# The Real Story Behind the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal



## Neo

*The Real Story Behind the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal​*
By Subrata Ghoshroy, 
Foreign Policy
AlterNet. Posted October 17, 2008.

*The recently passed nuclear pact was not just a late win for an unpopular president, it was a coup for lobbyists and defense contractors.​*
*At about 2:30 PM on Wednesday, October 8th, President Bush signed into law H.R. 7081, the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act, a.k.a. the "U.S.-India nuclear deal."* In attendance were Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is credited as the architect of the deal, members of Congress and an array of Indian American supporters. *It was the final milestone in a long road that started on July 18, 2005, when President Bush and India's Prime Minster Manmohan Singh announced the deal in a surprise joint statement. It was also a good photo op for a beleaguered president whose legacy will be an ill-conceived war and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.*

*The legislation signed by Bush is technically known as the 123 Agreement because it amends section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1954*, which regulates U.S. cooperation with other nations in nuclear matters and prohibits trading with states that have not signed the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Not only is India a non-signatory to the landmark treaty, it is, along with Israel and Pakistan, also in contravention of its underlying principle, having secretly developed the bomb by transferring fissile material from its civilian program.

*But while the point of the legislation was ostensibly to enable India to meet its energy needs, in reality it was about much more than that. The primary motivation is the U.S. embrace of India as a strategic partner.*

*An important, unlikely ally*

India is no small prize. A founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement and a traditional champion of "third world" countries at the U.N. and the World Trade Organization, gaining India as a collaborator rather than an adversary was not a stroke of genius by the Bush administration. It started under President Clinton, but could not be consummated because of India's nuclear tests in 1998. (Strobe Talbot, Deputy Secretary of State under Clinton, describes this in his book, Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy, and the Bomb.) Faced with the /pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=825">rapid

*decline of the U.S.'s global popularity in the world and desperate for a foreign policy success, getting India on our side became a "win-win" proposition for the Bush administration. But the so-called "nuclear irritant," as Bush called it, was standing in the way. It had to be removed.*

*The payoff was immediate. India voted twice against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).* According to an article published by the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, a former Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Non-Proliferation, Stephen Rademaker reportedly remarked at a meeting in New Delhi in February 2007:* "The best illustration of this [change in India's attitude] is the two votes India cast against Iran at the IAEA. I am the first person to admit that the votes were coerced."*

*Rademaker left the State Department in January 2007 to take up a "lucrative" job with Barbour, Griffith and Rogers, the firm hired by the Indian Embassy in Washington to lobby for the deal.*

India's actions did not go unappreciated. While expressing his frustration with India's continued pursuit of an Iran-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline deal in the face of U.S. opposition, at a hearing for the 123 Agreement this summer, Congressman Gary Ackerman, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Middle East and South Asia subcommittee, called India's IAEA vote "courageous." *But, he warned, he would not continue to make nice if India kept pursuing the pipeline. "Continued pursuit of the pipeline or other investments in Iran's energy sector ? will halt and potentially even roll back the progress made in bilateral relations over the last several years," he said.*

*As Noam Chomsky observed in a recent interview, India seems to be playing on both sides of the street. Unfortunately, it can't go on for ever.*

*A "strategic partnership"*

*That the nuclear deal was about much more than nuclear energy was evident from the title of the hearing this summer, which took place on June 25th: "More than just the 123 Agreement: The future of U.S.-Indo relations." A cursory search of the transcript for the word "Iran" found it mentioned a total of 96 times, compared with 81 for "nuclear" (with the two often mentioned in the same context). Of the three witnesses who testified before the committee, all were old State Department hands and cheerleaders for the deal. No skeptics were invited, not even for the appearance of balance.*

*In a report sent to Congress this September, President Bush acknowledged India's cooperation with American initiatives, referring specifically to India's votes in the IAEA:* "The Government of India has taken several steps to support the U.S. and to bring Iran back into compliance with its international obligations, particularly those pertaining to its nuclear weapons program." In addition, "India has also maintained a strong public line of support for P5+1 and U.S. diplomatic efforts to resolve international concerns with Iran's nuclear program," Bush said, referring to efforts that are viewed by most of the rest of the world as coercive and discriminatory towards Iran.

For their part, high-level Indian government officials promoting the deal have also waxed enthusiastic about the transformation of the India-U.S. relations. In December 2005, then Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran, the point man for the deal, delivered a speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. titled "Transforming India-U.S. Relations: Building a Strategic Partnership." The U.S.-India deal, he said, was a "declaration" that U.S. and India were moving towards a "global partnership," based not only on "common values," but "common interests" as well. These included the "promotion of democratic values and practices," and "combating terrorism and WMD proliferation" -- a whole-hearted embrace of the Washington consensus and evidence that, as former U.S. Ambassador Teresita Schaffer told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Indian foreign policy has "turned around" from the days of non-alignment.

*A further sign of the growing strategic partnership is the rapidly strengthening defense link between India and Israel.* In the past decade, as the relationship has blossomed, Israel has stepped in as a major supplier of weapons and sophisticated military hardware to India as a surrogate, since because U.S. firms were blocked from selling to India because of remaining sanctions and also because of inevitable protests by Pakistan. Israel is now India's second largest arms supplier.

*The Israel lobby was instrumental in garnering congressional support for the deal. In January this year, in an unprecedented move India launched a sophisticated Israeli satellite, the TECSAR, which could boost its intelligence gathering capabilities regarding Iran, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. The satellite, manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), was sent into orbit from the Sriharikota Launching Range in India using an Indian rocket. According to the Jerusalem Post, the launch of the TecSar was the first launch of an Israeli satellite aboard an Indian missile and it is part of growing Indian-Israeli cooperation,which is scheduled to eventually lead to the launching of two more satellites. While Indian space officials facing criticism at home and abroad characterized the launch as a strictly commercial venture, the significance of it was not lost in Iran and elsewhere.*

Alongside the joint statement, the United States and India signed a ten-year defense pact, which envisages global collaboration in multilateral operations, expanded two-way defense trade, increased opportunities for technology transfers and coproduction, increased collaboration on missile defense, "and the list goes on," said Chairman Ackerman at the hearing.

