Wife Says Viktor Bout 'Card In Political Game'

[whybother]

<snip>

I also blame Thailand for it's dumb reaction to have foreign secret agents operate on their soil, enabling the arrest of Bout, but on the other hand I don't think the US could have find another, even more stupid, country to cooperate with them trying to lure Bout.

The USA certainly showed their balls in Thailand but Idoubt very much if any European country would have massaged the US balls

LaoPo

Should Australia send all their police home that are helping the Thais with drug traffickers?

Laws are broken across borders, so countries need to work together to bring the crooks to justice.

[mark45y]

Think how many people this animals weapons for profit antics have killed -

right....

http://en.wikipedia....defense_budgets

I'm happy the weapons by legal producers and exporters don't kill

The hypocracy is literally dripping from this topic.

LaoPo

That's the point. Legal suppliers vs. illegal. Would you want everybody to be able to distribute these kinds of weapons? It's bad enough the major powers do it...can you imagine if every Viktor Bout could do it? Absolute Mayhem.

You can't compare both: legal versus illegal producers and exporters since the latter will be absolutely in the minority although every gun is one too many.

I am opposed to ALL guns and weapons wherever in the world and whoever is producing them.

The US is by far the largest producer and also (as far as I know) the only country in the world where the number of private citizens carrying so many guns is so huge.

I understand it's anchored in the Laws of the USA by means of the Second Amendment to have the ability to carry/posses weapons but it also creates the most deadly killings in the western civilized world.

Of course men like Bout should not exist and all the attention is now to his person and past but that doesn't mean I'm not opposed to the powers, used, to get him were an abuse of powers by the USA.

Not another single country in the world could have accomplished this action.

I'm very curious how Russia will respond and the first signals on television in Europe are not very promising for a better relationship between the US and Russia as well as between Russia and Thailand.

I also blame Thailand for it's dumb reaction to have foreign secret agents operate on their soil, enabling the arrest of Bout, but on the other hand I don't think the US could have find another, even more stupid, country to cooperate with them trying to lure Bout.

The USA certainly showed their balls in Thailand but Idoubt very much if any European country would have massaged the US balls

LaoPo

Google gun ownership Switzerland.

[LaoPo]

<snip>

I also blame Thailand for it's dumb reaction to have foreign secret agents operate on their soil, enabling the arrest of Bout, but on the other hand I don't think the US could have find another, even more stupid, country to cooperate with them trying to lure Bout.

The USA certainly showed their balls in Thailand but Idoubt very much if any European country would have massaged the US balls

LaoPo

Should Australia send all their police home that are helping the Thais with drug traffickers?

Laws are broken across borders, so countries need to work together to bring the crooks to justice.

As if countries do not act like crooks... BUT...............WHO brings those countries to justice ?..let me tell you: NOBODY!

I recall that Australia does not want to extradite (yet) the American, David Gabriel Watson, to the USA, who is on Australian soil now, convicted for the murder on his newly wedded wife, Christina Watson, back in October 2003.

Australia wants Federal confirmation from the US that Watson won't be sentenced to death.

It's not so easy saying "laws are broken across borders...." in this case the crime was committed on foreign soil -Australia- and he was convicted and sentenced to jail (after a plea bargain, ending him up in jail for "just" 18 months)

Can or should he be convicted again in his birthland -USA- for the same crime, likely receiving the death sentence and what should Australia's role be here.....sending him back ?

Not so easy to answer.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Google gun ownership Switzerland.

That's about Militia (army trained) arms' ownership and has nothing to do with the weapon laws or ownership of weapons/guns like in the US.

And, of course, at the same time, gun related crimes (or even murders) are minor in comparison to the US:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland#Gun_crime

LaoPo

[Buchholz]

Hopefully, when he reaches the American prison system, he won't lose the benefits he achieved here while participating in the dramatic and hugely beneficial obesity-reduction program employed by the Thailand penal system.

BEFORE (upon arrest):

AFTER (Aug. 20):

Still continuing to shed those unwanted pounds on Oct. 5 using the effective Bang Kwang Obesity Reduction Program:

It would seem I've erred by ascribing Viktor's tremendous weight loss to the Bang Kwang Obesity Reduction Program. As it turns out, the credit would seem to go to the Alla Bout I Cook Food So Badly People Lose 40 Kilos Eating It Program.

In a telephone interview from Bangkok, Bout's wife said she had arrived at the prison Tuesday for her daily meeting with her husband, but was met at the gate by the warden, who told her Bout was on his way to the United States. She was carrying the lunch she made for him because Bout only ate the food she cooked for him.

