indian_warrior
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2010
- Messages
- 204
- Reaction score
- 0
so? what's your point?
My point is be happy with Iranian gas.
US-Pak negotiations on nuclear cooperation?
- Thread starter pkd
- Start date
My point is be happy with Iranian gas.
rangbaaz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 0
typical india media just like their bollywood where alone sunny deol takes over the forces
their news are also like their drama serials - saas bahu stuff
rangbaaz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 0
Chanakyaa
BANNED
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 6,538
- Reaction score
- -36
- Country
- Location
N Deal has no Alternatives and its the NSG waiver that helped india get 7 Nuclear Deals.
also,
1. Gas power is much costlier than nuclear fuel.
2. China cant sell uranium to pak.
3. Gas deal has no Political, Strategic Benifits.
4. Gas power is not clean as Nuclear..
also,
1. Gas power is much costlier than nuclear fuel.
2. China cant sell uranium to pak.
3. Gas deal has no Political, Strategic Benifits.
4. Gas power is not clean as Nuclear..
kidwaibhai
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 1,494
- Reaction score
- 0
Can you provide statistics for that please.
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
Shouldn't it be easier to convince our own government to build the Reservoirs and dams, amicably, than to go around the world and convince other people's governments?
Kalabagh is such a failure of politics... If it is built today Pakistan can kick some serious energy crisis butt with the addition of a 4000 MW power station. Don't use it for irrigation, keep the flood gates open 24/7, just use it for power generation and the End user remains unaffected.
Kalabagh is such a failure of politics... If it is built today Pakistan can kick some serious energy crisis butt with the addition of a 4000 MW power station. Don't use it for irrigation, keep the flood gates open 24/7, just use it for power generation and the End user remains unaffected.
rangbaaz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 0
1) you need to spend a lot more on nuclear plant to get started - once it's started, yes, it's cheaper
2) i can't comment on that - even if we don't get uranium we can look at other fissile materials
3) I am not sure how govt. is dealing with, though I would love to sign this deal with Iran
4) True that it's cleaner, but do you think people care when they are this crisis? All this global warming and stuff doesn't mean anything then
cheers
rangbaaz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 0
surely, it would be best if we could come up with something of our OWN, but it takes time to get things in place. we definitely needs to plan to overcome this crisis and build our plants, but all of this can't be done within an year. surely it would take some time, so for the time being, I see Iran's deal the best.
I agree that Kalabagh would have been such a success, but it's not working (due to whatever reasons) we must look at alternatives.
Cityboy
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2010
- Messages
- 745
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Majority of world electricity produced through the thermal power plants. .pakistan has so much of coals. .still why so much load shading of 16hrs? In my city ahmedabad, 100% electricity comes 4m thermal power plant and no load shading for even 1 minute. .even in america thermal power plants contritubes highest...with nuclear energy cost and efficiency r major concerns
DaRk WaVe
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2009
- Messages
- 5,239
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Pakistan seeking nuclear deal with US
The Irish Times - Tuesday, March 23, 2010
PAKISTAN WANTS the US to provide it with nuclear technology for a civilian energy programme and is to push the Obama administration this week for a deal.
Islamabad is seeking a civilian nuclear deal to mirror the package granted to India by George W Bush, a proposal that would prove contentious in Washington given Pakistans uneven record on combating extremist groups and its sale of nuclear technology to states hostile to the West, led by the former head of its programme, Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan.
A spokesman for Pakistans ministry of foreign affairs said yesterday: Pakistan is an energy-deficit country and were looking for all sources, including nuclear, to meet our requirements.
A team led by Pakistans foreign minister that includes the army commander and spy chief is due to arrive in Washington tomorrow for meetings with their US counterparts, including secretary of state Hillary Clinton, in an effort to relaunch dialogue between the two allies. Afghanistan and help for Pakistans economy will also be on the agenda.
Experts believe Pakistan holds the key to stabilising Afghanistan and is trying to position itself as the sole conduit to talk to the Taliban.
The US meetings are designed to restart talks that were last held in 2008. Pakistan believes it has suffered from the violent fallout of the US-led intervention in Afghanistan and requires further assistance, despite a recent $7.5 billion (5.5 billion) US aid injection.
* Pakistan wants to investigate Dr Khan on charges of transferring nuclear secrets to Iraq and Iran, a government lawyer said yesterday.
