dead
Sudan 8–10,000 dead
Colombia 50,000 dead
Panama 5,000 dead
Japan 140,000 dead
Afghanistan 10,000 dead
Somalia 5000 dead
Philippines 150,000 dead
Haiti 100,000 dead
Dominican Republic 10,000 dead
Libya 500 dead
Macedonia 1000 dead
South Africa 10,000 dead
Pakistan 10,000 dead
Palestine 40,000 dead
Indonesia 1 million dead
East Timor 1/3–1/2 of total population
Greece 10,000 dead
Laos 600,000 dead
Cambodia 1 million dead
Angola 300,000 dead
Grenada 500 dead
Congo 2 million dead
Egypt 10,000 dead
Vietnam 1.5 million dead
Chile 50,000 dead
July 6th, 2006 at 4:12 pmREAD THE REST OF AMERICAS MURDERING EXPLOIT WORLDWIDE AND FACE THE TRUTH
mmm, numbers like that get me all wet and sticky!
yes, we want india to have the bomb; we want everyone to have the bomb! you silly progressive/liberal/limp-wrists do not realize YET that there is cash in chaos!
mmm, book sales!
kisses,
ann
July 6th, 2006 at 4:14 pmComment by Doodle Bug — July 6, 2006 @ 4:12 pm
July 6th, 2006 at 4:15 pmWell done, buddy.
#28-Sexion,
The empirical evidence is that the leaders of the western nations are homicidal maniacs as well. So why should THOSE homicidal maniacs have nuclear weapons and not the other homicidal maniacs?
That is the beauty of the NPT and the overall disarmament plan that was in place before bush abandoned it. All nuclear weapons should go away. There is no legitimate use of them therefore there is no reason for anyone to have them. Yet if a single nation has them, then, by logic alone, other nations must get them to be able to adequately defend themselves from the nation that does have them. It’s a fool’s parade that unfortunately has too many willing participants, and has the most dire of all endings.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:15 pmNuclear weapons was nearly away forever
Who’s Against a Ban on
Fissile Material?
In a vote of the Disarmament Committee of the United Nations (UN), one and only one nation voted against ElBaradei’s proposal – George Bush’s America. In that same vote, Israel abstained, apparently fearing international interference with their own outlaw nuclear weapons program, and Britain abstained in an act of diplomatic fealty to the “special relationship” between Tony Blair and George Bush. The final tally was 147 nations to one with the two abstentions. In a later vote of the entire UN General Assembly, Israel and Britain abstained, while America and Palau voted against ElBaradei’s verifiable ban on fission, and 179 nations voted in favor of his proposal. The final vote on that occasion was 179 in favor, two opposed (U.S. and Palau), and two abstentions (Israel and Britain).
SOURCE ANTIWAR OR THE UN SEARCH
July 6th, 2006 at 4:23 pmHot dog history
i’m ann coulter, so, i’ll be damned if i am going to source this…umm, perhaps i just made it up?
my point is that even i, ann coulter, DO NOT think the norweigan is ever correct about anything…
la de dahhh….
kisses,
ann
July 6th, 2006 at 4:23 pm#33-Rix,
You make some very good points and I would also agree that racism does factor into the surface level discussions regarding nuclear technology and arms. I also have to state that you have an appreciable sense of humor.
However, in regard to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, I would say that it is a good first step but not the end all solution. Which is why it should first and foremost not be compromised and instead the focus should be entirely on working to eliminate ALL nuclear weapons, whether French, Canadian, Israeli, Pakistani, Chinese, American, etc…
It is beyond belief that the process is moving backward and it is totally unforgivable. There is no sane or logical basis for such.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:24 pmDoodle Bug,
Robert Fisk? Seriously. Bahahaha. You attribute every single death in all of those countries to the USA, when in fact most of them were caused by those countries’ leaders, a war between the USA and them, or the US simply being involved in a war in some kind of manner. Let’s not get cute here, we could dredge up the USSR, China, Hitler, and the colonial powers and get a lot of juicy numbers.
How many of those deaths are in the Western world? None. So why would the Western world fear the USA more than Iran?
Juan C,
I dunno, helping out Indonesia after the tsunami? It’s quite apparent that you’re nothing more than an anti-American hack.
