India backs Iran's nuclear rights

[brational]

President of Pakistan is shia ..

Aamir bhai pakistan bich me kyun aaya?

 

[lynx]

It seems the mullahs of Iran r so optimisic that they can wipe out israel from the world map. I am with them, but I wud like to see the map of Iran afterwards.. A big hollow!!! bravo mullahs, its like Iranian D### in Iranian A##

Actually a lot of educated urban Iranians are against this saber rattling buy Mullahs. They hoped that moderate Mousavi will put an end to it. Mullahs sensed this movement and they put their entire weight behind the nutcase Ahmedinejad and he won the last general election. We all saw how brutally the Mullahs suppressed the ant-Ahmedinejad movement.

Its sad that the whole of Iran will suffer for the craziness of Mullahs.

 

[lem34]

If India really wants to show an independent streak they should sign up to the ipi pipeline and encourage peace trade and interdependance in our area. It is suggested that India pulled out afte being asked to by the Americans.

 

[majesticpankaj]

If India really wants to show an independent streak they should sign up to the ipi pipeline and encourage peace trade and interdependance in our area. It is suggested that India pulled out afte being asked to by the Americans.

India will do the things which are in her national interest..

accepting and allow a line through pakistan may be a suicidal step in future (I may be wrong just my perception).

US is bringing a lot of things on table for India.. we cannot blindly back Iran when eccentric leaders of iran are giving uncalled remarks

 

[lynx]

If India really wants to show an independent streak they should sign up to the ipi pipeline and encourage peace trade and interdependance in our area. It is suggested that India pulled out afte being asked to by the Americans.

In this current scenario IPI remains a 'pipe dream' as no major bank is going to finance it, no major insurance agency is going to insure it and no major construction company is going to touch it with a 1000 ft pole.

 

[lem34]

So the fact that americans asked India not to participate in ipi had no part to play? To some extent you missed the point. India needs oil, iran needs customers for its oil, pakistan would get transit fees. It would encourage all three states firstly protect the pipline and secondly not jeopardise the arrangement by wars etc ie mutual interests. But hey the pipeline has already been started between Iran and Pakistan and eventualy if not india china will mot likely participate

 

[majesticpankaj]

So the fact that americans asked India not to participate in ipi had no part to play? To some extent you missed the point. India needs oil, iran needs customers for its oil, pakistan would get transit fees. It would encourage all three states firstly protect the pipline and secondly not jeopardise the arrangement by wars etc ie mutual interests. But hey the pipeline has already been started between Iran and Pakistan and eventualy if not india china will mot likely participate

India problem is not china... India's problem is highly unstable region ... allowing pakistan to control our energy lines is very critical... just in case of war how would be handle that?? there is one more thing India has demanded iran that ownership should be transferred at India's border but Iran was not ready for that... so in case something happened to lines still we have to pay to Iran...

Giving pakistan controls over our energy lines is like axing our own leg..

 

[lem34]

India problem is not china... India's problem is highly unstable region ... allowing pakistan to control our energy lines is very critical... just in case of war how would be handle that?? there is one more thing India has demanded iran that ownership should be transferred at India's border but Iran was not ready for that... so in case something happened to lines still we have to pay to Iran...

Giving pakistan controls over our energy lines is like axing our own leg..

Listen my point is that things like ipi wwould encourage peace and discussions. it would make fighting less likely. Dont you think we need and should encourage pease in our region

 

[majesticpankaj]

Listen my point is that things like ipi wwould encourage peace and discussions. it would make fighting less likely. Dont you think we need and should encourage pease in our region

yaa.. definitely peace should be encourage no doubt about it... but don't u think it is very early to say .. the process would be gradual .. still a lot of CBMs need to be taken to decrease the trust deficit... Pakistan hasn't given india MFN status yet.

Once the situation becomes normal we can move ahead with this. at present pakistan is highly unsatable and GOI doen't have faith in pakistan either

I am talking quite frankly dont take it negatively but we cannot surrender the assets which are of strategic importance

 

[lem34]

yaa.. definitely peace should be encourage no doubt about it... but don't u think it is very early to say .. the process would be gradual .. still a lot of CBMs need to be taken to decrease the trust deficit... Pakistan hasn't given india MFN status yet.

Once the situation becomes normal we can move ahead with this. at present pakistan is highly unsatable and GOI doen't have faith in pakistan either

I am talking quite frankly dont take it negatively but we cannot surrender the assets which are of strategic importance

We have to start somewhere.

 

[majesticpankaj]

We have to start somewhere.

surely... we can start with our activities.. but a gas pipeline is of huge importance cannot be sacrificed...

 

[pmukherjee]

India is still transitioning from the Nehruvian idealistic era to a more rationalistic and pragmatic one. That is why this hiccup about the IPI. We should never have abandoned the IPI. This is one decision which will haunt us for decades.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Actually India voted against Iran sometime back

India and the Iran Vote in the IAEA | FPIF

Why they changed their mind? I mean vote against it at one time and support it now

 

[majesticpankaj]

Why they changed their mind? I mean vote against it at one time and support it now

India voted against the nuclear aspiration of Iran not against the peaceful nuclear energy purpose..

Iran being a signatory of NPT is obligatory on her part to allow full inspection of her nuclear installations to IAEA..

where is the contradiction ??

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

The issue is whether Iran has a "right" to nuclear weapons. If Iran develops nuclear weapons, then many other nations, including the USA, will feel justifiably threatened.

Why all rights belong to USA and let me remind you that it was not Iran who dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki so we know who is more threatening . There is a huge difference between saying and doing.

It is an open secret that Israel since its inception has refused to comply with any UN resolutions, let alone come forth with verifiable information about its own hidden nuclear program which they developed with support of USA.

If Israel can develop and hide its nuclear program, and refuse to sign up to the NPT or allow UN inspections, why is that ok, and why is a double standard applied and Iran is always scolded for non compliance, and Israel is not?

I will tell you why. America and its allies deep down believe they and Israel are responsible members of the international community, and beholden to democratic and free-market practices, while Iran is not. If the pro-western Shah had remained in power, the West wouldn`t have had the slightest objection to his pursuit of a nuclear (and nuclear weapons) program, since they considered him a staunch ally.

Now the West is faced with an intractable dilemma, and accused Iran of breaking the rules. Iran is within its rights under the NPT to develop a civilian nuclear program, and its defiance is legitimate (since it doesn`t like to be bullied) , and not to be considered or equated a threat to the West. That is a poor excuse for concealing the real intention here, which is to prevent Iran from becoming a powerful regional player in the Middle East and the West wants to contain its influence as far as possible.

The developing world has every right to harness nuclear energy for peaceful and civilian purposes, and until proven guilty of a crime (i.e using them in a war ect), no one including the US has the right to dictate terms to others, so as to prevent them from developing and prospering and becoming powerful on the world stage.