Indian PM's stand in Iran issue..Right or wrong?  Why?
99234
US has bought India's loyalty long ago when it allowed the country to build its nuclear arsenal.\n\nSo, India's going to betray a long-term economic and political ally (Iran). \n\nFrom this point of view various people can debate, loyalty vs opportunism. \nOn the other hand, India's position suggests lack of intelligence since it has taken such a position without having received any evidence that Iran is conducting a military nuclear programme (not to mention that even if it's the case, then Iran's nukes would support India).
213218
America is clearly seeing its own interests and is supporting a country who will be able to help them in future. And clearly  this country is india and not pakistan since india is stronger economically, technologically, militarily and is becoming an important global player. This has nothing to to do with peace in the Indian subcontinent or with ethics.
632449
If it is peaceful nuclear energy then there would be no argument; but no body believes that it is purely for power needs.  this is also borne out by the fact they have never agreed to a system whereupon Russia would process the uranium and then deliver it to Iran for use in a nuclear reactor.  This would give them there power without the possibility of making a bomb, the have not accepted this as a alternative. They also refuse the inspections needed by the UN to confirm that it is only for power generation. So with both of these things in mind then it does not seem that they do want it just for peacefully power production.\n\nAs for India and Pakistan - go back a few years and you will find that the world community was not to happy with them either!  But neither government has a large tract record in sponsoring terrorism.
351450
Not at all.  In military and atomic power India is not a puppet like Iraq or Afgan.  Even if the 100 million people walks over, the invation will come to end.  US will not take this kind of invation decision against India or China fearing the population these countries have.
1183863
Iran should have the right to peaceful nuclear technology.Why is it U.S.A,India,and all the other countries can have nukes, but Iran can't?Bush is a Racist. He hates Iranians.If you really don't want Iran to have Nuclear tech, ask the world to destroy their nuclear stockpiles first,especially the US.
1075773
It should be taken seriously, but to a point.\nIran restricting its fossil fuel sales would cause considerable price hikes of the oil pricing. The world won't end, but oil will become much more expensive, both for private individuals, for many nations and for private corporations. This would probably cause higher costs for oil-derived products and wasteful, energy-consuming activities in most countries, and a bit of inflation.\n\nOn the other side, you have to realize that Iran has little motivation to carry out this promise. If they rise the oil price or restrict sales, that means that they will be losing money as well. Iran's economy is quite dependant on its oil exports, and I can't imagine them substaining a high-price oil policy for a long time, since, for them, that would mean losing exports and money.\nThe truth is that Iran needs the world community as much as the world community needs Iran. Sure, we will always need oil, while they don't have an exclusive need to export it, what gives them the upper hand. But how far are they willing to take their threats? \nI'm not sure common Iranians would like their living standards reduced due to their economic dependency on oil exports. How much hardship are the iranians really willing to endure? Much of these are smokescreens and empty threats to see how the world community reacts, me thinks.\n\nAlso, we wouldn't be having this problem if Bush's and Blair's "pre-emptive strike policy" and pro-corporate war agenda wouldn't have scared the sh*t out of Iranian people and led them to elect the nationalist nutso that Iran has as prime minister. They've really done a good job, increasing terrorism in Iraq and turning a quasi-religious state into something even more radical and fundamentalist!
808128
As an Iranian, I should say you "Ahmadi Nejad"s speeches and letters are a bunch of his strange ideas, not all of the Iranian ideas.\n\nHere we don't concern to his strange speeches. I suggest you don't worry about Iran's activities in base on "Ahmadi Nejad" speeches and letters ;)\n\nIran and US had some dialogs but some US policies like invading to Iraq and Afghanistan and occupying those countries made this situation worse.\n\nIran's government is worry about US policy and its goals, so someone like "Ahmadi Nejad" succeeded in last presidency election.
471832
Interesting question.\n\nAt the moment the truth is that Iran is stating absolutely that it doesn't want 'Nukes', instead it is claiming a right to develop a nuclear capacity for peaceful power generation. With the price of oil rising globally this seems a sensible strategy.\n\nOf course the problem is that this could be masking a drive for the development of nuclear weaponry.  \n\nIs this justified?  Well there are two schools of thought.  \nThe first is that for defence purposes it is.  Iran is a developed nation in the Middle East and one of its neighbours, Israel has a nuclear capability.  Iran could justifiably argue that it requires a nuclear deterrent to counter that of Israelis.\n\nThe second is that no, it's not.  Iran has been explicitly threatening to the West and Israel (whom it said it intended to 'wipe off the map') and whilst the rest of the world are looking to dismantle nuclear stock piles, it is incongruous for a nation to be building a nuclear capability.\n\nNot sure of the answer, but hope this helps.
