[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Nuclear Policy
I'm in close agreement with Kush's position here.
It is worth noting that the US senate has NOT ratified the CTBT, or
START3 which calls for a 67% reduction of nuclear armaments by the US
Kush Khatri[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org] wrote:
>Sanjeev: Yes, the power of the atom bomb was known but not its use in
>real war situation.
>No one will diagree with the fact that nuclear weapons are an anathema
>and a constant danger to humanity. But I disagree that the recent
>testing of nuclear devices is going to move the world closer to
>nuclear disarmament. It is not.
>WE MUST DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DANGER AND A NUCLEAR MILITARY THREAT.
>That nuclear weapons are dangerous goes without saying. But did India
>face a real nuclear threat from China or any other declared nuclear
>Should India pursuade the world to disarm? It is a question of
>priorities and resources. Our priority should be economic
>development, improving quality of life for ALL our citizens and
>reaching a zero population growth.
>In the meanwhile, India could continue to do what it was doing. it
>did the right thing in not signing the CTBT and keeping the option of
>developing nuclear weapons open. Thereby, it was putting pressure on
>the world. In any case reducing nuclear weapons danger is not just
>India's burden, NOR SHOULD IT BE INDIA'S PRIORITY.