The petition by the Pakistani government for court permission to investigate the nuclear scientist was filed after the Washington Post reported that he had tried to help Iran and Iraq develop nuclear weapons. (Guardian service; Reuters)
Pakistan seeking nuclear deal with US - The Irish Times - Tue, Mar 23, 2010
xebex
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,964
- Reaction score
- 0
N-deal for Pak? US denies, India remains anxious
ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI: The US on Monday denied it was considering offering Pakistan a civilian nuclear deal similar to the one it signed with India, refuting purported remarks of Anne Patterson, its ambassasdor to Pakistan, to the contrary.
"The US has not entered (into) negotiations on a civil nuclear agreement with Pakistan," a PTI report said, quoting the spokesperson of the US embassy in Islamabad.
The denial came even as ambassador Patterson's remark suggesting that the US was trying to establish parity between India and Pakistan on the nuclear energy issue triggered concern in New Delhi. Foreign minister S M Krishna reacted to Patterson's remarks by reminding the US of Pakistan's notorious proliferation record. A similar stand was taken by the principal Opposition, BJP, with Yashwant Sinha, chairman of the standing committee on external affairs, criticising any attempt to establish parity between India and "a rogue state like Pakistan with the worst proliferation record".
The apprehension of a shift in stand came from Patterson's interview to a Pakistani American magazine which quoted her as saying that the US and Pakistan would have "working-level talks" on civilian nuclear energy as part of the strategic dialogue between the two countries beginning Wednesday.
On Monday, however, the US spokesperson in Islamabad sought to rebut the perception of a policy shift. "The US is committed to helping Pakistan address its real and growing energy needs, and we look forward to cooperating with Pakistan in ways that are compatible with Pakistan'e economic, environmental and security needs and with the US' international commitments and policies," the spokesperson said.
In a swift response, foreign minister Krishna said, "I think, the US would always look into the track record of every country with which they are going for certain understanding or signing a treaty. I am sure the US will remember that the proliferation of nuclear weapons was because of certain indiscretions of certain countries and more particularly Pakistan and the clandestine activities which they carried on."
Congress party said it would only comment after official US announcement on the subject, but the BJP described reports as "disturbing". Yashwant Sinha, chairman of Parliament's standing committee on external affairs, said, "The US has established parity between a nuclear rogue and India at a time when they are accusing Iran of proliferation. It is perverse and brings back the hyphenation that was supposed to be over."
He further said that Patterson's remark seems to undercut the US's claim that the Indo-US nuclear deal was an exception which could not be extended to any other country, leave alone Pakistan, "the worst proliferator".
G Parthasarathy, former diplomat, said the US move was a "violation" of the July 18 agreement, because it was premised on US and India sharing commitment against terrorism and nuclear proliferation.
In her interview, Patterson appeared to be downplaying concerns over Pakistan's proliferation record. "Earlier on, non-proliferation concerns were quite severe. I think we are begining to pass those and this is a scenario that we are going to explore."
Officials said India would keep a close watch on the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue starting in Washington this week because of the assessment that the US is looking for more ways to "accommodate" Pakistani demands, to "do more" for them to incentivize them to act against terror groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Daniel Markey, senior fellow Council for Foreign Relations in Washington, said, "I think the Obama administration is trying to be responsive to Pakistan's requests as a means to demonstrate its commitment to bilateral partnership. But there is zero chance that Pakistan will get a nuclear deal of the sort that we have with India. They cannot get it through Congress or the NSG."
On a more realistic level, Pakistan has a small nuclear programme, with three reactors -- Chashma 1 & 2 and Khushab (all built with Chinese assistance). While they produce a small amount of power, they are also the source for Pakistan's uranium-based nuclear weapons programme. Incidentally, both are run by Pakistan's powerful military. So there cannot be a separation of civilian and military nuclear sectors in Pakistan.
Anupam Srivastava of University of Georgia said, "Pakistan has not completed the process of strengthening its export control systems following the A Q Khan scandal, nor has it provided access to A Q Khan. On the other hand, US has worked with Pakistan's Special Plans Division on programmes including personnel reliability programme to shore up security of nuclear weapons facilities." This is a reference to George Bush spending $100 million to train Pakistanis to make their nukes more secure -- the overriding concern being that they should not fall into the hands of terrorists or guarding against "leakage" by insiders of the system.
N-deal for Pak? US denies, India remains anxious - India - The Times of India
ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI: The US on Monday denied it was considering offering Pakistan a civilian nuclear deal similar to the one it signed with India, refuting purported remarks of Anne Patterson, its ambassasdor to Pakistan, to the contrary.