Humanist,
Ah yes, so since the USA has them, a democracy, then Iran with crazy religious dictators should also have them!
So what you’re saying is that all of us should get rid of nuclear weapons and put our faith in dictators in Iran and North Korea to do the same?
Let’s just put it this way: if there was a guy on your street who had a gun a couple feet away from him, while you were carrying a gun, would you agree to just drop your gun hoping that the guy, who had expressed hatred of you, would not attempt to pick up the gun and shoot you with it?
I don’t think you would, but apparently you’d have no problems with putting billions of people at the mercy of Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad…
July 6th, 2006 at 4:26 pmwe should all ban the bomb and let the UN monitor the world
anybody caught out trying to have a bomb or an advantage should be invaded by every other country that dont want the bomb – conventionally
so easy on text
July 6th, 2006 at 4:30 pmin all places, the american conservative magazine had an interesting article describing quite well the rational response of iran towards the bush doctrine of pre-emptive invasion by acquiring nuclear weapons.
for what is worth, i agree that iran would be silly to not arm themselves against their aggressors: the usa and israel.
peace,
james
July 6th, 2006 at 4:32 pm42 Seixon dont preach how American morals are to be please
—Peter J. Robertson, Chevron Vice Chairman, 2003
Amid all the talk of training Iraqi soldiers, heading off a civil war, and protecting Iraq’s fledging democracy, one overriding agenda has been ignored in the debate over the time-table for bringing US troops home: President Bush will not withdraw US forces until US oil companies have secure access to Iraq’s oil.
The process of securing this access involves four steps. The first, restructuring Iraq from a state to a market-controlled economy, was implemented and well underway within the first few months of the invasion. The second, put into motion with the December 15, 2005 election, is the formation of a legitimate Iraqi government with the authority to, among other things, sign contracts with foreign oil companies. The third step is the completion and passage of a new national Petroleum Law which is set to take place this year. The fourth, having enough security on the ground for US oil companies to get to work, is uncertain, and therefore the timeline for full US troop withdrawal remains unknown.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:33 pmYou guys are upset that Bush is giving India Nuke Technology? Where you upset when Clinton gave North Korea Nuke Technology? Man, I hope so and that is the biggest double standard ever!
July 6th, 2006 at 4:37 pm#42-Seixon,
Using diplomacy and the consensus of the international community (ie; UN) will achieve total disarmament, yes. The logic is flawless and I would gladly address it with you if you have specific questions.
But your fearful approach and scenario only helps to substantiate the point that I was making. As long as one country has the weapons (or “gun” in your question), then of course the other country has to have them. That is why NO ONE should have them.
Your assertion that the USA, the only country to ever put to use in warfare nuclear weaponry, should be the overseer of the technology is based only on nationalism and not on logic or even common sense for that matter.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:40 pmI dunno, helping out Indonesia after the tsunami? It’s quite apparent that you’re nothing more than an anti-American hack.
Comment by Seixon
You mean lend some money with huge interest rates so IMF keeps on the usury? Just as any “humanitarian help” US affords. Just read the list Doodle BUg post…any comment about that? Were those humanitarian expeditions? You are really full of shit. Read some history.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:41 pmonly a damned fool (seixon, bush, cheney, rumsfeld, rice) would think that the usa ought to be the sole arbiter and distributor of nuclear technology. it would be analagous to having rush being your pharmicist, ann coulter being your ethicist, or ted stevens your internet czar…
iran has a soverign right to defend themselves against the religious fanatics–the usa and israel–and they realize that one of the only ways to avoid annihlation from these fanatics is to have a nuclear option.
iran with nukes is safer than israel and the usa controlling the game…
July 6th, 2006 at 4:48 pm#41 – Humanist,
I am sorry about the rather strong way in I put what I wanted to say…I kno I have aense of humor..:) and no sense of modesty :)…I don’t want you think I am pro-nukes. For the record I am not. I guess you are more optimistic than I am, becoz there is no way that that a “preacher” west is going to give up nukes….and that is my objection to the NPT. Its always going to be “look we are better than you smelly natives”.
July 6th, 2006 at 4:51 pmJames Risser,
Which country do you live? You obviously hate America so you obviously don’t live here. I know I wouldn’t live in a country I hated.
July 6th, 2006 at 5:09 pm#50-Rix,
You never have to apologize for being passionate about your beliefs. To the contrary, apologies are necessary when one is not passionate about them. One could argue that such is the state of the USA right now, complacent and unmotivated even though the results of the populace’s inactions are the deaths of innocent men, women, and children. I applaud your passion and encourage it.
May peace be with us all.
July 6th, 2006 at 5:11 pmAh yes, so since the USA has them, a democracy, then Iran with crazy religious dictators should also have them!
So what you’re saying is that all of us should get rid of nuclear weapons and put our faith in dictators in Iran and North Korea to do the same?Comment by Seixon
OK. First, a democracy??? After what happened in Ohio and Florida…mmmm…you have to wash your mouth before you talk about democracy, invented by greeks and stained by US GOP. So, that is a debatable argument: you are not a good example of democracy.
Crazy religious dictators? You mean alcoholic leaders who speak with god and think the constitution is merely a book full of nice intentions? You are spitting to the sky and it raining on you, buddy.
As far as I know, nobody in human history has invaded more countries than US, no other country has financed and supported more dictators and coup d´etats than US (The US government spent more money per capita to get the presidential candidate it favored elected in Chile in 1964 than was spent by both candidates (Johnson and Goldwater) in the 1964 election here in the United States.)
July 6th, 2006 at 5:11 pmYou are in a toilet with the people you defend and are all going down. If you support murderers you are absolutely discredited.
I know I wouldn’t live in a country I hated.
Comment by Ben — July 6, 2006 @ 5:09 pm
If you support a government that takes actions to strip you from your liberties, then you live in the country you hate.
July 6th, 2006 at 5:14 pmJames Risser,
Which country do you live? You obviously hate America so you obviously don’t live here. I know I wouldn’t live in a country I hated.
Comment by Ben — July 6, 2006 @ 5:09 pm
thank you so much for your interest in my life. i am an american. a dissenting american whose hatred is focused on the bush crime family, their war-crimes, lies, and disdain for humanity.
i would sort of like to live in the netherlands or southern france and will go as soon as you paypal $40,000 to my account. thanks for the offer!
peace,
james
July 6th, 2006 at 5:15 pm#51-Ben,
There is a monumental difference between hating what a country is doing and hating the country. In fact, I believe that the bible tells you to “hate the sin but not the sinner”.
Your cheap and amateurish attempt at discrediting someone using a simpleton’s logic only succeeds in discrediting yourself.
July 6th, 2006 at 5:19 pmJuan,
I know for you lefty’s, the world is going to crash down any day. I on the other hand try to live more with reality (as much as anyone can). Bush isn’t perfect and should not have invaded Iraq. He also should have controlled congress’ horrible spending habit better. All this doesn’t mean we are all doomed. Bush is gone in under 2 years anyways. Look, most of normal America (the type that doesn’t post on blogs on either side) simply are not stuck in the past furious about each and every mistake our leaders make because it simply doesn’t matter. What happened in the past with Iraq and Over spending on the Budget are in the past and cannot be reversed.
Most of us converse about what is best for tommorrow, but what went wrong yesterday. Do you guys cry over spilled milk for years as well?
July 6th, 2006 at 5:34 pm#57-Ben,
I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about spilled milk. Now spilled BLOOD, that’s an issue that humanity should NEVER become complacent on or indifferent to.
I can see that in your underdeveloped mind that you could care less about all of this unless you feel that it directly affects you. I’m sorry for you that the sophistication of the issues reach well beyond your level of comprehension. However, it is unreasonable to expect everyone else to dumb themselves down so that they would be able to see things your way. It needs to be the other way around and you need to get working on that task immediately.
