What's new

How secure is Indian nuclear program?

Bull

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 6, 2006
6,850
0
280
I asked

bull said:
From were did u get these names,it a wonderfull work of fiction

You answered
Indian sources..... some fiction isn't it? ;)

I asked the same question a few posts back

bull said:
From were did u get these names,it a wonderfull work of fiction,appreciate that.
and you answered..

just because you have no clue about these popular movements, doesn’t mean they are “wonderfull work of fiction”. Such ignorant remarks only goes to show your limited knowledge. Here is one reference: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../war/assam.htm Please do not forget to read the list in the right column. ;)


Now tell me from where did u get it? India sources or foriegn sources.The global security site tell about 5 major and some 30 odd "dead or inactive" separtist movements.
 

TomCat111

FULL MEMBER
Nov 8, 2006
527
0
4
I'm sorry I didn't get the whole bully, dog and leash thing.
Just as expected. Next time instead of using euphemism, I will try to use simple words so you could understand too. ;)

As for corporate greed - the US spends billions to make sure 'rogue' regimes don't get any form of WMDs least of all nuclear tech.
Are you suggesting, India to have ‘rouge’ regimes?

Well documented?
Indeed... Next time please read Appendixes A,B and C too (Seeds of Indian Proliferation). They chronologically go over Indian proliferation. For additional proof of Indian nuclear proliferation, please read Nukes for India before Bull diligently try to discredit it too.;)

Pakistan is as guilty as India.
I know it’s hard for Indians not to use childish argument of ‘he is doing it too’, but try to stick to the topic which is about India and not Pakistan. If you are badly itching to discuss Pakistan’s guilt, feel free to start another thread.

did India share, sell or otherwise spread nuclear technology with any other country or company? No.
Your conclusion is way off the mark. Let me reiterate, read Appendixes A,B and C too (Seeds of Indian Proliferation). They chronologically go over Indian proliferation. For additional proof of Indian nuclear proliferation, please read Nukes for India.

Take this line by Mr. Gill
For its part, India effortlessly proliferates the nuclear technology to countries like Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Sudan and South Korea
He's given no supporting arguments. He just expects his readers to believe it because the great Mr. Gill has said it.
Well... we have to wonder if you have reading disability or if you have a habit of lying. :angry: The complete line is as follows: ” For its part, India effortlessly proliferates the nuclear technology to countries like Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Sudan and South Korea (see Appendix - B).” which part of “see Appendix - B” do you find hard to read or comprehend? Could it be any simpler? Mr. Gill doesn’t expect his readers to believe it because the great Mr. Gill has said it, but he certainly makes a basic assumption that the readers could, at minimum, read English. The arguments and supporting proof is there, but you will have to actually read them. As they say, ‘you can take horse to water, but you can’t make it drink it too’. Ironically, the saying fits very well on certain Indians in these forums.:lol:
 

TomCat111

FULL MEMBER
Nov 8, 2006
527
0
4
Start looking at news articles in perspective.
Yes, please do. The Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil clearly said, The Indo-US nuclear agreement has made the country’s atomic power plants "highly vulnerable" to terror threats, and that “while nuclear plants were already on the terrorists’ hit list with national security advisor M K Narayanan disclosing early this year plots to target Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, and Kaiga plant in Karnataka, Patil said that they had become ‘highly vulnerable in view of the recent India-US Agreement on Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation’.”

any attack by them will be a fidayeen strike symbolic in nature rather than an attempt to blow up the facility or steal nuclear secrets. Result of any attack will be - all terrorists dead + some security personnel dead/wounded. Period. That is the limit of what terrorists can achieve.
I knew Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil should have consulted you before sharing shocking admissions and government’s alarming worries. But then who listens to the Indian Home Minister when we have such confident optimists like you? :rofl:
 

Contrarian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 23, 2006
11,572
4
10,721
Yes, please do. The Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil clearly said, The Indo-US nuclear agreement has made the country’s atomic power plants "highly vulnerable" to terror threats, and that “while nuclear plants were already on the terrorists’ hit list with national security advisor M K Narayanan disclosing early this year plots to target Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, and Kaiga plant in Karnataka, Patil said that they had become ‘highly vulnerable in view of the recent India-US Agreement on Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation’.”



