India, please stop deceiving the world and your people.

[SBUS-CXK]

this source is from wiki right?..how come ROC & PRC are one and the same when ROC is still up & running till the present day & call themselves as Chinese Taipei to differentiate from PRC. In regards to Russia..there were other republics too in the Soviet Union...since Russia was the largest republic it was chosen to be the successor state in the UN in place of USSR

Give it up. You don't know anything. Taiwan implements the ROC Constitution. In this constitution, Taiwan is still a province of China. The capital of ROC is Nanjing.

Taiwan can only use "Chinese Taipei" in the international community. This is licensed by PRC. Taiwan can use this name to participate in international competitions (such as the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games).

So how much common sense do Indians know?

Accept the reality, no one talks about India.

 

[mirage2K]

Give it up. You don't know anything. Taiwan implements the ROC Constitution. In this constitution, Taiwan is still a province of China. The capital of ROC is Nanjing.

Taiwan can only use "Chinese Taipei" in the international community. This is licensed by PRC. Taiwan can use this name to participate in international competitions (such as the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games).

So how much common sense do Indians know?

Accept the reality, no one talks about India.

I don't need to argue with fools like you coz arguing or for that matter reasoning with fools is of no use..they would bring you to their own levels

 

[SBUS-CXK]

I don't need to argue with fools like you coz arguing or for that matter reasoning with fools is of no use..they would bring you to their own levels

Ah, thank you. But I hope you understand. No country can rely on lies to become a global power. Reality cannot change.

The ostrich closes its eyes and does not mean it is correct... Repeat this fact and common sense again. India has nothing to do with the seat of the Security Council.

 

[Shankranthi]

Here are the Facts from the Indian perspective.

Nehru got FOUR foreign offers in total for a UNSC seat. Twice by US in 1950 and 1955. Once by Chinese rebels and once by USSR.

The First offer was in 1950.

In a letter to Nehru dated 24th August 1950, Indian Ambassador to US and Nehru's sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit reveals that US State department made a proposal to India for UNSC seat. Those were the days of Cold War and US was looking at a potential ally in India.

How was this Possible ? Especially when people claim that there has been NO CHANGE in the UN composition since it was first set up ?

There HAS BEEN a change in UN composition. In 1950, PRC was blocked from taking Chinese seat at UN. In response Russia walked out. These events gave a scope for a new member.


To this Rare opportunity Nehru wrote a response to this letter on August 30 in which He unequivocally denied the offer. He said the UNSC seat would break "the impeccable relations between India and China". He further said "it would be an affront to China" and he would "press for China's admission in UNSC"

From 1951, Nehru worked constantly to ensure china go the permanent council seat at the UN.

So much so that Dr. Ambedkar who was one of the Founding members o f the Indian constitution wrote this in Frustration.

Here is one Indian Newspaper of that time, highlighting Nehru's plea for UN(UNSC) seat for Peking (China).

Here is a scholarly work by Anton Harder who was a PhD candidate in the International History Department of the London School of Economics. His dissertation is on Sino-Indian relations from 1949-1962. "Not at the cost of China"

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/cwihp_working_paper_76_not_at_the_cost_of_china.pdf



The Second offer came in 1955.

It was initially made by Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin’s as a offer of a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council in 1955. This was made as a feeler to test India and proposed to make India the SIXTH member of the Security council.


Jawaharlal Nehru again rejected the Soviet offer to propose India as the sixth permanent member of the Security Council and insisted that priority be given to China’s admission to the United Nations.

Their conversation is recorded and published in the selected works of AG Noorani.

[Nikolai] Bulganin: Regarding your suggestion about the four power conference we would take appropriate action. While we are discussing the general international situation and reducing tension, we propose suggesting at a later stage India’s inclusion as the sixth member of the Security Council.

JN [Jawaharlal Nehru]: Perhaps Bulganin knows that some people in USA have suggested that India should replace China in the Security Council. This is to create trouble between us and China. We are, of course, wholly opposed to it. Further, we are opposed to pushing ourselves forward to occupy certain positions because that may itself create difficulties and India might itself become a subject to controversy. If India is to be admitted to the Security Council, it raises the question of the revision of the Charter of the UN. We feel that this should not be done till the question of China’s admission and possibly of others is first solved. I feel that we should first concentrate on getting China admitted. What is Bulganin’s opinion about the revision of the Charter? In our opinion this does not seem to be an appropriate time for it.



