Posted on 03/02/2006 5:15:41 PM PST by indcons
The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog has welcomed a nuclear agreement between the US and India.
International Atomic Energy Agency chief (IAEA) Mohammed ElBaradei said it would boost non-proliferation efforts.
The UK and France also hailed the deal. But it was criticised by some members of the US Congress, who said it would lead to the spread of nuclear weapons.
Under the accord, India gets access to US civil nuclear technology and opens its nuclear facilities to inspection.
US President George W Bush - who finalised the agreement with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Delhi - called it "historic".
However, Mr Bush admitted it might be hard to get it through the US Congress, which must ratify it.
The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says Mr Bush has a fight on his hands, after being accused of sending out the wrong signal just as America and its allies try to limit Iran's nuclear ambitions.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
The U.S. tends to lose on every deal it makes with other countries.
This "deal" will be no different.
Thanks for your "wise" insights.
The Prez mentioned that building nuke plants in India would take some pressure off world oil demand, which would help keep the price down in the US. Same logic should work for China, which is already building a lot of nuke plants. Asia is building 80 nuke plants now.
That would explain why the US only has twice the GNP of whichever country is number two.
Ping
Increased nuclear power should also lead some some energy independence for all democratic, non-muslim countries around the world.
Of course... They've got the bomb already. Bush has persuaded them to abide by the rules.
It must be a very different world for countries that absolutely don't need ME oil.
The U.S. is over 8 trillion dollars in the hole. $8,000,000,000,000. Eight million billion.
If you were 100,000 thousand dollars in the hole, would you be considered solvent?
Solvent? By whose standards?
David Gregory is happy though!! Did you read the threads about how David Gregory, NBC's WH correspondent, made an ass of himself on the Imus show this morning? The guy appeared to be in a hashish-induced giggling fit. He also went on to call India a wonderful "language" and the like. It was great to see Gregory make a fool of himself but sad to see the MSM treat this success by Pres. Bush with such superficial coverage.
Aha! An understanding of the nature of capital in the Industrial Age is in order.
This deal removes that stumbling block. It allows for International oversight of India's Nukes and allows India to buy state of the art technologies. It was a very smart move no matter how much the Perpetually Pissed Caucus trys to deride it.
In some ways Im happy that this isnt a big MSM story.
When it passes congress though I want it on the frontpage.
Then I want folks to ask "Why cant we have clean safe nuclear power too?"
"It allows for International oversight of India's Nukes and allows India to buy state of the art technologies. It was a very smart move no matter how much the Perpetually Pissed Caucus trys to deride it."
You got it right, Johnnie. Agree 100%...this was a very smart, logical and a brave move by Pres. Bush. An article I read yesterday noted that when Clinton was in India, he partied a lot, danced around with people from all over the country, and was just unprepared to discuss policy.
On the other hand, Pres. Bush eschewed these photo-ops (like the visit to the Taj Mahal) and concentrated on the vital partnerships re: WOT, energy independence, trade, and spread of democracy.
Despite his success, the president's visit has been continually mocked by the American, European, and Australian MSM for the last 2 days.
How about removing comment 15 also?
This "lead" will disappear over the next ~30 years.
Can anything be done to return America to the position of overwhelming economic advantage, short of withdrawal from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty?
I like Idia... but I don't think we should share ANY of our technology with anybody.
Thats a rather cynical thing to say.
The US is the grandaddy of realpolitik (remember the Kissinger era?) and seldom makes deals if it doesn't stand to gain in some way. This deal can be a winner for both parties but it needs working, as usual.
Besides, cheer up. India is an anglophone nation and the english speaking nations have seldom let down uncle sam (OK< count out Canada during the Iraq war) when push came to shove. Now more than ever, India and the US are going to take the same path and I hope in time, a generation down the line, India will be as allied with us as the US and Aus. are now. China, Russia, France or Germany certainly wont.
That is no longer a US advantage.
Oops, that should be UK and Aus.
/Typo. My bad.
Here's the cruncher.
IIRC, India has most of the world's thorium reserves along its Malabar coast. Throium that goes into its fast breeder reactor program. In fact, if I have this right, India is currently the world leader in Thorium based nuke energy research if only because nobody else quite has reserves like that.
A nuke deal where thorium based tech can be shared with the US would be nice. No more one way handing down tech and aid anymore. India has exported its best brains to the US, well, how about finished tech - a much more complete product?
India and America together would have a tech advantage in the world. Each by itself would be lost in the crowd.
A billion here, a billion there. Pretty soon it adds up to real money.
"The U.S. is over 8 trillion dollars in the hole. $8,000,000,000,000. Eight million billion.
If you were 100,000 thousand dollars in the hole, would you be considered solvent?
Solvent? By whose standards?"
If you were making $120,000 do you think you could manage an $80,000 low interest loan? If you couldn't, you'd probably never buy a home. Our GDP is nearly 12 trillion dollars and we're carrying 8 trillion in debt, we'll be fine.
Thanks. I hope you're right.
