Where do they get their weapons? - Page 2

E61Silver · #11 10-30-2006, 05:19 PM

Seriously man, can't you post about anything else? I swear I think everyone of your posts has been anti-bush, anti-war, something being suspect, other war/political controversy etc. Isn't there something else to talk about

Sponsored Links

GUINNESS · #12 10-30-2006, 05:31 PM

Seriously, talk about something else already... You keep posting these threads and I simply MUST come in AND READ THEM against my will because you are holding an invisible gun to my head FORCING me to read your posts and reply with jibberish!

Tee-Hee

ifly · #13 10-30-2006, 05:38 PM

All I can say is when you have the 5 largest arms manufacturers in the world as the 5 permanent members of the UN security council what better conflict of interest could you ask for?????

If someone can't buy from one then they will buy from another. You also have to remember that a lot of weapons deals actually have to be sanctioned beyond the borders of those countries by the government before they can be shipped. If you check government records on arms sales (the ones they actually admit to) for the last 50 years the USA has actually shipped weapons into the theatres of 85% of the conflicts! The same groups probably bought from the other 4 countries.

Wagner · #14 10-30-2006, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ifly

All I can say is when you have the 5 largest arms manufacturers in the world as the 5 permamnent members of the UN security council what better conflict of interest could you ask for?????

If someone can't buy from one then they will buy from another. You also have to remember that a lot of weapons deals actually have to be sanctioned beyond the borders of those countries by the government before they can be shipped. If you check government records on arms sales (the ones they actually admit to) for the last 50 years the USA has actually shipped weapons into the theatres of 85% of the conflicts! The same groups probably bought from the other 4 countries.

So true!

And Guinness...it's a waste of time brother!!

Eric5273 · #15 10-30-2006, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ifly

All I can say is when you have the 5 largest arms manufacturers in the world as the 5 permamnent members of the UN security council what better conflict of interest could you ask for?????

If someone can't buy from one then they will buy from another. You also have to remember that a lot of weapons deals actually have to be sanctioned beyond the borders of those countries by the government before they can be shipped. If you check government records on arms sales (the ones they actually admit to) for the last 50 years the USA has actually shipped weapons into the theatres of 85% of the conflicts! The same groups probably bought from the other 4 countries.

Keep in mind that while what you say is true with regard to both China and Russia, with regard to the United States the weapons manufacturers are private corporations. They are not government controlled. The government does indeed place restrictions on them. But as we all know, in recent years with the Republicans controlling this country there has been a trend towards less and less government oversight of industry, and thus the military hardware manufacturers have the freedom to pretty much do what they want, with perhaps the exception of selling weapons to Iran, Cuba or North Korea.

In many cases they have actually sold weapons to both sides in a conflict. The Pakistan/India war of the early 1970s comes to mind. In many instances each side shot down their own planes as they all looked the same -- they were all American. They also sold arms to both sides in the Iran/Iraq war.

But from the look of that article I posted, it sounds like perhaps someone is making money on the side by selling American arms to the Iraqi insurgency. Where else could tens of thousands of weapons go? It's not like they are only missing a few.

grasan · #16 10-30-2006, 06:37 PM

I want to know why the Brits have to make the subtle spelling changes..i.e. Taliban v. Taleban. Are they still mad about Yorktown?

ifly · #17 10-30-2006, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grasan

I want to know why the Brits have to make the subtle spelling changes..i.e. Taliban v. Taleban. Are they still mad about Yorktown?

I could very well ask why Americans drive on a Parkway and Park on a Driveway!

I'm not mad about Yorktown and someone must have misspelt Taliban as it is spelt the same in the UK as it is in the US. I'll check again when I get into London Friday but it was spelt the same back in July.

Anyway Yorktown I believe was US and French victory because Clinton forgot to send his 5000 men down a day early. Plus we surrendered and were not defeated (Big difference when you built you're empire on the fact we had a flag and all the countries we occupied did not).

Hope that clears things up, again we are not mad about Yorktown, especially as after the Dutch we are the 2nd largest holder of US assets and still in front of Japan.

grasan · #18 10-30-2006, 07:41 PM

Just kidding. But I do believe our press has been spelling it Taliban. Don't know which is correct...don't really care. Peace.

Sponsored Links