US leads world in arms sales, especially to unstable, undemocratic regions

[seafan]

New Congress, are you going to stop this insanity? If you do not take a stand against these war makers, it is a good chance our troops and/or citizens will be facing down these same weapons in the not so distant future.

These people are about creating and maintaining chaos around the world, while channeling unbridled wealth to themselves at the expense of all living things.



US is top purveyor on weapons sales list

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff
November 13, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The United States last year provided nearly half of the weapons sold to militaries in the developing world, as major arms sales to the most unstable regions -- many already engaged in conflict -- grew to the highest level in eight years, new US government figures show.


According to the annual assessment, the United States supplied $8.1 billion worth of weapons to developing countries in 2005 -- 45.8 percent of the total and far more than second-ranked Russia with 15 percent and Britain with a little more than 13 percent.
Arms control specialists said the figures underscore how the largely unchecked arms trade to the developing world has become a major staple of the American weapons industry, even though introducing many of the weapons risks fueling conflicts rather than aiding long-term US interests.


The report was compiled by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.
"We are at a point in history where many of these sales are not essential for the self-defense of these countries and the arms being sold continue to fuel conflicts and tensions in unstable areas," said Daryl G. Kimball , executive director of the nonpartisan Arms Control Association in Washington. "It doesn't make much sense over the long term."
--snip
A study last year by the progressive World Policy Institute found that the United States transferred weaponry to 18 of the 25 countries involved in an ongoing war.


snip

Meanwhile, more than half of the countries buying US arms -- 13 of the 25 -- were defined as undemocratic by the State Department's annual Human Rights Report, including top recipients Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Uzbekistan.
--snip
"We are creating our own market by selling to both sides of regional conflicts," Bouse said.
With more such lucrative deals in the offing, there is little sign that the United States -- or other major suppliers -- wants a treaty to control the sales.


"The US would be significantly affected if there was an arms treaty that took into account human rights abuses and conflict areas," added William Hartung , director of the Arms Trade Resource Center at the World Policy Institute in New York. "The US government still wants to be able to do covert and semi-covert arms transfers. And a certain amount of it is simply keeping factories running in certain congressional districts."

[jwirr]

1. This is Ike Eisenhower's nightmare come true.

[seafan]

2. A kick for arms treaties on the Democratic agenda in 2007 and beyond.

When the defense/military industrial industry in this country sells deadly weapons to anyone, not for legitimate defensive reasons, but purely for economical reasons of fattening the weapons manufacturers' coffers, it is no different than North Korea's missile trade, including related materials, components and technology, to rogue nations and/or actors, at the expense of the safety of everyone in the region.


This senseless warring mindset will turn into a death march for all of us if we do not stop it.

[Romulus]

3. one question

Is this "45.8 percent" based on:

Number of weapons sold?

or is it based on the

Dollar amount of sales?

An AK-47 variant is pretty cheap to produce, especially compared to a $15-18mill F-16, an $18mill Apache helicopter, a $4.3mill M1A1 tank, an $18K JDAM, or a $600 M16.

Examples from the article:

The United States, for instance, also signed an estimated $6.2 billion worth of new deals last year to sell attack helicopters, missiles, and other armaments to developing nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, India, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Developing nations are designated as all those except in North America, Western Europe, Russia, Australia, and New Zealand. . . .

One such example is the recent decision to sell F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan.

[seafan]

4. Based on the dollar amount of worldwide arms sales, it appears.

Here is a helpful graphic linked in the article:



http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/11/13/us_is_top_purveyor_on_weapons_sales_list/?page=full



Here is what I take from this:

Out of $25.4 Billion in total worldwide arms sales, the US leads by far, selling $11.6 Billion worldwide, which is 45.7% of that total.

And out of $17.7 Billion in sales just to developing countries, the US also leads overwhelmingly, selling $8.1 Billion of the total, which is 45.76%.



And a few more notable points:


The US sends 45.8% of all its arms sales to developing countries.

Next is Russia, sending 15% of all its arms sales to developing countries.

Next is the UK, sending 13% of all its arms sales to developing countries.

France, China, Germany, other European nations, and all other nations send 7% or less of their weapons sales to developing countries. (So, we can take this to mean that these countries sell most of their arms to developed countries, which seems more likely that the majority of the weapons will be used for actual defense purposes.)

Italy sends no weapons to developing countries.



So, as the rubber meets the road, the US is world leader in arms sales to countries that are undergoing wars, other turmoil, and engage in undemocratic and, at times, genocidal acts. This, people, is why many people in the world have intense hatred for what our government has done and is doing.