*A deal "crafted with the private sector firmly in mind"*

The signing of the defense pact is a clear, significant sign of where India wants to be in the future. So is India's support for the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. But perhaps most importantly, the defense pact has opened the door for the selling of U.S. military equipment to India.

*As Chomsky pointed out, Condoleezza Rice was "actually on record admitting what is truly behind this deal." Indeed, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 5, 2006, the Secretary of State made it clear it was about opening a new market for American technology: "At its core, our initiative with India is not simply a government-to-government effort. It was crafted with the private sector firmly in mind." She was not just talking about the nuclear industry, which is predicting a $100 billion market in India in the next 10 or 15 years. Boeing, for example, is reportedly projecting a market of $15 billion for its own products in India over the next 10 to 15 years.*

In his testimony before the House committee this summer, Stephen Cohen, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute and an old India hand, said that *India will be "one of the largest markets for defense equipment in the coming two decades." India's recent purchase of six C-130J aircraft -- made by Lockheed Martin -- was the "biggest ever Indian purchase of American equipment in dollar terms." The deal was worth more than one billion dollars.*

*Walter Andersen, a former State Department intelligence specialist who also testified, described the Indian Navy as an even more promising area for sales. With 35 ships in the works, India is now embarked on "one of the most ambitious naval building and procurement plans in the world," he said. And, he added, the U.S. -- and perhaps other U.S. allies like Japan and South Korea -- is more competitive as the "Indians have become increasingly skeptical" about the reliability of Russian naval suppliers.*

*A victory for lobbyists and the Bush administration*

Indeed, the U.S.-India nuclear agreement is a big deal, one made possible by the United States' willingness to trample many of its own laws and principles for non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, as well as the efforts of business lobbies in the U.S. and India, which stand to profit immensely.

*There were other payoffs as well. On his way back from New York immediately after the congressional vote in favor of the deal, the Indian Prime Minister stopped in Paris to sign a similar deal with France. The deal will allow the French nuclear giant Areva to sell at least two reactors and fuel to India. As the French anti-nuclear group Sortir to Nucleare (End Nuclear Power)aptly observed: "For having helped the U.S. and India get around the rules of non-proliferation, France will be able to sell nuclear reactors to India. These are nauseating deals that endanger the future of the planet," reported AFP.*

That the U.S. Senate voted 86-13 in favor of the deal is a testament to the power of such lobbying. By contrast, non-proliferation advocates -- not a homogeneous group by any means -- faced a David vs. Goliath situation. The brief debate before the House vote, however, revealed the concern among many members over the serious negative implications of the deal on the future for non-proliferation and disarmament.

*On the day of the vote, Boeing and Raytheon lobbyists were reportedly out in force, talking directly to the few wavering Senators bypassing even their staffers. "It was at a very high level," said one observer. "No one talked to the staffer, they went straight to the Senator and talked about business interests." For his part Vice Presidential nominee Joe Biden had pronounced that he was "going to work like the Devil to make it happen." And he did, by bending all the congressional rules and handing a prize to the most unpopular President in recent history barely a month before the U.S. elections.

Go figure.*

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## garibnawaz

Just a simple question. China could have veto'd the deal at NSG. Why did they vote in favor of India at NSG?


----------



## Nihat

garibnawaz said:


> Just a simple question. China could have veto'd the deal at NSG. Why did they vote in favor of India at NSG?



Because they want good relations , we are no longer strategic enemies , while apprehension was understandable . Economic sense prevailed on both sides .

Good fins Neo , it made for interesting read.

Even if deal was catered for Private Sector , I think it would be a excellent prospect , 20,000 Mwt by 2020 means that Delhi and mumbai could be powered by Nuke energy along.

The close defense corporation gets me a little worried though , too much pallying with the US has not bought prosperity to anyone of it's allies. Russia must still remain prime ally and relation with Iran should be kept stable at least , to go close to the US - we cannot dump existing allies , thank god this govt. is coming to end soon .


----------



## daredevil

Nihat said:


> Because they want good relations , we are no longer strategic enemies , while apprehension was understandable . Economic sense prevailed on both sides .



No, China didn't want to be seen as lone member opposing the deal. It almost rejected it, but Bush called up Hu and twisted his arm to vote for it. With respect to India, China is the biggest hurdle in its rise.


----------



## TruthSeeker

Great, I'm glad my government is trying to engage democratic India. India is much more of a natural ally for the US than is China. I have never understood why the US and India did not form a stronger trading relationship until the past decade. I think that India was reluctant to be "re-colonized" and so its foreign investment rules were an impediment to forming joint companies with American companies. This agreement helps both countries to further develop joint commercial projects. This will actually benefit Indian workers more than American workers, but will eventually raise the prosperity of both countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Neo

TruthSeeker said:


> I have never understood why the US and India did not form a stronger trading relationship until the past decade. I think that India was reluctant to be "re-colonized" and so its foreign investment rules were an impediment to forming joint companies with American companies.



India was practically in the Russian Camp during the Cold War serving Sovjet interests in the region and China posed little threat to USA. Things are different now, India is seen as "natural ally" by USA due growing Chinese influence (military)in the region.


----------



## ju87

Neo said:


> India was practically in the Russian Camp during the Cold War serving Sovjet interests in the region and China posed little threat to USA. Things are different now, India is seen as "natural ally" by USA due growing Chinese influence (military)in the region.



No we were not. As a part of NAM we did not have a special relationship with USSR until 1971. Until 1971, we were procuring defense equipment from the west as well as USSR - in 1965 for example we used Sherman tanks and Folland Gnats, both western. In 1971, Indira Gandhi was forced into the Soviet camp because of unquestioning US support for Pakistan, despite them knowing the horrific events in Bangladesh. The US 7th Fleet was being sent into the Bay of Bengal and India needed a superpower counterweight to this.

As for the Chinese, it may be true that the US seeks to use India as against their growing power, but it doesn't necessarily mean India is going to become a tool of US policy against China. Its foreign policy is quite independent of the US.


