It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are the world's arm industries fuelling future conflict?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   
The reason I ask is simple. The armaments industries are there to make weapon systems and sell them to the highest bidder - either their government awards a massive contract and everybody goes away happy, or more often than not, a down-graded weapon system is offered to 'friendly' governments at a knock down price.

Then somebody else comes along and says, 'Hang on! We just sold so and so our best fighter aircraft. It can do such and such. Don't you think we should develope a bigger and better a/c that's able to take it out?'

And so you develope the unbroken circle of design, development, procrurement and eventual deployment.

But is the arms industry fanning the flames of war? Lets face it, apart from the recent Gulf Wars and Afghanistan, there are nowhere else to battletest these weapons.

Anybody else out there share this view and if not, why not? Please explain.




posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
No actually I don't. Because we AREN'T selling our best fighters. There HAS been a lot of advancement during war, but there has also been a lot more during "peace" time. A lot of the weapons systems are developed as counters to other countries equipment. Look at how fast things went when we were "competing" with the USSR during the cold war.

The biggest reason we sell even dumbed down equipment to friendly countries is that these are the people we're going to be fighting a war with. If we sell them versions of our equipment, we have a much better feel of their capabilities when we DO go to war with them. Instead of suddenly saying "Oh wait, how does that work exactly?" if they bring out something new, we can say "Oh, I know what that is, and how to best work with it." And they can also interact with OUR equipment a lot better. For exampe, Japan recently had an exercise with the USAF where they practiced refueling from our tankers, so that if they had to deploy for any reason, they could use our tankers to increase their range. They use versions of our F-15s among others that are license built in Japan.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The biggest reason we sell even dumbed down equipment to friendly countries is that these are the people we're going to be fighting a war with.


The biggest reason to sell weapons is to make profits, as these weapons are produced by "private" companies. Politics only come into the game when decisions are made to what is appropiate to be sold and to whom.

As to the topic, I guess that is a rather difficult question. Industrial lobbying and government interactions surely create a possibility to influence certain stances on international conflicts. But I would rather guess this lobbying is directed at creating a governemnt that is willing to increase military spendings, not directly to go head-on in any confrontation possible.

[edit on 6/7/2005 by Lonestar24]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Its good business to sell other countries weapons. If you dont sell weapons to others you arent making money off them and they'll be weaker than you. if you do sell them weapons then you wont sell them your best because you keep them so you can defend or attack them without failure and make a good few pounds of them at the same time. Then they find out you have new technology so want better weapons so you sell them your old best weapons cause you now have better.

Keep them weak and take their money. A bit like the World Bank is doing with 3rd world debt. Keep the countries weak enough that they cant pay the whole loan but only the interest and they can never stop paying and you will be rich.

[edit on 6-7-2005 by soapydodger]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Except that the final decision of who we sell what to isn't made by the contractor. They can APPLY to sell equipment to another country/military, but the final decision is made by the government as to whether or not it is actually sold to them.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Except that the final decision of who we sell what to isn't made by the contractor. They can APPLY to sell equipment to another country/military, but the final decision is made by the government as to whether or not it is actually sold to them.


three words. Britain, supergun, Iraq.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join