freedom for Viktor Bout

[Spooky Lynx]

China and North Korea bear a greater responsibility than Russia in this but this thread is about Viktor who was involved in arms smuggling and violating UN sanctions across africa. Are you now trying to deny that any Russian made AK's were supplied to africa? Really? RE the SAM-7's they dropped the tubes and they were recovered and identified. If you look on the Russian Strela wiki page the incident is listed there because of this fact.

I don't deny that Russian weapons were supplied to African nations. But I don't understand some things, please explain me:
1) what's the difference between killings from Russian/Chinese/German/Belgian/US/Czech weapons? You lived in particular part of Africa so you hadn't a chance to see which weapons were used in many other conflicts there.
2) who forced African nations to buy so many weapons all over the world and kill each other in hundreds of wars between states, military coups and civil wars? Do the guys like Bout violate UN sanctions just for lulz or some people from countries that are listed in sanctions want to buy some arms and ask smugglers for them? Why don't you understand that it's their choice - to buy or not to buy arms, legally or not, to kill each other or to live peacefully? "If there is a request - then there will be an offer" - one of the main rules of human life. You want to get high - here's a drugs and alcohol. You want a gun - here it is, legal and not. If people don't want to live peacefully with each other - they'll find infinite numbers of the ways to kill their opponents. And Russian arms are only one item it this loooong list of way to kill. If some group says "Hey look at this cheap and easy available arms from USSR! Let's get'em and beat the cr@p out of that neighboring s&#@ers!" - it's their decision and their response for all they did with this arms. Arms don't make their users zombies that think only of murders and blood.

[batto]

Why don't you understand that it's their choice - to buy or not to buy arms, legally or not, to kill each other or to live peacefully?

Yeah, I wonder what would PELHAM say if 100 people in USA legally got machine guns and went on killing spree with thousands of victims. Would he blame US govt for it? Nope. I'm sure he would came up with some simple explanation putting guilt on Russia. Screw this thread...

[PELHAM]

If there were two teenage boys in your street wanting to fight each other, would you sell them knives and let one kill the other, then say, nothing to do with me, it was their choice. Without your hypothetical invovlement they would have used fists and it's unlikely death would have been a result. It's basic ethics and morals. Your hypothetical behaviour in this situations shows no ethics, you would have profited from a death.

That is why many countries try (fail at it mostly lol) to have some sort of ethical policy when it comes to this. My specific gripe with China, North Korea and Russia is that there is virtually no ethical restriction on who gets to buy weapons. You will sell anything to anyone and all that matters is the cash.

Yeah, I wonder what would PELHAM say if 100 people in USA legally got machine guns and went on killing spree with thousands of victims. Would he blame US govt for it? Nope. I'm sure he would came up with some simple explanation putting guilt on Russia. Screw this thread...

Yes I would blame the US in general not just the US Govt. The 2nd amendment did not forsee the machine guns and cannons which people have in their homes. It was made during the time of flintlocks. Legally I don't think we could curb the average US citizens right to bear arms, but do they really need an AK-47, M-16 or 50Cal M2?

[Spooky Lynx]

If there were two teenage boys in your street wanting to fight each other, would you sell them knives and let one kill the other, then say, nothing to do with me, it was their choice. Without your hypothetical invovlement they would have used fists and it's unlikely death would have been a result. It's basic ethics and morals. Your hypothetical behaviour in this situations shows no ethics, you would have profited from a death.

Heh, I see you don't know anything about teenage fights. There is a great chance to get severe wounds just in plain fight without knives or any other items. Or even die.
Another thing that you compare African states and nations with immature teenagers. But they are considered to be mature people, they are UN members and handle independent states. The same states as in Americas, Asia and Europe. If they are like stupid teens - then they don't deserve to live in their own states, right? All they deserve is to live in colonies ruled by more mature nations, right, mr. Pelham?

[Tonci87]

Calling for freedom for Victor Bout is the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen on these forums. I guess as long as someones seen to be acting against the USA their crimes don't matter to certain people here.

I have to agree with Pelham on this one. This guy sold weapons, knowing that they will be used to kill. ANd not only to kill soldiers but also civilians. That makes him part of the killing. He supplied the tools knowing how they will be used. A person like that deserves to be in Prison.

[batto]

The 2nd amendment did not forsee the machine guns and cannons which people have in their homes. It was made during the time of flintlocks. Legally I don't think we could curb the average US citizens right to bear arms, but do they really need a 50Cal M2?

Yeah, but of course I meant M-16s which are legal. No point discussing with you.

[NoRailgunner]

Do you guys really think that people everywhere do have a choice to choose what they can do? Sorry, but some here only show a "Russia strong!!" attitude. Would you be butthurt if a weapon dealer from another country would be caught and sentenced to lifetime prison or death? Does the country matter or does the action/deal matters? Or would you just like to put a blind eye on crime/(tribal) genocide just because its more comfortable to excuse these atrocities with "political" or "people are worth/not worth" reasons?

[PELHAM]

Yeah, but of course I meant M-16s which are legal. No point discussing with you.

I meant M-16s too, had not finished editing. Any other spurious arguments now you have essentially lost this one?

---------- Post added at 02:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ----------

Heh, I see you don't know anything about teenage fights. There is a great chance to get severe wounds just in plain fight without knives or any other items. Or even die.
Another thing that you compare African states and nations with immature teenagers. But they are considered to be mature people, they are UN members and handle independent states. The same states as in Americas, Asia and Europe. If they are like stupid teens - then they don't deserve to live in their own states, right? All they deserve is to live in colonies ruled by more mature nations, right, mr. Pelham?

If Bout gets out, go and apply for a job, you just passed his ethics test. Someone like you would be a valuable employee.

[froggyluv]

Heh, I see you don't know anything about teenage fights. There is a great chance to get severe wounds just in plain fight without knives or any other items. Or even die.

I know a little bit about teenage streetfighting and no it is not equivocable to arming them both in terms of degree of injury.

[ST_Dux]

If there were two teenage boys in your street wanting to fight each other, would you sell them knives and let one kill the other, then say, nothing to do with me, it was their choice.

Technically I'd say this is correct. I don't believe you should be held responsible for someone else's crime simply for providing a tool for him to carry it out; it is still the criminal's decision and his alone to actually commit the crime.