Read more: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/11/16/1724937/russian-leaders-protest-after.html#ixzz15Yh1VsRS

Edited November 17, 2010 by Buchholz

[mark45y]

Think how many people this animals weapons for profit antics have killed -

right....

http://en.wikipedia....defense_budgets

I'm happy the weapons by legal producers and exporters don't kill

The hypocracy is literally dripping from this topic.

LaoPo

That's the point. Legal suppliers vs. illegal. Would you want everybody to be able to distribute these kinds of weapons? It's bad enough the major powers do it...can you imagine if every Viktor Bout could do it? Absolute Mayhem.

You can't compare both: legal versus illegal producers and exporters since the latter will be absolutely in the minority although every gun is one too many.

I am opposed to ALL guns and weapons wherever in the world and whoever is producing them.

The US is by far the largest producer and also (as far as I know) the only country in the world where the number of private citizens carrying so many guns is so huge.

I understand it's anchored in the Laws of the USA by means of the Second Amendment to have the ability to carry/posses weapons but it also creates the most deadly killings in the western civilized world.

Of course men like Bout should not exist and all the attention is now to his person and past but that doesn't mean I'm not opposed to the powers, used, to get him were an abuse of powers by the USA.

Not another single country in the world could have accomplished this action.

I'm very curious how Russia will respond and the first signals on television in Europe are not very promising for a better relationship between the US and Russia as well as between Russia and Thailand.

I also blame Thailand for it's dumb reaction to have foreign secret agents operate on their soil, enabling the arrest of Bout, but on the other hand I don't think the US could have find another, even more stupid, country to cooperate with them trying to lure Bout.

The USA certainly showed their balls in Thailand but Idoubt very much if any European country would have massaged the US balls

LaoPo

Thailand's dumb reaction! Time to wake up. The US military is deployed in strength in over 150 different countries. You really think it would be hard to have agents operate almost anywhere? I don't want to start a gun debate but Hitler did agree with you and disarmed Germany as soon as he took power. My point about Switzerland is most homes have an assault rifle. They learned something from Hitler. the US has had undercover agents operating in Thailand since 1944. Hardly anything new.

I am a little confused by all the rhetoric. What is the bottom line? For you? Do you think Victor Bout should be allowed to continue to sell arms to the highest bidder as a private enterprise? Yes or no? Forget all of the comparisons between the evil US and all that. The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

[TAWP]

Think how many people this animals weapons for profit antics have killed -

right....

http://en.wikipedia....defense_budgets

I'm happy the weapons by legal producers and exporters don't kill

The hypocracy is literally dripping from this topic.

LaoPo

That's the point. Legal suppliers vs. illegal. Would you want everybody to be able to distribute these kinds of weapons? It's bad enough the major powers do it...can you imagine if every Viktor Bout could do it? Absolute Mayhem.

The definition of 'legal' vs 'illegal' is very much in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, nations, corporations and groups.

[mark45y]

Think how many people this animals weapons for profit antics have killed -

right....

http://en.wikipedia....defense_budgets

I'm happy the weapons by legal producers and exporters don't kill

The hypocracy is literally dripping from this topic.

LaoPo

That's the point. Legal suppliers vs. illegal. Would you want everybody to be able to distribute these kinds of weapons? It's bad enough the major powers do it...can you imagine if every Viktor Bout could do it? Absolute Mayhem.

The definition of 'legal' vs 'illegal' is very much in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, nations, corporations and groups.

Same question as LaoPo, Do you think Victor Bout should be allowed to sell weapons? Yes or no. I am not asking about anybody else. I don't think this thread is about anyone else. Just Victor and the rockets and things.

[TAWP]

Same question as LaoPo, Do you think Victor Bout should be allowed to sell weapons? Yes or no. I am not asking about anybody else. I don't think this thread is about anyone else. Just Victor and the rockets and things.

Yes, absolutely.

[LaoPo]

I don't want to start a gun debate.........

I agree; you better not.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

I suggest you read my previous posts a little better; the answers you're asking for were answered already.

Read better.

LaoPo

[flying]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

Yes it is complicated & If only it were as simple as you would like it to be.

If so & it goes the way you obviously want.....Who then decides who the qualified customers are?

It is not so easy to let one power claim who is good & who is bad. Even if you say let them be judged by their deeds

it is not so easy. Many deeds some claim as righteous are seen as wrongful by the rest of the world.

So yes your question as to who is a qualified customer is quite complicated.

