Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

[Soomro]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

Pakistan would be much better too (it was before the eighties) if it had a population of 70-80 million like Iran!

[Sadiyah]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@nikhil25

they want a united global non-cooperation attitude with Iran in opposition to its nuclear ambitions to send a message.

no, they don't have to worry. Iran has plenty of natural gas with the second-largest proven gas reserves in the world.

Thank you for the clarification. I forgot it's the nation that is all about 'me me me!' at the expense of others.

If such a pipeline is to bring about prosperity and peace amongst the nations in the geographical region, then why not? I say go for it.

On a side note, don't forget natural resources aren't infinite. I guess that was the attitude of majority about fresh water, and now we aren't left with that many fresh water reservoirs.

[nikhil25]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@Sadiyah

Thank you for the clarification. I forgot it’s the nation that is all about ‘me me me!’ at the expense of others.

If such a pipeline is to bring about prosperity and peace amongst the nations in the geographical region, then why not? I say go for it.

that is basically what the Indians and Pakistanis said in response to the US disapproval…it will be the biggest confidence-builder in a tense region and more importantly, what other option is there? if the US cannot offer a viable alternative, then they really shouldn’t be asking for them not to do the deal.

[Prince_Abbas]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

nikhil:

[quote]
it will be the biggest confidence-builder in a tense region
[/quote]

Solving the Kashmir dispute is the biggest confidence-building measure.

[nikhil25]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@Prince Abbas

nikhil:

Solving the Kashmir dispute is the biggest confidence-building measure.

that is not realistic in the short-term.

[Prince_Abbas]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

Why not? When and how would it be realistic in the long term?

Or was the above answer just given to evade the solution of this dispute?

[nikhil25]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@Prince Abbas

Why not? When and how would it be realistic in the long term?

Or was the above answer just given to evade the solution of this dispute?

more confidence-building measures like the pipeline project need to be successful before there is enough trust to move forward on the kashmir issue.

[Prince_Abbas]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

If, for some reason, the pipeline project does not gets forward, does this mean that Bharat-Mata will not agree to solve Kashmir dispute?

What trust does Mata-ji need to resolve an issue? What is Mata-ji afraid of?

But I honestly think this pipe-line project should go on. It will give Pakistan more control over Bharata.

[elahi]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

Interesting that the Ameicans would have approved the deal. I wonder why?

[MALIK_786]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@NameInUse

Yes indeed, the devil is in the details. The biggest detail you forget is that Pakistan and Iran are extremely unstable. Pipelines are being blown up daily in Pakistan and Iran is under threat of UN sanctions and possible hostile action. This makes for any deal, especially one with great economic impact, unlikely and unwise. You contention that India can only move forward on natural gas coming from Pakistan is incorrect. India can maintain staus quo, in terms of import, and move future electric power generation to nuclear power and hydroelectric power. The fact still remains, Pakistan as a source for Indian power is becoming more unnecessary.

You have'nt really answered any of my questions.
If you read above you'll note I never implied that a pipeline through Iran + Pakistan is your only option for NG imports - I dont know this to be true, but I suspect it probably is or it would'nt even be on the table.
My only contention is from a strictly technical stand point that your comments are misleading; i.e. "Use nuclear power instead of NG" may sound like a reasonable statement but is technically and realistically impractical. Anything else is independant of this fact.

[NameInUse]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@MALIK_786

You have'nt really answered any of my questions. If you read above you'll note I never implied that a pipeline through Iran + Pakistan is your only option for NG imports - I dont know this to be true, but I suspect it probably is or it would'nt even be on the table. My only contention is from a strictly technical stand point that your comments are misleading; i.e. "Use nuclear power instead of NG" may sound like a reasonable statement but is technically and realistically impractical. Anything else is independant of this fact.

India is negotiated a deal with Burma for a natural gas pipeline that does not go out of the boundaries of the two countries. The deal has now been fast tracked.
The Indian President recently concluded a trip to Burma where the deal was solidified.
Perhaps, to be more clear, I should have said: Nuclear power can provide much of the energy demands that natural gas was slated for. Areas where natural gas, and natural gas intermediaries cannot be substituded easily, another transit route, than Pakistan, can be found.
The pipeline, through Pakistan, now with the nuclear deal, is lot less interesting an idea.

[MALIK_786]

Re: Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline

@NameInUse

India is negotiated a deal with Burma for a natural gas pipeline that does not go out of the boundaries of the two countries. The deal has now been fast tracked. The Indian President recently concluded a trip to Burma where the deal was solidified. Perhaps, to be more clear, I should have said: Nuclear power can provide much of the energy demands that natural gas was slated for. Areas where natural gas, and natural gas intermediaries cannot be substituded easily, another transit route, than Pakistan, can be found. The pipeline, through Pakistan, now with the nuclear deal, is lot less interesting an idea.

If you'd said this in the first place, I wouldnt have had to argue with you for 2 pages.