I knew Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil should have consulted you before sharing shocking admissions and government’s alarming worries. But then who listens to the Indian Home Minister when we have such confident optimists like you? :rofl:
Havent you heard the statement:
Better safe than sorry!

We all know the terrorists would like to strike wherever it hurts, the nuclear plants are no exception. Just cuz terrorists would LIKE to strike the nuclear plant does not mean that it can, and the Minister is just stating that, that the Nuclear establishments are under threat and we should take additional steps.
This is what vnomad emant by look at the articles from perspective. Look at them from an objective point of view.

Your wishful thinking that the Indian Nuclear establishment is going to crumble or fall in the hands of terrorists does not mean that it will happen so.
 

Contrarian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 23, 2006
11,572
4
10,721
Just as expected. Next time instead of using euphemism, I will try to use simple words so you could understand too. ;)

Are you suggesting, India to have ‘rouge’ regimes?
I take it you can comprehend well then....

What is meant that if the US govt spends billions of dollars to prevent rouge regimes from getting nuclear tech, then if it is giving India nuclear technology, India certainly does not fit the above mentioned bill.
 

TomCat111

FULL MEMBER
Nov 8, 2006
527
0
4
Just cuz terrorists would LIKE to strike the nuclear plant does not mean that it can, and the Minister is just stating that, that the Nuclear establishments are under threat and we should take additional steps.
1. There are perceived terrorist threats to nuclear assets all over the globe, but how many highest government officials do you know of who publicly declare their atomic power plants to be "highly vulnerable" to be terrorist attacks? Could the answer be, beside Indian, NONE? :eek:
2. Then what’s the worry? What’s with all these explanations? :confused:

Look at them from an objective point of view.
I wish you guys could hear your advice too, instead of attacking and marginalizing everyone else why don't you guys try to objectively discuss the topic?

Your wishful thinking that the Indian Nuclear establishment is going to crumble or fall in the hands of terrorists does not mean that it will happen so.
Then why don’t you guys chill out. What’s with the obsessive attacking and discrediting?
 

Bull

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 6, 2006
6,850
0
280
1. There are perceived terrorist threats to nuclear assets all over the globe, but how many highest government officials do you know of who publicly declare their atomic power plants to be "highly vulnerable" to be terrorist attacks? Could the answer be, beside Indian, NONE? :eek:
You need to read a lot more before commenting;

in US,http://www.nci.org/02/06f/14-01.htm
in US, Nuclear Power Plants Remain Vulnerable to Terrorist Attack, Some Experts Say..http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_6_20.html

This is what Bush said ""We ought to be sending a strong signal (to terrorists)," Bush said. "If you sabotage a defense installation or a nuclear facility in a way that takes an innocent life, you ought to get the death penalty."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2004/n04202004_20l0404203.html

Then why don’t you guys chill out. What’s with the obsessive attacking and discrediting?
What’s with the obsessive attacking and discrediting?:rolleyes:
 

TomCat111

FULL MEMBER
Nov 8, 2006
527
0
4
You need to read a lot more before commenting;
And you need a lot of comprehension skills before you rant;

What part of what I said did you find hard to comprehend? Would it help you if I bold and underline? Here is what I said, “how many highest government officials do you know of who publicly declare their atomic power plants to be "highly vulnerable" to the terrorist attacks?”
 

Bull

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 6, 2006
6,850
0
280
And you need a lot of comprehension skills before you rant;

What part of what I said did you find hard to comprehend? Would it help you if I bold and underline? Here is what I said, “how many highest government officials do you know of who publicly declare their atomic power plants to be "highly vulnerable" to be terrorist attacks?”
Go to google or reuters and search for Bush's comments and you will see how many times they have.

