so if you stab someone with a ginsu is the knife maker "an enabler" of the crime?
better yet what about the scientists that developed nuclear fission. Is he/them "enablers" of the bombings of Japan?
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
Are you suggesting the U.S. is the only maker of mines in the world? My point is many in this thread seem willing to point the finger at anyone other than the U.S. Does anyone have any proof that the majority of kids killed by mines are killed by mines produced by the U.S.?
Should we be holding Obama criminally responsible for not stopping these sales of weapons who kill children?
DivideBYZero
Lifer
- May 18, 2001
- 24,117
- 2
- 0
OK, now that is out of the way, notice that I only used that example as that was what you were concerned about, US made mines, so I used that in my example.
As for the 'Knife' manufacturer defence from another poster, let me present it another way; Why imprison the Drug dealer for supplying Crack? It's not his fault the user OD'd. Or is it...at least in part. Yeah, that's right.
The drug dealer is imprisoned for the illegal sale of a banned substance not for the result of the substance he is pushing (ie crackheads OD'ing).
If a user OD's on illegal drugs how many drug dealers are tried for murder?
I'm questioning the motive in only seemingly implying that U.S. makes mines that kill children. Is there ANY proof that the majority of mines used around the world are U.S. made? Is there ANY proof that U.S. companies are making mines and supplying them to countries with a known history of using them against non-combatants?
The problem with your 'drug dealer' analogy is that crack by its nature is illegal. Knifes, bullets, mines, etc. Are not. Do you hold the bullet manufacturers responsible for murders? Of course not. Do you hold a guy who in his garage produces armor piercing bullets and gives them to criminals responsible? YES. See the difference there?
Now if there is some proof that the U.S. is purposely selling things like mines to countries who are purposely using them against innocent poeple.. I'd love to see that. Otherwise it seems like a bunch of America bashing while ignoring the people who are truly responsible.
DivideBYZero
Lifer
- May 18, 2001
- 24,117
- 2
- 0
Patranus
Diamond Member
- Apr 15, 2007
- 9,280
- 0
- 0
I think it is funny when I read articles about arms exports and then read related articles about other countries complaining about weapons illegally entering their country. One such example that has been in the news recently is that of weapons trafficking into Mexico from the USA. What I find interesting is that the Mexican authorities think that it is the responsibility of USA government to control these illegal exports. All these other countries want the USA to "take responsibility" for these weapons but don't feel the need to secure their borders and control their illegal exports such as assisting in the control of illegal immigrants.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
In terms of land mines and children, once planted, the mine remains active for decades or maybe even centuries.
So long after the conflict in which the mine may have been needed is long over, its still killing the hapless who simply happen to step on it.
At least maybe a treaty could require the use of a clock that deactivates the land mine after a period of time.
And to the USA's somewhat great fortune two decades later, those stinger missiles we gave to freedom fighters were quite useless when the freedom fighters turned into what they had been all along, namely terrorists. Simple because the battery packs we sold to power them ran down, lost their charge, and because the design was entirely proprietary, those battery packs could not be simply replaced. Meaning the missile system no longer worked to be used against Nato troops.
So long after the conflict in which the mine may have been needed is long over, its still killing the hapless who simply happen to step on it.
At least maybe a treaty could require the use of a clock that deactivates the land mine after a period of time.
And to the USA's somewhat great fortune two decades later, those stinger missiles we gave to freedom fighters were quite useless when the freedom fighters turned into what they had been all along, namely terrorists. Simple because the battery packs we sold to power them ran down, lost their charge, and because the design was entirely proprietary, those battery packs could not be simply replaced. Meaning the missile system no longer worked to be used against Nato troops.
They're going to buy weapons from someone, might as well be us. But I guess you think that if people couldn't buy guns and bombs they wouldn't kill each other?
Or would you prefer Russia and China to make more money by arming the world.
But of course this is the internet, so you have to be on a moral high horse.
So by your logic, If some one kills someone else while drunk driving, you should be able to sue 1. Jack Daniels, 2. The maker of the glass the drinks were in, the transportation company that moved the booze from Jack Daniels to the bar, the bar tender, Honda for making the car, Shell for making the gasoline that helped the car go, Toyo for making the tires.
Where does it end? It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. The only person responsible for the death is the country that used the mines.
Hahaha, How high is your moral horse?
You are discussing morality, we are discussing REALITY.
Morals can only sustain you for some long until reality punches you in the face and you wake up and see the world for what it really is.
Might as well become a contract killer then - someone's gotta do it. Might as well sell nukes too. Who cares what they do with them. Personal responsibility, like you said.
Why the country? Why not just the actual person who layed the mine? Personal responsibility.
So essentially, what you're saying is, that you hate people?
/edit: and BTW that 'liberal' in your sig should be 'socialist'. Get your facts right.
Your logic is poor. You offer no solution at all, as well.
First, there are some conflicts the US sells to that no one would replace us in selling (what nation was going to sponsor the death squads in El Salvador, the Contra terrorists in Nicaragua, the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, supply arms and training for the brutal police forces of the Shah in Iran, for Pinochet in Chile, as just a few examples?
Second, if we weren't the top profiteer of arms for massive violence in the world, we could be leading the effort to prevent such large arms sales.
Third, yes, the arms sales do lead to increased violence. They allow more people to kill more efficiently - and the ones who are the worst much of the time, the ones who are not winning politically because they lack popular support because they're thuggish warlords, but arms let them kill and terrorize the people and get power.
Our morals on arms sales are not much better than a drug dealer's morals on drug sales.
They mean money, employment, votes, tax revenue, and people don't worry about the violence.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
I don't blame you at all, but you should let your closest allies know when they get into territories that YOU have sent them into and that YOU have armed.
I'm never going to make any excuses if the deal about Libya is true, not one chance, all i can say is that i'd expect nothing less from Gordon Brown and his ilk.
The rest of the hyperbole and insults, well fuck you, go work for your masters in Saudi Arabia, you know, those who have been sending aid to the Taliban and you helped them do it.
Fuck off.
DivideBYZero
Lifer
- May 18, 2001
- 24,117
- 2
- 0
Attack the post, not the poster, n00b.
In your world if it is legal it's OK? So, if your nation of birth had laws stating it was legal to shoot a baby in the face once a year, that would be OK? Extreme example, yes, but just because something is legal, it does NOT mean it is automatically right.
It's also pretty sad that you consider anything relating to morality is soft or dumb and that reality will 'punch me in the face'. Maybe you should consider that maybe you're not a very nice person, that you consider a violent society to be acceptable. Maybe you could mandate that every person gets a swift kick in the shins once a month to toughen them up? Would that be cool? Why not run around arguing with everyone you meet, giving yourself an ulcer, road raging, fighting, murdering. After all, that's what the world is really like, eh? Or maybe it isn't and you live in an angry little bubble behind your keyboard and secretly wish you had the stones to do anything of any worth.
Suck on THAT reality.
Something has to pay for Obama's drunken spending. We can only print money and buy our own bonds for so long.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Public oversight. It exists in pretty much every other nation except NK and Iran. Hell even Russia has it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter