Weapons as diplomacy

bamf

bamf

Is Watching You
Retired Staff
MBTI
Meh
Enneagram
Meh
I've read about it before, and done a little research on the subject, but for some reason it kinda struck me today when reading through The New York Times. The US government just announced a 5 billion dollar arms deal with Taiwan. They're doing it, in part, to force China to act in a way they want them to. Selling arms to 'produce' diplomacy seems rather snarky to me.

I know it happens around the world, and that countries make bank on selling arms...but doesn't it seem somewhat wrong to anyone else? I mean...war profiteering, and arms profiteering? Blah. Me no likes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/world/asia/01china.html?ref=todayspaper
 
I don't know much. I don't like to read about war, but it is a bit silly, everyone selling arms to each other. I'd like it more if they involved some deal of craftsmanship. Nice swords, for example, like in Highlander, the TV series, where each immortal had a sword that reflected his or her background/culture. If countries were doing swapsies with ornamental swords, that would be better. The first country to collect all the different kinds of swords wins a meet and greet with Christopher Lambert.There can be only one!
 
  • Like
Reactions: acd
China ought to demand their money back from the USA if the US is going to attempt to bully them like this.
 
Shai Gar said:
China ought to demand their money back from the USA if the US is going to attempt to bully them like this.
Click to expand...
Despite living in the US, I agree with you. If we're going to play international relations like it's a school-yard game, some day we'll get what's coming to us.
 
And then the U.S. would take would stop buying goods from China.
 
so would theirs, thats why it's not going to happend with either.

And even then whats to stop U.S. companies to moving to another country (somewhere in Africa maybe) and getting cheep goods and labor.

Our economies are interdepedant. Also, if China demanded their money back, Obama would probably just say no in a very eloquent way.
 
Barnabas said:
so would theirs, thats why it's not going to happend with either.

And even then whats to stop U.S. companies to moving to another country (somewhere in Africa maybe) and getting cheep goods and labor.

Our economies are interdepedant. Also, if China demanded their money back, Obama would probably just say no in a very eloquent way.
Click to expand...
Exactly. We know China won't ask for their money back, and so we can get away with international bullying by selling arms to Taiwan. We want China's support/backing in Iran, and we want China to be harsher against Iran. China wants us to agree to Copenhagen agreements on climate control. However, we hold the upper-hand in the current arms dealing...Personally I find it wrong to use weapons to Taiwan as a way to push China in our direction.

But that's just my two-cents. There is definitely room for opposing opinions.
 
I wish I could find the actual quote but here's a paraphrase of it:

while private arms dealers do a lot of business; the five largest arms exporters – the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China – are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
~Lord of War
Click to expand...

However fictitious, the quote still stands. Arms dealing is here to stay and it is global policy.
 
kavalan said:
I wish I could find the actual quote but here's a paraphrase of it:



However fictitious, the quote still stands. Arms dealing is here to stay and it is global policy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I realize it's here to most likely stay, but it still makes my stomach turn. The Security Council essentially sells warfare under the guise of diplomacy. I just don't like it.
 
mf said:
Yeah, I realize it's here to most likely stay, but it still makes my stomach turn. The Security Council essentially sells warfare under the guise of diplomacy. I just don't like it.
Click to expand...

The only thing I could see ending this cycle would be another world war and the dissolving of the UN... Simply put the bureaucratic BS does little good in the system that is biased towards western nations. It isn't a UN but a 5 nation circle jerk.
 
mf said:
Exactly. We know China won't ask for their money back, and so we can get away with international bullying by selling arms to Taiwan. We want China's support/backing in Iran, and we want China to be harsher against Iran. China wants us to agree to Copenhagen agreements on climate control. However, we hold the upper-hand in the current arms dealing...Personally I find it wrong to use weapons to Taiwan as a way to push China in our direction.

But that's just my two-cents. There is definitely room for opposing opinions.
Click to expand...

agreed, I've just always enjoyed the big stick policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top