There was also an offer from the US in the same time frame for a permanent seat for India. This is made clear by Nehru's own letter on August 2 1955. Nehru in his letter to Chief Ministers clearly mentions there was indeed an informal offer from US for a UNSC seat. Nehru denied it because he didn't want to take the seat "because it would be unfair to a great country like China"

This letter can be accessed online.

It is available on Page 237 of Jawaharlal's Nehru's "Letters to the Chief ministers Volume 4 (1947-1964)", Oxford university Press. Government of India 1988

Check for page 237 in this link

https://ia801606.us.archive.org/20/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.54646/2015.54646.Letters-To-Chief-Ministers-1947-1964-Vol-4_text.pdf …



Despite this, Nehru shamelessly LIED on the Floor of the Parliament and claimed there was no such offer. He did this because to admit to the offer and to then admit he rejected it would have be political suicide.

On 27 September 1955 in Parliament, Nehru categorically denied that a UNSC seat was ever offered to India. "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind". Though just a MONTH earlier his letter to the CM's admits the opposite.


The worst part is that even in 1963, a year after China invaded India. PM Nehru's sister - leader of India's delegation to UN - said India STILL supports China's admission to the United Nations as a "matter of principle".

Today, China spares no effort to oppose India at the UN. As a "matter of principle".

Also as a side note, here is a picture of some Indians in China. The picture shows Naga separatist leaders at the Great Wall of China, 1960s. China has created, supported & armed insurgencies & terrorism in India for over half a century.

So china's support to Azhar Mahmood should not come as a surprise to anybody.

 

[sinait]

Here are the Facts from the Indian perspective.

Nehru got FOUR foreign offers in total for a UNSC seat. Twice by US in 1950 and 1955. Once by Chinese rebels and once by USSR.

The First offer was in 1950.

In a letter to Nehru dated 24th August 1950, Indian Ambassador to US and Nehru's sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit reveals that US State department made a proposal to India for UNSC seat. Those were the days of Cold War and US was looking at a potential ally in India.

How was this Possible ? Especially when people claim that there has been NO CHANGE in the UN composition since it was first set up ?

There HAS BEEN a change in UN composition. In 1950, PRC was blocked from taking Chinese seat at UN. In response Russia walked out. These events gave a scope for a new member.


To this Rare opportunity Nehru wrote a response to this letter on August 30 in which He unequivocally denied the offer. He said the UNSC seat would break "the impeccable relations between India and China". He further said "it would be an affront to China" and he would "press for China's admission in UNSC"

From 1951, Nehru worked constantly to ensure china go the permanent council seat at the UN.

So much so that Dr. Ambedkar who was one of the Founding members o f the Indian constitution wrote this in Frustration.

Here is one Indian Newspaper of that time, highlighting Nehru's plea for UN(UNSC) seat for Peking (China).

Here is a scholarly work by Anton Harder who was a PhD candidate in the International History Department of the London School of Economics. His dissertation is on Sino-Indian relations from 1949-1962. "Not at the cost of China"

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/cwihp_working_paper_76_not_at_the_cost_of_china.pdf

The Second offer came in 1955.

It was initially made by Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin’s as a offer of a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council in 1955. This was made as a feeler to test India and proposed to make India the SIXTH member of the Security council.


Jawaharlal Nehru again rejected the Soviet offer to propose India as the sixth permanent member of the Security Council and insisted that priority be given to China’s admission to the United Nations.

Their conversation is recorded and published in the selected works of AG Noorani.

[Nikolai] Bulganin: Regarding your suggestion about the four power conference we would take appropriate action. While we are discussing the general international situation and reducing tension, we propose suggesting at a later stage India’s inclusion as the sixth member of the Security Council.

JN [Jawaharlal Nehru]: Perhaps Bulganin knows that some people in USA have suggested that India should replace China in the Security Council. This is to create trouble between us and China. We are, of course, wholly opposed to it. Further, we are opposed to pushing ourselves forward to occupy certain positions because that may itself create difficulties and India might itself become a subject to controversy. If India is to be admitted to the Security Council, it raises the question of the revision of the Charter of the UN. We feel that this should not be done till the question of China’s admission and possibly of others is first solved. I feel that we should first concentrate on getting China admitted. What is Bulganin’s opinion about the revision of the Charter? In our opinion this does not seem to be an appropriate time for it.



There was also an offer from the US in the same time frame for a permanent seat for India. This is made clear by Nehru's own letter on August 2 1955. Nehru in his letter to Chief Ministers clearly mentions there was indeed an informal offer from US for a UNSC seat. Nehru denied it because he didn't want to take the seat "because it would be unfair to a great country like China"

This letter can be accessed online.

It is available on Page 237 of Jawaharlal's Nehru's "Letters to the Chief ministers Volume 4 (1947-1964)", Oxford university Press. Government of India 1988

Check for page 237 in this link

https://ia801606.us.archive.org/20/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.54646/2015.54646.Letters-To-Chief-Ministers-1947-1964-Vol-4_text.pdf …



Despite this, Nehru shamelessly LIED on the Floor of the Parliament and claimed there was no such offer. He did this because to admit to the offer and to then admit he rejected it would have be political suicide.

On 27 September 1955 in Parliament, Nehru categorically denied that a UNSC seat was ever offered to India. "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind". Though just a MONTH earlier his letter to the CM's admits the opposite.


The worst part is that even in 1963, a year after China invaded India. PM Nehru's sister - leader of India's delegation to UN - said India STILL supports China's admission to the United Nations as a "matter of principle".

Today, China spares no effort to oppose India at the UN. As a "matter of principle".

Also as a side note, here is a picture of some Indians in China. The picture shows Naga separatist leaders at the Great Wall of China, 1960s. China has created, supported & armed insurgencies & terrorism in India for over half a century.

So china's support to Azhar Mahmood should not come as a surprise to anybody.

Wow, such a long post about NOTHING but HOT FART.
Simply produce a letter from the US to India or Russia to India purporting your contention.

DON'T SHOW personal letter from your SISTER TO YOU saying MODI want to appoint you as MINISTER.
Personal letter from your sister is NOT proof and carries no weight that Modi really wants to appoint you as MINISTER.
Letter from Modi's sister maybe would at least be more credible.
.

 

[rott]

Here are the Facts from the Indian perspective.

Nehru got FOUR foreign offers in total for a UNSC seat. Twice by US in 1950 and 1955. Once by Chinese rebels and once by USSR.

The First offer was in 1950.

In a letter to Nehru dated 24th August 1950, Indian Ambassador to US and Nehru's sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit reveals that US State department made a proposal to India for UNSC seat. Those were the days of Cold War and US was looking at a potential ally in India.

How was this Possible ? Especially when people claim that there has been NO CHANGE in the UN composition since it was first set up ?

There HAS BEEN a change in UN composition. In 1950, PRC was blocked from taking Chinese seat at UN. In response Russia walked out. These events gave a scope for a new member.


To this Rare opportunity Nehru wrote a response to this letter on August 30 in which He unequivocally denied the offer. He said the UNSC seat would break "the impeccable relations between India and China". He further said "it would be an affront to China" and he would "press for China's admission in UNSC"

From 1951, Nehru worked constantly to ensure china go the permanent council seat at the UN.

So much so that Dr. Ambedkar who was one of the Founding members o f the Indian constitution wrote this in Frustration.

Here is one Indian Newspaper of that time, highlighting Nehru's plea for UN(UNSC) seat for Peking (China).

Here is a scholarly work by Anton Harder who was a PhD candidate in the International History Department of the London School of Economics. His dissertation is on Sino-Indian relations from 1949-1962. "Not at the cost of China"

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/cwihp_working_paper_76_not_at_the_cost_of_china.pdf



The Second offer came in 1955.

It was initially made by Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin’s as a offer of a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council in 1955. This was made as a feeler to test India and proposed to make India the SIXTH member of the Security council.


Jawaharlal Nehru again rejected the Soviet offer to propose India as the sixth permanent member of the Security Council and insisted that priority be given to China’s admission to the United Nations.

Their conversation is recorded and published in the selected works of AG Noorani.

[Nikolai] Bulganin: Regarding your suggestion about the four power conference we would take appropriate action. While we are discussing the general international situation and reducing tension, we propose suggesting at a later stage India’s inclusion as the sixth member of the Security Council.

JN [Jawaharlal Nehru]: Perhaps Bulganin knows that some people in USA have suggested that India should replace China in the Security Council. This is to create trouble between us and China. We are, of course, wholly opposed to it. Further, we are opposed to pushing ourselves forward to occupy certain positions because that may itself create difficulties and India might itself become a subject to controversy. If India is to be admitted to the Security Council, it raises the question of the revision of the Charter of the UN. We feel that this should not be done till the question of China’s admission and possibly of others is first solved. I feel that we should first concentrate on getting China admitted. What is Bulganin’s opinion about the revision of the Charter? In our opinion this does not seem to be an appropriate time for it.



There was also an offer from the US in the same time frame for a permanent seat for India. This is made clear by Nehru's own letter on August 2 1955. Nehru in his letter to Chief Ministers clearly mentions there was indeed an informal offer from US for a UNSC seat. Nehru denied it because he didn't want to take the seat "because it would be unfair to a great country like China"

This letter can be accessed online.

It is available on Page 237 of Jawaharlal's Nehru's "Letters to the Chief ministers Volume 4 (1947-1964)", Oxford university Press. Government of India 1988

Check for page 237 in this link

https://ia801606.us.archive.org/20/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.54646/2015.54646.Letters-To-Chief-Ministers-1947-1964-Vol-4_text.pdf …



Despite this, Nehru shamelessly LIED on the Floor of the Parliament and claimed there was no such offer. He did this because to admit to the offer and to then admit he rejected it would have be political suicide.

On 27 September 1955 in Parliament, Nehru categorically denied that a UNSC seat was ever offered to India. "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind". Though just a MONTH earlier his letter to the CM's admits the opposite.


The worst part is that even in 1963, a year after China invaded India. PM Nehru's sister - leader of India's delegation to UN - said India STILL supports China's admission to the United Nations as a "matter of principle".

Today, China spares no effort to oppose India at the UN. As a "matter of principle".

Also as a side note, here is a picture of some Indians in China. The picture shows Naga separatist leaders at the Great Wall of China, 1960s. China has created, supported & armed insurgencies & terrorism in India for over half a century.

So china's support to Azhar Mahmood should not come as a surprise to anybody.

Good read and well documented propaganda.
India and Nehru was no fool, he wanted to UNSC seat as much as any Indian today.
Creteria needed for the UNSC -
1st. Approval of all 5 permanent members of UNSC.
2. Support of at least 2/3 of Security consul.
In 1950 the USA proposed a seat to India, and even if India wanted the seat the USSR would have vetoed. Mind you, this was at the time the ROC was to be replaced PRC and the cold War between the USA and the USSR.
In 1955, when India visited the USSR and build a landmark friendship, the USSR gave a proposal to India into the UNSC., (This was at the time of the cold War) but then the US would have vetoed.
Keeping both options in mind India could not please and be an ally to both the USA and the USSR. It was a lost case.
Even if both USA and USSR did agree to allow India into the UNSC, there were still France and UK. At that time both these countries didn't favor India much.
1. France and it's Pondicherry agenda.
2. UK could have sides with Pakistan and vetoed.
India's admission into the UN was more of a tease than a concrete one of a lost case.

Wow, such a long post about NOTHING but HOT FART.
Simply produce a letter from the US to India or Russia to India purporting your contention.

DON'T SHOW personal letter from your SISTER TO YOU saying MODI want to appoint you as MINISTER.
Personal letter from your sister is NOT proof and carries no weight that Modi really wants to appoint you as MINISTER.
Letter from Modi's sister maybe would at least be more credible.
.

Lol, I think he was banned in about few minutes. This is a record ban time.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

Here are the Facts from the Indian perspective.

Nehru got FOUR foreign offers in total for a UNSC seat. Twice by US in 1950 and 1955. Once by Chinese rebels and once by USSR.

The First offer was in 1950.

In a letter to Nehru dated 24th August 1950, Indian Ambassador to US and Nehru's sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit reveals that US State department made a proposal to India for UNSC seat. Those were the days of Cold War and US was looking at a potential ally in India.

