Bush Campaigning for U.S.-India Nuke Deal

[Judi Lynn]

Bush Campaigning for U.S.-India Nuke Deal
By FOSTER KLUG, Associated Press Writer

Tuesday, March 7, 2006

(03-07) 02:46 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --

The Bush administration has started an aggressive campaign to convince skeptical lawmakers of the merits of a landmark civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with India.

Nicholas Burns, a top State Department official, told an audience Monday at the Heritage Foundation that a "very intensive debate" looms on the accord that he helped to settle last week during Bush's visit to India.

"We're prepared for that debate," Burns said at the conservative think tank. "We will advise the Congress that it is our very clear judgment that this is a good deal for the United States as well as for India."

Burns said Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other officials would spend the coming weeks briefing lawmakers.
(snip/...)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/03/07/national/w024640S51.DTL

NO :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[acmavm]

1. If this doesn't convince them that bush** and his buddies are totally

certifiable, nothing else will.

We start a war (Iraq) over non-existent nukes. We want to bomb another country back to the Dark Ages over their nuke program (Iran). But now the Looney Tune In Chief wants to give out nuclear technology in exchange for mangoes.

THIS IS INSANE.

[cornermouse]

2. The No Ethics, No Morals, No Common Sense Presidency.

And apparently they're too old and too unwilling to learn anything new.

[Judi Lynn]

3. Bush's India deal a backward step

Bush's India deal a backward step
Mar. 7, 2006. 01:00 AM


United States President George Bush has not handed India "The Bomb" by agreeing to sell that country nuclear technology. That's because India has had atomic weapons for decades. But the new pact between Washington and New Delhi undermines 35 years of nuclear arms control, and that stark reality poses a real risk to global security.

By treating India as an acceptable nuclear partner, Bush has signalled the U.S. is prepared to do business with "strategic partners" such as India or Israel, even as it continues to treat Pakistan like a nuclear pariah and blasts North Korea and Iran as threats to world peace. Bush is not alone in this selectivity. Canada, Britain and France agreed last year to resume civilian nuclear co-operation with India, despite the risks for arms control.

Why shouldn't Pakistan or Israel now seek similar bilateral deals outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)? And what incentive have North Korea and Iran to comply?

This is clearly a slippery slope. Yesterday the International Atomic Energy Agency busily debated just how much "face-saving" bomb-grade material Iran should be allowed to build up, before triggering some action by the United Nations Security Council. The thinking by some at the agency is that Iran will be seeking concessions now that India has its deal.
(snip/...)

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1141685411182&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795

[Judi Lynn]

4. US sees no parallel between India and Iran

US sees no parallel between India and Iran
Washington, March 7. (PTI): Dismissing any parallel between Indian and Iranian atomic programmes, senior official Nicholas Burns today said that with the signing of a historic civil nuclear deal with the US, New Delhi was moving towards obligations with International Atomic Energy Agency.

But during an address to the Heritage Foundation here, the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs who played a key role in clinching the agreement signed during President George W Bush's India visit, also warned that it might take "several weeks or even months" before Congress approved it.

Rejecting some critics' argument as to what message the US was sending to Iran by signing a nuclear energy deal with India, Burns said: "We don't see the connection between what Iran is doing and what India seeks to do."

While Tehran is trying to extricate itself from the obligations to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), India is moving towards it, he said, adding, "India is the responsible one, Iran is the irresponsible one."
(snip/...)

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200603071041.htm

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. This is the PNACers plan to "contain" Russia and China

.
.
.

The PNACers are desperately courting Harper to get nukes stationed in Canada -

That would "take care" of "over the pole" - the Northern approach.

Iraq would be it's Western "containment" border along with it's nuke buddy Israel. - They ain't building those bases in Iraq for the Iraqis . . .

And India to the South

Japan to the East - getting Japan involved in the forces in Iraq had nothing to do with a need for a few thousand troops from Japan - It was getting them back into the "game"

That little "error" in bombing Pakistani soil wasn't just an "oops" - it was "let's see what we can get away with" - and they did. All Pakistan did was whine a little about it -

Korea and Iran are pretty big thorns to the PNACers agenda, ergo all this hoopla about them having a nuke or two - it ain't the nukes the USA is worried about, its their millions of military personnel - The US wants to nuke the hell out of those little guys . . .

Killing civilians is "collateral damage"

Killing your own, or your allies is "friendly fire"

and so on

PNACers on the march

and winning,

(sigh)

[rodeodance]

6. "it is our very clear judgment"----Well, this puts it to bed for me.

[tecelote]

7. These words...

"The Bush administration has started an aggressive campaign to..."

And, we just know it's wrong!

[mrdmk]

8. This will go over like a lead balloon

The deal is that the civilian projects can be looked at by the International Community and those are the only ones the International Community can look at. The military projects can booster by sending the United States a few bucks and the only people who know about those projects will be the few in the Indian Government and those being sent a few bucks. This makes perfect sense to me if I were an idiot.