It is a Pandora's box

[craigt3365]

You can't compare both: legal versus illegal producers and exporters since the latter will be absolutely in the minority although every gun is one too many.

I am opposed to ALL guns and weapons wherever in the world and whoever is producing them.

The US is by far the largest producer and also (as far as I know) the only country in the world where the number of private citizens carrying so many guns is so huge.

I understand it's anchored in the Laws of the USA by means of the Second Amendment to have the ability to carry/posses weapons but it also creates the most deadly killings in the western civilized world.

Of course men like Bout should not exist and all the attention is now to his person and past but that doesn't mean I'm not opposed to the powers, used, to get him were an abuse of powers by the USA.

Not another single country in the world could have accomplished this action.

I'm very curious how Russia will respond and the first signals on television in Europe are not very promising for a better relationship between the US and Russia as well as between Russia and Thailand.

I also blame Thailand for it's dumb reaction to have foreign secret agents operate on their soil, enabling the arrest of Bout, but on the other hand I don't think the US could have find another, even more stupid, country to cooperate with them trying to lure Bout.

The USA certainly showed their balls in Thailand but Idoubt very much if any European country would have massaged the US balls

LaoPo

I'm in agreement....every gun is one too many. I am pro gun control in the US. But it is a sensitive subject there. Most anti gun control people in the US are valid hunters. I use to be a HUGE hunter. But have gotten soft in my old age. Just can't shoot Bambi any more!

If men like Bout should not exist, who is going to take care of that? Thailand? Not sophisticated enough. Russia? It's their weapons being sold. Don't forget your country was going after this guy also...and initiated the first Interpol arrest warrant. Maybe it's just a case of the US helping the Belgians?

Who cares about pleasing the Russians. They are helping Iran make nuclear weapons! No sympathy from me.

Thailand has foreign agents from many countries here. Not just the US....but people get all riled up over anything the US does.

I think your comments about Thailand being stupid are inappropriate. Come on...that's a bit rough. You really are anti USA, aren't you?

[mark45y]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

I suggest you read my previous posts a little better; the answers you're asking for were answered already.

Read better.

LaoPo

Sorry. Too much to read. I assume you don't want Victor to sell weapons. So in the end analysis you think the US did the right thing. Kind of the same reasoning as Mussolini did make the trains run on time.

[mark45y]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

Yes it is complicated & If only it were as simple as you would like it to be.

If so & it goes the way you obviously want.....Who then decides who the qualified customers are?

It is not so easy to let one power claim who is good & who is bad. Even if you say let them be judged by their deeds

it is not so easy. Many deeds some claim as righteous are seen as wrongful by the rest of the world.

So yes your question as to who is a qualified customer is quite complicated.

It is a Pandora's box

This thread is about one man. Victor Bout. Do you think he should be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he likes. You are making it complicated because you want to comment on the morals of countries as opposed to Victor Bout alone.

[mark45y]

Same question as LaoPo, Do you think Victor Bout should be allowed to sell weapons? Yes or no. I am not asking about anybody else. I don't think this thread is about anyone else. Just Victor and the rockets and things.

Yes, absolutely.

At least you are honest. Victor's friends in the former USSR have suitcase nukes. That is why I don't want him to sell weapons.

[mark45y]

I think Bout most certainly CAN get a fair jury trial in the USA. However, I also think that question is academic as there will most likely be some kind of plea bargain and/or prisoner trade deal that would mean no trial at all.

We need a poll. This is a poll topic. 1. Do you think Victor can get a fair trial. 2. Do you think Victor should be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he wishes. I am sure I am missing some things but you are really good at polls. Maybe you could help.

[craigt3365]

I think Bout most certainly CAN get a fair jury trial in the USA. However, I also think that question is academic as there will most likely be some kind of plea bargain and/or prisoner trade deal that would mean no trial at all.

We need a poll. This is a poll topic. 1. Do you think Victor can get a fair trial. 2. Do you think Victor should be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he wishes. I am sure I am missing some things but you are really good at polls. Maybe you could help.

I agree with Jingthing. It won't go to trial. It will get resolved before that. But he will be treated fairly...unlike his countrymen who are dealing with the judicial system back there.

I'm in agreement with LaoPo. No weapons should be sold. The US is arming the world. But so are a bunch of other countries. And it's just madness. So no, Victor should not be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he wishes...just like the US and other countries should not be allowed to do so...but sometimes do as part of covert ops. Not a good thing. It usually comes back to bite you in the butt!