----------



## maximus

ju87 said:


> As for the Chinese, it may be true that the US seeks to use India as against their growing power, but it doesn't necessarily mean India is going to become a tool of US policy against China. Its foreign policy is quite independent of the US.



Only time will tell. Thus far the Indians have obeyed US instructions. The nuke deal and trade isn't free lunch. India is undeniably the new US puppet of this region.


----------



## ju87

maximus said:


> Only time will tell. Thus far the Indians have obeyed US instructions. The nuke deal and trade isn't free lunch. India is undeniably the new US puppet of this region.




Do you even know the whole story about the nuke deal? The nuclear deal allowed India access to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which is not just the US but Canada, Australia, Russia (three biggest Uranium producers) and more. So the US can't really use the nuclear deal as an arm-twister unless the other countries cooperate. So even if US is pissed off at India, India can still guarantee a good supply from other countries.

What instructions do you speak of? Except voting against Iran in the UN, India hasn't done the US any favors.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## spsk

For now,Pakistan will remain closest ally for US in South Asia than India . They need support from Pakistan to win Afghan war and India heavily depends on Russia for its military imports.So I think Pakistan would continue to get support from US for some more time.Nuke deal could be for its economic benefit(GE might get 100Bn $ business out of this)


----------



## Chanakyaa

psugumar said:


> For now,Pakistan will remain closest ally for US in South Asia than India . They need support from Pakistan to win Afghan war and India heavily depends on Russia for its military imports.So I think Pakistan would continue to get support from US for some more time.Nuke deal could be for its economic benefit(GE might get 100Bn $ business out of this)



Well, Its a 50-50 situation , The only interest that US has is to check the Terrorism , which is rooted i Pak ( atleast US believes it ) and needs pak support to curn Taliban and Al Quaeda.

Obama has Also indicated to Increase the Financial Aid , But only for "NON Military" Purposes and that too with condition that pak WILL act on Terrorists.

The Major Differnece is that Indian is Now .. a :

Defence
Stratigic
Economic

"Partner" of US , Thats the important point.

More over , IMO now US fears Communist China more than Russia , as China has More Cast to Inveest .. India and a Strong India becomes the natural way For US.
To make the Balance in Asia.


----------



## spsk

But Indian foreign policy cannot be changed that it would be "used" by United States to balance against China and India must consider how US would abandon its friends when in need if they decide to accept any kind of help from US.


----------



## Pk_Thunder

*Pentagon may take control of US nuclear stockpile*​
Updated at: 1655 PST, Saturday, February 07, 2009 
WASHINGTON: Obama administration is considering the idea to hand over the US nuclear stockpile to the Pentagon.

According to a US newspaper, the US nuclear weapons program is currently under the Department of Energy (DOE) and the US government wants the Pentagon to take control of this program so that the DOE could focus more on research and preservation of energy initiatives.

The White House has directed both the departments to prepare a detailed report in this regard and a deadline of September 30 has been set for the purpose.


----------



## xebex

Neo said:


> India was practically in the Russian Camp during the Cold War serving Sovjet interests in the region and China posed little threat to USA. Things are different now, India is seen as "natural ally" by USA due growing Chinese influence (military)in the region.



It is not really the growing chinese *MILITARY* influence in the region, It is the growing financial capability of China.If u have money nations will listen to you thatz a universal theory. with a population of 1.3 billion china have a maximum potential to become 3 times as large as US if it can sustain/improove current growth rate.If US can join hands with India and Japan then threat is nuetralized. As far as millitary is concerned it will take a while for chinese to catch up. even if they do there would be no cold war 2. thanks to the multipolar 21st century.


----------



## xebex

psugumar said:


> But Indian foreign policy cannot be changed that it would be "used" by United States to balance against China and India must consider how US would abandon its friends when in need if they decide to accept any kind of help from US.



The thing is India and China are in much better position than they were say a decade ago. They both understand that together India and China share 1/3 or human population; which means a huge market. Its like the good old saying "United we stand, devide we fall".


----------



## Gabbar

*^^^ Idiot on the loose!!!!*


----------



## shravan

Gabbar said:


> *^^^ Idiot on the loose!!!!*



HE IS WORKING FOR RAW....


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

^^
Stop the Sickness


----------



## Gabbar

shravan said:


> HE IS WORKING FOR RAW....



No he is not, I am working for RAW. My job is to report MBI, Babur CM and Communists back to my boss. But I am having dificulty finding Communist's true identity.  Can you help!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

The Americans have virtually bought the Indians through this Strategik Deal .
Yet it was an expensive one but Certenly Gaved US an edge over its Arch Rivals China and Russia .
The Bear and the Red Dragon would certinly be not happy from such a move. I still dought it ! Is it Really a strtegik Deal or a trap layed down to catch the White Whale . 
Its like the Russians are defeated By the US over such a strategik and a vital Market.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Wat if India surpases China and comes up to a level upon which it could challange the Westren Economy and interests throughout the Globe. Then what will happen ? any Indian wants to putt light on it .
BTW India has certinly made a huge leap on to the course of becoming a Major Global Power through this Deal. 
I say play bothways dont challnge the Chinese quite often and let the Juice keep flowing in From the West untill its time show some guts.


