India open to 'no veto', for now, as UNSC member; Pak still says 'no go'

[Hemu Vikram Aditya]

Nehru being a loser twat is a whole thread in itself. UNSC was formed in 1945 by victors of WW2. that is the time period I am talking about. We were still a British colony back then.

THE americans offerd us a place in security council but that asshole nehru influenced by gandhi (G*NDU) refused and said to give it to china

 

[Willy2]

Commi CCP don't get UNSC , Chinese seat belongs to Kuomingtang party and Republic of China , who fight with every soldier they have to save their country from Japanese wrath , where Mao waiting for Japanese to weaken the ROC ,and finally defeated weaken wartorn republican army .
bloody commi , only that Bastard Nixon let CCP to take P5 .

 

[Krusty]

Commi CCP don't get UNSC , Chinese seat belongs to Kuomingtang party and Republic of China , who fight with every soldier they have to save their country from Japanese wrath , where Mao waiting for Japanese to weaken the ROC ,and finally defeated weaken wartorn republican army .
bloody commi , only that Bastard Nixon let CCP to take P5 .

Exactly, Even after Mao took over power by force, the UNSC membership was transferred to KMT party which left mainland china and relocated to Taiwan. Only in the 1970's Nixon let the membership be transferred back to CCP.

Had Roosevelt known China would collapse and Mao would take power, China would have never gotten the membership. Especially when Churchill was absolutely against letting China in.

 

[no smoking]

So yes, regardless of being beaten back or not, China (ROC) had a huge army and resources which made the US give it the position of a 'key ally'. Little did they know just a few years later Mao would crash the party. And India, regardless of the men and material supplied wasn't considered 'Indian'. they were resources of the British colony (A perception that the British narrative held and something that we as Indias should work to change).

Then you have to ask yourselves a question: why can’t India fight as an independent force during WW2. Why didn’t China fall into the same trap of fighting under a foreign flag? The answer is: millions of Chinese died to keep this country independent even though partially long before the WW2. How many Indian died to make sure that India was ruled by an Indian?

Sino-Japan war began July 1937, US stepped in at the end of Dec 1941, it was the death of millions of Chinese soldiers keeping China standing until “right time”. Most of these Chinese soldiers knew exactly their future-death even before they joined the army.

Did India population ever did anything for this “right time and right place”?

Even after independence, India had no infrastructure or prosperity (not to mention it was still not fully our of colonialism) to support the role of a UNSC member even if it were offered and accepted at the time.

You are kidding, right? India had a lot better infrastructure or prosperity to support the role of a UNSC member than China in 1950s.

 

[Hemu Vikram Aditya]

Then you have to ask yourselves a question: why can’t India fight as an independent force during WW2. Why didn’t China fall into the same trap of fighting under a foreign flag? The answer is: millions of Chinese died to keep this country independent even though partially long before the WW2. How many Indian died to make sure that India was ruled by an Indian?

Sino-Japan war began July 1937, US stepped in at the end of Dec 1941, it was the death of millions of Chinese soldiers keeping China standing until “right time”. Most of these Chinese soldiers knew exactly their future-death even before they joined the army.

Did India population ever did anything for this “right time and right place”?





You are kidding, right? India had a lot better infrastructure or prosperity to support the role of a UNSC member than China in 1950s.

nope china had more soldiers and was more devlopedd than India at that Time

 

[Krusty]

Then you have to ask yourselves a question: why can’t India fight as an independent force during WW2. Why didn’t China fall into the same trap of fighting under a foreign flag? The answer is: millions of Chinese died to keep this country independent even though partially long before the WW2. How many Indian died to make sure that India was ruled by an Indian?

Sino-Japan war began July 1937, US stepped in at the end of Dec 1941, it was the death of millions of Chinese soldiers keeping China standing until “right time”. Most of these Chinese soldiers knew exactly their future-death even before they joined the army.

Did India population ever did anything for this “right time and right place”?





You are kidding, right? India had a lot better infrastructure or prosperity to support the role of a UNSC member than China in 1950s.

Is this a serious question? Your question/answer makes as much sense as, If you have 4 pencils and I have 7 apples why doesn't 20 rotis fit in the cooker?

Answer: purple.

China had imperial rule. Their own soldiers formed and rebelled against their king which eventually led to the KMT party. Which was inturn overthrown by Mao after a bloody struggle. No one actually fought for the motherland. They fought for power. All the while the French and British reaping the benifits. No one fought for China. Go check Extraterritoriality for British citizens in China. You would be wrong to conclude China fought off the Europeans and kept their country free. They were fighting within themselves so the Europeans job of exploiting them for easier. That's all. They had made their profit out of China without unnecessary spending and bloodshed. Except the opium wars in the case of the Brits. When an enemy is making a mistake, you should keep quiet and exploit it.

