'Restricted UNSC prevents small nations' voice to be heard'

[Hindustani78]

What's wrong with a new world order?

'expansion' of UNSC is wrong, just other countries with Veto power will come in, while still others who happen to be the majority will be singled out. ALL countries should be able to vote on world matters, not just 5 or 6 or 7 countries.

New world order is the result of second world war which resulted in the blocks of the nations and during the heights of cold war we saw enough bloodshed all over the world.

Human rights were the bases of the new world order.

 

[Gibbs]

India is just playing real politiks, They have their own hegemonic objectives so how the feck are they a supporting voice for smaller nations ?? Hilarious

Never gonna happen, Them getting in to the UNSC that is.. Size of the population does not matter in this case, Given that India has simply nothing else to add of value to the equation.. It's only argument is on it's massive population.. End of

 

[Armstrong]

Lool good luck. Lets wait for 10 years and see India rise to superpowedom where europe and other nations can follow india's leadership.
Hope india wont turn us into its slaves though? India should show us mercy.

Well supporting Man United ought to merit punishment of some kind !

How about getting you to sing London bridge is falling down while wearing a pink tutu and nothing more in the middle of Trafalgur Square !

 

[mike2000 is back]

Still didnt interested in taking that peanuts?Right?
UK is just a puny shadow of US ,just a shadow.What do you have your own except that surplus foreign aid after cutting of the your own internal budget ?

France is still better than that .

Did you see that US-India diplomatic tussle ?Sorry the so called special relationship with US wont allow you to straighten your bended back bone.

How many times did your PM visits India last decade?How much time Indian PM spent for the same cause ?




Please spend those foreign aud peanut for your own squeezing country budget.



And Tibet was not also there when you got the UNSC seat .

UNSC will get more credibility if they allow India .Otherwise within few years we will take action on our own and wouldnt hear the whining of the UNSC.
Simple.You cant ignore the voice of world fastest economy that having 129 crore people.
Poverty .We have had 98% poverty when ee got the independence .Now it is just 21%.
Sorry dont teach us about poverty reduction.
We didnt employ inhumane methods that did in your own nation.

Lool When you stop having our language as your national language and when you can build a simple jet trainer without our BAE systems help(even then you are still facing problems jeezzzz), then i will say India is more advanced than us. Then we can be your slaves like your advert of India in 2020 @Luca1 .


Its just ridiculous to even compare any major european power with India to be honest. You are not there yet. So calm down my man. dont take it personal.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

India's Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Asoke Mukerji said it is a "pity" that the "restricted and undemocratic nature" of the Security Council

To improve things ...maybe ?

And yet the Indian government and her representatives have absolutely no qualms in being outright hypocrites and calling for a continuation of the 'restricted and undemocratic nature of the Security Council' by demanding India's inclusion.

The Indian proposal does nothing about the 'undemocratic and restricted nature of the SC', since the Indian proposal only calls for a continuation of the caste system, albeit with India arguing that it should be made a Brahmin instead of being considered a Dalit.

India has offered nothing in terms of ideas around substantive UNSC reform (which would have to revolve around ending the veto of the permanent members at some point). How exactly does making India a permanent representative of the UNSC under the current structure address any of the issues the UNSC suffers from? China, Russia and US will continue to veto initiatives they disagree with, and under the Indian proposal, if the 3 somehow actually agree on something, there will be the potential of a veto wielding India stopping the process.

 

[Sam.]

Really?

If you were part of the P5 will you still be saying the same thing? I have a strong feeling that NO .

As i said, you are merely looking after your interests by trying to get in by ALL MEANS , which is normal, as every country looks after their own interests, but India shouldnt try and frame it as if you care about small poor developing countries, nobody is a fool here bro.

Stop judging people by thinking they are like you , we want to help people who no one want to.

 

[mike2000 is back]

India is just playing real politiks, They have their own hegemonic objectives so how the feck are they a supporting voice for smaller nations ?? Hilarious

Never gonna happen, Them getting in to the UNSC that is.. Size of the population does not matter in this case, Given that India has simply nothing else to add of value to the equation.. It's only argument is on it's massive population.. End of

Well i already said the same thing. Its funny India even thinks its fooling anybody. We all know its only looking after its own interests, and wants to get into the exclusive club of the P5 BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY. If it was already in, it too will not want others in as it will dilute/reduce its own influence. It doesnt care one bit about the so called voice of small poor developing countries like Iran(huh....though Iran is even wealthier than India) or whatever. lol

I find it normal though, since if i was India, i too will do the same thing. Every country only looks after his/her own interests first and foremost, every other thing comes secondary. That's normal, but when some indian members here are trying so hard to convince people they genuinely care about the voice of poor deveoping nations and want to be their representative , then HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

nobody here is a fool or naive(maybe apart from some very few Iranian members? Lol)

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No We want to represent the underrepresented in the UNSC so the question is not of fair or unfair but of representation.

You mean it's about India's ego, because as others have pointed out, the addition of more countries to the UNSC with veto powers does nothing to change the fact that the existing P5 will still not allow any movement on issues that benefit the 'underrepresented', unless all of the P5 agree on it. The only thing the addition of India does is make the whole process even more complicated.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Stop judging people by thinking they are like you , we want to help people who no one want to.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

, we want to help people who no one want to.

By doing what exactly, assuming a hypothetical situation in which India is a veto wielding member of the UNSC?

Sell us on the 'changes, improvements and help for the global community' that India's inclusion would bring.

 

[Sam.]

See we already started helping by helping of your depression illness *Laughter is best medicine "

By doing what exactly, assuming a hypothetical situation in which India is a veto wielding member of the UNSC?

Sell us on the 'changes, improvements and help for the global community' that India's inclusion would bring.

Bhai whatever i say it won;t matter as you see our nation in through special glasses and we sure not getting into UN to help you guys as according to you guys you already more developed than us so you guys don't need help.

 

[Armstrong]

You mean it's about India's ego, because as others have pointed out, the addition of more countries to the UNSC with veto powers does nothing to change the fact that the existing P5 will still not allow any movement on issues that benefit the 'underrepresented', unless all of the P5 agree on it. The only thing the addition of India does is make the whole process even more complicated.

Representing the underrepresented is a self-righteous euphemism for shamelessly coveting power and rationalizing it !

Not that there is anything wrong with that - Just don't peddle BSh*t and tell us its something else !

 

[Spring Onion]

ahhh SO India would be agreeing to Bangladesh's demand to become part of UNSC? if that may happen ?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

rough special glasses and we sure not getting into UN to help you guys as according to you guys you already more developed than us so you guys don't need help.

There are other nationalities on this forum, and a rational and logical argument stands on its own merit, irrespective of nationality.

So, again, sell us on the 'changes, improvements and help for the global community' that India's inclusion would bring.

 

[Sam.]

There are other nationalities on this forum, and a rational and logical argument stands on its own merit, irrespective of nationality.

So, again, sell us on the 'changes, improvements and help for the global community' that India's inclusion would bring.

i will answer them not you.

Thankyou very much