http://desicritics.org/ Superior South Asian bloggers on Culture, Media, Politics, Sport, Business, and Technology. en Copyright 2006 by the authors Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:32:58 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss BC custom software http://desicritics.org/2006/12/19/010735.php#comment-329910 I will not support Hillary Clinton for president [url=http://ngocchinh.aboutus.ms/adult/seska-amateur.html]seska amateur[/url] [url=http://cpoakville.aboutus.ms/adult/anal-first-her-index-link-sex-html-theeggchaihjh-i.html]anal first her index link sex html theeggchaihjh i[/url] 329910@desicritics.org Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:32:58 EDT http://desicritics.org/2006/12/19/010735.php#comment-39054 Hey will you permit us to publish your article in the third volume of our series, Indo-US Civil Nuclear Deal Ed : Rahul Bhonsle, Ved Prakash, Dr K R Gupta Placing the Debate on the Indo US Civil Nuclear Deal in Perspective – Please place order Atlantic Publishers and Distributors (P) Ltd B-2, Vishal Enclave, Opposite Rajouri Garden, New Delhi – 110 027, INDIA Rs 990/- (Two Volume Set) Thanks. Rahul Bhonsle 39054@desicritics.org Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:19:46 EST http://desicritics.org/2006/12/19/010735.php#comment-38789 Kaushik, thanks for linking here. Atlantean, I must disagree. The Hyde act does not take away the right to test nuclear weapons. It simply implies that if we want to test nuclear weapons, we will have to weigh the benefits of doing so against the loss of nuclear cooperation. Second, without the agreement, we may have to stop our civilian program altogether, since Thorium is not enough. I still support the act. However, it is important to signal to the US that we can accept the pain of stopping nuclear cooperation. If the US thought we were willing to walk away from this deal (even if we weren't), it would be less likely to suggest foreign policy to us. Where the good Doctor is wrong, is in supporting vehemently the Hyde Act, rather than presenting a lukewarm response to it. 38789@desicritics.org Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:06:38 EST http://desicritics.org/2006/12/19/010735.php#comment-38787 Indeed. I have been largely in favour of the Indo-US nuclear agreement but our foreign policy is too precious and we cant just sell it off for Uranium. It might even lead to a conflict between India and US in the future over international issues. The US is opposed to many projects that India is taking up in the Middle East... this includes the Iran pipeline and the oil project in Syria. And it wants us to do whatever it asks with Iran, an important strategic and economic partner. The Hyde Act also seeks to take away our right to make a nuclear test in the future, which is unacceptable. If the final deal doesnt reflect the July 26 Agreement perfectly, then we should drop it. The PM should say "Uranium? No thanks. We have lots of Thorium and we'll manage with that. And hey, the next time you offer any deal, be clear. You shouldnt be wasting others' time like this." But our PM is Dr. Manmohan Singh. Most probably, he'll sell us off to the US/ 38787@desicritics.org Tue, 19 Dec 2006 08:53:49 EST http://desicritics.org/2006/12/19/010735.php#comment-38784 We have linked to your commentary on in our daily "security briefs" (archive available at http://www.madrid11.net/securitybriefs, today's will be available later at http://www.madrid11.net/articles/sbriefs191206 ). Madrid11.net is the branch of openDemocracy (the leading online magazine of international affairs www.opendemocracy.net) to do with terrorism and global security. If you are interested in what you see at Madrid11.net (soon to become Terrorism.openDemocracy.net), please feel free to link to the site or the daily security briefing, or to submit your own opinions and comments on security issues. Thank you, Kanishk Tharoor Managing Editor Terrorism.openDemocracy.net 38784@desicritics.org Tue, 19 Dec 2006 08:23:11 EST