A picture says a thousand words doesn't it 8D

RAWR

United States government-brokered overseas arms sales are expected to total about US$34 billion in the current fiscal year, up more than 45 per cent from the year before. Personally, I think this is totally atrocious, but firstly lets look at it from the American government's point of view. Ms Jeanne Farmer of the Defence Security Cooperation Agency says that "Our programme is growing by leaps and bounds." and that her agency is playing a growing role in the US-declared global war on terrorism and national security. The US carries out government-to-government conventional arms transfers through the Defence Department's Foreign Military Sales programme, which operates on a no-profit, no-loss basis. Or so they say. I seriously doubt that a country in such heavy debt would still help a total of 207 countries for no benefit at all. It is highly possible that they can earn millions if not billions from these sales. With a total of 12,262 open cases totalling US$274.3 billion as of last month, just imagine how much the US could earn if they take just one percent for themselves. If my assumption is true, America would have lots to gain. Look at the Iraq War. A war started by America. America would have earned lots and lots of money if they profit from arms sales. And now look at which country is the biggest buyer. Among the biggest governemnt-togovernment buyers in fiscal 2008, which wraps up at the end of this month, were Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, morocco, Egypt and Iraq. Through this war, other than the numerous benefits they have gained from, they have also created a new customer for arms sales. Further on, they also improve their foreign relations with other countries and gain a good reputation.

But all this is really beside the point. Is there really a need at all to have all these sales? Aren't there better things that can be done with the billions spent on weaponary? Many US arms customers could and should be funding education, health and infrastructure programmes that would go much further in improving the long-term stability of their countries. The benefits these countries would get if they did so far outweigh the benefits of improving their armoury. By increasing their sales, America is indirectly causing these countries to lose out in the long run.

Critics say booming sales reflect a failure of US diplomacy and show a need for America to rethink how it handles foreign policy. I agree with this statement, and it is sad to say that this is not the only time America has failed in diplomacy. Back to the example of the Iraq War. The recent case in Thailand.