Let me hazard a try
10,140,000,000,000 (PPP) for 57 countries vs 3,500,000,000,000 for a Single country. Not bad I guess
It is only now that India is a single country. A more apt comparison instead of the 1 vs. 57 would be population. As you've pointed out, the population is roughly the same. So the OIC has more than 3 times the PPP than India, even as per your numbers... despite having roughly the same population!
The comparison will depend on which country amongst the 57 countries
Take an average. From the numbers you've given above and the population, the average OIC citizen would be more than 3 times better off.
India doesnt have Oil,OIC countries dont have Iron ore. So ?
I don't see the world going ga ga over India's Iron ore the way they do over the oil and gas reserves in muslim countries. On the subject of natural resources, don't chicken out with a subjective reply such as the above. Look at estimates of total natural resource value in India vs. those of the OIC countries.
Total population of 1.45 billion (57 countries) vs 1.3 billion(1 country)
Precisely. So even though India has roughly the same population, it's PPP is 1/3rd that of the OIC. And resources per capita are far lower. And non-PPP GDP is even lower. Oh well.
Can one OIC country dock its warship in another OIC country's shore
without the extensive permission from the other Govt.? For example can a Iranian warship dock with no prior permission in Jeddah ?
Many of them can. And are you bringing this up to cover yourself on the shoreline response? You didn't even understand the point them. The length of a shoreline is a national resource. It defines your access to the seas and the extent to which you can benefit from resources in the sea. It has nothing to do with Naval ships. Per capita, consider the amount of shoreline an average OIC citizen has access to vs. an Indian citizen.
As for the point regarding critical sea lanes, that too is a purely economic issue. It obviously has strategic dimensions, but from an economic standpoint it has massive ramifications. You know the Suez story and how France, UK and Israel bombed Egypt when they nationalized the Suez, right? They didn't do that because the Suez was meaningless to them.
If the answer is "NO" this question is not worth replying.
If you dispense with the emotion you might actually comprehend the point, but I guess that's a tall order.
Again will a UAE Mirage go to war with Australia for the sake of Indonesia ?. Any OIC country that has a Aircraft carrier or a SSBN ?
According to the Indian press, muslim countries have provided weapons, materiel and men to assist each other in times of war. You claim Jordanian F-104s and Iranian F-86s were used in war against you. As recently as the 90s, a US wargame scenario predicted Iran would join Pakistan if an Indo-Pak war escalated.
Indonesia has three helicopter carriers which are variously reported as in service or under construction.
-::[AIRCRAFT CARRIER INDONESIA]::-
Turkey will have its aircraft carrier deployed by 2013 and is also acquiring helicopter carriers
Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums - View Single Post - Greek / Turkish Aircraft Carriers!
On the subject of SSBNs, WHY? With MESMA AIP technology you can stay under water for very long periods of time, you don't need an SSBN to deploy nuclear weapons on the sub, so once again, why? Is this what you're hanging your hat on in this multifaceted comparison with OIC countries
Tsk tsk.
How many OIC countries support Iran against 'infidel' US ? And any OIC country in the G4(countries that are next in line for the Permanent membership)
G4 is a completely arbitrary tag. There is no defined process for UN SC reform, there is no agreed upon "next in line" set of countries, a single veto can kill all entrants. The UN doesn't have a formal agreed upon process to on-ramp the "G4". I have already posted an extensive set of links concerning both OIC and Arab League considerations as UNSC permanent members. The Arab League has achieved consensus on Egypt as a permanent member on behalf of the AL. The OIC has considered an organizational seat. You guys are so giddy about this UNSC thing that you've lost all context.
Show me a comprehensive plan for UN SC reform which has been agreed to. Then talk to me about being "next in line". Just because someone comes up with cute nomenclature and says some nice words on a sales trip, it doesn't mean a darned thing. When someone even agrees on an overall framework for reform - much less a defined plan - talk to me then. Until that time, it is all feel good nonsense.
Yes, dazzle me with your obfuscation and side stepping!
As I expected, since you can't compete with the OIC numbers on any front, you are now bringing up muslim unity issues. Ok. Well, I guess the OIC is unified enough to condemn India repeatedly on the Kashmir issue, no? And this is despite India's protests - over and over again. They get ignored over and over again, and the OIC continues with the condemnations. If India didn't care about these, they would not take notice. But they do care, obviously. And continue with the diplomacy to try to somehow enter the OIC, if not as a member, then as an observer. And even on that front, the OIC has been united enough to disallow Indian even an Observer status despite the fact that India has been trying since the OIC Rabat conference!!
