|Aug 05, 2006, 06:50 PM|
Market forces rule, no sorry, US forces rule
I have no love for the sale of arms of any sort by anyone to anyone. I consider for what it is worth that creation, distribution and use of arms is a massive diversion of resources from more worthy uses.
However there appears to be a global market demand for such things and when the global market demands no one should stand in the way of the market, should they. After all the market will somehow sort this all out in a most efficient manner.
So what justifies the US interfering in this market by placing bans on certain market competitors after all US companies sell weapons to a few unsavory characters as well?
Hang on, am I confusing the market with morality or is this an example of market morality anyway what is morality doing in the market.
Moral choices before market forces,or visa versa, what is the answer?
|Aug 06, 2006, 04:56 AM|
Well, do we really want Iran to be buying stuff for nukes, when we are trying to get a UN sanction against them? It is within the rights of the US to use what leverage they can, I suppose.
Having said that, I read where the US supplied fighter jet parts to Iran (among other things), through Israel, of all countries, during the Iran-Iraq war. Supplying both sides in a war could be very lucrative I guess, but what does that do to the foreign policy strategy?
Additionally, what is to keep the suppliers from doing it secretly for the purpose of avoiding the sanctions?
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Dropping US dollar forces changes at WWW.RWDRC.COM||Ron Daniels||Vendor Talk||8||Jan 28, 2005 01:05 AM|