English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This is not a political question about Israel or Pakistan, in general, does anybody think if our military developes a weapon, we should keep it for our military and ours alone. I don't like the idea of seeing F-16's in someone elses military

2006-07-25 20:37:33 · 16 answers · asked by JoeThatUKnow 3 in Politics & Government Politics

16 answers

Well....reality bites.

F-15s are already in the Iranian Air Force

F-16s are with the Israeli Air Force

AH-1H Cobra gunships are with South American Anti-Drug Enforcement Units

The M-16 is a standard weapon for almost every democratized country on this earth.

My point?...the sad reality that the US government creates and develops weapons and sells it to other countries (using third party arms dealers). Not only selling the weapons but also initiating conflicts to increase their weapons sales.

Sad but true...peace.

2006-07-25 20:45:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We do sell weapons to other countries.

Since you brought up F-16s - Do you honestly believe that an F-16 sold to, say Pakistan, can successfully fire a missle at a U.S. Air Force F-16? Don't be silly. We're not that stupid.

FYI - Soul - The Iranians have F-14 Tomcats, not F-15s. And since the day of the revolution, they have not been able to fly. Not one minute of air time - they can't even start the engines.

2006-07-25 20:46:38 · answer #2 · answered by Jolly1 5 · 1 0

It's all about money. The US government does not have ownership of technology developed by private industry, The government can restrict technologies developed with government money, or deemed to sensitive to disburse because of a tip in the balance of power, but ultimately, the industry relies on foreign sales for a decent percentage of their earnings. The US government also gives or sells at a lower cost some of our older airframes and weapon systems to our allies. Now, as to the moral implications of doing so, that is another matter.

2006-07-25 20:45:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

am not very fond of the us army and what it does but i think they should keep their weapons to them selves one killer on the loose is enough unless you want the blood of every human being on your hand that is another matter ,
but but but
sometimes it is good because it balances the military power in some regios like having japan have american weapons defends it from the raging force in north korea and china and that it would stop china
you know what i mean

2006-07-25 20:51:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

our country gives our allied countries weapons all the time. but what very few know is its never better than what we have. isreali has the best pilots in the world who teach our top gun pilots. the fighters we gave them are not the same we have as ours is alot more modified. side by side, you couldn't tell, but ours has better high tech and weapons that we use that others don't know about. its just like getting a new car. they get the beasics and we get ours fully loaded.

2006-07-25 20:46:03 · answer #5 · answered by hollywood71@verizon.net 5 · 0 0

That's a joke considering America's allies participate in developing/building new "American" weapons.

Case in point: the Stryker vehicles used by the US military aren't a US invention. They're Canadian.
The US eventually bought the company that developed them, but they're still built in Canada:
Link - http://www.lfpress.com/2014/02/28/blockbuster-deal-to-sell-military-vehicles-to-saudi-arabia-bulks-up-londons-muscle-as-a-global-arms-merchant

Another example: America's Joint Strike Fighter program to develop next-generation fighters for the air forces of the United States, Australia, Britain, Canada, The Netherlands and their allies.
Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program

In the globalized world of the 21st Century, Americans need to smarten up and quit pretending anyone does anything all by themselves anymore.
Including weapons development.

2014-04-07 09:24:38 · answer #6 · answered by Shawn Robin 7 · 0 0

America is giving only weapons considered as surplus and already of public knowledge.

2006-07-25 20:40:39 · answer #7 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 0

Yes, Israel! They are our best ally and believe me, when the proverbial s__t hits the fan, we want them on our side all the way. and maybe Britain... but since they appear about to be run over by terrorists, maybe not them... unless they can get their act together. And maybe Taiwan...

2006-07-25 20:46:47 · answer #8 · answered by skypiercer 4 · 0 0

I think we should give stuff to Israel, UK, and Canada. The rest of the world are a bunch of chumps.

2006-07-25 20:42:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

certainly....We pushed German back into their borders as quickly as they rightfully conquered maximum of Europe two times. Bullied Japan to a small island chain as quickly as they gained lands in China and the island interior the Pacific Ocean. of direction we stopped North Korea from invading South Korea to maintain them from being a unified usa against their will. by using our potential we saved Russia from conquering all of Europe in the time of the chilly warfare. returned the u . s . grew to become into bullying Iraq as quickly as we pushed them off of their rightfully conquest of Kuwait. Yup the super undesirable u . s . we deliver additional funds over seas to help the undesirable of the international then the different usa for the time of organic failures. Renie: The P3 Orion that grew to become into compelled to make an emergance landing in China that undercover agent airplane? The SUB HUNTER percentis not a spyplane it quite is a militia asset used to seek subs to guard international transport and US Allies. it quite is not a recon airplane

2016-12-10 14:41:02 · answer #10 · answered by vanderlinden 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers