Rice Faces Questions on India Nukes Deal!!

[AGENDA21]

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called on Congress Wednesday to approve an unprecedented U.S. plan to share nuclear technology with India, saying the deal will not trigger an arms race in Asia.

Her testimony was received with skepticism. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar agreed that India under the deal would submit to more international safeguards. But the Indiana Republican with a strong interest in arms control, said the pact "would not prevent India from expanding its nuclear arsenal."

Rice clashed with Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., over port calls that Iranian vessels have made on India.

Under questioning, the secretary said Indian authorities had given assurances their country was not training Iranian sailors and soldiers, but she also said "we have made clear we are concerned about their relationship with Iran."

"The Indians say they have some low-level military contacts with Iran," Rice said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/04/05/national/w084744D25.DTL

[saltpoint]

1. I like that one sentence, "Her testimony was received with skepticism."

Bingo City.

[gratuitous]

2. Testimony? They actually swore her in?

Or was this a typical Republican dog-and-pony show where someone shows up for questioning on a serious public matter, but is given a free pass by the committee chairman to lie without being liable for perjury?

Look for the stream of "clarifications" to begin this afternoon and continue through the week as people with some actual knowledge get a look at Dr. Rice's bullshit.

[Coastie for Truth]

3. We worry so much about some countries

and spend so much effort trying to limit "munitions exports"

Guess what -- walk into any advanced physics or math class at any top grade university anywhere in the world and look at who is teaching and who are the students.

Second order partial dif eq's are second order partial dif eq's -- some people just are conditioned to get turned on by second order partial dif eq's.

It ain't spies or surreptitious exports - it's discipline and curiosity that starts in pre-k.

[endarkenment]

4. This deal violates the NPT that we think Iran ought to comply with.

The deal enables India to build more nuclear weapons and in doing so violates both the spirit and the letter of the NPT, to which we are a signatory. The hypocrisy of the Bush regime is beyond the pale. There is a constitutional obligation to obey treaties. Will our Democratic Leadership stand up and speak the truth?

[Supersedeas]

5. Maybe, Dr. Rice believes the NPT is also just a historical documents, pfft

[cliss]

6. Notice this last sentence....

The Indians say they have some low-level military contacts with Iran.

That's NOT what the White House said yesterday. Just 1 day ago, there was an article in the LBN about Iran sending military people for training. The White House said it was not for training purposes, it was just for 'fun' and a 'visit'.

They are such liars!!

[AGENDA21]

How low-level are military contacts with Iran..?

Thats the question.

[LSK]

7. the admin talks about stopping WMD but acts 100% opposite

They talk about preventing Iran from getting Nukes but then give them to their neighbors and deny that the two countries are cooperating.

We have to get rid of this admin. Sheesh!! :nuke:

[lovuian]

8. India has many allies that are not our friends

why would we give them technology...

[bigtree]

9. what about the same accountability from India that you demand from Iran?

India actually has weapons, Iran's just dreaming of them.

Why are we starting a new nuclear arms race in Asia, Rice?

[endarkenment]

10. India is not an NPT signatory.

And thus has no obligation to comply with that treaty. On the other hand the USA is an NPT signatory and the treaty forbids nuclear states such as the USA enabling non nuclear states (which by treaty definitions is any state, such as India, that had not detonated a nuclear device before 1968) to build nuclear weapons. Our transfer of technology and enriched uranium to India does just that, it enables India to build nuclear weapons, and in doing so is a direct treaty violation by the USA, not by India.

[bigtree]

11. that's the hypocricy

treaty or not

why is it okay for India to do certain things just because they refused to sign a treaty?

What's right and what's wrong? That's the way the argument over nuclear weapons should be framed.

Or course, you are correct in your descriptions of the NPT violations and obligations.