Thursday, August 17, 2006

Invulnerable to attack?

Dr Kalam, India's president reckons that India must make itself "invulnerable to attack". I am sure the statement was made with all the best intentions, but I must note that the world would be better off if India remained the one sixteenth super-power it already is.

Let' s face it. There's way too many bombs with the US, Russia and China. If they ever decide to attack us with them, then we're done for. Unless, of course, we build our own. But we're a small nation (at least in size). We're not that rich. If we ever manage to top these nations in Nuclear weapons (or at least get ourselves enough to make them think twice before they do the nuclear thing), then we would have spent an immense amount of money. Money that our poor nation call ill afford to spend. Money that could be spent in, say, building better roads and intersections.

I personally believe that we should not even plan for defending ourseleves against these nations. We should focus on becoming an economic superpower. An active trading partner that these nations can ill afford to fight with. Of course, we must fight with the terrorists. We must have good intellegence. The LET and the Maoists would be itching to get their hands on the bombs, for one.

Presidents are not elected directly. The constitution gives them almost no power. They just live in a large house and consume as many resources as the average American. India feeds its ego by feeding a figurehead with luxury that the normal person cannot even concieve. Indian presidents' opinions do not matter in the policy arena, as the recent "office of profit" episode has shown. Aren't we wasting an engineer of Dr Kalam's caliber in the Rashtrapathi Bhawan?


Arunn said...

Yes, i agree with the view that we shouldn't proliferate our arms, leave alone the nuclear type. Gun begets gun begets more gun...

Dr. Kalam made HIS decision for whatever reason he thought he could contribute... say, giving inspirational talks to children, the so called 'future of india'; riding war planes and submarines; making a friendly gesture from time to time to the 'common man' of india by sending greetings cards and small donations signed "from the president of india", etc., the list is endless on what a president of our beloved india can contribute to...

We have no say in his decision.

For that matter, whoever wanted or requested him to take up the figure-head throne didn't have a say in HIS decision for saying a YES or a NO.

I leave it at that for the moment.

BTW, why the seeming sudden dip in the blograte of yours? What happened abt. your technical posts at the other blogs? what happened with the third world tomorrow?

visit and let me know of what you think. comment there or write to me...a contribution on temporary or more permanent terms from you is alwyas welcome there at techbiz - read the FAQ (i know, i am sounding almost like those religious ticket sellers...but i don't mind doing it with you...;)

Akhilesh said...

Been a bit "busy" of late.
A new post is on the verge of coming up.
I've sort of abandoned thirworld tomorrow for now ... perhaps due to the rather caustic comments ... I think I will start posting again .... after all, if one has an original idea, then one must be prepared to be laughed at.

Arunn said...

Don't be put off. Try working/writing for your own. If comments distract you, close them down completely. If viewership itself distracts you, restrict subscribed viewers alone. But kindly don't stop writing/thinking technical posts...

I like what you write. I don't comment always...I will from now on...;)

Did u check with U wanna contribute? Send me an email to me.

Anonymous said...


Firstly, every Indian wants to see his country as an econimic superpower. The reason is very obvious. This will make every Indian economically sound. The roads, the intersections, education etc. etc are the duties of the government. These have to be provided at any cost, don't they? So what's the next thing the government has to do? Military/Nuclear superiority will,

1. Get India respect in the world.
2. Perhaps Pakistan will think twice before another 'Kargil.'
3. And the next time U.S. decides on bringing down Afghanistan or Iraq, we can help.

Agreed, these things are easier said than done. But if for all our lives we are going to struggle to provide the basic amenities to the our people when will we be a force to reckon with. And isn't protection a basic amenity too?

Akshay (Tushar's pal @ IIT, Bombay)

Akhilesh said...


I could not disagree more with you!

1. Get India respect in the world.

Do you respect Japan? I do. Everybody does. And they don't have an army that is authorized to attack.
Only economic development will get India respect. And frankly, I don't care if we don't get respect from the rest of the world. I just want everyone in the world to be happy, especially Indians.

2. Perhaps Pakistan will think twice before another 'Kargil.'

I don't want to get into what happened in Kargil.... because I don't know what happened. Why should I assume the Indian media is unbiased in what it reports. By the very fact that it is an Indian entity, it surrenders any notion of neutrality.

I think it is really unfortunate that so many innocent soldiers and misguided armed "militants" had to die. (I think anyone who is armed is misguided!)

3. And the next time U.S. decides on bringing down Afghanistan or Iraq, we can help.

America "brought down" both the countries (Iraq, specifically) in a very ugly and, well, unjustified way. Saddam was no worse than Laloo.

And India will never help! India did not even send troops to Iraq.

You seem to have an RSS / Right wing ideology. It is interesting to correspond with someone who thinks that way. I have got fed up of hearing the American right wing here all the time. A pleasant change to talk to some Indian right wingers.

I'm left leaning. And I believe I'm right! (Pls. forgive the pun)

Bloody nukes will never protect us. They will feed nationalistic Jingoism, a very economically dangerous force.

"The roads, the intersections, education etc. etc are the duties of the government. These have to be provided at any cost, don't they?"

No. They are not. The government should act as a watch-dog, not as a provider. Primarily because it is utterly incompetent in doing so... the government should enable a free market and make sure it is not exploitative. And also make sure that the poor get their fair share.

India should not ape the US. The US has more resources than India. We're better off looking at Japan and Scandinavian Welfare states which have done a better job of balancing resources... especially japan. It's population densities are comparable to India... and it's economy, well, is larger than India's!