----------



## nwmalik

PAK WARRIOR said:


> BANGLADESHIS ARE SON OF A BIT-CH
> 
> BANGLADESH IS A LOW LYING LAND WITH A LOW LYING PEOPLE.
> 
> BANGLADESHIS ARE MONKEYS.
> 
> BANGLADESHIS ARE SPOON OF INDIA.
> 
> BANGLADESHI PEOPLE EAT HORSE SH-IT.
> 
> BANGLADESHI PEOPLE STINK LIKE FISH.
> 
> WE PAKISTANI ARE THE MOST SUPREME RACE
> 
> BANGALIES ARE MONKEYS AND THEY SUCK DONKEY'S CO-CK
> 
> WE FU-CK BANGALI DOGS
> 
> WE WILL KILL BANGALI DOGS
> 
> WE CUT BANGALI DOGS INTO PIECES
> 
> SHITHOLES ARE BANGLADESHIS
> 
> WE WILL NEVER FORGET THAT THEY ALLIED WITH INDIAN BASTARD ARMY & BETRAYED US WHICH SHATTERED OUR IMAGE TO THE WORLD
> 
> DUE TO THESE TRAITOR BANGALIS, WE HAD TO LOSE UNBELIEVABLY IN 1971 WAR.
> 
> YET WE FUCKED THEIR FEMALES,THEIR BREASTS ARE SO JUICY
> 
> WE LICKED BANGLADESHI FEMALES NIPPLES
> 
> WE RAPED THEM IN DAYLIGHT
> 
> WE MADE BANGLADESHI FEMALES PREGNANT
> 
> WE CUT THEIR BREASTS AND THEN DROPPED THEIR BODIES IN THE GRAVE.
> 
> ALLAH WILL HELP US TO TEACH BANGALI A VERY GOOD LESSON IN NEAR FUTURE.
> 
> 
> WE KILLED BANGLADESHI FREEDOM FIGHTS INDISCRIMINATELY
> 
> WE ARE THE STRONGEST ARMY IN THE WORLD.
> 
> PAKISTAN ZINDABAD.


bast**ds like u are disgrace to Pakistan and its army.
Please ban him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

I think India should consider that what its giving US in Return. Arent they giving away something really needed to US in Cheap . They could have got more juice out of it ?


----------



## Thomas

I think the sales are just part of the reason. The U.S. see's a opportunity to drive a wedge between India and Russia on defense procurement and cooperation. India is not very happy with Russia right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Gabbar said:


> No he is not, I am working for RAW. My job is to report MBI, Babur CM and Communists back to my boss. But I am having dificulty finding Communist's true identity.  Can you help!!!!



There can't be two gabbar singh on PDF ...


----------



## Abhiras

H2O3C4Nitrogen said:


> I think India should consider that what its giving US in Return. Arent they giving away something really needed to US in Cheap . They could have got more juice out of it ?





Thomas said:


> I think the sales are just part of the reason. The U.S. see's a opportunity to drive a wedge between India and Russia on defense procurement and cooperation. India is not very happy with Russia right now.




India is not giving any thing in return,,,,,India & USA both are gaining a partner.......
India out of Nuclear apartheid 
USA economy boosted


Strategically ,,india is doing everything right::
india is now close allies of both USA & Russia,,,good friend of both Israel & Muslim world...


----------



## ARCHON

> Pentagon may take control of US nuclear stockpile
> 
> Updated at: 1655 PST, Saturday, February 07, 2009
> WASHINGTON: Obama administration is considering the idea to hand over the US nuclear stockpile to the Pentagon.
> 
> According to a US newspaper, the US nuclear weapons program is currently under the Department of Energy (DOE) and the US government wants the Pentagon to take control of this program so that the DOE could focus more on research and preservation of energy initiatives.
> 
> The White House has directed both the departments to prepare a detailed report in this regard and a deadline of September 30 has been set for the purpose.





Does it matter if its in pentagons hands or armys's hand or even obamas uncles hand... it does matter anyway for the rest of the world..


----------



## ARCHON

> The Americans have virtually bought the Indians through this Strategik Deal .




Or is it the other way??/ coz its India which benifits from US. 




> Yet it was an expensive one but Certenly Gaved US an edge over its Arch Rivals China and Russia .




Us has no edge from the deal since nothing has been gained by US.



> The Bear and the Red Dragon would certinly be not happy from such a move. I still dought it ! Is it Really a strtegik Deal or a trap layed down to catch the White Whale .



i have noted that after the US deal india inked similar deal with Russia, France, UK, Canada, and now south korea.. if ur theory is right all these countries have bought India and India is now their puppet.



> Its like the Russians are defeated By the US over such a strategik and a vital Market.




My friend Russia gave a better deal than US ( please check some news articles)...


http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-france-ink-nuclear-deal-first-after-nsg-waiver/368048/

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/indias-nuclear-deal-back-on-track/story-e6frg6t6-1111116990733

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-Russia-sign-nuclear-deal/articleshow/5311267.cms

more if u want..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ek_indian

@birdofprey:

Dear, you are wasting your time explaining all these. This all has been discussed in detail. People out of jealousy and frustation are talking like India became puppet and all.

History shows India was never a puppet. It was one of founder of NAM movement. With ever increasing militiray, economy, diplomatic, cultural etc. might, how can India now be a "puppet"??

Bottom line is, India did a geniuos stroke by this deal. India has friend everywhere. Kudos to Indian foreign policymakers. India has friends in west, central asia, SA, SE asia, east asia, ME nations etc. etc...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hulk

ek_indian said:


> @birdofprey:
> 
> Dear, you are wasting your time explaining all these. This all has been discussed in detail. People out of jealousy and frustation are talking like India became puppet and all.
> 
> History shows India was never a puppet. It was one of founder of NAM movement. With ever increasing militiray, economy, diplomatic, cultural etc. might, how can India now be a "puppet"??
> 
> Bottom line is, India did a geniuos stroke by this deal. India has friend everywhere. Kudos to Indian foreign policymakers. India has friends in west, central asia, SA, SE asia, east asia, ME nations etc. etc...



Those who call India had become puppet also ask for same deal and cry river over it. So does that mean they are unhappy that US is not accepting them as puppet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## s6demon

TruthSeeker said:


> I have never understood why the US and India did not form a stronger trading relationship until the past decade. I think that India was reluctant to be "re-colonized" and so its foreign investment rules were an impediment to forming joint companies with American companies.




umm ... probably because India was giving the Soviets a naval base during the cold war??

and because untill 1992 Indian policies were protectionist and what the U.S. would call socialist and slightly communist even.

It was after 1992 when India almost went bankrupt that they opened up their markets and China became a counter to the U.S. that it seems India would make a good ally to counter China's influence.

