
|
|
|||||||
| Strategic & Geopolitical Issues Strategic discussion about Pakistan and its geo-political issues. Pakistan's importance in todays world and affairs related to its national security. |
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
ADMINISTRATORS
![]()
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10,090
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 804
Thanked 1,494 Times in 671 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
US lawmaker slams China-Pakistan N-deal
A critic of the Indo-US nuclear deal has raised objections over China helping Pakistan in building two new atomic reactors, saying that the agreement flouts the norms established by the NSG and would further "destabilise" South Asia. "The Peoples' Republic of China has had a long history of nuclear cooperation with Pakistan. This history made China and Pakistan likely candidates for future nuclear cooperation in violation of NSG guidelines, which was always a concern for those of us who opposed Indo-US nuclear deal," Massachussetts Democratic Congressman Edward Markey said in his October 23 letter to the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Markey said, "Unfortunately, our concerns appear to be borne out in the events that are unfolding right now, which must be considered a direct consequence of the US-India nuclear deal." "I strongly opposed the US-India nuclear cooperation deal on the grounds that it would gravely damage the vitally important nonproliferation regime. A key concern raised by this agreement was that waiving the international rules for India would set a precedent for other nations to flout international nuclear nonproliferation export controls for their allies or trading partners," he said. China has built one nuclear reactor 'Chashma I' in Pakistan and is currently nearing completion of 'Chashma II'. The contracts for these reactors existed before China received membership in the NSG in 2004 and because of this China was allowed to complete work on them. NDTV.com: US lawmaker slams China-Pakistan N-deal |
|
Come forward as servants of Islam, organise the people economically, socially, educationally and politically and I am sure that you will be a power that will be accepted by everybody.
---Muhammad Ali Jinnah |
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Think Tank: Chairman
![]()
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Karachi
Posts: 8,349
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 3,662
Thanked 4,487 Times in 2,161 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Markey said, "Unfortunately, our concerns appear to be borne out in the events that are unfolding right now, which must be considered a direct consequence of the US-India nuclear deal."
even though Markey seems a level-headed guy, what is it that they say: so u shall sow; so shall you reap; |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
SENIOR MEMBERS
![]() Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hell's Highway
Posts: 4,638
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 669
Thanked 896 Times in 570 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
What else could they do other then running their mouths. Or did they expected that Pakistan will not follow suit.
Isnt it obvious that Pakistan too is energy deficient and we need all the support that we can get to over come it so whats the huge uproar for. |
|
A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived. George S.Patton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 485
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 18
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
No biggie. Russia was planning on building 2 plants in india way back in 1988(kundankulam). The chasma was the chinese answer to the russian plants. This is proliferation on part of both pak and india with china and russia resply. Not related to the indo-US deal. The lawmaker is only giving it as an excuse to blame it on the indo-US deal. | |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
ELITE MEMBERS
![]()
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The home of dance
Posts: 6,218
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 463
Thanked 560 Times in 385 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Well Neo, that would be an example of non-Indians saying "me too".
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
SENIOR MEMBERS
![]() Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3,158
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 2,339
Thanked 764 Times in 519 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
A hater!! thats all we will do wat we have to dont mind no attention to this silly fool getting high!!!!!!! hahah lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
SENIOR MEMBERS
![]() Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: la-la land
Posts: 2,839
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 216
Thanked 555 Times in 329 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
And i quite frankly think nuclear power plants arent worth the investment as they bring nothing but polution for a very very long time.
The 58m euro (Ł40m) plant near Serpa, 200km (125 miles) south of Lisbon, will produce enough electricity for 8,000 homes when it starts next January. Zero pollution no shortage of sunshine in our country and best of all no Danger to population.I don't no exactly how much a nuclear power plant will cost to build protect and run but i am pretty sure it will be lot more then Solar power plants. And best part is in case of accident no body glows in the dark with solar that is. ![]() This is where Pakistan can change her course and move towards cheaper alternatives and invest her money on some thing useful for long term+getting in on this industry when its just an infant will benefit us in the long run.
