India offers help in stopping proliferation of WMDs

[Abhishek_]

What is the moral argument backing up this one? Either way, they'll get the nukes.

This only means, that the larger countries will get nukes, while small countries like Singapore won't.

You tell me since China is NPT signatory, India isn't. Perhaps thats why it is considered discriminatory.

 

[Abhishek_]

Please explain the distinctions for us simpletons.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Read the first and third pillars

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You tell me since China is NPT signatory, India isn't. Perhaps thats why it is considered discriminatory.

Just curious as to why you think it's morally fine for a country to develop nukes on its own, but morally wrong to get help from others.

The result is the same, they will both get nukes.

However, it will give a big advantage to large and/or rich countries who are able to develop nukes independently. But will make it almost impossible for small and/or poor countries to get it.

 

[Abhishek_]

Just curious as to why you think it's morally fine for a country to develop nukes on its own, but morally wrong to get help from others.

why doesn't china complain when taiwan develops its own weapons but cries out loud when US transfers munitions and technology to TW?

 

[true_indian]

Please explain the distinctions for us simpletons.

Let me try.. India would object to anyone who have already signed the NPT. India has every right to point the morality in upholding their previous commitment. For those who thought NPT is discriminatory and haven't signed the NPT, to them India has no moral ground in preaching them. Obviously Bangladesh fall in the latter category. End of discussion.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

why china doesn't complain when taiwan develops its own weapons but cries out loud when US transfers munitions and technology to TW.
does that help?

Not really, since of course we would be against both options. (Assuming we are talking about nukes).

The position you argued, just changes the current so-called inequality, into another form of inequality, based on large/rich countries versus small/poor countries.

There is always going to be some inequality in the world, even Communists know this. The haves and the have nots.

The UN Security council being another example of this. Some will have the power and some won't.

 

[damiendehorn]

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Read the first and third pillars

So if a non-signatory nation were to develops WMDs that is fine? Hence under your definition Pak and Nok development is fine? Or after if a nation were to leave the NPT then they can develop WMDs, to which you would have no objection.

 

[peaceful]

proliferation is quite different than independent development my dear friend.
India has developed nukes, but it has not proliferated.

so far india has not demonstrated that it can independently develop a working H-Bomb. that is the bottom line.

 

[peaceful]

why doesn't china complain when taiwan develops its own weapons but cries out loud when US transfers munitions and technology to TW?

because:

1. developing conventional weapons is not banned by any international treaties.
2. The US already agreed to stop selling weapons to Taiwan 30 years back.

 

[peaceful]

You tell me since China is NPT signatory, India isn't. Perhaps thats why it is considered discriminatory.

no matter whether india signs the NPT or not, it is not a nuclear power, the 1998 tests of a 40kt failed or faked h-bomb demonstrated that india's nuclear status is no more advanced than north korea.

 

[true_indian]

So if a non-signatory nation were to develops WMDs that is fine? Hence under your definition Pak and Nok development is fine? Or after if a nation were to leave the NPT then they can develop WMDs, to which you would have no objection.

When did we say Pak has no right to develop nuclear weapons. India doesn't have moral right there. North Korea had signed NPT before. So India has every right to oppose its nuclear development.

---------- Post added at 07:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 AM ----------

no matter whether india signs the NPT or not, it is not a nuclear power, the 1998 tests of a 40kt failed or faked h-bomb demonstrated that india's nuclear status is no more advanced than north korea.

So whats your point? India would be happier if everone consider it non-nuclear state. If your next (i)llogical statement is to ask India to sign NPT as a non nuclear state then India has every right to say Fu$K off to anyone..

 

[Abhishek_]

Not really, since of course we would be against both options. (Assuming we are talking about nukes).

The position you argued, just changes the current so-called inequality, into another form of inequality, based on large/rich countries versus small/poor countries.
There is always going to be some inequality in the world, even Communists know this. The haves and the have nots.
The UN Security council being another example of this. Some will have the power and some won't.

I concur CD. I dont have an issue if a country develops any kind of technology on its own.

 

[peaceful]

India does have an impeccable nuclear non-proliferation record so I can see why it would like to increase its participation in this field.
as for BD, we're talking about something that will never happen so lets not go off-tangent on it.

india refused to sign the NPT and illegally developed nuke, that is your "impeccable nuclear non-proliferation record ".

your test in 1990s were condemned by the entire world. google before you post

 

[Abhishek_]

india refused to sign the NPT and illegally developed nuke, that is your "impeccable nuclear non-proliferation record ".

your test in 1990s were condemned by the entire world. google before you post

Glad you could join the party.
while you're at it, read the entire thread before you post

 

[peaceful]

When did we say Pak has no right to develop nuclear weapons. India doesn't have moral right there. North Korea had signed NPT before. So India has every right to oppose its nuclear development.

No, india doesn't have any right to develop nuke.
india is not recognized by the NPT as a nuclear weapons state, india is expected to sign the NPT like all other 180+ non nuclear weapons state.

by having the 1998/1999 tests, it has been widely observed/concluded that india so far doesn't have any proven ability on h-bomb, not to mention the absolote lack of delivery systems. india is not going to be able to afford to have more tests as again it will be strongly condemned by the entire world.

the chance has already gone, india is not going to be able to build and test its nuke.