Other than that, I dont get the "natural" part of the ally.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## asq

ju87 said:


> Do you even know the whole story about the nuke deal? The nuclear deal allowed India access to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which is not just the US but Canada, Australia, Russia (three biggest Uranium producers) and more. So the US can't really use the nuclear deal as an arm-twister unless the other countries cooperate. So even if US is pissed off at India, India can still guarantee a good supply from other countries.
> 
> What instructions do you speak of? Except voting against Iran in the UN, India hasn't done the US any favors.



ju87. what a deduction concocted by clever brain.

let me say this as soon as U.S. signed a deal all came aboard, and if U.S says NO than those who came aboard will continue to supply uranium.

How do you figure that they will be willing to go against the wishes of U.S. make no sense.


----------



## Abi

Why can't Russia build the reactors for India?


----------



## KS

asq said:


> ju87. what a deduction concocted by clever brain.
> 
> let me say this as soon as U.S. signed a deal all came aboard, and if U.S says NO than those who came aboard will continue to supply uranium.
> 
> How do you figure that they will be willing to go against the wishes of U.S. make no sense.



thats the prob with NSG my friend.U need approval from all the members to either establish nuclear trade with a country or dis-allow it.
in the sense everyone has a veto rite over there.
Now since the US signed the deal everone allowed it.But the reverse is definitely not true.
With India going for multi billion dollar deals with France nd Russia,now in the future even if US shouts at the top of its voice to again impose a nuclear apartheid on India they willl jus veto it.
remember India of today is not the same as india of1960 s (wen NSG was established)


----------



## rajgoynar

Abi said:


> Why can't Russia build the reactors for India?




russia builds more reactor in india then US


----------



## Gene

It is true that India needs USA. At the same time it is also true that USA also needs India.
India needs USA mainly for the vast pool of technology USA has & for military hardwares.
USA needs India to counter the growing influence of china & tapping its growing market.

It does not make any sense that USA sanctioned the civilian nuclear deal because India just needs it. The deal went through because USA wanted it to be done. There are many countries who also want these type of deals. Has this type of deal been made available to any country? For ex-Pakistan is the biggest alloy in Asia and it always wants a similar deal with USA. But USA is in denial mode.USA is giving lots of military aid to pakistan,At the same time it also sells very advanced weapons to India, even more advanced weapons than it offer to Pakistan.
It is clearly shows USA's eagerness in India. It is totally wrong that its only India who desperately needs USA. The USA also needs India.


----------



## sam27

maximus said:


> Only time will tell. Thus far the Indians have obeyed US instructions. The nuke deal and trade isn't free lunch. India is undeniably the new US puppet of this region.



India,US puppet in the region..so sir would you pls tell something about Pakistan??


----------



## JonAsad

sam27 said:


> India,US puppet in the region..so sir would you pls tell something about Pakistan??



India is a puppet and Pakistan is a major Non-Nato Ally


----------



## blueoval79

jonasad said:


> India is a puppet and Pakistan is a major Non-Nato Ally



And puppet is getting all the goodies ...and ally is shouting on top of its voice.... please treat me equal to the puppet...please treat us equally.


----------



## JonAsad

blueoval79 said:


> And puppet is getting all the goodies ...and ally is shouting on top of its voice.... please treat me equal to the puppet...please treat us equally.



well if you actually know what puppet is.. a sort of the pet.. yh u will be treated fairly well


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> thats why usa not giving u best weapons ....
> nd provide india best ones
> 
> u got what 10-20 years old ...good be happy they listen to you



and still these 10-20 years old stuff is a pain in ur A**
biggest whiners


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> u r the real pet for usa
> begging infront of them ... please give us money we have nothing
> please give us food . we are hungry



well u r new to forum nd i will not reply to ur comments.. soon you will know y. have fun with your master


----------



## blueoval79

jonasad said:


> well if you actually know what puppet is.. a sort of the pet.. yh u will be treated fairly well



Well......we are loving it.....as long as we are getting benefit out of it...without any dependency. on Americans .....no problemo.


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> yes i know ... them ban me right
> 
> i got banned more than 20 times ..is my 21 id
> 
> so i hve no problem
> 
> (because this forum has double standard )



instead of getting banned all the time.. y not learn some manners?
is it so hard for you


----------



## JonAsad

blueoval79 said:


> Well......we are loving it.....as long as we are getting benefit out of it...without any dependency. on Americans .....no problemo.



yh same as i said we are Non-NATO allies... and we sure are benifiting alot aswell 
its difference of perception i guess the way we look at each other.


----------



## nForce

maximus said:


> Only time will tell. Thus far the Indians have obeyed US instructions. The nuke deal and trade isn't free lunch. India is undeniably the new US puppet of this region.



w0w..now thats amazing,considering this is coming from a Pakistani.How 'bout a little reality check???American forces are operating in Pakistani territory,the drones are attacking Pakistani citizens while the govt. sits back and watches helplessly.Its not India in the receiving end,its Pakistan.

Even the Pakistani economy will have a hard time to stand on its own without US Aids.Pakistan has received billions of dollars as aids, bailout and loans from US ,the latest bein a massive $ 7.5 billion(2009-'14).
A comprehensive list can be found here---

About Those Billions


What the heck.. there is even an entire American website dedicated to the aids given to Pakistan.
Have alook at this---

USAID


The Deputy Secretary of State of Bush administration threatened the then Pakistani President Musharraf that *"US will bomb Pakistan back to stone age"* if Pakistan didnt comply with the US.

Have a look---

We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan

Now u tell me which country is in the US leash?? India or Pakistan??

Stop leaving in fool's paradise man,if u ever want to develop..Grow up,see the World.U will find out,its way different than u think it to be.


----------



## JonAsad

nForce said:


> w0w..now thats amazing,considering this is coming from a Pakistani.How 'bout a little reality check???American forces are operating in Pakistani territory,the drones are attacking Pakistani citizens while the govt. sits back and watches helplessly.Its not India in the receiving end,its Pakistan.
> 
> Even the Pakistani economy will have a hard time to stand on its own without US Aids.Pakistan has received billions of dollars as aids, bailout and loans from US ,the latest bein a massive $ 7.5 billion(2009-'14).
> A comprehensive list can be found here---
> 
> About Those Billions
> 
> 
> What the heck.. there is even an entire American website dedicated to the aids given to Pakistan.
> Have alook at this---
> 
> USAID
> 
> 
> The Deputy Secretary of State of Bush administration threatened the then Pakistani President Musharraf that *"US will bomb Pakistan back to stone age"* if Pakistan didnt comply with the US.
> 
> Have a look---
> 
> We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan
> 
> Now u tell me which country is in the US leash?? India or Pakistan??
> 
> Stop leaving in fool's paradise man,if u ever want to develop..Grow up,see the World.U will find out,its way different than u think it to be.



We are fighting a Wot and if you understand that you will also understand why we require Aid.
We are asking only for the services we are providing to US.
if u still dont understand go and look at ur history in 65 and 71 war.. every one needs aid during war.. nothing is infinite.


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> when they hit innocent .... lot of time i know by mistake so what ur gov say o them ...no problem batter luck next time... apki ek missile kharab hue ... thts it????



Lot of innocent ppl die during a War, its not been so long since you had a war.. did you lost only soldiers?


----------



## mrwarrior006

watevr the story may be

we got the deal which is good for india in lot of aspects tat one cant even think off


----------



## mrwarrior006

we using this deal will have to make most out of it

first priority satisfy enrgy req as fast as can


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> so they are free to kill innocent ... or its ur govt responsibility to take some action
> 
> or u have no guts to stop them???



its our responsibility to stop them and we are stopping them.. its not like that every strike kills innocent ppl or they are delibrately targeting innocents... like i said its bound to happen in a War.

Get it through ur thick skull. War, Casualities.. nothing new

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> m never heart that pakistan govt try to stop them
> 
> ohh m forget they didnt even taking permission for drone attack
> 
> and when they apologist for killing innocent



if you have never heard of it b4 then first try to educate ur self a little about Pakistan's stand on Drone attacks. Then Argue

about the permission our latest dictator allowed them and this no use of a democratic government has renewed it.. fcu*in twa*s


----------



## chcha420

jonasad said:


> if you have never heard of it b4 then first try to educate ur self a little about Pakistan's stand on Drone attacks. Then Argue
> 
> about the permission our latest dictator allowed them and this no use of a democratic government has renewed it.. fcu*in twa*s



dude sirf bolne se kya hota hai.. kuch karo bhi to

n ny source of permission ???


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> dude sirf bolne se kya hota hai.. kuch karo bhi to
> 
> n ny source of permission ???



hum common log sirf bol hi saktay hien....

read the book Gen Musharraf... In the line of fire


----------



## chcha420

jonasad said:


> hum common log sirf bol hi saktay hien....
> 
> read the book Gen Musharraf... In the line of fire



we r talking about government here not about individual 
ny source of permission??


----------



## JonAsad

chcha420 said:


> we r talking about government here not about individual
> ny source of permission??



like i said the government is bunch of twa*s
i can bet that every drone attack on Pakistani soil increases the bank balance of Zardari


----------



## nForce

jonasad said:


> We are fighting a Wot and if you understand that you will also understand why we require Aid.
> We are asking only for the services we are providing to US.
> if u still dont understand go and look at ur history in 65 and 71 war.. every one needs aid during war.. nothing is infinite.




I dont remember Pakistan fighting a war on terror until Pakistan was arm-twisted to be a part of it..Need proof??Go and read ex-Prez Musharraf's autobiography....

We'll bomb you to Stone Age, US told Pakistan

A country giving in to this form of arm twisting is a puppet...


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

Good Story... 
By the way who directed this story.....


----------



## shiningindia

Neo said:


