India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka should unite

Pro wishes to continue arguing in the comments section. I would like to point out that this is inappropriate. If my opponent wished to have the last word, he should've said so at the start itself, like other instigators who tell the contenders to leave their final round arguments blank, and not in round 4 as he's doing right now. That being said, I shall now prove conclusively as to WHY THE UNION ISN'T BENEFICIAL. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Rebuttals_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Nuclear warIt's a mistake to think that the only way to prevent a nuclear war between India and Pakistan is to unite the two countries. Nuclear war is something extreme; the odds are low no matter where you go. Even North Korea and Iran would think thrice before acting. Besides, both India and Pakistan are under influence of greater powers, such as the USA. To prevent a drastic step like nuclear mobilization, only the slightest influence is required. I accept that the possibility of nuclear war is nearly zero in the union, but I HARDLY BELIEVE THAT ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF AN ALREADY UNLIKELY EVENT IS REASON ENOUGH TO PUSH FOR SUCH A UNION. -----------------------------------------My opponent speaks of homelessness and injuries in almost the same level as death. Rightly so. For most people, their household is their life, and the dexterity of their limbs is the source of their livelihood. What good is the life of a crippled man, deprived of his self-dependence? Even for those who have temporary injuries, the trauma affects them for the rest of their lives. I am sorry to say this, but this is another extremely appalling and insensitive remark from Pro. As my opponent tries to see his unrealistic dream realized, he continues to overlook the pain and hardships that afflict riot victims. With hard work, and with a bit of government compensation, the homes can be re bought and injuries can be healed. I have only two statements to make here:1. The Indian government is notorious for denying/delaying compensation to those afflicted.2. The government's money won't heal the mental trauma of the victims. .. in some cases BREAD WINNER, dieAnd in some cases, the bread winner is castrated, or his arms are cut off. The outcome is pretty much the same. I dont get why my opponent is being so blunt. ..50,000 homeless is for which riot. .? I speak of the VERY SAME Muzaffarnagar riots, for which the death toll was, in Pro's own words, "not much" compared to previous riots. The figure is mentioned in the source I provided earlier. Less people died = less level of violence and/or less rioters = lowering communal violence. By that logic, if the Mecca or the Vatican is destroyed when few people are around, would that mean the attack was not severe? Pro continues to make more and more insensitive statements. I repeat myself: Pro's indication is that the loss of life is the only parameter by which the severity of violence should be measured, which is extremely wrong. ----------------------------------------Tamil - SinhalesePro has stated that Tamilians in Tamil Nadu don't hate the Sinhalese (Sri Lankans). This is NOT true. . http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...It's not just about fair treatment; hate between TN & SL has its roots in ancient India. LTTE leader Prabhakaran's 12-year old son was brutally murdered after Prabhakaran himself was captured and killed. Contrary to Pro's conception, I'm not failing to appeal to ration; I am recalling outrageous incidents. ----------------------------------------. .it (India's efforts) is certainly better what Pakistan has done to deal with the insurgents. .Better, but certainly NOT ENOUGH. I've made it very clear that India took 40 YEARS to frame an action plan against the Maoists. The Islamist insurgents are just as dangerous, if not more. Besides, Pro himself stated that the other nations in the union are more corrupt than India. IF A CORRUPT INDIA'S EFFORTS ARE NOT ENOUGH, HOW WOULD AN EVEN MORE CORRUPT UNION'S EFFORTS BE ENOUGH? It is true that the union will do a better job of dealing with the insurgents. But what good is it if it's still not enough? ----------------------------------------The tensions (between India & Pakistan) only arose because of the Kashmir dispute, not anything else. Once again, my opponent is WRONG. He fails to mention the Junagadh conflict, and more importantly, THE LIBERATION OF BANGLADESH. . http://en.wikipedia.org...The Kashmir dispute is the biggest cause, but definitely not the ONLY cause of the sour relations between the two nations. And hence, by extension of my earlier argument, the Inter-state disputes will very much be there. ----------------------------------------Bangladesh is one of the poorest countries in the world right now and the economy of the Union can be invested to improve Bangladesh's economy. "Economy of the union"? WHERE would these investments would come from? The answer is, as I've indicated before, NOWHERE. It seems Pro completely ignored my argument about fiscal deficit. The union CANNOT afford to take any loans. As for Bhutan and Nepal. .. proper government investments can be made to develop those countries. If it were only that cheap. Pro argues it isn't a huge strain. He probably didn't even check my source. I extend my argument about fiscal deficit and reiterate my source for the same, once again. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Conclusion__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-Even if the Union is formed, the (Pakistani) muslims have no reason to discontinue their hate towards the Indians. It happened earlier when they WERE, in fact together, and Kashmir was NOT the only reason. -Considering the time and effectiveness of Indian government in dealing with the Maoists, it can be safely established that THE EFFORTS OF THE UNION WILL IN NO WAY BE ENOUGH TO QUELL ISLAMIST INSURGENTS. -The economy of India itself is under tremendous strain, with a huge fiscal deficit and a weakening rupee. There isn't much it can do to help FIVE other nations economically. In any case, overwhelmingly huge manpower, which seems to be a pivotal factor in Pro's argument, DOES NOT GENERATE JOBS ON ITS OWN. -There is a high risk of religious violence increasing, especially between Hindus & Muslims. Ahmedabad knows very well what happens when they're segregated, which Pro thinks is a viable solution. . http://en.wikipedia.org...-Pro's remarks about injuries and loss of property not being a considerable factor in communal violence are appalling and extremely insensitive. Non-fatal injuries can never be disregarded.