How was this Possible ? Especially when people claim that there has been NO CHANGE in the UN composition since it was first set up ?

There HAS BEEN a change in UN composition. In 1950, PRC was blocked from taking Chinese seat at UN. In response Russia walked out. These events gave a scope for a new member.


To this Rare opportunity Nehru wrote a response to this letter on August 30 in which He unequivocally denied the offer. He said the UNSC seat would break "the impeccable relations between India and China". He further said "it would be an affront to China" and he would "press for China's admission in UNSC"

From 1951, Nehru worked constantly to ensure china go the permanent council seat at the UN.

So much so that Dr. Ambedkar who was one of the Founding members o f the Indian constitution wrote this in Frustration.

Here is one Indian Newspaper of that time, highlighting Nehru's plea for UN(UNSC) seat for Peking (China).

Here is a scholarly work by Anton Harder who was a PhD candidate in the International History Department of the London School of Economics. His dissertation is on Sino-Indian relations from 1949-1962. "Not at the cost of China"

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/cwihp_working_paper_76_not_at_the_cost_of_china.pdf



The Second offer came in 1955.

It was initially made by Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin’s as a offer of a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council in 1955. This was made as a feeler to test India and proposed to make India the SIXTH member of the Security council.


Jawaharlal Nehru again rejected the Soviet offer to propose India as the sixth permanent member of the Security Council and insisted that priority be given to China’s admission to the United Nations.

Their conversation is recorded and published in the selected works of AG Noorani.

[Nikolai] Bulganin: Regarding your suggestion about the four power conference we would take appropriate action. While we are discussing the general international situation and reducing tension, we propose suggesting at a later stage India’s inclusion as the sixth member of the Security Council.

JN [Jawaharlal Nehru]: Perhaps Bulganin knows that some people in USA have suggested that India should replace China in the Security Council. This is to create trouble between us and China. We are, of course, wholly opposed to it. Further, we are opposed to pushing ourselves forward to occupy certain positions because that may itself create difficulties and India might itself become a subject to controversy. If India is to be admitted to the Security Council, it raises the question of the revision of the Charter of the UN. We feel that this should not be done till the question of China’s admission and possibly of others is first solved. I feel that we should first concentrate on getting China admitted. What is Bulganin’s opinion about the revision of the Charter? In our opinion this does not seem to be an appropriate time for it.



There was also an offer from the US in the same time frame for a permanent seat for India. This is made clear by Nehru's own letter on August 2 1955. Nehru in his letter to Chief Ministers clearly mentions there was indeed an informal offer from US for a UNSC seat. Nehru denied it because he didn't want to take the seat "because it would be unfair to a great country like China"

This letter can be accessed online.

It is available on Page 237 of Jawaharlal's Nehru's "Letters to the Chief ministers Volume 4 (1947-1964)", Oxford university Press. Government of India 1988

Check for page 237 in this link

https://ia801606.us.archive.org/20/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.54646/2015.54646.Letters-To-Chief-Ministers-1947-1964-Vol-4_text.pdf …



Despite this, Nehru shamelessly LIED on the Floor of the Parliament and claimed there was no such offer. He did this because to admit to the offer and to then admit he rejected it would have be political suicide.

On 27 September 1955 in Parliament, Nehru categorically denied that a UNSC seat was ever offered to India. "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind". Though just a MONTH earlier his letter to the CM's admits the opposite.


The worst part is that even in 1963, a year after China invaded India. PM Nehru's sister - leader of India's delegation to UN - said India STILL supports China's admission to the United Nations as a "matter of principle".

Today, China spares no effort to oppose India at the UN. As a "matter of principle".

Also as a side note, here is a picture of some Indians in China. The picture shows Naga separatist leaders at the Great Wall of China, 1960s. China has created, supported & armed insurgencies & terrorism in India for over half a century.

So china's support to Azhar Mahmood should not come as a surprise to anybody.

India's "evidence" is only speculation. Or self-righteous.

Compare Indians... I believe more in the UN resolution. You know Indians can't be trusted. They are the people who are best at telling lies.

Facts have proved that. India deceived its people. No country will support Indian lies.