Sarkozy requested India to join UNSC as permanent member

[JayAtl]

And how will adding more permanant members without ending veto powers fix the issues you pointed out?

If anything, the fact that India and some other nations are insistent on permanant membership with veto power, the sorts of reforms being demanded by India would only serve to make the UN even less efficient and cause even more logjams as more countries exercise veto powers to stifle and slow issues they disagree with.

I thought it was well known that additions to the seat would not add " veto powers" aka comes without veto powers. any new member added will not,I repeat , will not have veto powers.

 

[JayAtl]

What is really embarrassing for Hillary is that they (including her president) ultimately had to support this 'self appointed' 'jingoistic' front runner. A big shame for Hillary lovers as well who hang around her comments. Even some other contenders are shouting that India must work with them!

its just banter. someone should leak Indian and Pakistan diplomatic cables to see what they say about each other and other countries.

She is very Pro India... period.

 

[Evil Flare]

Veto thing is bull-sshit . remove veto power from permanent members ... decisions should be made by popular vote

 

[Kinetic]

its just banter. someone should leak Indian and Pakistan diplomatic cables to see what they say about each other and other countries.

She is very Pro India... period.

Its not about pro or anti India but why 'fox' quoted Hilary and how it backfired for both ie Hilary and those quoting her.

I know she is not anti-Indian nor anyone in the US govt but neither they are pro. Its just politics that we support each other. Hilary has good supports from NRIs in US.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

he he ! so much for not getting UNSC ? or is it a problem with only india getting UNSC ?

yaar, zindagi barbaad ho jaaye to chalega........bharti se competition zaroori hai !

Don't troll please, answer the point raised in my post, if you have a response.

And India getting into the UNSC as a permanant member is still a very long shot, given international dynamicsbaround reform, regardless of the platitudes uttered by leaders looking to land business and military deals.

 

[Jade]

'More Democratic and representative' would be theoretically best accomplished by including every nation in the UNSC ....

Again there is a trade off between responsiveness and representativeness

AM, even most Indians here would agree that UNSC membership is more symbolic than anything else….its nothing more than some parity with China and an acknowledgment of India’s achievements and potential. We are willing to wait and are not desperate to get into UNSC. The day India started growing economically we have arrived at the world stage…all the attention the world is showering on us is just because of this and we know this

 

[TarikhiMusalman]

I do not see anything to worry about. Does it make any difference if India wins the UNSC seat. What is UN? A tool of the US and Israel, does it have any Islamic representation? No! UN was created by Zionists to enslave other countries. It does not matter, we have been alone and we will survive alone InshAllah!

 

[GUNS-N- ROSES]

i think UN security council is a over rated thing. for long it has been used as a tool for protecting personal interests of super powers.

more then getting permanent seat, we need to become strong economically, miltarily and socially. if we indians work towards that and achieve that, then take my words my friends, we wouldnt need to lobby for security council seat.

 

[WAR-rior]

Don't troll please, answer the point raised in my post, if you have a response.

And India getting into the UNSC as a permanant member is still a very long shot, given international dynamicsbaround reform, regardless of the platitudes uttered by leaders looking to land business and military deals.

HE HE !

Sorry if u mind ! but i was just enjoying the situation.

frankly, where was this democratic concern when india was no where in the race. if u are so rational, temme if pakistan wud have got UNSC seat for some reasons, wud u have advocated the same ?

accept it friend, india or pakistan, we both will not like other to fly off in competition. the reason being simple, it hampers our interests and that being of KASHMIR.

pakistan knows, once india gets into UNSC, its dream of kashimir will be nailed with a final one in the coffin. and i can see the same sentiment in ur ideas.

Now, coming back to ur point of democratic representation then i think its not the time to let everyone or anyone make decisions....

only the influential countries deserve to make decisions because they have much higher stakes, either strategically or economically, in these decisions.

that is the reason why reorganization of UNSC is necessary, coz right representation of those countries who have high on stakes isnt counted.

UNSC shud consider every region in this world but not evryone from every region........just imagine management issues in coping with hostilities and all.....

tell me why dont u make all the workers or employees in a company decision makers? why only the board members make decision?

answer this and rest will be obvious for u !

 

[WAR-rior]

I do not see anything to worry about. Does it make any difference if India wins the UNSC seat. What is UN? A tool of the US and Israel, does it have any Islamic representation? No! UN was created by Zionists to enslave other countries. It does not matter, we have been alone and we will survive alone InshAllah!

if u think a body like UN is established on religious beliefs then u are in wrong world frnd.....u need to be in some other galaxy.

i understand the UN hasnt been able to take strong decisions, but thats due to its working style and not structure.UN also runs on funds and thats provided by USA to large extent. the only weakness of UN is it cant go against USA to enough extent....

But what da heck is this Muslim representation ?

That way every religion country shud be in UNSC....

and i support it coz that wud get a better logic for india to be in UNSC.

UNSC is a place for security not religious fanatacism.

and just coz UN isnt able to rope USA doesnt make it a failed organization.

U need to have enough stake in any organization to have a say.....

its just like a club system...

more u pay...more u say !

 

[Peace Sells no one buying]

And India getting into the UNSC as a permanant member is still a very long shot, given international dynamicsbaround reform, regardless of the platitudes uttered by leaders looking to land business and military deals.

Dear sir, I agree that any celebration is premature. That said, very few things are absolutes. What was a long shot a few years ago becomes a sure shot with the passage of time and the improvement of relationships. After all, history serves as the greatest example:

USA went to war vs. UK and (what would become) Canada
USA went to war with UK, Canada (and others) vs. Germany
England was always in perpetual war against France
When France was invated by Germany, all of the other mentioned nations went to her aid.
Now all of those nations are allies.

All of this happened over the span of 200+ years. We shouldn't be too short sighted when it comes to time.

Especially with increased globalization, co-operation, and trade - which makes relationship building a more fast process than ever before.

Lastly, nations only want to trade with other nations that have something to give. If India can give favorable trade / jobs to European / North American groups for something in return then more power to the nations doing the business.

A nation can only get so far by begging. After a while, nations need to stand up and, if you excuse me, be the change that they want to see.

UNSC reform is a major issue. But in time, it should sort itself out. What matters more is global co-operation, trade, and building relationships between North America, Europe, and Asia.

Petty rivalries and complaints over time are rather short sighted. I'm sure the French, after the battle of Agincourt could not see a future where England comes to France's aid in world wars.

As far as India is concerned, I don't think they wont mind waiting - they are one of the oldest continous civilizations in the history of our species. Even if it takes 200 years, that is only like two weeks in the history of India, if Indian history was one year long.

Please do not take offense, none was intended. And remember, I supported your first premise.

Veto power may never come, but nations are still able to do good things for the people they attempt to serve without it. Remember, this should be about what a nation can do for the people who make up that society - and not about trying to quickly achieve constructed milestones.

 

[Peace Sells no one buying]

On that note, I don't think the UNSC is that big of a deal going forward. Being a big part of the UNSC doesn't prevent America from having a huge obesity health epidemic, poorly performing students, and massive debt.

 

[MohammadHaqueCA]

So it was after that proposal by "former" maverick president of France that his brother married Mary-Kate Ashley!

 

[magudi]

So it was after that proposal by "former" maverick president of France that his brother married Mary-Kate Ashley!

so you revive a 5 year old thread to let us know someone got married