Couldn’t agree more with your statements.

http://renjithmn.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/a-camouflage-nuclear-deal/

Good to have some views about why the deal could be bad for the country. However have you considered the follwing
1. Shift of dependencies – Point taken but what is the harm in this shift? Instead of being dependent on one commodity, we now have a choice between oil and nuclear fuel to produce energy!
2. Why rely on another nation – are’nt we already relying on other nations for energy? with this deal, 39 out of 45 NSG nations have actively agreed to supply us with nuclear fuel.. so we arent dependent on a small bloc of middle eastern nations for fuel anymore.. isnt that good for us?
3. Minor benefits in the short term – Valid point. But then again, we have to start sometime to reap the rich benefits that nuclear power has to offer.. research to make thorium and other sources of energy cheaply available must no doubt go on.. however that doesnt mean that we forego the potential development spree 10 years down the line when nuclear power is mass produced.
4. Water usage in nuclear energy production – Dont agree with your view that water is a depleting resource..
5. Strategically swallowing a bullet – like i said, there are at least 39 countries from which we have 8-10 real options for procuring nuclear fuel. this means competetion and competetion is always good for the customer! Also, the 123 agreement is silent on the issue of what happens if india does uses nuke weapons. So US may stop supplying us with the fuel but nations like russia, france and others will see this as an opportunity to increase their trade benefits and may continue to supply us.
6. Lag in gaining benefits from this deal: As per my reply to point 3.. the ‘best’ should not be the enemy of ‘good’. So we can continue working on other energy sources as nuclear energy is cultivated over th next few years
7. Economic costs – the catch with nuclear enetgy is that the capital cost is high but then again the fuel cost is low. If the suply is constant and uninterrupted, the energy can be produced cheap. india is one of the largest markets for nuclear energy going forward and this is the reason the US and other NSG members have passed this deal and all clearances so quickly…for their own selfish reasons. However if this also means cheap enegy for us, then why not..
8.Alternative energy creation – completely agree with your point however producing nuclear energy does not mean we dont think about alternate sources.. this is merely a big push to a nation where development is stunted due to lack of infrastructure.
9. Safety considerations – again i dont think its a valid point.. its like refusing to build bombs becuase someday some of them might explode in the ammunition factory.. only this is on a larger scale. agreed that there are potential implications however i feel that the bhopal tragedy was like a wake up call to anyone who was oblivious about chemical/nuclear hazards and it will act as a deterent against lax standards beig practiced.

1)what will happen if ties of pipeline between Iran and India brakes. ?

2) you said that their is 50 % chance of obama to become president. what will happen if he not become president ? what will be impact of new American president on India’s nuclear deal ?

3) what do you think of global economy ?

Please reply me on my email id – dear2u.viral@gmail.com