OrdinaryGuy

Asim, the article is very one-sided. We've had plenty of editorials written about the nuclear deal in India, and still a vast majority are in favor for it.

The article ignores the fact that all future nuclear reactors, India can choose whether they are military or civilian. When the US provides nuclear fuel to civilian nuclear reactors, it frees up substanial uranium resources for india to develop as many bombs as it wants using its military nuclear facilities... Some US congressmen have expressed concern that India can very rapidly build a nuclear stockpile.. Pakistan has plenty to worry about. India has rejected US demans for a fissile material cap.

To feed India's growing economy.... we need power. As long as we have a credible minimum nuclear deterrance, and can maintain that for 50 years from now.. I think most in india are happy to compromise a little.. For us, the growth of our economy and not our nuclear capability is more important.

Also, the article ignores India's Fast Breeder Reactor program. India right now is at the cutting-ege of FBR technology which can be used to power tomorrow as well as produce plutonium for our nuclear bombs.. We have kept this in the military list... India is the only country right now that is building efficient Fast Breeder Reactors based on the thorium cycle.. And India has plenty of thoruium (half the world's reserves)