The whole world is worried about the "dirty bomb" and you are trying here to create a paronia about Indian nuclear sites.
 

TomCat111

FULL MEMBER
Nov 8, 2006
527
0
4
Go to google or reuters and search for Bush's comments and you will see how many times they have.
You seem to be pretty proficient at Googling. Instead of desperately presenting some irrelevant Bush nonsense, why don’t you present some relevant links to prove your point?

The whole world is worried about the "dirty bomb" and you are trying here to create a paronia about Indian nuclear sites.
Sweetheart, please don’t be disheartened. Read the article and for a change do your best to comprehend it too, because it explains how the leaky Indian nuclear program has increased the possibilities of "dirty bomb" too. :coffee:
 

vnomad

FULL MEMBER
Oct 31, 2006
549
0
71
Just as expected. Next time instead of using euphemism, I will try to use simple words so you could understand too. ;)
I doubt if anybody else understood what the heck you were getting at.

Are you suggesting, India to have ‘rouge’ regimes?
I'll take this slow for your sake.

1. US spends billions to stop nuclear proliferation.

2. Nuclear programmes by 'rogue' regimes are a threat to the US

3. US supposedly ignores Indian proliferation to those same regimes.

Did you spot the disconnect?


I know it’s hard for Indians not to use childish argument of ‘he is doing it too’, but try to stick to the topic which is about India and not Pakistan. If you are badly itching to discuss Pakistan’s guilt, feel free to start another thread.
I'm somehow not surprised you're taking this tack. :lol:


Mr. Gill doesn’t expect his readers to believe it because the great Mr. Gill has said it, but he certainly makes a basic assumption that the readers could, at minimum, read English. The arguments and supporting proof is there, but you will have to actually read them
I've read the Appendix B and that is not proof. If you believe it, it means that SK has an undercover nuclear weapons program. Does it?
The Appendix contains claims that so and so came to India and so and so worked with India. It also shows reports of exports of dual use material by private Indian companies.
Code:
Indian external affairs minister Yashwant Sinha said "most certainly between Iran and India, there would be collaboration, there is collaboration".
The word nuclear was missing. Just collaboration doesn't mean anything.
 

vnomad

FULL MEMBER
Oct 31, 2006
549
0
71
Yes, please do. The Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil clearly said, The Indo-US nuclear agreement has made the country’s atomic power plants "highly vulnerable" to terror threats, and that “while nuclear plants were already on the terrorists’ hit list with national security advisor M K Narayanan disclosing early this year plots to target Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, and Kaiga plant in Karnataka, Patil said that they had become ‘highly vulnerable in view of the recent India-US Agreement on Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation’.”
Which means that there is a high probability of an attack on India's nuclear facilities by Pakistan's beloved LeT. That doesn't have anything to do with nuclear proliferation and neither does it imply that terrorists (trained in Pakistan incidently) can steal nuclear weaponry or technology.



I knew Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil should have consulted you before sharing shocking admissions and government’s alarming worries. But then who listens to the Indian Home Minister when we have such confident optimists like you?
Read the above lines. Tell me what exactly would a terrorist be able to get from a nuclear power plant guarded by the best India can come up with? We're dealing with terrorists not thiefs. :wall:
 

MIG_ACE

FULL MEMBER
Oct 31, 2006
370
0
30
Then why don’t you guys chill out. What’s with the obsessive attacking and discrediting?
Jeez Tomcat nearly every topic u come up with on this forum seeks to somehow discredit India and paint it in a bad light.And now u are accusing us of "obsessive attacking and discrediting"??
Its YOU who is obsessed with discrediting and attacking India .
 

Contrarian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 23, 2006
11,572
4
10,721
inferiority complex at its best...he keeps on attacking to try and discredit anything Indian, then he tries to paint us in teh same light.

Just saying that Nuclear insallations are at a threat from terrorists does not amount to anything. Any nuclear plant in the world is under threat from terrorists. Just cuz our minster said so, that means our nuke plants are 'leaky'!!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom