NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just thinking about a pattern over the recent years.

Russia, China, former Warsaw Pact nations sell arms overseas to tinpot dictators.

Europeans sell everything else: radars, air defense computers, centrifuges, etc.

US comes in, bombs it all to pieces - the "arms" are incredibly ineffective.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Is someone making money here?

Russia, et al: Yes, we'll sell weapons, and since the companies are multinationals, you'll get a cut of the profits in legal stock ownership. All you have to do is get upset about some item we sell them, or they go and do something stupid with the more traditional stuff, and you go in and kick their ass, act all upset...

US: yeah, we could say they were trying to make WMD...

Russia, et al: Yes. And, when you do so, we act very morally outraged....

US: And when we replace the government, we contract to get weapons from you... (this is currently being done in Afghanistan)

Russia, et al: Exactly. And we sell them more weapons and radars, and...

Doesn't a conspiracy imply a degree of rule-breaking & undercover-ness?

I mean, it's all perfectly legal according to all involved, who also happen to make the rules.. And there's nothing secret about it.

Doesn't a conspiracy imply a degree of rule-breaking & undercover-ness?

I mean, it's all perfectly legal according to all involved, who also happen to make the rules.. And there's nothing secret about it.

I'm beginning to think that after the Cold War (where many proxy struggles made a lot of money), everyone who made arms said, "hey, now THERE's a racket".

It's called "racketeering". Conspiring to secretly jimmy the system to screw some people while you make a lot of money.

This would imply cynically that the major nations of the world are fomenting struggles in the far off places to make money. And who cares who gets killed, as long as it isn't "terrorism" (which in this definition is any attack on the major nations).

Ah yes, everything is going exactly as I have planned... Er, I mean, global conspiracy? Don't be silly. :p

Seriously, a global conspiracy like this would require more intelligence and will to cooperate than most nations are capable of mustering. Remember, world leaders have enormous egos - it's a job requirement. This makes it extremely unlikely that they could all agree to a secret plan like this, because they would all insist on being the one in charge.

Remember, arrogance, selfishness, and outright stupidity are part of the human condition. It's the best defense we have against global totalitarianism - nobody is smart enough to be able to run the whole planet.

I'm beginning to think that after the Cold War (where many proxy struggles made a lot of money), everyone who made arms said, "hey, now THERE's a racket".More like everyone who sold arms said that & that happened to be too true for anyone important to object to.It's called "racketeering". Conspiring to secretly jimmy the system to screw some people while you make a lot of money.There's nothing secret about it. It's all very public & honest. Hell, a couple of weeks ago the NRA propagandised among their members to get them to oppose tightning the rules against illegal arms trades. Not because it'd ever affect an NRA member or legal gun owner, but because NRA is an extension of the people who manufacture the weapons being sold illegaly & obviously prosper from it.This would imply cynically that the major nations of the world are fomenting struggles in the far off places to make money. And who cares who gets killed, as long as it isn't "terrorism" (which in this definition is any attack on the major nations).They do, but it's on a case by case basis. Mostly it happens when a powerful nation finds itself making a killing on internal instability/civil war somewhere & then goes for the throat - and that draws the rest of us as well.

It's not some grand ploy, it just happens all the time because of the utterly broken market economy we have & people's natural tendency to kill eachother en masse. Still, the difference between it "just happening" and us orchestrating it, is meaningless.

I was just thinking about a pattern over the recent years.

Russia, China, former Warsaw Pact nations sell arms overseas to tinpot dictators.

Europeans sell everything else: radars, air defense computers, centrifuges, etc.

US comes in, bombs it all to pieces - the "arms" are incredibly ineffective.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Is someone making money here?

Russia, et al: Yes, we'll sell weapons, and since the companies are multinationals, you'll get a cut of the profits in legal stock ownership. All you have to do is get upset about some item we sell them, or they go and do something stupid with the more traditional stuff, and you go in and kick their ass, act all upset...

US: yeah, we could say they were trying to make WMD...

Russia, et al: Yes. And, when you do so, we act very morally outraged....

US: And when we replace the government, we contract to get weapons from you... (this is currently being done in Afghanistan)

Russia, et al: Exactly. And we sell them more weapons and radars, and...
And the US just sells arms to the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_trade#Top_Arms_Exporters):

The United States is by far the largest exporter of weapons in the world, selling more weapons than the next 14 countries combined. Military sales account for about 18 percent of the national budget, far and away the greatest proportion of any other nation. (Estimated budget authority as presented in the President's budget.) Saul states that the American government cannot reduce arms sales because of the consequent fall in GDP.

Imagine that the US economy depends on the sale of weapons. Ironic huh?

Here's a conspiracy: we're all phurking munkees waiting to come out of our man-suits!