[flying]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

Yes it is complicated & If only it were as simple as you would like it to be.

If so & it goes the way you obviously want.....Who then decides who the qualified customers are?

It is not so easy to let one power claim who is good & who is bad. Even if you say let them be judged by their deeds

it is not so easy. Many deeds some claim as righteous are seen as wrongful by the rest of the world.

So yes your question as to who is a qualified customer is quite complicated.

It is a Pandora's box

This thread is about one man. Victor Bout. Do you think he should be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he likes. You are making it complicated because you want to comment on the morals of countries as opposed to Victor Bout alone.

BS

You would like it to be simple & it is not.

Yet you hail from a country that in the last 2 years the citizens bought more guns & ammo than the Chinese & Indian armed forces combined.

Not that I think that is a bad idea given the state of the govt but.............

For you to claim in so many words that *certain* folks should not be allowed to buy or *certain* folks not allowed to sell is the usual prejudice.

Here is a simple answer to your simple question....

He should be allowed to sell to those who have the cash & their governments allow them to buy.

Now how about you?

Do you think the US should have been allowed to give weapons to the Mujaheddin? I mean sheet they have gone & turned those weapons on the supplier now eh?

How about Israel? Should the US give them weapons? As foreign aid? should that be allowed?

Sorry the question cannot be about one man...That is called prejudice.

Edited November 18, 2010 by flying

[mark45y]

The bottom line, does Lao PO think Victor should be allowed to sell arms to anyone he wants to? Yes or no. It is not a complicated question.

Yes it is complicated & If only it were as simple as you would like it to be.

If so & it goes the way you obviously want.....Who then decides who the qualified customers are?

It is not so easy to let one power claim who is good & who is bad. Even if you say let them be judged by their deeds

it is not so easy. Many deeds some claim as righteous are seen as wrongful by the rest of the world.

So yes your question as to who is a qualified customer is quite complicated.

It is a Pandora's box

This thread is about one man. Victor Bout. Do you think he should be allowed to sell weapons to anyone he likes. You are making it complicated because you want to comment on the morals of countries as opposed to Victor Bout alone.

BS

You would like it to be simple & it is not.

Yet you hail from a country that in the last 2 years the citizens bought more guns & ammo than the Chinese & Indian armed forces combined.

Not that I think that is a bad idea given the state of the govt but.............

For you to claim in so many words that *certain* folks should not be allowed to buy or *certain* folks not allowed to sell is the usual prejudice.

Here is a simple answer to your simple question....

He should be allowed to sell to those who have the cash & their governments allow them to buy.

Now how about you?

Do you think the US should have been allowed to give weapons to the Mujaheddin? I mean sheet they have gone & turned those weapons on the supplier now eh?

How about Israel? Should the US give them weapons? As foreign aid? should that be allowed?

Sorry the question cannot be about one man...That is called prejudice.

Your questions and your attempts to bash US policy are irrelevant. “Do you think the US should have been allowed to give weapons to the Mujaheddin? I mean sheet they have gone & turned those weapons on the supplier now eh? How about Israel? Should the US give them weapons? As foreign aid? should that be allowed?”

Interesting as those are they are off topic and should be removed by a mod.

Why don't you start a thread about US weapons sales policies. I'll come. Then your post would be relevant and on topic. Here in this thread it is simply US bashing.

Edited November 18, 2010 by mark45y

[flying]

Your questions and your attempts to bash US policy are irrelevant.

Your usual safety net deployed....Sad but predictable.

Your prejudice shows & you revert to the old...They are bashing the US

If an answer does not fit your narrow parameter it does not mean the US is being bashed.

Yet 99% of your responses in most sections of the forum revert to it.

I live in the US....Kow Jai Mai?

Edited November 18, 2010 by flying

[mark45y]

Your questions and your attempts to bash US policy are irrelevant.

Your usual safety net deployed....Sad but predictable.

Your prejudice shows & you revert to the old...They are bashing the US

If an answer does not fit your narrow parameter it does not mean the US is being bashed.

Yet 99% of your responses in most sections of the forum revert to it.

I live in the US....Kow Jai Mai?

This is what you left out of my post.

Your questions and your attempts to bash US policy are irrelevant. “Do you think the US should have been allowed to give weapons to the Mujaheddin? I mean sheet they have gone & turned those weapons on the supplier now eh? How about Israel? Should the US give them weapons? As foreign aid? should that be allowed?”

Interesting as those are they are off topic and should be removed by a mod.

Why don't you start a thread about US weapons sales policies. I'll come. Then your post would be relevant and on topic. Here in this thread it is simply US bashing.