Regardless, China had a massive army under Chinese flag in ww2. But unlike what you think, it's not because Europeans tried to exploit china and failed due to the Grit and bravery of the Chinese. Chinese were literally drugged to give uprights and taxes to the Brits.

All said and done, UNSC was offered to a country beaten badly by a much smaller force and having a huge chunk of its territory lost and in the end, USA having to step in to help. No Tibet and xinjiang and Manchuria of USA hadn't stepped in. Effectively it was a loser and yet it was offered.

P.S: eastern China (the actual han portion) was far more prosperous than British India.

 

[no smoking]

nope china had more soldiers and was more devlopedd than India at that Time

Really? Are you really knowing?
Are you sure you want to compare India with a country just walked out of 38 years civil war including 8 years Sino-Japan war?
Just let's check how china developed comparing to India on 1949:
railway china had 27380km while India had 55000km;
Steel, China produced 158k tons, India? 1.37m!
Electricity consumption per person, China 8, India 13.6;
And there is one figure may give you the best idea how China was "more" developed in 1949, the total technicians in the whole mainland was less than 50,000!

 

[Krusty]

@no smoking where did you get these figures? For railways, probably true. Brits did a good job with railways and postal service. But where did you get the numbers for the rest? Especially electricity consumption and steel? Indian steel was going to the UK anyway at 1945

 

[no smoking]

China had imperial rule. Their own soldiers formed and rebelled against their king which eventually led to the KMT party. Which was inturn overthrown by Mao after a bloody struggle. No one actually fought for the motherland. They fought for power. All the while the French and British reaping the benifits. No one fought for China. Go check Extraterritoriality for British citizens in China. You would be wrong to conclude China fought off the Europeans and kept their country free. They were fighting within themselves so the Europeans job of exploiting them for easier. That's all. They had made their profit out of China without unnecessary spending and bloodshed. Except the opium wars in the case of the Brits. When an enemy is making a mistake, you should keep quiet and exploit it.

You still didn't answer the question: why didn't British just claim major part of China as their colony under their direct administration. Japanese proved that was lot more profitable than just only selling drugs.

Regardless, China had a massive army under Chinese flag in ww2. But unlike what you think, it's not because Europeans tried to exploit china and failed due to the Grit and bravery of the Chinese. Chinese were literally drugged to give uprights and taxes to the Brits.

Really? Then how did Chinese raised up a massive army if they already gave all the taxes to the foreigners? And how come this massive army didn’t fight a single day under any foreign flag?

All said and done, UNSC was offered to a country beaten badly by a much smaller force and having a huge chunk of its territory lost and in the end, USA having to step in to help. No Tibet and xinjiang and Manchuria of USA hadn't stepped in. Effectively it was a loser and yet it was offered.

Well, after all these great loss, the Chinese government didn’t bend over and swear her loyalty to a foreign emperor, that make herself an Independent country, that is the difference between China and India. One didn’t give up even with great loss while another give up to avoid great loss. The Americans thought this difference was worth a UNSC seat to buy.

P.S: eastern China (the actual han portion) was far more prosperous than British India.

How funny to claim the major battle fields of 38 years civil war to be more prosperous than British India. What the hell!

 

[Krusty]

You still didn't answer the question: why didn't British just claim major part of China as their colony under their direct administration. Japanese proved that was lot more profitable than just only selling drugs.

You do not understand the basics of geopolitics or warfare. That is why you think I did not give an answer. Chapter one page one. Do not start a war when you have a pawn doing all your bidding. It does not make sense is any level.

India was ruled by kings who showed the finger to the British. That is why they had to invade. Chinese kings on the other hand accepted the terms readily. They paid what British wanted and gave the concessions and opened the ports they needed. India also had such kings who readily kissed British boots. Most notably the Nawab of Hyderabad. His kingdom was spared and the Ones that surrounded Hyderabad was conquered by the British. Do you understand now? I cannot make it anymore simple for you.

As you can see the British didn't have control over the entire Indian landmass. They spared the kings who did as they were bid. Just like the Chinese kings. There were some in India of course who actually fought the British and held their territories.

​

 

[Krusty]

Really? Then how did Chinese raised up a massive army if they already gave all the taxes to the foreigners? And how come this massive army didn’t fight a single day under any foreign flag?

Refer my previous message. What do you mean by all taxes. Brits don't take 'all' taxes. Please learn how kingdoms and colonies work.

Well, after all these great loss, the Chinese government didn’t bend over and swear her loyalty to a foreign emperor, that make herself an Independent country, that is the difference between China and India. One didn’t give up even with great loss while another give up to avoid great loss. The Americans thought this difference was worth a UNSC seat to buy.

Dude. The only thing that kept Chinese alive was the sheer size of china compared to Japan. If they were smaller, thy would have gotten absolutely steamrolled by Japan. I agree they didn't give up. They were fighting even after being beaten to a pulp. It was USA that finally helped China by freeing it from Japanese occupation.

Well, after all these great loss, the Chinese government didn’t bend over and swear her loyalty to a foreign emperor, that make herself an Independent country, that is the difference between China and India. One didn’t give up even with great loss while another give up to avoid great loss. The Americans thought this difference was worth a UNSC seat to buy.

Wrong. Read roosevelts and Churchills memoirs. Churchill was dead against China joining and the only reason why FDR supported China's membership inspite of the cannon fodder army was because of KMT party which was against communism and it would weaken Stalins position in the new Organization. But it was a mistake because Mao was waiting for KMT to weaken (ww2) and seized power which was something that the west didn't predict. Unknowingly, they had strengthened the clout of communism in UNSC

 

[vinuzap]

where did opium war happened?

which was the british market for opium and supply for silk to be exploited ruthlessly

hong kong was a naval base to them why will they poke there noise in country where russia and japan had interest unlike india

 

[no smoking]

Refer my previous message. What do you mean by all taxes. Brits don't take 'all' taxes. Please learn how kingdoms and colonies work.

Well, Brits does control how to split all taxes in a colony which was under her direct control, such as India. In China, she can't.

Dude. The only thing that kept Chinese alive was the sheer size of china compared to Japan. If they were smaller, thy would have gotten absolutely steamrolled by Japan. I agree they didn't give up. They were fighting even after being beaten to a pulp. It was USA that finally helped China by freeing it from Japanese occupation.

Well, India was also a big size country and British was not even India's neighbor. But China stood to the end while India didn't.

Wrong. Read roosevelts and Churchills memoirs. Churchill was dead against China joining and the only reason why FDR supported China's membership inspite of the cannon fodder army was because of KMT party which was against communism and it would weaken Stalins position in the new Organization. But it was a mistake because Mao was waiting for KMT to weaken (ww2) and seized power which was something that the west didn't predict. Unknowingly, they had strengthened the clout of communism in UNSC

Mistake or not, the president of USA thought China was valuable enough to give a seat while no one had the same idea about India. There is a saying: opportunity doesn't waste time with unprepared. In this case, when the opportunity came, China prepared but India didn't. Think further: if India participated the WW2 as an independent country, her army saved British in Africa and China in Asia, who do you think Roosevelts would pick up as the partner?

 

[Krusty]

Well, Brits does control how to split all taxes in a colony which was under her direct control, such as India. In China, she can't.



Well, India was also a big size country and British was not even India's neighbor. But China stood to the end while India didn't.



Mistake or not, the president of USA thought China was valuable enough to give a seat while no one had the same idea about India. There is a saying: opportunity doesn't waste time with unprepared. In this case, when the opportunity came, China prepared but India didn't. Think further: if India participated the WW2 as an independent country, her army saved British in Africa and China in Asia, who do you think Roosevelts would pick up as the partner?

I'm going to stop replying to you. This will be my last reply. Quite simply because you seem to be like a horse on blinds. For the last and final time, there was no 'Indian country' during world war 2 or when UNSC was formed. Do you think Churchill would have given a seat to UKs own colony? There was no 'India as a nation' to even consider giving a seat to. So stop saying india was a big size country. It was a colony. That was fractured with many kings with no single constitution or mandate.

Also your 'Mistake or not' whatever. The seat belongs to KMT (now in Taiwan). They were deemed worthy of the seat. Not Mao. CCP stole their seat just the way they steal everything else from people who actually worked hard.

if India participated the WW2 as an independent country, her army saved British in Africa and China in Asia, who do you think Roosevelts would pick up as the partner?

From this statement I can see just how much you know about world war 2. You really are not qualified to participate in any discussions regarding this topic really. If you have some reputed libraries, go and check. British Indian army was the largest standing voluntary army in ww2. They saw action in the European, North African, Middle eastern, South and Far eastern fronts. Perhaps the only country to do so in significant numbers. Allies actually owe their ww2 victory (consequently free china and their UNSC) to the British Indian army. No one will mention this because, and I say again, it was considered colonial possession and de facto British possession. It was the largest contributor towards the war effort mind you. If they didn't have it, allies would have most certainly fallen early in Europe and Japan would have mopped a china under the carpet. Seriously, you have to stop living in your dreamland and read some actual history. Chinese were just fighting around China, and not doing a great job while they were at it...