In fact, if anyone cared enough to read the leftist anti-American cesspol propagandas, they will find that each time when the US and country X signs an agreement to do something, "Country X sells out to the US on issue Y and it gains minimal/nothing in return!" If you trust the MSMs of these countries, you would have thought the US gains everything and Country X nothing.
Trust me, I have read enough of the leftist tripes, from the anti-American noisy people in Taiwan, to the Australian Hard Left in Australia, to the hardcore Greens in Germany.
Japan is #2
"It was great to see Gregory make a fool of himself but sad to see the MSM treat this success by Pres. Bush with such superficial coverage."
Seriously! I don't know what's up with them. After I turned on the news it was 15 minutes of something about car sales, then 10 minutes of Natalee Holloway, then about 20 minutes of some kid in Colorado who taped his teacher's left wing rants, and then 1 minute of coverage of Bush's trip to India.
And then about a billion HOURS of the car bomb in Pakistan. >:(
For some reason, the MSM are not giving this story much coverage. :(
I wouldn't "certainly" count France + Germany out. They're still in NATO, and both have troops in Afghanistan. Germany has the most after the US, I believe.
Germany + America = friends.
France, too, except they are friends we have a lot of disagreements with.
Well we should share some of our technology, with friendly nations. Of course we keep our most sophisticated stuff classified just like any other country.
Protective tariffs is an option. They're very controversial though.
"And then there are 'allies' where public sentiment is so strongly anti-America, makes one wanna puke. Lez talk Saudi, Pakistan, Turkey etc"
Well they are not real allies. Their governments are allied with us to further the interests (often divergent) of both countries.
Turkey, for example. We needed them in the Cold War to station nukes against the Soviets. They needed us to protect them from Iran and the USSR.
Pakistan is not an ally at all, we just basically used them for basing rights, etc in the WOT.
Aside from Musharaff, all of Pakistan hates America. Musharaff dies (which isnt all that far-fetched) and Pakistan could become another Iran.
Except with nukes. And modern submarines.
As for public opinion in Europe, the Europeans dont hate America, but some of them loath America's policies.
Again though, much of the information that says Europe hates America comes from liberal polls and such.
There is a very vocal group of America-bashers in Europe, just as the Kerry supporters out-shouted the Bush supporters before the US election.
But then the silent majority spoke, and the leftists were trounced.
Italy is controlled by a government that is in some ways more conservative than the Bush administration (Burlusconi favors an all-out ban on abortion and once said that "Islamic culture is inferior to Western culture").
In Germany, the conservatives won the last election. Denmark is pretty conservative and pro-American, and have troops in Iraq.
I'm tired of listening to the lying reporters in the MSM like the NY Times tell us how much the rest of the world hates us.
Europeans may disagree with some US policies, but they respect America, and like it.
I know this because I live right near NYC in New Jersey, and I'm often when in NYC i meet tourists from Europe.
My Uncle is also German (he came here from Germany, and his brother still lives there) and he tells me that germany is still a pretty conservative country at heart, and is still pro-US.
Schroder the leftist wacko lost the last election, remember.
When I visited the Netherlands recently, people didnt seem anti-US either. Actually, I think that they are waking up to the danger of Islam.
I was heartened to hear that after Theo Van Gogh was killed, a couple of mosques were Molotov-cocktailed...evil grin..>:-)
"A nuke deal where thorium based tech can be shared with the US would be nice."
Is that part of today's deal?
Thanks for the ping indcons.
well, now that the IAEA has Ok'd the deal, it seems that only the Nuclear Supplier Group has to (that should be easy) as well as the US Congress.
The article said that multiple congresspeople opposed the deal, but so far the only one I have heard about who opposes it is Edward Markey (Communist-Massachusetts) who is considered far out of the mainstream.
I bet Markey's on the phone right now. "Yes, Mr. Jaibao, you can deposit that 50 million yuan into my numbered Credit Suisse account."
I bet Markey's on the phone right now. "Yes, Mr. Jaibao, you can deposit that 50 million yuan into my numbered Credit Suisse account."
LMAO...too good (and most likely true)
No.
But it is very much on the cards. If Thorium can be processed into Plutonium in the first stage of the fast breeder reactor, then India'll have enough nuke fuel to last centuries. For eveybody. Short of nuclear fusion, this represents one of the best possibilities for clean nuke power.
If India makes a breakthrough here (and they're fairly advanced in that direction, there're 3 FBR prototypes in operation and a 4th in construction), we'll be watching ...heh, heh.
"Short of nuclear fusion,"
Does the US have nuclear fusion?
NOBODY has nuclear fusion.
The brains that be claim clean unlimited power (thats the essential promise of fusion tech - the process that powers the sun is recreated and controlled here on Earth...if ya ask me, this is what I call playing God) is somewhere between 20-50 yrs away.
The Joint European Torus (JET) is a $50 billion geneva based fusion research project thats so far gone nowhere. The US and Japan have been long planning to setup and pursue their own fusion solution. The Chinese and the Russians have been flirting with setting up a joint project as well. Methinks India fits in well with the US here.
hmmmm
"the process that powers the sun is recreated and controlled here on Earth"
sounds kind of dangerous...i mean, what if the thing exploded, with the power of the sun, wouldnt that kill millions of people?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.