"The US has not entered (into) negotiations on a civil nuclear agreement with Pakistan," a PTI report said, quoting the spokesperson of the US embassy in Islamabad.
The denial came even as ambassador Patterson's remark suggesting that the US was trying to establish parity between India and Pakistan on the nuclear energy issue triggered concern in New Delhi. Foreign minister S M Krishna reacted to Patterson's remarks by reminding the US of Pakistan's notorious proliferation record. A similar stand was taken by the principal Opposition, BJP, with Yashwant Sinha, chairman of the standing committee on external affairs, criticising any attempt to establish parity between India and "a rogue state like Pakistan with the worst proliferation record".
The apprehension of a shift in stand came from Patterson's interview to a Pakistani American magazine which quoted her as saying that the US and Pakistan would have "working-level talks" on civilian nuclear energy as part of the strategic dialogue between the two countries beginning Wednesday.
On Monday, however, the US spokesperson in Islamabad sought to rebut the perception of a policy shift. "The US is committed to helping Pakistan address its real and growing energy needs, and we look forward to cooperating with Pakistan in ways that are compatible with Pakistan'e economic, environmental and security needs and with the US' international commitments and policies," the spokesperson said.
In a swift response, foreign minister Krishna said, "I think, the US would always look into the track record of every country with which they are going for certain understanding or signing a treaty. I am sure the US will remember that the proliferation of nuclear weapons was because of certain indiscretions of certain countries and more particularly Pakistan and the clandestine activities which they carried on."
Congress party said it would only comment after official US announcement on the subject, but the BJP described reports as "disturbing". Yashwant Sinha, chairman of Parliament's standing committee on external affairs, said, "The US has established parity between a nuclear rogue and India at a time when they are accusing Iran of proliferation. It is perverse and brings back the hyphenation that was supposed to be over."
He further said that Patterson's remark seems to undercut the US's claim that the Indo-US nuclear deal was an exception which could not be extended to any other country, leave alone Pakistan, "the worst proliferator".
G Parthasarathy, former diplomat, said the US move was a "violation" of the July 18 agreement, because it was premised on US and India sharing commitment against terrorism and nuclear proliferation.
In her interview, Patterson appeared to be downplaying concerns over Pakistan's proliferation record. "Earlier on, non-proliferation concerns were quite severe. I think we are begining to pass those and this is a scenario that we are going to explore."
Officials said India would keep a close watch on the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue starting in Washington this week because of the assessment that the US is looking for more ways to "accommodate" Pakistani demands, to "do more" for them to incentivize them to act against terror groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Daniel Markey, senior fellow Council for Foreign Relations in Washington, said, "I think the Obama administration is trying to be responsive to Pakistan's requests as a means to demonstrate its commitment to bilateral partnership. But there is zero chance that Pakistan will get a nuclear deal of the sort that we have with India. They cannot get it through Congress or the NSG."
On a more realistic level, Pakistan has a small nuclear programme, with three reactors -- Chashma 1 & 2 and Khushab (all built with Chinese assistance). While they produce a small amount of power, they are also the source for Pakistan's uranium-based nuclear weapons programme. Incidentally, both are run by Pakistan's powerful military. So there cannot be a separation of civilian and military nuclear sectors in Pakistan.
Anupam Srivastava of University of Georgia said, "Pakistan has not completed the process of strengthening its export control systems following the A Q Khan scandal, nor has it provided access to A Q Khan. On the other hand, US has worked with Pakistan's Special Plans Division on programmes including personnel reliability programme to shore up security of nuclear weapons facilities." This is a reference to George Bush spending $100 million to train Pakistanis to make their nukes more secure -- the overriding concern being that they should not fall into the hands of terrorists or guarding against "leakage" by insiders of the system.
N-deal for Pak? US denies, India remains anxious - India - The Times of India
rangbaaz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 0
bhai sahib, yeh baat humaray hukmaranon ko kaun bataey? wohi ghadari kar rahay hain awam kay saath aur yehi awam hai jo unko vote day kar bithati hai apnay sar pay, to phir bilkul theek ho raha hai.
Hyde
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,543
- Reaction score
- 20
- Country
- Location
don't worry Diamer-Bhasha dam is bigger than Kalabagh and it is also approved and there is no dispute on it. If i am not wrong the construction work is supposed to start this year or the beginning of next year and after 5-6 years we will be able to tackle with energy crisis more sufficiently. Also Dasu dam is there which is also not controversial like Bhasha
