what is your opinion about india as a nuclear power?
365790
India definitely needs the nuclear energy for its surging economy and it's perfectly acceptable for civil puposes, but I doubt the government will restrict it for that exclusively given its annual military expenditures of 16B/year ranking  it on the top ten. \n\nCompartively, the recent agreement with the US to share knowledge etc is not going to sit easy with Pakistan, unless there is a similar agreement for the so-called ally.
459575
You must have posted this just as I put my answer to a similar question! Anyhow, here's what I wrote:\nIran. 200 years and they have never attacked another foreign state. They are members of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Just like about 170 other countries). They are NOT Iraq, as in, they are well advanced industrially and sanctions won't mean much to them as they are also fairly self sufficient. \nThey HAVE NOT breached ANY of their responsibilities as sigintories of the NPT. They have cooperated with the IAEA and allowed UN inspectors to their facilities.\nHmmmm, The United States is also a member of the NPT and has breached its responsibilities under the treaty several times. The USA has USED the UN to go to war ineffectively no less than SIX times since WWII! That does not include political insurgencies and and the like... Oh, wait, I remember The US has been there and done that. Look at the last time the US messed around with Iran! \nIsrael is not even a signitor of the NPT! Yes folks, Israel is not even a member of the NPT and REFUSES to allow UN Weapons inspectors to monitor their nuclear capabilities. HUH? Yep, it's true... We bomb Iraq back to the stone-age for "Developing WMD without UN Monitoring" (WMD that never even existed) and all the while Israel has a KNOWN Stockpile of WMD and constantly refuses to co-operate with the UN and the IAEA!! Israel is a rogue state! But hey, Pakistan also has WMD and is also not party to the NPT. Weird... They are always wanting to kick their neighbours **** (India) and why aren't USA World Police F*** Yeah wading in there to "Create stability, in the Indian Sub-continent?" Me thinks someone is puppeteering with The USA!
893698
I actually want a distance between India and the Muslim states.\nIn this respect I would prefer India to increase cordiality with states like Japan, the USA, Israel and the EU etc.\n\nAlthough, having stated this, our major long term threat is not Paki Land, it is China.  China has already begun to make inroads everywhere, and if India doesn't try and compete we will show ourselves to be the biggest political novices on the face of the earth.
730232
India is not ready yet. Nuclear arms does not make a country ready for world leadership.
489764
I do.\n\nNo Country has the Moral Authority to prevent another from producing Nuclear Weapons, unless those who already have it are willing to destroy them.\n\nDouble standards just because you are powerful is a shame !
948598
If you checked you would find that India is already has nukes. Russia isn't really in good enough shape to help anyone out. Although selling arms is becoming a big export business in Russia. Glad its a hypothetical question. I can't figure out who or why anyone would attack India.
1187781
The way developments are taking place, I think it would be much earlier.\n\nDidnt you hear the news yesterday? India and US have signed a Nuclear deal for generation of enery\n\n\nCheers !!!
673737
Both India and Pakistan have tested nuclear weapons by denotating them underground, so there is little doubt that they have "the bomb".\n\nIsrael on the other hand has never actually tested any weapons, although there is little doubt that they do possess them, although it is not clear just how many they have or how big they are.\n\nIran is a different kettle of fish, as none of the above countries have ever advocated using them unless attacked, unlike Iran, whose supreme Ayatollah has already stated publicly that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.\n\nIran has stated that it wants to develop nuclear power stations (a basic requirement for building a nuke) in order to help reduce a reliance on oil, a stange thing since the country has the 4th largest oil reserves in the world !!!\n\nThere is no doubt that Iran wishes to build a nuclear bomb, with which to threaten it's neighbours, and possible to use against Israel.\n\nUnlike other countries, which don't wish to be excluded from the rest of the civillized world, Iran is still out in the cold and refuses to acknowledge any of it's duties and responsibilities, hence it doesn't care what the rest of the World thinks.\n\nThe same is true for North Korea, hence the conrcern over these two countries.\n\nBoth are extremely unstable and any nuclear weapons they possess might not be used as a deterent against attack, but might be used to "strike first" at another country.\n\nOther nuclear powers have already agreed not to use such weapons unless attacked - neither Iran nor North Korea have signed up to this agreement. \n\nBasically, you wouldn't place your John Bobbit in the hands of a lunatic with a pair of scissors, so why trust Iran with nuclear weapons ?   Just doesn't make sense.
902132
If India was suddenly elected to the UN Security Council, Pakistan would have a fit. May I remind you both of these countries have nuclear weapons.
1059816
India was once an ally of the Soviet Union and was part of the now non-existent Non Aligned Movement. They also have a long history of non-violence. They can probably be a trade partner, like China is, but not a military ally.\n\nAnd I agree with MC Hummer. Indians, regardless of their state of industrialization, voted out an ultra-conservative, ultra-patriotic government for a more liberal one. A billion people voting to do that is indeed quite a democracy.
