On May 3, 9:27 am, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" <urj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Very good, even if not satire. :)
>
> vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > On Apr 29, 4:30 am, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >> Actually didn't Russia just become the world's number 1 arms
ex****ter?
>
> > Not according to you. You have been bragging for years that Russian
> > arms ex****ts are useless and worthless; and India and all other
> > Russian customers are switching to US-made weapons.
>
> > But in reality, yes, Russian ars ex****ts are soaring, because Russian
> > arms, just like Russian space ****ps, are much more relaible and less
> > expensive than American ex****ts.
>
> One undiscussed yet very basic problem is that weapons reliability
> can only be determined from their use. So bragging about reliability
> means bragging about the results of their use. And the use of weapons
> is to kill, maim, destroy.
>
Well, if your point is that modern American bomber planes, misiles,
and guns have been extensively tested and proved reliable in the
killing, maiming, and destroying of Yugoslavs, Panmanians, Haitians,
Afghanis, and Iraqis (twice) - OK. Indeed, USA managed to conquer
all these countries, suffering probably 1000 times fewer casualties
than did their victim countries.
On the other hand, if we speak of space crafts, Russian crafts dont't
kill, maim, destroy. The American crafts do kill, maim, destroy.
Sadly, they do that to their own astronaut passengers... That's why
Russian space craft are much more reliable than American ones.
But you are wrong to think that the only way to test the reliability
of a weapon is through actual "killing, maiming, and destroying".
How can I explain to you so that you would understand....I guess I
will pretend that I am talking to my 6-year-old daughter... You see,
child, most of the gun shots, made in the World, are not aimed at
human. They are aimed at targets, as tens of millions of soldiers and
policemen throughout the World shoot probably billions of bullets per
day in training and target shooting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_shooting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recruit_training
Similarly, the reliability of aircraft can be judged through peaceful
flights. In fact, hundreds of thousands of pilots around the World
ac***ulate millions of flight hours per day:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_pilots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_training
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_force
>
> >> But Russia is not selling its arms to children or to college
students,
> > like US manufacturers, whose guns are then used to commit mass murders
> > like Columbine or Virginia Tech.
>
> How about all those child soldiers armed with Kalashnikovs and machetes
> in Africa? :) <-- cynical & sarcastic, not funny smiley
>
I am not sure what you want from Russians. Russians don't sell their
guns to civilians. Like in all other European countries, civilains are
forbidden from using guns.
In USA, the gun lobby has made sure that any kook can own a gun and
commit mass murder the way they did in Columbine and Virginia Tech.
As far as sales to Africa and other theird other countries are
concerned, these sales are made to governments, not children. What the
governments do with these weapons, is their responsibility, not that
of the manufacturer. BTW, US manufacturers ex****t more arms than
Russian ones, including machine and other guns.
//////////////////////////////
http://www.fas.org/asmp/fast_facts.htm
Federation of American Scientists
Fast Facts
Since 1992, the United States has ex****ted more than $142 billion
dollars worth of weaponry to states around the world.[1] The U.S.
dominates this international arms market, supplying just under half of
all arms ex****ts in 2001, roughly two and a half times more than the
second and third largest suppliers. [2 ] U.S. weapons sales help
outfit non-democratic regimes, soldiers who commit gross human rights
abuses against their citizens and citizens of other countries, and
forces in unstable regions on the verge of, in the middle of, or
recovering from conflict.
U.S.-origin weapons find their way into conflicts the world over. The
United States supplied arms or military technology to more than 92% of
the conflicts under way in 1999.[3] The costs to the families and
communities afflicted by this violence is immeasurable.
As re****ted by Richard Grimmett of the Congressional Research Service
(in "Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations, 1994-2001"),
U.S. weapons sales for 2001 accounted for 45.8% of all registered
international arms deliveries. This was roughly than 2.5 times the
value of ex****ts by the second (United Kingdom) and third (Russia)
largest ex****ters, 9.7 times the level of ex****ts registered by
France, and 19 times the level of ex****ts registered by China.
The United States military has had to face troops previously trained
by its own military or supplied with U.S. weaponry in Panama, Iraq,
Somalia, Haiti, and now in Afghanistan. Due to the advanced
capabilities these militaries have acquired from past U.S. training
and sales, the U.S. had to invest much more money and manpower in
these conflicts than would have otherwise been needed.
Military Training: The U.S. government is training soldiers in upwards
of 70 countries at any given time. The most transparent, and
consequently well known of these training programs is the Pentagon's
International Military Education and Training Program (IMET). Recent
graduates as well as soldiers soon to be trained by this program come
from countries at war or with horrific human rights records, including
Indonesia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Congo, and Cote d'Ivoire.
The Defense Industry
Top defense contractors (including sales to both U.S. government and
foreign buyers):[13]
FY2001:
1. Lockheed Martin Corp.: $17 billion
2. Boeing Co.: $16.6 billion
3. Northrop Grumman Co.: $8.7 billion
4. Raytheon: $7.0 billion
5. General Dynamics Co.: $7.0 billion
6. United Technologies Co.: $3.6 billion
7. Science Applications International: $2.1 billion
8. TRW Inc.: $2.0 billion
9. Health Net, Inc.: $1.7 billion
10. L-3 Communications Holding, Inc.: $1.7 billion
One reason the defense industry has such influence in our government
is because of federal campaign contributions. Past industry
contributions as re****ted by the Federal Election Commission and
presented by the Center for Responsive Politics:[14]
2002 Election Cycle (to date): $7.2 million
2000 Election Cycle: $13.6 million
1998 Election Cycle: $10.6 million
Top Lobbyists for 2000 Election Cycle:
Lockheed Martin ($2.38 million)
General Dynamics ($1.2 million)
Conflicts
Of the active conflicts in 1999, the United States supplied arms or
military technology to parties in more than 92% of them -- 39 out of
42.
Nevertheless, the United States has a consistent record of giving
military aid and weapons to governments that engage in serious human
rights abuses, including Uzbekistan, Colombia, and Turkey. The U.S.
government has also aided military governments. Pakistan, whose
government was overthrown by a military coup in 1999, has been
receiving emergency military aid as one of the U.S.'s new allies in
the war on terror after a special law was passed waiving the military
coup rule for two years.
///////////////////////////////
>
> > Moreover, Russia ***ex****ts*** its weapons. Thus, it doesn't arm
> > itself to the teeth. In fact, Russia spends 25 times less money on its
> > military (defence) than USA spends on its military (offence and
> > aggression). Last year, USA spent more on the military than the rest
> > of the Wiorld combined, and in the next couple of years, it is likely
> > to spend twice as much as the rest of the World, as Gates has asked
> > the Congress to enlarge US army and marines spending in order to fight
> > conventional wars against "Russia, China, North Korea and Iran."
>
> Hmmm. So you consider it a good to _***ex****t***_ the means of waging
> wars and killing?
>
Actually, I do sup****t the ex****t of defence weapons to rsponsible
governments. But if you don't - then you should give up your job, move
to Wa****ngton, DC and stage demostrations, carry signs "Stop the
Slaughters in Iraq!", go on hunger strikes and flag burnings in front
of the US Capitol, demanding that the Congressmen stop taking money
from the US weapons manufacturers and forbid the ex****t of Ameircan
guns and weapons to other countries.
Or do you enjoy a double standard: you disapprove of the sales of
Russian-made "means of waging wars and killing", but are in favor of
the sale of US--made "means of waging wars and killing"? A typical
American stance.
>
> >> But Russia spends less money on defence than even Britain or the
peace-
> > loving France.
>
> > By ex****ting its arms to Latin America and India, Russia doesn't
> > threaten the World, while US spends its own money on arming itself in
> > order to be able to invade and occupy many countries at the same
> > time.
>
> > Finally, by ex****ting its arms, Russia gains wealth, while USA wastes
> > about $1 trillion of hard-earned taxpayer money a year on its own
> > warmongwering, making the Americans poor, making USA the debtor at the
> > mercy of China, and leading the US economy to a total collapse very
> > soon.
>
> >
> Ahh yes, Praises of Russia for profiteering from weapons sales. :)
>
The term is "profiting" not "profiteering".
If you think that the manufacture and sale of arms is wrong, then stop
taking cheap shots at a country on the opposite side of the Globe from
you Russia - and instead protest the US "profiteering" from arms sales
and manufacture, both by selling them to foreign cluntries and by
robbing US taxpayers to the tune of close to $1 trillion per year on
the projects of manufacturing weapons of ""killing, maiming, and
destroying" and then using them against populations of foreign
countries.
>
>
> > On the good side, the Exxon, Halliburton and Lokheed owners are very
> > happy with the way their puppets in the US government make them and
> > themselves rich at the expence of average Americans.- Hide quoted text
-
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
