We Must Support The Missile Defense Initiative

Posted on Wednesday, October 20 at 12:05 by harrisp
Let’s be clear: weapons, and their proliferation, are big-ticket items and we have hitherto failed to get in on this lucrative trade in any meaningful way. We need to take a lead from our friendly neighbours to the south and start making a few bucks off the senseless killing of people. The United States invaded Iraq to locate and capture Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Since they couldn’t find any, and since the U.S. refuses to accept Iraq’s claims that the weapons were all destroyed pursuant to United Nations resolutions, they must have been sold or given away to someone else. Common sense dictates that they were given away, since weapons make such great gifts. What better time to start our new adventure in weapons trading than at the end of another year with its approaching holiday season. Not only should we get into the weapons business, but we should do it with gusto and encourage all the nations of the world to buy their weapons from us. Lots of them. With the holidays coming, we can position them to move off the shelves quickly, customers can exchange them amongst their friends in the time-honoured ritual, or use them for surprise gift-giving. Weapons make great presents and it’s hard to think of anyone who wouldn’t be pleased to receive a sporty new weapon from a friend, or even as a surprise from people they hardly know. They’re the ideal gift for that hard-to-shop-for nation, there’s a great supply of them in every shape and colour and potency imaginable, and usually you don’t have to worry about wrapping them. A caution, though: if you do send them to some other nation as surprise gifts, be sure you know what you’re buying because the vendor usually won’t take them back if the recipient doesn’t like them. International trade in weapons has never been better and there is almost nothing that can’t be bought with enough money. And we all know that when money talks, nobody criticizes its accent. Weapons are finding their way to the world’s Malls of Mayhem these days from exciting new sources. It used to be that you could only count on a few reliable suppliers like Britain and the United States; but now it’s definitely a buyers’ market. Following the breakup of the former Soviet Union, one of its former states has become an active and sizeable exporter of fine weaponry: Belarus. Please don’t be concerned that Belarus has a hard-line leadership which had close ties to Hussein’s Iraq and several other not-so-nice nations. In the spirit of globalization, many arms manufacturers have decentralized their operating facilities. For instance, there is a particularly effective German assault rifle that is now manufactured in seventeen countries, most of whom do not have stringent export controls. So not only can you find the weapons to buy, with a little diligence you can manage to avoid any import/export duties or pesky paperwork. This is ‘globalized free trade’ working as it was intended. Reverse engineering has become a favorite way of avoiding the headaches and hassles of having to develop your own products; just steal or buy someone else’s stuff and take it apart to see how it is made, then build your own. Common wisdom has it that the North Koreans and the Chinese are especially good at this, once they figured out how to dismantle it without exploding it in their own faces. It is said that if you have the capability to build an automobile, you can probably build tanks and a whole lot of other weaponry as well. But still, no one comes close to the United States in the manufacture and sale of weaponry; the best is still the best. The U.S. nets billions of dollars annually from arms exports, more than double the earnings of their closest competitor, Britain. In fact, the U.S. delivers almost half the weapons bought on the world market. Mind you, the purchaser knows that you get what you pay for: American weapons are top-notch and are fully field tested under all sorts of conditions, almost continuously, throughout the world. For the most part, the United States does not sell weapons directly to the less savoury buyers unless you consider shady little transactions like the arms-for-hostages deal with Iran, or the weapons sold to Iraq when it was useful to do so. But despite all the evidence to the country, American leadership is not stupid; they know full well that what is sold to the so-called friendly nations is very often just a sale to a middleman before the arms find their way into the hands of the less friendly countries, or even less friendly terrorists. So you have to know that the U.S. don’t see this as being a problem, at least not until it comes back to bite them in the butt. Canada is missing out on this vast market and signing on to Bush’s Missile Defense Shield is the first step in making sure we prosper. If we’re smart, once we really start to mass-market weaponry, we’ll cut out the middlemen and sell direct to the consumer in order to increase our profit margins. It’s an ever changing world out there with alliances that shift, develop, evaporate faster than most politicians can redefine the truth. A result of this is a lot of hand-me-down weaponry spread around the world. For instance, when the U.S. attacked Afghanistan in 2001, they were met with U.S.-made Stinger missiles left over from when the United States was supporting the Afghans against the Soviets. Iraq managed to invade Kuwait in 1990 using weaponry bought, at least in part, from the U.S. Sometimes these things, especially those laced with deadly depleted uranium, become the gifts that keep on giving, sort of like a meal at Taco Bell. So long as there is profit to be made in the killing of someone somewhere, you can assume that weapons will continue to circle the globe and keep us on our toes as we enjoy an ever-shifting dance on the precipice. According to a report released in October 2004 by Oxfam, world-wide peace nuts are stepping up their efforts to develop a solid, workable, enforceable international arms trade treaty. They are concerned that arms sales have shown a dramatic increase since 2002. In fact, the increases are the largest expansion of the arms trade in over a decade as the world has finally got over the notion that the fall of the Soviet Union should have produced some sort of ‘peace dividend’. One of the concerns of a group which includes Oxfam, Amnesty International, and IANSA (International Action Network on Small Arms) is that a failure to control the sale of arms encourages worldwide lawlessness. The Director of IANSA, Rebecca Peters, says: “We know that an increase in the arms trade also means a rise in black market sales, as many small arms are diverted to human right abusers, warlords, terrorist groups and common criminals.” While it is clearly important to ensure that weapons remain in the hands of responsible paying customers who will kill only the right people, we should stand firm against efforts to curb the sale of arms. If weapons are not readily and freely available, our options for blowing each other into small bits are seriously curtailed and the entire economic infrastructure of mass murder could collapse. That sector of the economy has been in the doldrums over the past 15 years and is only now beginning to recover. So do your part: urge officials in your country to get out there and buy some weapons. And once you have them, you might as well use them. Hell, there must be somebody out there you hate or who just needs to be taught a good lesson. And for Canadians, make sure you tell your MP that we want to kill people too and we’re eager to help George do it. Legal Disclaimer: In case any of you who are humour-challenged and can’t easily recognize satire squatting hoof in mouth right before your eyes, let me assure you I don’t really want anyone to go out and buy weapons. If anyone gives you some, see if you can exchange them for a sweater or something. And for those of you who celebrate Christmas, here’s hoping you wake up on that morning to the sound of someone saying ‘Merry Christmas’ rather than the sound of someone screaming out ‘Incoming!’

