Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:55 pm
wrencat1873 wrote:
And therein lays the conundrum.
You would expect that "allies" would share their technology (up to a point) but, regardless of cost and loss of business, arming dangerous groups should be absolutely off limits.
Of course there is diplomacy at work all over the world and deals done for all sorts of reasons but, the rationale of selling arms to the Saudis "because we have to sell them somewhere to balance the book" is just ridiculous.
Lets face it, the majority of recent conflicts involving the UK have been over oil or drugs, ultimately falling at the feet of our major ally, the USofA
You would expect that "allies" would share their technology (up to a point) but, regardless of cost and loss of business, arming dangerous groups should be absolutely off limits.
Of course there is diplomacy at work all over the world and deals done for all sorts of reasons but, the rationale of selling arms to the Saudis "because we have to sell them somewhere to balance the book" is just ridiculous.
Lets face it, the majority of recent conflicts involving the UK have been over oil or drugs, ultimately falling at the feet of our major ally, the USofA
As the saying goes keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer - if they are reliant on you for spare parts etc. to keep their war effort alive I doubt they will bite the hand that feeds
