.....Libya 2011 and we stand on the cusp of yet another conflict. I have no hang ups about the arms industry, it is a necessary fact of life if we are to defend ourselves against those who would see us enslaved a la Hitler or fundamentalist Islam.
But I do have an intense dislike for a total lack of moral concern as shown by our attitude over the arms industry.
Since the end of the Second World War we have been served well by the nuclear defence industry and the code of conduct that accompanies it, namely, only the "civilised" nations are permitted to own nuclear weaponry and the consequence of its use would, in all likelihood, destroy aggressor and defender alike.
Now, this policy may be presently coming apart at the seams when one considers North Korea and Iran but it has held well for 60 years.
Is it too naive of me to think that the "civilised" powers ought to adopt the same practice when it comes to conventional weaponry, that is, we keep it to ourselves and do not sell it on to the Gaddafis, Mugabes and Al-Bashirs. Would that be such an economic disaster?
There is a grim irony in the fact that both Gulf Wars involved us in largely blowing up tanks and weaponry that originated in Sheffield or Illinois and now we are about to do the same thing in Libya.
Of course, if we had not supplied arms to Gaddafi he would have just bought inferior versions from Russia and China but at least we would have a portion of the moral high ground and there would have been the benefit of us warring with a better class of weapon that might, arguably, be more effective at ending a conflict sooner rather than later.
But I do have an intense dislike for a total lack of moral concern as shown by our attitude over the arms industry.
Since the end of the Second World War we have been served well by the nuclear defence industry and the code of conduct that accompanies it, namely, only the "civilised" nations are permitted to own nuclear weaponry and the consequence of its use would, in all likelihood, destroy aggressor and defender alike.
Now, this policy may be presently coming apart at the seams when one considers North Korea and Iran but it has held well for 60 years.
Is it too naive of me to think that the "civilised" powers ought to adopt the same practice when it comes to conventional weaponry, that is, we keep it to ourselves and do not sell it on to the Gaddafis, Mugabes and Al-Bashirs. Would that be such an economic disaster?
 |
| Photo: BBC It is difficult to find a picture reference of Gaddafi in which he looks relatively sane |
Of course, if we had not supplied arms to Gaddafi he would have just bought inferior versions from Russia and China but at least we would have a portion of the moral high ground and there would have been the benefit of us warring with a better class of weapon that might, arguably, be more effective at ending a conflict sooner rather than later.
No comments:
Post a Comment