Posted on 09/21/2011 9:12:13 AM PDT by MBT ARJUN
In a surprise move, NATO has reportedly offered to share its ballistic missile defence (BMD) technology with India. The tentative proposal, premised on the acknowledgement of the ‘commonality of threats’ faced by NATO and India, includes the sharing of BMD technology as well as the possibility of ‘training together.’ There has yet to be any official response to this offer, but its acceptance would make India the only non-NATO ally, apart from Russia, in the alliance.
Russia’s reservations on this issue are well known, and it’s most likely that India, too, won’t be jumping at the bit. This could be attributed to at least three factors.
One, as a non-aligned country during the Cold War years, India maintained its distance from bloc politics. Though the international landscape has changed drastically since then, India has retained its policy of not entering into an alliance with any country, though New Delhi does have strategic partnerships with a record number of nations today. While warming to the United States considerably in the last half decade, India is still unlikely to enter into any arrangement that might be perceived as compromising its sovereign autonomy. It may be recalled, after all, that India hasn’t formally accepted the Proliferation Security Initiative because it’s a US-led initiative. A US-led BMD architecture, then, would also be viewed from the same perspective.
Second, while it’s true that India has been working on the indigenous development of BMD technology, and has conducted four successful interceptions since 2006, there has been no shared commonality of threats with NATO. As premised on the US missile threat assessment, threats to NATO are believed to arise from missile proliferation by problem states. BMD is seen as necessary to defend against limited ballistic missile attacks involving ‘up to a few tens of ballistic missiles.
(Excerpt) Read more at the-diplomat.com ...
[NATO’s India Offer]
NATO?
I think it’s more “a sneakier way” of saying “our” India offer... Don’t you agree, Guys?
And we have the humor in us to question the validity of the God given rights of the Chinese in their attempts at ensuring of their own survival...
And who was it that claimed that ABM/NMD (one and same) doesn’t work???
Perry, Palin or Romney would sign off on this. Obama will not. Which just goes to show it is the right thing to do.
[The Chinese also believe in their “God given rights” to deploy nuclear armed missiles aimed at other countries, carry out hostile and threatening missile tests and military exercises close to their neighboring countries and make aggressive moves across the borders into neighboring territory in clear violation of international borders. ]
You are implying that [the Chinese does not have the rights to test drive and deploy their version of a much needed NMD system] to defend against the threat they face... You are implying that they don’t have the rights to built their Darth Vader TIE fighters when threaten with the X-Wing Starfighters of the Star Federation... You are implying that Lord McMahon is God and it is he who determines where international boundries start and where it end...
Convienent for you isn’t it? And what logic is that?
And quite the contrary it is the Chinese government that believes itself to be God and has the sole right to determine where international boundaries should lie. McMahon Line is a valid treaty signed by the two governments of the day namely the British Indian government and the Tibetan government. China is an occupying force in Tibet and their claims over Indo-Tibetan border region is plain frivolous”.
“You are implying that [the Chinese does not have the rights to test drive and deploy their version of a much needed NMD system] to defend against the threat they face... “
Can you define what “threat” they really face?
[Can you define what “threat” they really face?]
You mean to tell me that I need to spell it out for you? I mean isn’t it obvious where that threat is coming from? Be honest. If I can sense it, then so can everyone else in this board.
[And quite the contrary it is the Chinese government that believes itself to be God and has the sole right to determine where international boundaries should lie.]W
Hell! If Lord McMahon is the rule of International law, then I would presume that every Gurkha on earth is his domestic servant so what can I say when I flunk history big time. O’h... How I wish there are happy faces here instead of just colons and semi colons and brackets :)... I mean I do get a big laugh out of this funny argument ;)...
“You mean to tell me that I need to spell it out for you?”
Please. Humor me.
And what exactly is the Chinese claim over Tibet or the borderline regions of India-Tibet? The fact that the Yuan dynasty had occupied Tibet for a brief period in Chinese history? And the Yuans weren't even Chinese, they were Mongols. If occupying an area through a give period in history gives you a legitimate claim then Japan probably has as much legitimate claim over Manchuria and Taiwan as China has over Tibet.
Besides if you have a better argument sans your nonsensical trash talk then lets hear it.
I am not quite sure what that means. Why does Tibet not count?
The treaty is still a valid one regardless of whether Chinese were a party to it or not. Tibet was a sovereign independent state when the treaty was signed. That in itself abrogates the need for Chinese to be a party to it. Its just another land grabbing ruse for the Chinese.
And I am still waiting on you to explain to me what exactly is Chinese claim over Tibet in the first place, for you to even question the validity of Shimla accord.
Also any word yet on what exactly China defines as “threat”?
Dunno about McMahone but I guess by the same yardstick Mao Tse Tung might make a better savior considering how he “saved” inner Mongolia, Uighuristan, Tibet and Manchuria from them bloody “imperialists”. /sarc
Besides....if “Lord” is too imperialistic for you would you rather prefer “Comrade” instead?
Let me ask you the same question I asked you a couple weeks back.
Are you Chinese? In recent posts you have claimed to be ‘Western’ (I am not sure whether you mean you are Western, as in born and bred; or merely a Chinese living in Boston or Ontario etc), but a cursory look at your posts shows tacit (at times shifting to candid) support for certain Chinese acts, including some a month or so where you were outright supporting them. Are you Chinese? By the way there is nothing wrong with that, and it would actually explain you a lot. Now, in case you are not Chinese and I am totally barking up the wrong tree, then I offer my apologies. However, out of the goodness of your heart, if you are indeed Western (and not just a commie living in the West), please state the school you went to. It will really assist FReepers with children living in your area to know which schools to avoid, because – honestly – your level of written language, syntax and diction is truly woeful. In other threads I can always tell when it is you posting because the sentence construction is simply so convoluted that it can even induce a headache if read for too long.
Hence the other reason, apart from your support of things Chinese (and appearance on threads to do with China), that I doubt you are Western. Your grasp of English for any English speaking country, even in my native Kenya, is at 2nd grade level (in terms of sentence construction) and 6th grade level (in terms of appropriate word usage). Furthermore, in my many travels I have met many people from many places, and all countries that are Commonwealth states (former British colonies like Canada, Australia, Kenya, India, etc) all have very proper English; and obviously if you were American you’re English would also be good. European countries, even those that have English as a second or third language, also tend to have very good language grasp (for instance the good FReeper Western Culture who is Swedish). You, on the other hand, could make a living typing out text to be used as a tertiary torture tool at Guantanamo! You, sir, are not ‘Western.’ I would surmise you are Chinese based on the way you construct your sentences, plus your posts on China-related threads. However, and again I offer a mea culpa if I am wrong on your heritage, if you are in fact ‘Western’ (and particularly from North America or Western Europe ….actually even Nigeria for that matter …), then please state the name of the school you went to. You can even start a vanity titled ‘Schools to avoid like a hot plague.’
Thank you and have a good day.
Why are you shilling for the Chicoms?
Chinglish is funny.
So, China "much needs" it's Nuclear weapons, eh? to defend against "the threat" -- is "the threat", the USA?
Er. Edison, wrong board -- this is not the ChineseCommunist patriotic hail mao web forum...
burn....
Perhaps the Japanese should be given Manchuria, eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.