I don't have any problem with discussing US policy 30 years ago but find it has no relevance to the current thread.

[Robby nz]

This thread may be about VB and what his wife says but...

The whole thing is about the weapons trade in general, and in the case of VB, removing a competitor who was getting in the way of someone with the right connections.

I would be interested to know what weapons he has sold that have been directly used against the US, if any.

For that seems to be the basis of the charges against him.

If this is to set a precidence then may be they should go after whoever sold the planes that hit the twin towers.

Yea silly right? but not so far off.

[mark45y]

This thread may be about VB and what his wife says but...

The whole thing is about the weapons trade in general, and in the case of VB, removing a competitor who was getting in the way of someone with the right connections.

I would be interested to know what weapons he has sold that have been directly used against the US, if any.

For that seems to be the basis of the charges against him.

If this is to set a precidence then may be they should go after whoever sold the planes that hit the twin towers.

Yea silly right? but not so far off.

You won't know till January when he is arraigned.

[TAWP]

His hollywood manufactured reputation will be in the minds of any jury they can put together in the US.

One note, that perhaps some might not know since Bout is repeatedly mentioned as the source for the movies protagonist, is that the main character is a mash-up if 5 (not 1) international arms-dealers. One of them being Leonid Minin, accused of supplying Charles Taylor etc.

[Robby nz]

This thread may be about VB and what his wife says but...

The whole thing is about the weapons trade in general, and in the case of VB, removing a competitor who was getting in the way of someone with the right connections.

I would be interested to know what weapons he has sold that have been directly used against the US, if any.

For that seems to be the basis of the charges against him.

If this is to set a precidence then may be they should go after whoever sold the planes that hit the twin towers.

Yea silly right? but not so far off.

You won't know till January when he is arraigned.

Will that be before of after the waterboarding?

[mark45y]

On another note some may not know. In February 2002, the Belgian government indicts Victor Bout on charges of money laundering and illegal weapons trafficking. Interpol issues an arrest warrant for him anywhere in the world. British intellegence field agents try to arrest Bout in 2002 in Athens.

[mark45y]

This thread may be about VB and what his wife says but...

The whole thing is about the weapons trade in general, and in the case of VB, removing a competitor who was getting in the way of someone with the right connections.

I would be interested to know what weapons he has sold that have been directly used against the US, if any.

For that seems to be the basis of the charges against him.

If this is to set a precidence then may be they should go after whoever sold the planes that hit the twin towers.

Yea silly right? but not so far off.

You won't know till January when he is arraigned.

Will that be before of after the waterboarding?

I don't think they can waterboard in the US. He would have to go to Cuba.

[craigt3365]

His hollywood manufactured reputation will be in the minds of any jury they can put together in the US.

One note, that perhaps some might not know since Bout is repeatedly mentioned as the source for the movies protagonist, is that the main character is a mash-up if 5 (not 1) international arms-dealers. One of them being Leonid Minin, accused of supplying Charles Taylor etc.

Jeez...few American's will even remember that movie. Much less what it is all about.

On another note some may not know. In February 2002, the Belgian government indicts Victor Bout on charges of money laundering and illegal weapons trafficking. Interpol issues an arrest warrant for him anywhere in the world. British intellegence field agents try to arrest Bout in 2002 in Athens.

Ok, mark45y, let's not get other governments into this...it's all about the US and how bad they are....OK?

[LaoPo]

Don't forget your country was going after this guy also...and initiated the first Interpol arrest warrant. Maybe it's just a case of the US helping the Belgians?

I think your comments about Thailand being stupid are inappropriate. Come on...that's a bit rough. You really are anti USA, aren't you?

To clarify a few things: I'm not from Belgium, I'm from The Netherlands.

Secondly, no I'm not anti-USA although I have been accused of being so many times on this forum.

Some Americans are alike GW Bush's comment he made after the horrible 9/11 attack: "If you are not with us you are against us" which many considered as a silly statement and I agree with that.

If I criticize some American aspects or actions I am qualified as anti-America? How silly. If you criticize some aspects/facts in Thailand, are you anti-Thai...?? same-same silly.

As explained many times before, the US is a great nation with many impressive facts. That doesn't mean that many other facts are disapproved by many people in the world.

The US has some 4,5% of the world's population and they should learn to accept that there are 95.5% people left in the world and that a certain amount of people disagree with some of the American thoughts, facts and actions.

If one disagrees he/she isn't automatically anti-American.

LaoPo