1127439
This may apply to you.\n\nJust look at your post where you got basic factual information wrong regarding Al Quaeda and the US and Iran.
236860
The nuclear deal with India is not a benevolent gift from the emperor to a client state. It was a clever move to put India out of the competition for fossil fuels.Unquestionably, there are economic motivations behind the agreement. For one thing, the US nuclear industry hopes to cash in.Tens of thousands of Indians waving black and white flags and chanting 'Death to Bush!' rallied on Wednesday in New Delhi to protest a visit by US President George W Bush.More protests are planned for today
364261
The concern, and it's a fairly legitimate one, is that a nation like Iran, which has had strong ties to organizations that advocate violence against the US in the past, might be willing to supply radioactive materials or nuclear weapons to such organizations in the future.\n\nIndia already has nuclear technology, but refuses to allow international agencies to monitor it's programs, which is a bit curious.\n\n"Developing nations" sometimes cause concern because of the potential to sell radioactive material or even nuclear weapons to radicalists.  And there is also concern that such a nation would build nuclear weapons and possibly use them against a rival nation.  (Pakistan and India are a perfect example of this)\n\nThe bottom line is this: nuclear weapons = trouble.  If more countries have them, there is a greater potential, not only for a nuclear war, but also accidents, contamination, leaking of nuclear secrets and the secret sale of dangerous weapons and materials.\n\nThe potential for all of these is much higher in a country that does not yet have strict environmental and safety regulations and global economic interests that would be badly damaged by international sanctions.
60763
Let me begin by saying that my wife's cousin married an Iranian so I have nothing against anybody on an individual basis.  However, I take issue w/ the Iranian people for electing a rhetoric spewing, inflaming anti-semite for "President".  \n\nFurthermore, I cannot understand how the government of a country rich in petroleum oil would want to develop nuclear energy for "peaceful means" after announcing to the world that Israel should be "wiped off the map"?  This theocratic government w/ absolute power over its people needs to be "wiped off" from rule and its citizens re-educated on how to properly co-exist w/ the rest of the world in harmony.
12213
It all depends on the monarch, the previous one was allied to both India and Pakisthan so he couldnot support any of the nations but the current one has publicly embraced his support of India.\n\nIt's a matter of personal preference, friendship
587337
Wonder whose fault he thinks it is.\n\nFact is, he merrily supported an illicit president, who made a bad decision and justified it with spurious'proof' of nonexistent Weapons of Mass Destruction, to meddle in a sovereign state's internal affairs, to go into Iraq and completely destroy a functioning society.\n\nCertainly it was an unpalatable society to many people.  But it is ultimately the right and responsibility of the citizens of a sovereign state to turf out the people whose government they do not want, that is part of the democratic process.\n\nIn any event, the West supports an idiot, and the crooks surrounding him, who has a skewed interpretation of democracy.  Palestinians democratically elected a government The Bush and Blair et al do not like.  In 1953 Iranians democratically elected a government the US did not like, and they deposed him, put the autocratic, corrupt Shah in his place, and are now reaping the results.\n\nFor Blair one can't have a lot of sympathy.  If you play with fire you will get burnt.
310143
we have a whole bunch of opinion about iran. listen to this. \nhttp://scotthortonshow.com/\nhttp://thestressblog.com\nhttp://www.kaos959.com\nhttp://www.antiwar.com\nmoney, http://www.philipdru.com/griffin_stream.html\neducation, http://www.philipdru.com/taylor_stream.html\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/gatto_stream.html\nww1 wilson,\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=88\nww2 http://www.philipdru.com/stinnett_stream.html\nnam http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=108\ngovernment explained simply,\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=98\nbush & clinton http://www.philipdru.com/triplett_stream.html\nisrael http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8730\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/webb_stream.html\niran http://www.weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=131
212272
I think India is playing games with George Bush.\n\nSee link below:
417147
I assume you're being kind. The Iranian leadership represents the worst aspects of ANY government's international policy in recent memory - and I'm an old geezer. Anyone can (rationally) oppose the anti-palestinian policies of the Israeli right-wing, but the madness coming out of Ahmadinejad's mouth is alarming REGARDLESS of where you find youself on the issue.\n\nResponsible Muslims I know further understand that those policies can easily lead to a conflagration in which the only sure losers will be Muslims, the vast majority of whom do not wish to be the designated martyrs of these zealots.\n\nThank you from bringing up the question.