I hope you read up and learn more before getting back to the discussion because you frankly seem clueless on top of selectively ignoring points.

 

[pringles]

In practical terms, what does it mean for a country to be a non-veto, but permanent member of UNSC? Let's say an issue comes up for voting, then we cannot vote NO, since we don't have veto, but we can vote YES?

EX : Shall the UN put observers in Somalia

Countries (US, UK, France, China, Russia) options available : (YES/VETO)
Countries (India, Germany...) options available (YES/ Abstain)

No veto means no power to influence policy. We can either say yes or abstain, just like we do now. What does this new option really entail for us?

Also, if it came to politicking and if it appears that the white Christians are more open to the idea of allowing Germany but not allowing India (based on the assumption that India will never agree to it), is it in Indian interest to actually agree* to it and make them boil in their own juices?

Germany has known strategic rivalry with France and Britain in all spheres (arms sales competitions, competing for influence within Europe and outside Europe). Propping up Germany in any multilateral forum will increase the friction within Europe. Interesting contours. It will hurt Britain more than any one else.

 

[Krusty]

Just out of curiosity.... @pringles you aren't @Nuvneet Kundu are you? The similarities are uncanny....

 

[no smoking]

I'm going to stop replying to you. This will be my last reply. Quite simply because you seem to be like a horse on blinds. For the last and final time, there was no 'Indian country' during world war 2 or when UNSC was formed. Do you think Churchill would have given a seat to UKs own colony? There was no 'India as a nation' to even consider giving a seat to. So stop saying india was a big size country. It was a colony. That was fractured with many kings with no single constitution or mandate.

That is the problem, isn't it. Indians didn't manage to keep your independence. When the opportunity came, you can't be considered as a candidate as everyone saw you a part of British.

Also your 'Mistake or not' whatever. The seat belongs to KMT (now in Taiwan). They were deemed worthy of the seat. Not Mao. CCP stole their seat just the way they steal everything else from people who actually worked hard.

Well, you argue with the whole world, 76 out of 114 countries didn't agree with you.

From this statement I can see just how much you know about world war 2. You really are not qualified to participate in any discussions regarding this topic really. .... Seriously, you have to stop living in your dreamland and read some actual history. Chinese were just fighting around China, and not doing a great job while they were at it...

Dude, I am making an assumption: what if India fought the WW2 as an Independent country, would she have a better chance to get a seat than China.

I hope you read up and learn more before getting back to the discussion because you frankly seem clueless on top of selectively ignoring points.

Dude, reading carefully before jumping up.

 

[Krusty]

That is the problem, isn't it. Indians didn't manage to keep your independence. When the opportunity came, you can't be considered as a candidate as everyone saw you a part of British.



Well, you argue with the whole world, 76 out of 114 countries didn't agree with you.



Dude, I am making an assumption: what if India fought the WW2 as an Independent country, would she have a better chance to get a seat than China.




Dude, reading carefully before jumping up.

If I am to use your logic, I can say 'well what if ww2 happened in the 70s? We could have got in.' But it will make me as dumb as you and I dont want that. Good day.

 

[no smoking]

Germany has known strategic rivalry with France and Britain in all spheres (arms sales competitions, competing for influence within Europe and outside Europe).

It was only true 60 years ago.
Today, no a single European country has the same level influence as 60 years ago.
The only chance they can still be treated as a power is that they speak as one. So, no, Germany doesn't compete against France and Britain. On the contrast, they need germany to join in to increase European influence.

Propping up Germany in any multilateral forum will increase the friction within Europe. Interesting contours. It will hurt Britain more than any one else.

France is the one popping up Germany in multilateral forum. Britian doesn't have problem against Germany, she simply doesn't like the idea of Eu.

 

[Hardi]

Indian members still don't get it, objection from Pakistan is not the reason why India can't get a unsc seat. the real thing is none of the p5 sincerely wishes to share the most powerful diplomatic tool with new members.

Americans or British might have expressed that India is welcome to join the club, but we all know they were merely paying lip service.they just know someone else is gonna be the bad guy and veto India, why not play the good guy, after all India is not gonna make it.

the P5 won their seats by creating a new world order, to do that each of them except France had suffer huge sacrifices during the wold war two. the world would have been different if the P5 had lost. unless the current world order collapsed and a new one was built, the P5 stay and no one else gets in.

I understand indian members' frustration, at the same I advise you people to be pragmatic.

yes off coursce....

because...Chinese and Pakistani Pigs Dont want that india get any kind of power like VETO or NSG seat or UNSC permenent Member....