<vkarlamov@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1178259327.634091.231170@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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.
>
MMMmmm...how so? Wasn't it the Russian R4 that blew up on the launch pad
and
killed 200 people? Then of course there was the very spectacular N-1 moon
rocket explosions. Russia has dead astronauts too. And of course just
about
every planet in the solar system is littered with rocket probes that
failed.
> 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 -
>
>
|
