A country such as India not being a permanent member of the [UN] Security

[Chinese-Dragon]

now this is called crappy rant............hhhhhmmmmmits not about 5gen fighters or nuke subs ,its all about the representation of 1.1billion strong,smart,economically sound people,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and if china does not want this to happen then i think "china is worried of india's rise" or "china is a not a very responsible superpower"..........

Your avatar is Epic.

 

[buddyboyyash]

@chinese dragon

u have been posting that one article from economist at least i guess 100 times


did u manage to read other articles in favour of india ever??...posted in the same thread...

when china got in...economy was not the factor

its not a factor even today...its all about regional influence...chinese dont have as much regional influence in south and south east asia.....just how india doesnt have influence in far east sector...understood??

 

[IND151]

It's not me who said that, it was "The Economist". Go cry at them.

And the Pak-fa is based on RUSSIAN technology.

Give me a call when India can independently produce it's own 5th generation jet, or ASAT, or ASBM... or even a simple 10,000km+ ICBM which China already had in the 1970's.

our first fast breeder reactor went critical in 1985 while yours in 2011.

 

[holysaturn]

Your avatar is Epic.

thank you hes my fav -kamal hassan......

 

[Hu Jintao]

India was offered a permanent seat on the council 55 years ago, in 1955. But that offer, made by the United States and the Soviet Union, was declined by India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru said the seat should be given to China instead." [4] The council seat then was held by Taiwan (ROC). This decision by Nehru is seen as a blunder and the loss of an opportunity to attain a stronger diplomatic stature by India.

India and the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jade]

Anyway, sorry to break the Indian wet dreams. From the United Nations website:

Charter of the United Nations: Chapter XVIII: Amendments

Without the unanimous approval of ALL the P5 members, the UN charter cannot be amended. Which would make it impossible to allow new permanent members in the UNSC.

No veto is required. If even one member of the P5 decides to abstain, then the reform will fail.

Mark my words. You could do a zilch when India's vote came up at NSG, and you will do a zilch when India's vote come up at security council. The main player is US.

 

[CarbonD]

India should have UN seat I guess, its economy is growing and soon to surpass most permanent members. I guess no ones in the way by the looks of it. Japan would never get a seat as it is strongly opposed by chinese and russians (Japs have disputed land with russia bigger than that of claimed by china)Germany mmm chances are low but can become one. I suggest chuck French out they are so lame French Taunting - Monty Python and the Holy Grail - YouTube
They are wirdos

 

[CorporateAffairs]

May be we need to do Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V to get a permenant membership.

---------- Post added at 05:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:25 PM ----------

India was offered a permanent seat on the council 55 years ago, in 1955. But that offer, made by the United States and the Soviet Union, was declined by India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru said the seat should be given to China instead." [4] The council seat then was held by Taiwan (ROC). This decision by Nehru is seen as a blunder and the loss of an opportunity to attain a stronger diplomatic stature by India.

India and the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uselss fellow nehru

 

[gslv]

actually as an Indian ithink it is better to focus on education and health rather than an cold war era UN security seat. But its only my opinion anybody is allowed to disagree.

 

[rcrmj]

patience son it is our century

'India will be the biggest superpower'

when will you lot start feeling tired of using big words like 'will' 'going to' 'may' and 'future'?

---------- Post added at 02:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------

Mark my words. You could do a zilch when India's vote came up at NSG, and you will do a zilch when India's vote come up at security council. The main player is US.

you guys start to use 'wills' on US now.. incredible ..!

 

[peep]

when will you lot start feeling tired of using big words like 'will' 'going to' 'may' and 'future'?

---------- Post added at 02:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------


you guys start to use 'wills' on US now.. incredible ..!

Most Indians don't give a flying fcuk to United Nations Security Council seat. US is the only superpower now. It can arm twist any country including china ( yes ) to accept anything on the table and if any one doesn't budge, have their own way. Typical case is the IRAQ WMDs. Other members couldn't do squat against it.

A similar case of veto ( 45 members ) arose when our nuclear deal with US was on NSG table. Not a single soul sitting in the committee member could/did oppose it inspite of all that hooplah surrounding it.

So, with current structure of UN a security council seat with a veto mean nothing.

Also, counting russia as europe, if you people think that 1 seat (yours) is sufficient to represent more than 30% of humanity, then how much credibility it gives to that organization is anybody's guess !!

 

[Killswitch]

A seat at the UNSC is not going to make India any safer. Building up the armed forces, infrastructure, fighting corruption, etc. is far more important.

 

[ironwarrier]

guys why do we even care about the UN seat. UN has been a failure on its every single mission. it has been completely inefficient in controlling world politics, hunger, poverty, HIV and wars. My gf is doing world politics here in waterloo university, she made a project on UN and its failure. you can google abt failures of UN. UN couldnot resolve any major issues like chechnya, kashmir, georgia etc etc. No one seeks permission from UN before make nuclear weapons. Its simply powerless. our economic growth will not increase with getting UN memebrship. that will increase with infrastructure and policies reforms. sp better concentrate on that.

 

[Shaurya]

when will you lot start feeling tired of using big words like 'will' 'going to' 'may' and 'future'?

---------- Post added at 02:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 PM ----------


you guys start to use 'wills' on US now.. incredible ..!

Ah, my we meet again, chinese troller and yeah, it depends more on what US says than what actually is important... so yeah, your seat is primarily because of India and US votes.. just like the article says above, if you want a detailed summary please do PM me or reply to this comment, would be happy to clear your doubts (That is, if they are really doubts and not beliefs)

 

[Shaurya]

guys why do we even care about the UN seat. UN has been a failure on its every single mission. it has been completely inefficient in controlling world politics, hunger, poverty, HIV and wars. My gf is doing world politics here in waterloo university, she made a project on UN and its failure. you can google abt failures of UN. UN couldnot resolve any major issues like chechnya, kashmir, georgia etc etc. No one seeks permission from UN before make nuclear weapons. Its simply powerless. our economic growth will not increase with getting UN memebrship. that will increase with infrastructure and policies reforms. sp better concentrate on that.

Although, I won't disagree with MOST of your comments I have a slight disagreement .... Nobody cares what force you can exert with your veto powers on some other countries, if that was the case, Russia and china's opposition to the libyan war wouldve easily stopped it. Did it stop? Hell no, because in reality , only US can decide what other countries of the UNSC will decide... on the other hand, I would like to quote spiderman bauji "With great power comes great responsibility (and profits)" please note that when power comes, so does huge profits and media attention. In a short while I am going to explain rcmj my thoughts on china being a "powerful" country in the 50s, you may join in if you want. You cannot imagine how much profit and power you can make/accumulate with such positions, I really don't give a damn about attacking some weaker country, but the veto power and the profits it would bring to us.