Want to know who we’ll be asked to fight in a few years? Find out who’s buying our weapons now!

There is an easy way to stop wars with foreign countries: Stop selling them weapons!

There is an easy way to stop wars with foreign countries: Stop selling them weapons!

If there’s one thing that all politicians believe, it seems, it is that history will teach us nothing.

That’s the only explanation possible for Vince Cable selling the ingredients to make chemical weapons to Syria, 10 months into that country’s civil war.

Does he not remember how the United States gave money, weapons and training to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war – then launched its own war against Iraq after that country got too big for its boots and invaded Kuwait? Does he not remember the 16 British firms that suppled weapons to that country?

The sale of weapons to foreign countries is always a bad move. Look at the Iran-Contra affair – again involving our good buddies the United States. Weapons were sold to Iran – so America was funding both sides of the Iran-Iraq war – and the proceeds used to fund the Contras in Nicaragua – another war!

Now we have a Tory-led Coalition government that wanted to get into that morally-dodgy but lucrative weapons-selling action, it seems.

So in January 2012, 10 months after violence erupted in Syria, Vince Cable licensed the exporting of potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride to the Syrian government – both chemicals being ingredients of nerve gas.

The chemicals were sold under licences that specified they should be used for making aluminium structures like window frames – but the government has refused to identify the licence holders. Dodgy!

Sarin, the gas thought to have been used in an attack last month that killed nearly 1,500 people, can be made from such ingredients.

This means that, in the same way as the United States with Iraq, it is entirely possible that the Coalition government wanted British troops to attack Syria in response to a situation that the Coalition government created!

And then, when Labour – along with Tory and Liberal Democrat rebels – actually put a stop to this insanity, some of these people actually had the front to try to steal the moral high ground, accusing them of perpetuating a war that was killing children!

Remember when Vox Political published an article last November, about David Cameron selling arms and aircraft to countries in the Middle East? It seems this is what comes of that sort of thing.

On that occasion, he was selling Typhoon jet fighters to Middle East nations. How long before we’re told we have to go and shoot down however many of them he managed to sell?

19 thoughts on “Want to know who we’ll be asked to fight in a few years? Find out who’s buying our weapons now!

  1. Pingback: Want to know who we'll be asked to fight in a f...

    1. Nightingale

      It’s coming – the more they abuse, the closer we all get to the fight back. Just because so far it’s all been very stiff upper lip & stuff, that won’t apply when the riots start, and when there is industrial havoc Once they ban our organisations speaking for us for a year, we’ll have to shout it direct, won’t we?

  2. Pingback: Want to know who we’ll be asked to fight in a few years? Find out who’s buying our weapons now! | SMILING CARCASS'S TWO-PENNETH

  3. Steven Goodman

    People sem to reach a mis-understanding when it comes to the topic of “war” and the waging of. its not a glitch or misconception that compels us into conflict. More overly “war” as a marketplace is a growth industry. To expand the profit yield (That’s what business is about) you need more conflict.

    Both America and my UK are market leaders in the production of military hardware. The expertise of waging war and lastly are willing to provoke “sleeping” combatants into action as a market stimulation attempt

  4. Chris Whitworth

    Not sure about your chemistry – you coald use that really dangerous stuff called H2), or even NaCl – thats got nasty Chlorine and flammable Soduim in.. But the general point is well made

  5. Johan IV

    The main arms supplier to both Iraq and Syria were/is the Soviet block and Russia, not Britain and the USA. Not everything you read in the media is true, or even relevant.

    1. Mike Sivier

      … and your point is what, exactly? Nobody said anything about the UK or the USA being the MAIN arms supplier to those countries. The fact is that arms were supplied to Iraq, and then we had to go to war with Iraq, and the ingredients for arms were supplied to Syria, and then the government tried to get Parliament to approve a war with Syria.

      1. Nightingale

        Quite right Mike.

        Also, there is a huge difference between supplying traditional arms, ammo, and weapons, and supplying ingredients for internationally banned chemical weapons

  6. Pingback: Want to know who we’ll be asked to fight in a few years? Find out who’s buying our weapons now! | Vox Political « this 'n that

  7. daznez

    you assume the gov’t used the gas, which would of course be suicidal to them. nothing of the sort, and so much evidence about to the contrary. this report from an AP journalist is probably top of the list:

    if it’s still hard to access that page (popular recently,) piece re-posted here:


    with peace & love & unity

    1. Mike Sivier

      I’m not assuming anything at all. There’s a theory going around that even if the gas was government-owned, the opposing forces set it off.

      I’m not going to take offence because I can understand how you might have reached your conclusion – but it is dangerous to assume you know what another person thinks, just because they are quoting a particular theory.

      Cheers for the links.

Comments are closed.