On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:48:00 +1000, "Peter Webb"
For f***s sake - not the US - outside exploitation. Can't you understand?
How can I tell you what weapons when I agree with you that they have not sold weapons to Iran.
It was simply an example of how weapons get around.
Weapons are more than just guns. And again, I didn't say the US sold them - they are probably left overs from the supply given to them by the US during the Iraq-Iran war.
Iraq was once an ally of the states, remember.
This was simply an example to show that weapons, from any manufacturer, are available on the illicit world market.
Weapons make money - and if there is money to be make, a seller will always be found.
Again - not a US seller. But the US is not the only country in the world that can sell stuff.
Am I not explaining it correctly - I am not saying the US has sold wepaons to Iran.
I am saying that if US weapons are sold to another country, then they are on the open market, and if on the open market, would be available to an arms dealer to sell to Iran.
Is that so difficult to understand.
Look I'll say it in capitals:
AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE US HAS NOT SOLD ARMS TO IRAN IN THE LAST 20 YEARS.
Happy?
Not the US, Belarus. f***kkkkk!!!!!!! Can't you read.
The greedy bastards are not from the US - how many ways do I have to say it.
US weapons are on the world market. If open to purchase, they are open to exploitation.
Not by the US - by arms dealers.
Again - not the US.
Can't you understand I am agreeing with you. If Iran has US weapons, it is not form the US, it is from outside exploitation.
From 1991 to 2000, the U.S. delivered $74 billion worth of military equipment, services and training to countries in the Middle East.
What are the odds that none of this equipment ended up in Iran?
Artie...
