UK top weapons dealer.

fusil89 said:
Makes you proud to british doesnt it :roll:

So if I get this right, you begrudge one of the few successful British industries we have left?

A non news story that could only appear in the Guardian.
I am proud just a shame it has to be selling weapons that we are getting credit.

No No I don't mind the weapons trade (better us than someone else) but I do object to supplying some of the chaps we supply, Saudi Arabia for one (who we are just keeping sweet for the sake of oil). I'm also very proud that we are knocking the Yanks off the top spot (after decades of them selling far more than us). Anyway these findings (better shown in the actual newspaper) are only official, legal deals I shudder to think how many weapons are changing hands unofficialy.


Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The real reason for Britisin overtaking US of A in the arms trade is that the Yanks are keeping their weapons etc for use by their troops on the war on terror whilst the one-eyed mong is selling as much as he can instead of giving good kit to British troops. IMHO :x
Just to pour salt in the wound I recall the terms; "top of the line", "superior technology", "technologically sophisticated" being used a couple of time in the article...just to irritate you more Auld-Yin. The report shows we are one of the main exporters but not one of the top importers.
Some of the stuff being exported cant be good for us (check the link). For example 15,000 sniper rifles to Pakistan, Jordan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia...translation: some naughty chaps will get their hands on this stuff eventually.
We make good kit, some of the best. If the government decides they can't or won't pay for it that's up to them (and you when you vote). As to who we sell it to; who are we to judge another countries morals? The Saudis look at our disfuntional families, our drunkeness, underage parents, street crime etc. and make a pretty simple comparison. Let he who is without sin... :roll:
...Launch the first missile? first RPG?
I know I am close...
Auld-Yin said:
The real reason for Britisin overtaking US of A in the arms trade is that the Yanks are keeping their weapons etc for use by their troops on the war on terror whilst the one-eyed mong is selling as much as he can instead of giving good kit to British troops. IMHO :x
Well you know what they say about opinions.

Is it possible that we have a production strategy in train but no real cash to pay for it, hence the sensible option is to pass the deliverables to a third party (complete with end user certificate, of course!)

The US is still the world's aggregate largest arms supplier and accounts for approximately 48% of all such agreements: remember that these contracts span decades, so it is disingenuous to suggest that the UK are now No1 for ever, the World will end soon and it's all Broon's fault [insert smiley here]. It's one contract.

And the UK currently sits second in the table of highest defence spenders expressed as a proportion of GDP, beaten only by...the US. So I am having a few problems identifying what the source of your outrage is - surely this makes good economic sense for UK PLC? Or would you rather we bought stuff we can't use yet?

There is value in debating the current DIS and associated DSG, but I suggest you could be doing it slightly more coherently.
Anyone else notice this bit from the same article:

"It said that halving arms exports would lead to the loss of about 49,000 jobs but this would be offset by the creation over a five-year period of 67,000 new jobs in non-arms employment."

Where did they pluck this from? No explanation at all, just (apparently) an assumption that 67,000 jobs would pop up out of nowhere within 5 yrs, why don't they start just popping-up now then?
Isn't exporting weapons supposed to be a bad thing? Y'know on account of the fact that people kill each other with them and then turn the things on us? Then we do them for war crimes and nick the weapons back. Winner!
fusil89 said:
the UK is responsible for 53 billion pounds of weapons sales over the past 5 years (including a 3rd of total weapons deals last year) taking us to the top spot on weapons deals after selling 72 Eurofighters to Saudi Arabia.

Makes you proud to british doesnt it :roll:
Are you currently serving? Because if you are, you could well find yourself standing beside a piece of kit at DSEi, in uniform, promoting UK defence sales. Would you have a problem with that?
Im not currently serving...Sandhurst soon. I wouldnt object (check my comments after that, I already explained) it can be a good thing (good for economy and we do supply some good chaps) however some of the regimes we supply are not people I would want to have such supplies (fighter jets for example)
If a dictator wants a gun he's going to buy it. If he buys it from someone else, someone else gets the profit, to reinvest in his own arms industry to make better guns. Eventually we will face those better guns, or their even better daughter guns. If we sell the dictator the guns, we get to reinvest and build better guns. That HMG doesn't buy our guns for us is a completely separate matter. With luck (and your vote) the next HMG might...

Morally, it's better to make something good out of a bad situation that leave it entirely bad, at least in my book of morals ;o) bad guys sell guns to dictators and profit vs good guys sell the same guns and get the same profit, which via taxes (corporate, income and VAT) gets ploughed back into society as foreign aid, schools, NHS and unemployment benefits for scrotes.

Militarily, it's best that we sell our enemies the complex kit, because we then get to train them and know their capabilities and dispositions when we come to fight them. With very clever kit we could even spike it...

So long live our arms industries - and buy their kids a landmine for Christmas
Zaphodski; That is actually very insightful, I have never thought about it that way before. cheers.

Zaphodski may have just found a way to justify the arms trade to lefty peace nick tree huggers.
the slogan could be "Guns Cure cancer" because as you said money from arms trades gets pumped back into the Government and down to the NHS which in turn invests in research into cancer...they cannot argue with that.
When the reccesion really kicks in the bed wettng f**kers that read the gaurdian might stop whinging about UK arms sales when they can't afford their tofu from the local sainsbury's.
If we sell arms to countries around the world, those countries do not need to develop their own arms industries and we retain the ability to produce large quantities of arms.

When WWIII finally gets here, we will be able to ramp up production of arms for HMF and the other countries will find it difficult to maintain supply, without assistance from us. That has to be a good thing.

72 eurofighter we didn'nt actually want to buy = 72 saudi princes with the ultimate boys toy :roll:
Germany and japan don't flogg that many arms overseas and there doing ok or possibly couldn't be arrsed to compete
The only thing i find funny about this is that we sell shedloads of deadly weapons and in this country it's illegal to have a gerber or leatherman with a fixable blade of 3" or over, i won't even mention firearms, soon kitchen knives will be banned :lol:

Similar threads

Latest Threads