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.
366650
Look the thing that binds nuclear disarmament internationally is the Non-proliferation Treaty.  It's an agreement that allows for countries (even Iran) to engage in peaceful nuclear research for the purposes of nuclear power among other things.  It is also widely violated by Israel and by India (which was basically told in an agreement with the US that it could build as many nukes as it wanted).  \n\nNow, I'll give you the no country has the right to a nuke, but then the question goes to any nation seeking the bomb, "By what right can the US decide that India can build nukes but we cannot?"  And I'm not necessarily talking about Iran here.  Pakistan is pissed that India gets access to US nuclear technology but IT DOESN'T.  \n\nAnother problem is that once a country gets the bomb, like say North Korea, the US stops its Sabre rattling.  Iraq had to be invaded because Saddam could have been working on the bomb say the talking heads.  Well North Korea (hardly an improvement IMHO) did get the bomb and what happened?  Talks.  That sends a strong message to many a regime unfriendly to the US I think.  \n\nAs for if China adds another nuke, well, you really don't understand much about China's nuclear program.  They don't really have many nukes and have no real second strike capability, but if they were to turn their burgeoning economy and pour it into their nuclear inventory, and developed a second strike capability, they would be a much more serious threat to the US.
1026362
Alright, check this out.  I work in the oil field, and alot of the work I have been doing lately is drilling wells for a natural gas power plant about 80 miles away.  It's asinine.  Nuclear power, with the right planning and infrastructure, makes great sense.  All of our currently running nuclear plants were built more the 27 years ago, we have much better, more efficient, and safer technology now.  We've exported much of our expertise in this field to France.  They get almost 80% of their electricity from nuclear power, never had a problem.  Waste is an issue, but if we were to develop a repository in a geologically inert place, separated from any local aquifer, it's fine.  The newer breeder reactors (like we've built in France), generate less then half of the lower level waste then the ones were currently still using, and about a tenth of the high level waste.  If we were to dig a system of caverns in the Canadian Shield (an area that covers most of north central Canada), this mass of gneiss has been geologically inert for 2.6 billion years, is far away from any major population center, and is not a source of any aquifers (except for some minor faulting, but with proper engineering, that's not a problem).  We really should be looking towards the future, and I believe that nuclear energy could carry the US for a  couple of centuries of its energy needs.
630222
They haven't yet.  They've only produced low grade enriched uranium which, right now, could only be used to generate electricity.\n\nBut they are real close....
426364
I don't think any country should have nuclear power unless they are using it for producing power, not weapons.
962741
For the most part, I'm okay with nuclear power.  It tends to be clean, and is actually very safe when the guidelines are followed and standards are met.  My only fear is that guidelines and standards bow down to politics all too often.\n\nI think that, in general, we need to know a little about a lot.  As an example: I might not know everything about the engine of my car, but I know enough to recognize when there's a problem, and what that problem might be.
61342
Please go to the following site. It has a list of nuke powers. \n\nDeclared nuclear weapons states[2] Country Warheads (est.) Year of first test \n United States 10,500 1945 ("Trinity") \n Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) 18,000 1949 ("RDS-1") \n United Kingdom 6000 1952 ("Hurricane") \n France 350 1960 ("Gerboise Bleue") \n People's Republic of China 400[3] 1964 ("596") \n India 60-90[4] 1974 ("Smiling Buddha") \n Pakistan 28-48[5] 1998 ("Chagai-I") \n North Korea 0-18[6] none [7] \n\n\n Pakistan covertly developed its nuclear weapons over many decades, with active Chinese assistance, beginning in the late 1970s, and tested its first fission devices in 1998. The main reason as to why Pakistan began its nuclear development programs was in response to India's so called "peaceful nuclear device" the "Smilling Buddha", Pakistan fearing for its national security began its nuclear development projects and by the 1980s it was suspected that Pakistan had successfully developed nuclear warheads, yet this was to remain speculative until 1998 when Pakistan conducted its nuclear testing at the Chaghaii hills. \n\n\nIn his startling televised confession Wednesday, Abdul Qadeer Khan insisted he acted without authorization in selling nuclear technology to other governments. A.Q. Khan admitted selling nuclear technology to Iran, Libya, and North Korea. A.Q. Khan asked for clemency, but the Pakistani government made no public announcement about whether he is to be prosecuted. The confessed proliferation took place between 1989 and 2000, though it is suspected that proliferation activities to North Korea continued after that date. The network used to supply these activities is global in scope, stretching from Germany to Dubai and from China to South Asia, and involves numerous middlemen and suppliers. \n\nHe is in Pakistan.