> *The Real Story Behind the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal​*
> By Subrata Ghoshroy,
> Foreign Policy
> AlterNet. Posted October 17, 2008.
> 
> *The recently passed nuclear pact was not just a late win for an unpopular president, it was a coup for lobbyists and defense contractors.​*
> *At about 2:30 PM on Wednesday, October 8th, President Bush signed into law H.R. 7081, the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act, a.k.a. the "U.S.-India nuclear deal."* In attendance were Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is credited as the architect of the deal, members of Congress and an array of Indian American supporters. *It was the final milestone in a long road that started on July 18, 2005, when President Bush and India's Prime Minster Manmohan Singh announced the deal in a surprise joint statement. It was also a good photo op for a beleaguered president whose legacy will be an ill-conceived war and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.*
> 
> *The legislation signed by Bush is technically known as the 123 Agreement because it amends section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1954*, which regulates U.S. cooperation with other nations in nuclear matters and prohibits trading with states that have not signed the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Not only is India a non-signatory to the landmark treaty, it is, along with Israel and Pakistan, also in contravention of its underlying principle, having secretly developed the bomb by transferring fissile material from its civilian program.
> 
> *But while the point of the legislation was ostensibly to enable India to meet its energy needs, in reality it was about much more than that. The primary motivation is the U.S. embrace of India as a strategic partner.*
> 
> *An important, unlikely ally*
> 
> India is no small prize. A founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement and a traditional champion of "third world" countries at the U.N. and the World Trade Organization, gaining India as a collaborator rather than an adversary was not a stroke of genius by the Bush administration. It started under President Clinton, but could not be consummated because of India's nuclear tests in 1998. (Strobe Talbot, Deputy Secretary of State under Clinton, describes this in his book, Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy, and the Bomb.) Faced with the /pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=825">rapid
> 
> *decline of the U.S.'s global popularity in the world and desperate for a foreign policy success, getting India on our side became a "win-win" proposition for the Bush administration. But the so-called "nuclear irritant," as Bush called it, was standing in the way. It had to be removed.*
> 
> *The payoff was immediate. India voted twice against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).* According to an article published by the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, a former Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Non-Proliferation, Stephen Rademaker reportedly remarked at a meeting in New Delhi in February 2007:* "The best illustration of this [change in India's attitude] is the two votes India cast against Iran at the IAEA. I am the first person to admit that the votes were coerced."*
> 
> *Rademaker left the State Department in January 2007 to take up a "lucrative" job with Barbour, Griffith and Rogers, the firm hired by the Indian Embassy in Washington to lobby for the deal.*
> 
> India's actions did not go unappreciated. While expressing his frustration with India's continued pursuit of an Iran-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline deal in the face of U.S. opposition, at a hearing for the 123 Agreement this summer, Congressman Gary Ackerman, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Middle East and South Asia subcommittee, called India's IAEA vote "courageous." *But, he warned, he would not continue to make nice if India kept pursuing the pipeline. "Continued pursuit of the pipeline or other investments in Iran's energy sector ? will halt and potentially even roll back the progress made in bilateral relations over the last several years," he said.*
> 
> *As Noam Chomsky observed in a recent interview, India seems to be playing on both sides of the street. Unfortunately, it can't go on for ever.*
> 
> *A "strategic partnership"*
> 
> *That the nuclear deal was about much more than nuclear energy was evident from the title of the hearing this summer, which took place on June 25th: "More than just the 123 Agreement: The future of U.S.-Indo relations." A cursory search of the transcript for the word "Iran" found it mentioned a total of 96 times, compared with 81 for "nuclear" (with the two often mentioned in the same context). Of the three witnesses who testified before the committee, all were old State Department hands and cheerleaders for the deal. No skeptics were invited, not even for the appearance of balance.*
> 
> *In a report sent to Congress this September, President Bush acknowledged India's cooperation with American initiatives, referring specifically to India's votes in the IAEA:* "The Government of India has taken several steps to support the U.S. and to bring Iran back into compliance with its international obligations, particularly those pertaining to its nuclear weapons program." In addition, "India has also maintained a strong public line of support for P5+1 and U.S. diplomatic efforts to resolve international concerns with Iran's nuclear program," Bush said, referring to efforts that are viewed by most of the rest of the world as coercive and discriminatory towards Iran.
> 
> For their part, high-level Indian government officials promoting the deal have also waxed enthusiastic about the transformation of the India-U.S. relations. In December 2005, then Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran, the point man for the deal, delivered a speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. titled "Transforming India-U.S. Relations: Building a Strategic Partnership." The U.S.-India deal, he said, was a "declaration" that U.S. and India were moving towards a "global partnership," based not only on "common values," but "common interests" as well. These included the "promotion of democratic values and practices," and "combating terrorism and WMD proliferation" -- a whole-hearted embrace of the Washington consensus and evidence that, as former U.S. Ambassador Teresita Schaffer told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Indian foreign policy has "turned around" from the days of non-alignment.
> 
> *A further sign of the growing strategic partnership is the rapidly strengthening defense link between India and Israel.* In the past decade, as the relationship has blossomed, Israel has stepped in as a major supplier of weapons and sophisticated military hardware to India as a surrogate, since because U.S. firms were blocked from selling to India because of remaining sanctions and also because of inevitable protests by Pakistan. Israel is now India's second largest arms supplier.
> 
> *The Israel lobby was instrumental in garnering congressional support for the deal. In January this year, in an unprecedented move India launched a sophisticated Israeli satellite, the TECSAR, which could boost its intelligence gathering capabilities regarding Iran, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. The satellite, manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), was sent into orbit from the Sriharikota Launching Range in India using an Indian rocket. According to the Jerusalem Post, the launch of the TecSar was the first launch of an Israeli satellite aboard an Indian missile and it is part of growing Indian-Israeli cooperation,which is scheduled to eventually lead to the launching of two more satellites. While Indian space officials facing criticism at home and abroad characterized the launch as a strictly commercial venture, the significance of it was not lost in Iran and elsewhere.*
> 
> Alongside the joint statement, the United States and India signed a ten-year defense pact, which envisages global collaboration in multilateral operations, expanded two-way defense trade, increased opportunities for technology transfers and coproduction, increased collaboration on missile defense, "and the list goes on," said Chairman Ackerman at the hearing.
> 
> *A deal "crafted with the private sector firmly in mind"*
> 
> The signing of the defense pact is a clear, significant sign of where India wants to be in the future. So is India's support for the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. But perhaps most importantly, the defense pact has opened the door for the selling of U.S. military equipment to India.
> 
> *As Chomsky pointed out, Condoleezza Rice was "actually on record admitting what is truly behind this deal." Indeed, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 5, 2006, the Secretary of State made it clear it was about opening a new market for American technology: "At its core, our initiative with India is not simply a government-to-government effort. It was crafted with the private sector firmly in mind." She was not just talking about the nuclear industry, which is predicting a $100 billion market in India in the next 10 or 15 years. Boeing, for example, is reportedly projecting a market of $15 billion for its own products in India over the next 10 to 15 years.*
> 
> In his testimony before the House committee this summer, Stephen Cohen, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute and an old India hand, said that *India will be "one of the largest markets for defense equipment in the coming two decades." India's recent purchase of six C-130J aircraft -- made by Lockheed Martin -- was the "biggest ever Indian purchase of American equipment in dollar terms." The deal was worth more than one billion dollars.*
> 
> *Walter Andersen, a former State Department intelligence specialist who also testified, described the Indian Navy as an even more promising area for sales. With 35 ships in the works, India is now embarked on "one of the most ambitious naval building and procurement plans in the world," he said. And, he added, the U.S. -- and perhaps other U.S. allies like Japan and South Korea -- is more competitive as the "Indians have become increasingly skeptical" about the reliability of Russian naval suppliers.*
> 
> *A victory for lobbyists and the Bush administration*
> 
> Indeed, the U.S.-India nuclear agreement is a big deal, one made possible by the United States' willingness to trample many of its own laws and principles for non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, as well as the efforts of business lobbies in the U.S. and India, which stand to profit immensely.
> 
> *There were other payoffs as well. On his way back from New York immediately after the congressional vote in favor of the deal, the Indian Prime Minister stopped in Paris to sign a similar deal with France. The deal will allow the French nuclear giant Areva to sell at least two reactors and fuel to India. As the French anti-nuclear group Sortir to Nucleare (End Nuclear Power)aptly observed: "For having helped the U.S. and India get around the rules of non-proliferation, France will be able to sell nuclear reactors to India. These are nauseating deals that endanger the future of the planet," reported AFP.*
> 
> That the U.S. Senate voted 86-13 in favor of the deal is a testament to the power of such lobbying. By contrast, non-proliferation advocates -- not a homogeneous group by any means -- faced a David vs. Goliath situation. The brief debate before the House vote, however, revealed the concern among many members over the serious negative implications of the deal on the future for non-proliferation and disarmament.
> 
> *On the day of the vote, Boeing and Raytheon lobbyists were reportedly out in force, talking directly to the few wavering Senators bypassing even their staffers. "It was at a very high level," said one observer. "No one talked to the staffer, they went straight to the Senator and talked about business interests." For his part Vice Presidential nominee Joe Biden had pronounced that he was "going to work like the Devil to make it happen." And he did, by bending all the congressional rules and handing a prize to the most unpopular President in recent history barely a month before the U.S. elections.
> 
> Go figure.*



