Selling arms to China different from selling arms to Indonesia?

Discussion in 'Europe' started by j07950, Mar 16, 2005.

  1. j07950
    Offline

    j07950 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    419
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    Ratings:
    +9
    I remember not too long ago, a lot of things said about Europe wanting to sell weapons to China, and how that was wrong... I can understand that view, and with a war looming between China and Taiwan, I'm not inclined at all to having China possese the best technologie available.
    But then I've done a bit of reading lately and I wanted to get your view on how that was different from say: the US and UK selling weapons (the sale of 625 billion pounds in arms (to Indonesia), a record never reached by the Tories (Conservatives) and surpassed only by the US) to Indonesia and training their soldiers to fight in East Timor and In Aceh...?

    I thought in a way that it was related and wanted to know if you guys knew much about it...
     
  2. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Where's the link that verifies the sale of US military equipment to Indonesia? US military assistance to Indonesia was terminated in 1992. A $600,000 grant was authorized at the end of February 2005 for the US training of Indonesian military officers. Cite the link supporting the claim of US weapons sales to Indonesia since 1992. What, precisely, do you claim was sold to the Indonesians? I am not in favor of US arms sales to Indonesia. Regardless, selling weapons to a democratically elected Indonesian government cannot be compared to selling weapons to the totalitarian Chinese. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/GC03Ae01.html. Unsupported, you cite the sale of "625 billion pounds in arms" by the US and UK. Cite your source. 625 billion pounds equals more than $1.2 trillion dollars. Ridiculous.
     
  3. j07950
    Offline

    j07950 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    419
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    Ratings:
    +9
    You're going about this the wrong way again...Where do you come up with the 1992 thing? I just said that the US and UK have sold arms in the past to Indonesia, who has used them to violate Human rights etc... Anyway...
    The 625 billion pounds (amazing isn't it? hard to believe...) was approved in 1998 by the Labour government...I think maybee they meant millions and not billions...

    Where did this 1992 figure come from? Because I've read various documents thats say the US has sold weapons post-1992 to indonesia. Government records show that since 1992, the Clinton administration has sold or licensed more than $1 billion worth of arms to Indonesia (http://www.motherjones.com/news/special_reports/arms/indonesia.html). Also that, Indonesian military forces linked to the carnage in East Timor were trained in the United States under a covert programme sponsored by the Clinton Administration which continued until 1998 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/indonesia/Story/0,2763,200716,00.html).
    Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has resumed, and gradually increased, IMET funding to Indonesia. In 2002, Indonesia received $405,000 in IMET, and for FY 05, the budget request has risen to $600,000 (http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=2505).


    Again, don't take this the wrong way...you're going about this as if I was accussing the US and all...
    My point is this: isn't giving weapons (even in the past, killings startes in 1975...) to a "Democratic?" government that violates human rights and kills innocent people as bad as arming China? It's not excuse for arming china though...I sure in hell don't like the idea...
     
  4. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    The year 1992 comes from the fact that US military assistance to Indonesia was terminated in that year. You cite Mother Jones and that extreme leftist rag the Guardian as credible sources? The title of the 1999 Guardian swill is: “US Trained Butchers of Timor. Exclusive: Washington trained death squads in secret while Britain has spent £1m helping Indonesian army.” This type of hysterical anti-American leftist excrement is typical of Al Guardian. Maybe the propagandists at Al Guardian would prefer that Indonesian military officers receive their training in Pakistan, Iran, China, or Russia. A US trained former Indonesian military officer is the current democratically elected President of Indonesia: Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0930667.html . Where do you think SBY should have been trained?

    From the Center for Defense Information link that you posted:

     
  5. j07950
    Offline

    j07950 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    419
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    Ratings:
    +9
    Yeah what you bring foward is right...but thats not what I was talking about. You brought up the 1992 thing. Human rights violation have been taking place for ages in Indonesia...so whether the US stoped in 1992 or not is irrelevant. In the end they still get weapons from the UK...same thing...
    About the Guardian...although it may be sort of lefty it's a really well regarded newspaper here in the UK last time I checked, and a really good source of information, as good as any.
     
  6. Said1
    Offline

    Said1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    12,087
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Somewhere in Ontario
    Ratings:
    +937
    Why is it irrelevant? You brought up both.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Totally off topic, but just want to say I'm enjoying this conversation very much, thanks all. Onedomino, I think I may christen you the new fact checker. I wish someone would second the recommendation. I think I've put in my time! :beer:
     
  8. Said1
    Offline

    Said1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    12,087
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Somewhere in Ontario
    Ratings:
    +937

    Wasn't it you who said "consider the source"? or was it "poster"? :D
     
  9. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    :slap: Onedomino is more than a worthy poster, and his sources are great. I think it's time to pass that baton. (hot potatoe). :terror:
     
  10. Said1
    Offline

    Said1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    12,087
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Somewhere in Ontario
    Ratings:
    +937
    Hey! I didn't mean him, I was refering to R2D2. :tng:
     

Share This Page