Yep great achievement, defeating (if we really call it a victory) those illusive cave dwellers was really a huge task, that's why a full thrust from NATO was needed. Old empires fall and give way to new ones, USA's golden days are over, it will take time to digest this hard fact.
Desi American Patriot!
Calm down a bit, don't get butt-hurt. We know how much time does it take for an old flame to fizzle out, not much does it, and USA is next in line.
Nopes, Macaulay's Child with huge superiority (inferiority) complex.
Illusive cave dwellers? so now it's down to the caliber of the enemy and has shifted away from questioning those wars - LOL. freaking amusing how you guys shape shift . If I were you economics or History professor you would have gotten a big A for rhetoric and a big F for having zero facts to support that rhetoric. I'll let you have the floor as it obvious I'm debating the " america go down , Ooo ga Oooga " clan.
Intelligent poster , based on facts and not on false Desi or American pride... I don't go for BS based theories...Hell Indian intelligentsia would 100% agree with me including your military heads... so what does that make you guys? hehDesi American Patriot!
Do check your post (post 4 in this thread) where you started with the military prowess of America this and that. No where did before that post challenged or even talked about US military prowess. So, it is you who started the off-topic and took this thread into a tangent. Sorry, cannot let it happen. Open another thread and gloat about US military prowess to your heart's content. No more off-topic posts.
This is in the beginning of Obama's term where he had every intention of killing this deal
I can see where you get that picture from, but the topic the guy talked about America going down ( which for it to take place has to be both economically and military)- I was pointing out to the fact that just being richer ( which it it now and even if it takes 2nd spot to china ) is not enough of a contributing factor to claim US's demise-because also being a militarily super power ensures America's status ... But I have done my bit to show the ones who are all about yapping w/ o facts at hand... and so- done with the thread.
I only read the first of 3 links and its talking about in 2008 when MMS was not sure it would pass Indian parliment... that was the context.
what the liability issue is that ( i do believe even Russia and French have objections) India is seeking the onus of " insurance to be paid" in case of mishaps too heavily ( percentage on the foreign entities). Its what I call commercial negotiations , part and parcel of something they will hammer out... let's not forget it was the US and US's only move that opened these kind of nuclear deals in spite of not being an NPT signatory
I intentionally posted that old article to show you that Obama was out to kill the deal right from the beginning of his term. The deal had passed in Indian parliament while Bush was president after India got the clean waiver. The deal with USA is dead but 11 other nuclear deals with other countries are still in effect.
I dont follow you- the first link clearly, crystal clearly in it language says the opposite of what you said above? Plus I quoted you the latest from hillary on my previous post ...
Facts are US deal is dead under Obama administration and not 1 gram of uranium has been delivered to India from USA during the deal. India was the buyer USA was the seller usually the Seller dosen't kill the deals except for brilliant minds like Obama. USA had an unfair advntage in Indian MRCA with 2 planes as candidates both were rejected another failure by Obama.
ahh effectively your theory is " How dare they compete" if they are my eye to eye pal...they should give me all the finest technology ( remove India from restricted list) , they should be the reason why nuclear deals happened in India - because they lead the charge, they should make available their markets to export to , have their industries invest in India ----- BUT " How dare they compete" if they are my eye to eye pal
Look there is an NSG waiver issue, so let me do some more research and understanding of what are the hiccups . US has to hold itself to higher " compliance" standard- however, you can't refute that this entire boon in nuclear assets came about because Bush pushed for India to have it- without the NPT in place, yeah? call a spade a spade
That was the whole idea of the Bush deal. India will never sign the NPT so Bush made India an exception that Obama has now reversed.
This much I know that NSG waiver is not up to him and US, they changed the rules ( all members of the NSG group). Every bit of information I've read so far from the US- does not elude ot anything with having India to sign the NPT under Obama administration. Let's stick to facts ...it could be another reason ... but there is No sign the NPT agreement or else -from reading so far on the " internets"
