“What an odd argument nonemmit.
Bashing BAE? Merely quoting fact, the whole truth is probably a lot murkier, but they've made that awfully easy...
http://tinyurl.com/4u5wj2
Many innocent victims would say companies like BAE are the problem, the world's 'problems' or should I say, the problems inflicted upon them, are BAE's profit.
It's ok for them to behave like that because they employ British workers? So do junkies....Exactly what coffee are we supposed to be smelling? Or would we be too naive to understand?”

“There are some very naive people on here, if they think by bashing BAE will stop the worlds troubles. All that will happen is the Chinese Russians or French will step in to fill the void, you will just put hard working British taxpayers out of work. As an American once said, 'wake up and smell the coffee'”

“We the hard pressed ratepayers are sick of funding public sector pensions.”

“""BAE Systems is a legitimate company."

BAE maybe legitimate but it is not a law abiding company. BAE has been fined for fraud due to its activities in Tanzania (http://tinyurl.com/3yphl4x) accepting a 30 million fine to avoid a criminal trial so long as the word corruption didn't appear on the indictment. A system of secret payments to officials was found to be in use to secure contracts.There have also been accusation about bribes around sales to the Czech Republic and South Africa (http://tinyurl.com/3oc663t) BAE used front companies and Swiss bank accounts to make payments (http://tinyurl.com/35dxjjc). Bae as i'm sure you know was also accused of corruption in Saudi Arabia of all places even paying for a Prince's daughters honeymoon (http://tinyurl.com/3lvk4v5). Of course little was done about this as the Prime Minister Tony Blair stepped into halt the inquiry which was later deemed unlawful. I wonder if any of the weapons sold in Saudi Arabia were used by the Saudi forces sent into Bahrain to suppress protestors? Of course Bahrain has contracts for weapons and trainers with BAE perhaps some of these were also involved.
BAE had also been criticised for the production of cluster bombs. A large number of the explosives within do not detonate on impact and lie on the floor like land mines. These cartridges are brightly coloured about the size of a drinks can and are often picked up by children. You can imagine the result. Now I know these aren't illegal but landmines (the United Kingdom is a signatory of the Ottawa treaty) are and the unexploded cartridges have the same effect. Quite apart from legalities they are horrible weapons that kill civilians for a long time after their use.

"and employs many people - most highly skilled. In addition, it is vital to the UK's financial recovery"

The drug trade employs a lot of people - farmers, smugglers and other highly skilled workers but it doesn't excuse the violence and addictions that ruin and end lives through out the world. That is an extreme example but perhaps you can see that just because something employees people doesn't mean it shouldn't be criticised and may not be a suitable investment for a local council. As part of my role for the council I work with Children with disabilities. Do you think I want my pension contributions going towards creating more disabilities? Perhaps that money could be invested elsewhere creating more useful and beneficial employment for some of those highly skilled workers. I'm sure some of those skills are transferable. Many of these jobs are subsidised some of this money could be spent on retraining any Arms workers who lose jobs due to a more ethical business plan. This link may be of some interest on the subject of jobs and the arms trades value to the economy -http://tinyurl.com/3h7wq3r . This is produced by the Campaign against the arms trade but the references seem ok. There is also a suggestion of Tax Avoidance by BAE (http://tinyurl.com/4xagmvx http://tinyurl.com/4y5qd2w http://tinyurl.com/mtpa5n) though some of this is legal but hardly good for the UK in these times of austerity.

Under the UN charter all nations have a right to bear arms, and if the arms were not supplied by the UK, they would be supplied, willingly, by others.

Isn't that the drug dealers excuse? I guess that if those nations use weapons to kill their own people like Saddam Hussein or slaughter Kurds like Saddam and Turkey or to slaughter East Timorians and West Papuans as practiced by the Indonesians that's just bad luck. Money must be made.”

“http://tinyurl.com/4u5wj2”

“...''BAE Systems has been under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office, into the use of political corruption to help sell arms to Chile, Czech Republic, Romania, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Tanzania and Qatar''
'in September 2003 The Sunday Times reported that BAE had hired a private security contractor to collate information about individuals working at the Campaign Against Arms Trade and their activities.''
''Like many arms manufacturers, BAE has received criticism from various human rights and anti-arms trade organisations due to the human rights records of governments to which it has sold equipment. These include Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Zimbabwe.''

''BAE has in recent times been criticised for its role in the production of cluster bombs, due to the long term death/injury risks they cause to civilians (they behave similarly to land mines). However, after pressure campaigns from various human rights groups, BAE recently stated it no longer produces land mines or cluster bombs.''

''According to the ethical guidelines for the Government Pension Fund – Global, companies that produce weapons that through normal use may violate fundamental humanitarian principles shall be excluded from the fund''


http://tinyurl.com/3zxu2yt”

“Taxman...I agree with JFK and your last post. If only the weapons were for the defence of the UK and protection of innocent civilians, but it isn't like that. We have hypocritically armed despots and repressive regimes and our own weapons have been used against our own military. As we see from the increase in civilian casualties in the last century we deduce that now, 9 times out of 10 civilians are the targets.
The most glaring example of why we should be well trained and armed, act humanely to save innocents, the very reason why the UN was set up, was Rwanda. I remember the BBC news showing a village where men, women and children were hacked to death by machetes. Widespread, media organised genocide was witnessed by the UN and the west walked away. This genocide was simple to stop and we chose not to. Perhaps it was something to do with France backing those carrying out the genocide, I don't know, but we know that Libya has lots of oil, Syria a little, Rwanda none.
It's the rules of the playground and if someone objects to greedy bullies victimising the weak and innocent, I'll say you have a good point, we should change the system and take off the blinkers and shame the bullies
http://tinyurl.com/42mfkd7”

“Thank god defence spending is being cut and those who wage war are getting made redundant. More cuts to come too. Good, not before time. Cut MI5 too for working with Gaddafi when it suited them. The dirt in government and their boys in uniform takes some believing. Not long before the whole rotton set up falls to bits”

“In my last I should have written, 'The Cuban Crisis and the Bay of Pigs invasion, not The Cuban Crisis (Bay of Pigs')”

“Homerjay. I have never been at ease with the American drone incursions into the Sovereign sate of Pakistan. Back on track of the subject in question.
We would all like to live in Utopia, where there were no wars - but 'man' , in the real world, will always ensure that never happens.
Personally, I subscribe to JFK's comment, "to maintain the peace, we must prepare for war" - in one word, 'deterrence'.
Following the collapse of the USSR a number of Russian politicians and former Military commanders wrote books about the Cold War. They had in common, that they, the Russians, had considered the use of the Nuclear option on 3/4 occasions - The Cuba Crisis (The Bay of Pigs), probably being the best known. They did not use the Nuclear option as they knew what the consequences would be. Deterrence works! And, to have a recognisable and effective deterrent then you need weapons of war. What did the 'Peace activists want the West to do?
Many suggest, 'jaw, jaw, is better than war, war. I would agree in sentiment, as it sounds good. However, in the real world, the study of wars in the past 200 years would indicate, jaw, jaw, is only effective during, or after the war, and not before. How many wars have been prevented by, 'jaw, jaw, at the UN? - I am still reading!”