Contributed By


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:01 pm
    I don't know, Paul. Doesn't sound to me like the way to go.

    However, as you're a distinguished and trustworthy looking person, I'll buy it.

    Need to go now and buy some milling equipment, etc. to set up my own weapons manufacturing home business in the basement.

    Think I'll go with the hardware rather than biological. Fridge is too full to preserve specimens of the latter. Besides, daughter could confuse petrie specimens with yogourt, and I'd catch hell from the wife...



    ---
    "When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).

  2. Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:47 pm
    Best. Column. Ever.

    While we're ramping up the arms production, we really should pick a generic, non-descript target for those weapons. You know, help the neighbours out.

    They've already chosen 'terrorists', so we should pick something vague that can never be achieved (so as to keep the arms flowing!). How about 'peaceniks'? We can start with those whiners over at OXFAM and Amnesty International.

    Interfere with our economy, will ya . . .


    ---
    "If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

  3. Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:48 pm
    Wow, buddy! How can I get in on the depleted uranium action?

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  4. Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:03 pm
    <Following is facetious - Not serious or for easily offended</b>

    Good idea.

    I'm tired of being forced to watch those seemingly endless commercials trying to make me feel guilty through the display of starving, diseased children. Those open sewage through shanty town street shots are enough to put one off their beer and chips. Geez, if they wanted decent lives, why didn't they just arrange to be born white!!! Or failing that, European.

    Also, dealing with the Amnesty bunch will eliminate those aggravating articles about atrocities and abuse throughout the world. Then we can just have good news, e.g., Nike shares rose again today on news that workers have agreed to a 50% wage roll-back to 1/2 a bowl of rice a day.

    And what about those homeless nuisances that litter our streets? I suffered a slight muscle pull stepping over one the other day. Is it our fault they're too lazy to work three jobs to afford housing...why should we be made to suffer? Cold in the winter...how bout a full metal jacket?

    ---
    "When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).

  5. Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:24 pm
    Yeah, I think I`ll adopt 86 kids from the third world and put them to work in my depleted uranium plant! I can`t find enough Canadian born politicians to sign up for the jobs. Paul Martin will smuggle these kids over for me in his sweatships.

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  6. Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:58 pm
    Thanks, Dr. C.

    For a generic non-descript target, lawyers can't be beat! And you can get universal agreement (except maybe from lawyers, but then they argue and whine about everything).

    Paul Harris

  7. Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:39 pm
    Paul that is way too good! I can do my shopping early, now I know what to get everyone, where were you last year??

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  8. Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:44 pm
    True, but, I think they're hard to terminate, rise from the dead, and they'll sue.

    We could lose everything and end up out on the streets....whoops....damn, can't edit my earlier comment...

    ---
    "When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).

  9. Thu Oct 21, 2004 12:12 am
    What abooot the NHL player lockout,.....eh?

  10. Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:39 am
    What lockout?

    ---
    "When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).

  11. Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:32 pm
    Instead of DU bullets, I hear wood arrows work better on the undead.<p> Isn't there an abandoned city in Saskatchewan that would be perfect for DU retrieval? Uranium City? I'll have to buy some property there for the coming real estate boom!<p> <p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill <br />

  12. Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:49 pm
    CBC news reports today that 'Both Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham have
    suggested Canada has little choice but to take part in the new
    continental defence plans.'

    My question is why don't we have a choice anymore, did we lose our sovereignty overnight, or are we being threatened? What on earth does he mean?

    No public hearings, no binding vote in Parliament, why? What happened to democracy? BTW it's snowing like mad today, so that Christmas shopping idea is looking pretty interesting, so far it's only snow, wonder what fall-out looks like?

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  13. Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:50 am
    Ever heard of a guy named Vreeland? Here's what he said about missile defence: Also look him up at the Toronto Star for recent story on his 'capture', and latest threads at Democratic Underground. fwiw, Vreeland thinks The Twin cities (minnesota and st.paul) will be nuked around the end of October. We'll see if this has the effect of 'war of the world's scenario' of getting the population to 'panic' ... we watch

    "The name of the defense system is SSST . There are five different individual and unique defensive and strike capabilities of the system. The only portion that I have publicly spoken on is one frame regarding actual current orbiting satellites, which are not at this time owned by the US government. On advice of counsel I cannot discuss the other components.

    "This one component is a satellite system. Within the confines of the system there are multiple, deployable space/orbital EMP missiles that are not aimed at the ground. They are targeted at everyone else's satellites. These would kill worldwide communications. The satellites of some countries that are shielded with titanium are protected from these weapons. The protected countries are Russia and China, but U.S. satellites are vulnerable and Putin has told Bush that the U.S. missile defense system doesn't work, and that Bush knows it.

    "Now when I read this what came to my mind is the Space Shuttle being put out of commission at a time where America needed to be up there in space more than ever. a very bad coincidence

    "I know China has put sattelites up recently and is wanting to get into the Space race with us. And its amazing that the Russians and Chinnese have beaten a technological power house like America in Space but thats what it looks like. And didn't Israel fail to put a sattelite up recently?

    "If we lose Satellites then communication would be down for us but not China and Russia because they are protected. We would still have cable and wired phone systems but those cell phones would be trash

    "I mean Russia keeps telling our Military get their act together and why do I feel like they are sitting on their butts. I see WWIII coming definitely and if we are attacked I think Americans are going to ticked off at Bush cause that is two attacks coming while he is in the Whitehouse.

    "I also noticed the area talked about is Home to some of the most Liberal minded people in the US and Home to many Catholics. Where it's located would effect limited area of the US and yet it confirms to me It's the most liberal area of the country. Interesting place for an attack!!!

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 780#924787

    pending war fears in Whitehouse http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1143.htm



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news