July 6th, 2006 at 5:53 pmBack in 2001, Project Censored covered this little story on the continuing rip-off of the taxpayer by the inefficient, expensive, dangerous and nuclear-weapon proliferating nuclear power sector. They love to paint themselves as greenies who want to save the world from coal-fired global warming – but they could never do it without the good ol’ US taxpayer:
“U.S. Taxpayers Underwrite Global Nuclear Power Plant Sales
The U.S. tax-supported Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im) is solidly backing major U.S. nuclear contractors such as Westinghouse, Bechtel, and General Electric in their efforts to seek foreign markets for nuclear reactors. Between 1959 and 1993 Ex-lm spent $7.7 billion to help sell American-made reactors abroad.
Most countries do not have the capital to buy nuclear power, so contractors, in order to be competitive, provide 100 percent of the financing. Ex-Im offers terms too good for Third World countries and Eastern European buyers to pass up. If the host country defaults on its loan, the Ex-Im steps in with American taxpayer dollars.”
So what are the terms of that contract with India, anyway?
July 6th, 2006 at 6:10 pmjames,
iran with nukes is safer than israel and the usa controlling the game…
Sure it is, sure it is. You are friggin nuts dude. Seriously.
Juan C,
It’s quite apparent that my earlier statement is correct. Yes, the USA has done many stupid things in their past, as have many other countries. We live in 2006, not 1964. Extrapolating all our previous mistakes onto the nation as it is right now would be like holding Germany accountable for Hitler’s crimes 60 years afterwards.
OK. First, a democracy??? After what happened in Ohio and Florida…mmmm…you have to wash your mouth before you talk about democracy, invented by greeks and stained by US GOP. So, that is a debatable argument: you are not a good example of democracy.
Yeah, I mean Iran is clearly a democracy. There the religious leaders pick who gets to run for office, and then the people get to choose among them! Why, that is much more of a democracy than the US, where small amounts of voter fraud happen across the country due to something called human nature. What did happen in Ohio and Florida? Let me guess, the Republicans rigged both elections since they knew beforehand that it would come down to those two states. Right? Never mind having to actually prove that, it’s so much easier to spout off wild conspiracy theories without anything to back them. Back in reality, mostly everyone has thrown people like Robert Kennedy into the dumpster, his zany theories shat upon by even the most outspoken Democrats.
Keep rationalizing your hate of the USA buddy.
Crazy religious dictators? You mean alcoholic leaders who speak with god and think the constitution is merely a book full of nice intentions? You are spitting to the sky and it raining on you, buddy.
Oh no, Bush believes in God. Help! I mean, it’s not like 90% of the USA is religious or anything! Bush is a crazy person! He’s religious! Well actually, I do agree with that, but not the type of “crazy” that you’re thinking of.
July 6th, 2006 at 7:45 pmseixon, you ignorant slut!
do you think the usa/isreal cabal is more or less likely to begin a war in iran if iran is properly defended? if you say ‘less likely’ you would be right for the first time in your life.
not having a war in iran is a GOOD thing. the chances of a war in iran is MORE LIKELY if the usa/isreal cabal can invade a weakened iran than a strong one. or at least people with a brain, read, not a ‘bush fascist like seixon’ think so.
to clarify, in the universe of the living, war is not the prefered state; i understand that in your sick skull, war is prefered, especially when it is caused by the usa/israel cabal…but you know, no one really give two shits about your opinions.
go away, pest!!!
July 6th, 2006 at 8:12 pm#14-Rix
July 6th, 2006 at 8:27 pmYou Got it right man. The liberals have trouble calling a spade a spade. You cannot compare Pakistan and India. US needs to make India stronger to face off Islamic fundamental and slippery Chinese. Remember Chinese kept the plane in Hynan (spell) island for a long time even after repeated urging from our President ?
Bush has identified India as it’s stregic ally for future. Go Bush. You got balls.
What? Mixed messages? Oversimplification of complicated issues?
July 6th, 2006 at 8:55 pmFavoritism? Odd diplomacy? Not the Bush administration!!
Randy: Yes, blame America first! That’s what liberals do best. Forget everything else America has done as a nation for the rest of the world. It must suck being a liberal and have such a negative outlook in life.
Can you give this one-dimensional stuff a rest? You see, I love both my daughter and my country. However, whenever either does something against my values or any universal values I lovingly call them to account. That does not mean that I forget about all the good that they do. I just want them both to live up to their best.
July 6th, 2006 at 9:20 pmthis may be of some interest, somewhat relevant to the subject:
Ferment Over ‘The Israel Lobby’
by Philip Weiss
Intellectuals can only dream of having the impact that John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have had this spring. Within hours of their publishing a critique of the Israel lobby in The London Review of Books for March 23, the article was zinging around the world, soon to show up on the front pages of newspapers and stir heated discussion on cable-TV shows. Virtually overnight, two balding professors in their 50s had become public intellectuals, ducking hundreds of e-mails, phone messages and challenges to debate.
Titled “The Israel Lobby,” the piece argued that a wide-ranging coalition that includes neoconservatives, Christian Zionists, leading journalists and of course the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, exerts a “stranglehold” on Middle East policy and public debate on the issue. While supporting the moral cause for the existence of Israel, the authors said there was neither a strategic nor a moral interest in America’s siding so strongly with post-occupation Israel. Many Americans thought the Iraq War was about oil, but “the war was motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure.”
July 6th, 2006 at 9:52 pm…
@ #23
This just shows how ignorant some of u are over here in regard with foreign policy matters.
I’d like to ask this gentleman abt the source of his statements…..
July 7th, 2006 at 4:59 amJust a question, to demonstrate how difficult is international policy, and that not everything is about good or bad for the USA:
In what state lets this deal to Pervez Musharraff, the dictator of Pakistan, and fervent ally of the USA in the WOT in Afghanistan? Remember: he is a key ally to deploy forces in Afghanistan and pursuit terrorists in the frontier between the two countries?
The decission of facilitating nuclear war technology to the biggest enemy of Pakistan, India, while basing the USA forces in Pakistan would mean a great level of anger between the people of Afghanistan against infidels (americans), and against their forced leader, Musharraff.
Bush and Republican cheerleaders, you’re creating the USA enemies of tomorrow.
July 7th, 2006 at 8:05 amRix
No, you have the blinders on. Take it this way, what would the US’ reaction have been to Russia selling nuclear technology to Cuba have been? Oh, that’s right, you moved in your nuclear arsenal to show Russia just how bad an idea this could be.
Pakistan is already a wavering nation, it is already less then fond of America, doing this, and what is the outcome? Do you really want a nuclear Iran? Realise, America doesn’t have the funds to fight a non-nuclear Iran right now.
Further, by breaking the NPT, you are basically doing away with the major barrier to any other countries who want to sell their nuclear technology. Just now China decides to enter into a deal with Nigeria (Oil for Nukes anyone?) or the Russians decide its time to open house in order to balance their budget. Hell even South Africa could get in on the act and sell some of our technology to Zimbabwe. Once the NPT is off, it is off, and while the world isn’t divided into us and them, not everyone is exactly a friend.
July 7th, 2006 at 9:07 amExactly. It’s opening the Pandora’s Box.
July 7th, 2006 at 9:17 amYes, blame America first! That’s what liberals do best. Forget everything else America has done as a nation for the rest of the world. It must suck being a liberal and have such a negative outlook in life.
Comment by Rand
July 7th, 2006 at 12:34 pm===================
Painting with a pretty broad brush,aren’t you?
James Risser,
Which country do you live? You obviously hate America so you obviously don’t live here. I know I wouldn’t live in a country I hated.
Comment by Ben —
July 7th, 2006 at 12:40 pm=====================
Oh,please.Not that stale nonsense.
Have you all not realized that this deal is about nuclear energy not WEAPONS. Don’t you think it’s better to have a country that has been outside of the NPT regime for 30 plus years to be brought into the safeguards? Also no change to USA law will take place until negotiations between USA and India over the IAA 123 section is completed, India and IAEA safeguards are completed, and the NSG gives its unanimous consent to the actual transfer of nuclear fuel.
The Iran North Korea argument is flawed as well. Both Iran and NK have been outside international law and built up weapons programs while a signatory of the NPT. While I believe no country should have these weapons, who would you rather have them, a responsible democracy or a theocracy and dictatorship?
Maybe you should all do some research before you rant.
July 7th, 2006 at 4:20 pmFor those who may be interested, you may refer to my detailed response at: http://kirannk.blogspot.com/
July 8th, 2006 at 3:08 pm