yaar please explain it in brief bcoz it's huge report.


----------



## Dalai Lama

JonAsad said:


> its our responsibility to stop them and we are stopping them.. its not like that every strike kills innocent ppl or they are delibrately targeting innocents... like i said its bound to happen in a War.
> 
> Get it through ur thick skull. War, Casualities.. nothing new



War is a dirty thing. *Agreed!*

However I wish GoP would take a tougher stance on this "collateral damage" of the US's WoT. This is not the first time the US have been careless. I remember watching 'Ross Kemp in Afghanistan' where the Brits were taking heavy losses due to so called "air support" from the US. Incidents like this and many others simply begs the question?

*Is it that their targeting technology is not as superior as they claim it to be or is it that they just don't care who they target?*

A video entitled 'Collateral Murder' comes to mind. Here's a link.


----------



## Thomas

TheDeletedUser said:


> War is a dirty thing. *Agreed!*
> 
> However I wish GoP would take a tougher stance on this "collateral damage" of the US's WoT. This is not the first time the US have been careless. I remember watching 'Ross Kemp in Afghanistan' where the Brits were taking heavy losses due to so called "air support" from the US. Incidents like this and many others simply begs the question?
> 
> *Is it that their targeting technology is not as superior as they claim it to be or is it that they just don't care who they target?*
> 
> A video entitled 'Collateral Murder' comes to mind. Here's a link.
> YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.



lol, that video has been debunked many times. stop trying to throw the thread off.


----------



## Zeeshan360

Davis case is already showing who is puppet
And how Uncle Sam is playing arm twisting Pakistan


----------



## BATMAN

The Cohen Group: Expertise: Regional Expertise: India

do i need to say more?


----------



## Mr.Ryu

what ever the Real Story Behind the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal may be the truth is simply India need more nuclear power to support its development you know what in the recent election In TN the major loss for DMK was also due to restricted power access to industries and home in state due to power shortage. So what ever may be the secondary reason for the deal may be the primary is surely CIVILIAN POWER PROJECTS.


----------



## Imran Akhtar

yes US blackmail Pakistan.A founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement and a traditional champion of "third world" countries at the U.N. and the World Trade Organization, gaining India as a collaborator rather than an adversary was not a stroke of genius by the Bush administration. It started under President Clinton, but could not be consummated because of India's nuclear tests in 1998.


----------



## IND151

^^ oh shut your mouth man

mind your language


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

India has many thorium reservoirs. U.S has naked eye on Indian thorium reservoirs.. That's why deal nuclear deal is done to use thorium for their nuclear power.


----------



## magomad

What about other middle easter countries that can produce it?


----------



## james5

You give the good information about India-America nuclear deal.


----------



## 119ENG

Intersting comment xebex. I think India, Pakistan and China should join forces. It is a HUGE market.
"United we stand, devide we fall".---well put


----------



## 119ENG

sorry *divided we fall*. My fingers are too fat for my keyboard


----------



## snakeeagle

the deal is to about put china and pakistan in under presure,and to increase role of india in afganistan.


----------



## james5

India America nuclear deal was one of the best deal for India.In USA many best visiting places for tour and travel.Miami is one of the best places in USA to visit.


----------



## m haris khan

INDIA TO REPLACE ARMY WITH ROBORTS
from where tey know how make roborts and they can't make misiile how they make missile having range 10000 ..american are using them against china and PAKISTAN
http://asiandefencenewsblog.blogspot.com/2013/10/india-plans-robots-to-replace-soldiers.html


----------



## Capt.Popeye

TruthSeeker said:


> Great, I'm glad my government is trying to engage democratic India. India is much more of a natural ally for the US than is China. I have never understood why the US and India did not form a stronger trading relationship until the past decade. I think that India was reluctant to be "re-colonized" and so its foreign investment rules were an impediment to forming joint companies with American companies. This agreement helps both countries to further develop joint commercial projects. This will actually benefit Indian workers more than American workers, but will eventually raise the prosperity of both countries.


 
The expression "re-colonized" that you used in your post is the apt one in this context. India is very wary of that phenomenon. As a matter of fact; the entire "Non-Aligned movement" was born out of that sentiment. The then Soviet Union having had a far better "sense of History" than the (successive) American Leaders; and were very sensitive to that sentiment and carefully calibrated their response/relationship with India and the NAM accordingly. While Uncle Sam full of "gung-ho" gusto persistently blustered and blundered its way around. USA's hobnobbing with its client-state Pakistan did not help at all either.

All that is seems to be getting re-set probably. But USA will do well to finally develop some "sense of History" if it hopes to gain some traction in this part of the world. The last American Leader to have probably had that sense; was FDR; he was the first (and some-what the last, save Kennedy probably) who could effectively don the mantle of a World Leader.


----------



## armchairPrivate

There is no real story. It is a simple business deal.

India has a healthy ForEx, Uncle Sam has the goods.

Just remember Uncle Sam's shiny toys, commercial and military, are expensive. And watch your ForEx being drained faster than it can be replenished.

Uncle Sam has a habit of discarding partners like used toilet paper after he is done with them. Remember General Noriega Moreno? He is in prison now sharing a shower with 20 other inmates.


----------

