India And The Security Council

Anyone else think it's a mistake to push for having India enter the Security Council before the economic powerhouse of Japan? I think it's completely ludacris Obama is even proposing this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/08/AR2010110800495.html

What do you think?

Good for India. :D

I think it makes sense to let india in before japan..

seeing as india has nuclear weapons and japan doesn't..

India also has a lot bigger population than japan.. india could probably have a bigger effect on the general security of the world than japan would.. would make sense to give them a seat at the table >_>

They will probably let japan into the security council at some point i'm sure.. to do it while kim jong *** (think i spelt that right) is still in control of north korea would probably start a war.

like it or not gotta listen or at least be cautious of crazy people with nukes :o

Ludacris?

Ludicrous.

Meh, let them get a seat they got like over a billion people.

Would need a 7th member though for tie breakers, otherwise everything would be deadlocked.

Ludakrishna.
Special thanks to Aman Singh Saini.

LOL I didn't even notice I spelled it like that. Wow. I'd fix it but now I just find it amusing.


I was thinking that, although nuclear weapons are slightly moot. The US and Russia have over 75% of the nuclear weapons in the world, it's not like we're in any danger. One thermo nuclear weapon has the potential to kill 10,000,000 people and we have about 4,000 of them. Russia is closer to 6,000

My biggest concern is that India still has a strong anti-american group within it. I remember back on 9/11 indian muslims were blowing up churches and anything that looked American. While I think they're a good strategic ally, I think it may be foolish to trust them with the veto power. Potentially, we could give them a position and then have them veto every action we try to take as "wrong".

See there are no real tiebreakers. Each nation has a veto that instantly kills any idea if they so choose. China is all over us with Iran.

That's essentially what China does now.

Oh ***that's right, one veto kills anything. Meh, seems like the U.N. doesn't do much anyway but argue.

Yea I guess my point is that it could only make things worse. The only benefit I could see is if it lets India *** block china instead of us so that we don't have to look like the bad guys.

A billion people and not a single one that speaks *** english when I call tech support :/

Even if India vetoed everything the US wanted (which i highly doubt) id rather have political penis waving in some committee meeting at the UN than with a war.

Seemed to work pretty well for the US and russia during the cold war to make their political grandstands w/o any major conflicts.

Besides, when has the US ever listened to the UN >_>

If the US felt the big bad UN was stopping them from serving justice it would just ignore them.. like they have in the past.

Not saying its right or wrong just how it is.

I suspect is has a lot to do with placating the Indian government after years of spending billions on Pakistan, which until recent oversight (prompting military action into South Waziristan in November of 2009) actually went toward building up its military and positioning it to counter India instead of addressing internal terrorist concerns like the Bush Administration had wanted.