|
|
o Allah what did he finds who lost u and what did he loose who found u.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 345
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 3,433
Thanked 3,621 Times in 2,353 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 345
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 3,433
Thanked 3,621 Times in 2,353 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
He said: "A key concern raised by this agreement was that waiving the international rules for India would set a precedent for other nations to flout international nuclear nonproliferation export controls for their allies or trading partners," he said. This is not Pakistan specific but applies to other countries aswell. Its an action-reaction thing, US set a precedence so others will follow.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) | |
|
SUPER MODERATORS
![]()
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,334
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 5,825
Thanked 6,048 Times in 2,879 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
Ya'll have been beaten dead with counter arguments on the 'me too' thing, and at this point raising it again is really no better than flaming and hijacking the thread. Seriously, get over that hate and prejudice ya''ll have been brainwashed with in India. | |
|
--ON HIATUS, for a few months ---
'The Story of Pakistan, its struggle and its achievement, is the very story of great human ideals, struggling to survive in the face of great odds and difficulties.' -Jinnah |
||
|
|
|
| The Following User Says Thank You to AgNoStIc MuSliM For This Useful Post: | Neo (10-25-2008) |
|
|
#11 (permalink) |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 345
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 3,433
Thanked 3,621 Times in 2,353 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
By Khalid Hasan WASHINGTON: Congressman Edward Markey has said that China’s announcement that it will supply two nuclear reactors to Pakistan “flouts the international trade rules established by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)” and damages the international non-proliferation regime. In a letter to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week, Markey warns that the Chinese decision will further destabilise South Asia. Markey was a staunch opponent of the US-India nuclear cooperation agreement but did not find enough support in Congress to block the bill, which has since been signed into law by President Bush. He maintains that the Pakistan deal with China is a direct consequence of the one Washington signed with New Delhi. Markey has asked Rice if confirmation has been sought from China or Pakistan, or both, as to whether they have agreed on the provision of any additional nuclear reactors other than Chashma I and II. He also wants to know if the US has told Pakistan and China that provision of a nuclear reactor other than Chashma I and II would violate NSG guidelines. The lawmaker also asks if the US would force China to abandon the deal with Pakistan, once it confirms that the latest Chinese offer to Pakistan violates NSG guidelines. He also wishes to know if the US is going to raise this issue at the next NSG meeting in November this year. Markey would also like the US to block IMF assistance to Pakistan so that Islamabad does not use the money to pay China for the construction of nuclear reactors in violation of NSG rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) | |
|
ELITE MEMBERS
![]()
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The home of dance
Posts: 6,218
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 463
Thanked 560 Times in 385 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
I'm out! | |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
SUPER MODERATORS
![]()
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,334
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 5,825
Thanked 6,048 Times in 2,879 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Sorry, but Neo and I just went through this with doobie and GP on another thread, and we have gone through this on like 3 or 4 other threads before that - it gets annoying after a while.
Its time to move onto more substantive discussions instead of this needling. |
|
--ON HIATUS, for a few months ---
'The Story of Pakistan, its struggle and its achievement, is the very story of great human ideals, struggling to survive in the face of great odds and difficulties.' -Jinnah |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) | |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 485
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 18
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Quote:
It is only the spent fuel that needs to be taken care off. Other than that, it is clean. | |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Banned Members
![]() Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 485
(View Stats)
Countries:
Thanks: 18
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
|
Not Ranked
:
0 score
Its not about claiming to be a proliferator. Its about "getting caught."
Pak got caught. India did not. Anyways, pak was proliferating designs which were directly related to weapons research (like bomb design, enrichment designs and parts etc) while india proliferated reactor designs to iran. Different "levels" of proliferation. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| US lawmaker urges India nuclear deal be delayed | MBI Munshi | India Defence | 10 | 08-10-2008 06:53 PM |
| Key US lawmaker threatens to hold up India nuclear deal | pkpatriotic | India Defence | 2 | 08-07-2008 05:38 PM |
| China, Pakistan discussing N-deal to counter Indo-US pact | Neo | WMD & Missiles | 8 | 08-21-2007 08:40 AM |
| After China Test, U.S. Lawmaker Urges More Space Spending | Nasir | World Affairs | 1 | 02-03-2007 10:48 AM |
| Pakistan, China ink deal to develop long-range radar | Jana | Military Aviation | 19 | 12-03-2006 11:17 AM |